FORUMS: list search recent posts

Autodesk subscription model

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Oliver Peters
Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 3, 2017 at 3:32:03 pm

We debate subscriptions often here. This is an interesting article as it pertains to subscription at Autodesk. The last part about pirates is enlightening.

http://www.studiodaily.com/2017/05/autodesk-ready-push-customers-subscripti...

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Ricardo Marty
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 3, 2017 at 6:19:52 pm

!2 million illegal users? I wonder how they will get them to pay. Got a video this week on Facebook which claims that the adobe subscription will go up ton $69. if they don't renew. The video called "stop adobe from forcing create cloud on creatives" Looks like they want to stop a runoff to resolve. Adobe must have double that amount of illegal user.s

Ricardo Marty


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 3, 2017 at 7:06:10 pm

[Ricardo Marty] "!2 million illegal users?"

I presume this is mainly 3D users on both the CAD CAM and media & entertainment side.

[Ricardo Marty] "Got a video this week on Facebook which claims that the adobe subscription will go up ton $69. if they don't renew."

Completely bogus.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Scott Witthaus
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 3, 2017 at 11:32:24 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Completely bogus."

You sure of this? Sooner or later they will raise price. Do you have inside info?

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 3, 2017 at 11:59:19 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "You sure of this? Sooner or later they will raise price. Do you have inside info?"

I didn't say they would never raise prices. However, anything you hear on the net about actual planned increases at this point in time are either complete BS, scare tactics, or were posted by someone who doesn't understand the current price tiers.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 4, 2017 at 8:51:42 pm

[Oliver Peters] "[Ricardo Marty] "Got a video this week on Facebook which claims that the adobe subscription will go up ton $69. if they don't renew."

Completely bogus."


I completely agree with Oliver here.

This is completely antithetical to the long term success of the Adobe Subscription model since wild fluctuations in price will drive attention to costs that their subscriber base has already accepted. When people NOTICE something - they can decide they can live without it.

In this model, you don't want people to NOTICE that direct bank draw as anything but totally normal.

At least while you're actively building the subscriber base, you want those monthly draws to become regularized. Nothing to see here. Just ignore them everyone.

I'd be more concerned that at some future date, they find it difficult to resist - not wild increases like 30% - but incremental adjustments.

Once you have a system with a million people are paying $50 - an increase to $52.50 yields an additional $2.5 million dollars in profits against absolutely ZERO additional costs and likely almost no push back from your subscriber base.
(Just put out a press release mumbling about "keeping up with inflation" and you're fine.)

No individual gets hurt, but you suddenly have a "pure profit" dial in the hands of executives who have nothing to constrain them from using it to make their investors happy. Subscriptions down? Adjustment time. Economic downturn? Where's that dial?

Hey, we have these other services, right? Stock, etc? How about we just FOLD those purchases into your monthly Billings and let them FLOAT like electric usage? So you don't really know what's being charged anymore. Bingo. your Adobe bill becomes like your telephone bill. Lots of tiny charges and taxes and fees - yielding a monthly amount that you are unsure WHAT it should actually be unless you have the time to go through all the line items - but vaguely feel is necessary to continue into a service you can't really disengage from.

THAT would scare me.

Constant future incrementalism. Not wild pricing swings.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 3, 2017 at 6:23:04 pm

As always, the ONLY thing I want to know is how the company will be treating the IP I personally create with their software under the subscription model.

Can whatever system they devise lock the me away from my own IP should I choose to stop paying?

If so, if I was a customer, I'd nope out.

We'll see.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 3, 2017 at 7:07:56 pm

[Bill Davis] "If so, if I was a customer, I'd nope out."

You won't have that option with most of the leading software-only product companies. They've all realized that subscription is the best viable way to move forward and continue to fund development in a predictable fashion.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 4, 2017 at 2:22:01 am

[Oliver Peters] "You won't have that option with most of the leading software-only product companies. They've all realized that subscription is the best viable way to move forward and continue to fund development in a predictable fashion."

I agree it is good for the company but bad for the customer. Having said that I would not mind the Creative Cloud if it was $14.99 a month. At $49.99 a month we are paying more and getting less. The Phone companies have lowered their prices and offered much better plans from what they were 2 years ago. I hope Adobe does the same. Adobe and Apple used to offer inexpensive alternatives to Avid's MC. As of now Apple and BMD do a better job of that price wise than Adobe.


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 4, 2017 at 10:13:11 am

[andy patterson] "At $49.99 a month we are paying more and getting less. "

How are you getting less?


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 4, 2017 at 11:31:26 am

We do not have the actual DVDs. On a side not we also have more bugs. The latest upgrade for Premiere Pro was not all that great. Who would have upgraded? We paid a lot but got less than the CS 4.0 to CS 5.5 upgrade. We all paid for the upgrade regardless if it was worth it or not. That would not be the case with the CS system. Adobe did not take my request serious but BMD did! We got less than the BMD customers. Adobe could and should be doing a lot more as demonstrated by BMD.

Would you now agree we get less and pay more?

The old CS system was much better and Adobe knows it. I say bring back the CS paradigm and let me know how many people opt for the CC at $49.99 a month VS the CS version. At $14.95 a month more people would probably opt for the CC paradigm instead of the CS paradigm. See my point?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 4, 2017 at 3:13:55 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Jun 4, 2017 at 3:15:44 pm

[andy patterson] "Would you now agree we get less and pay more?"

Nope. Not at all.

[andy patterson] "See my point?"

No. I don't.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Tony West
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 4, 2017 at 6:06:00 pm

[andy patterson] "We paid a lot but got less than the CS 4.0 to CS 5.5 upgrade. We all paid for the upgrade regardless if it was worth it or not. "

If I'm reading you right, it almost sounds like you are saying there is a point where they could price themselves out of the market by charging more than people think the program is worth.

Obviously there is a cap. If they charged 1000 a month people would say I'm not paying that.

So how far can they go before they hit a realistic cap?


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 4, 2017 at 7:31:30 pm

[Tony West] "[andy patterson] "We paid a lot but got less than the CS 4.0 to CS 5.5 upgrade. We all paid for the upgrade regardless if it was worth it or not. "

If I'm reading you right, it almost sounds like you are saying there is a point where they could price themselves out of the market by charging more than people think the program is worth.

Obviously there is a cap. If they charged 1000 a month people would say I'm not paying that.

So how far can they go before they hit a realistic cap?"


My point is before we could decide if the upgrade was worth it or not. Now we pay no matter what. We also used to get the DVDs. I would prefer the DVDs as opposed to downloading the software. I admit you still need to download the updates with the DVDs but at least you have something if you wanted to wipe and reload the OS. Like I stated this upgrade was not that great. CS 4.0 to 5.0 was great. CS 5.0 to 5.5 was good and so was CS 5.5. to CS 6.0.

Look what BMD did with DR.







Also look at my request for Adobe from last year (below). I would not have upgraded this year if we still had the CS paradigm. Like I always say where will Avid, FCXP, BMD and Adobe all be in another 2-3 years form now. Will DR be free? Adobe needs to bring it's A-Game ASAP and look at the competition.







Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 4, 2017 at 12:34:26 pm

[andy patterson] "As of now Apple and BMD do a better job of that price wise than Adobe."

Apple and BMD have hardware sales to provide additional financial development support. Adobe and Autodesk do not have that.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 4, 2017 at 7:15:42 pm

[Oliver Peters] "andy patterson] "As of now Apple and BMD do a better job of that price wise than Adobe."

Apple and BMD have hardware sales to provide additional financial development support. Adobe and Autodesk do not have that."


Adobe didn't own hardware back in the CS days either. I am not saying the CC is super horrible or super expensive. I am saying the older CS paradigm was better. I myself would not have upgraded this year and with the CS paradigm I would not have to.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 12:19:06 am

[andy patterson] "I myself would not have upgraded this year and with the CS paradigm I would not have to."

Precisely the reason Adobe felt they had to move to subscription.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 1:31:19 am

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "I myself would not have upgraded this year and with the CS paradigm I would not have to."

Precisely the reason Adobe felt they had to move to subscription."


That is why I say we pay more and get less. I do hope the competition makes Adobe lower the price of the CC to $19.99 a month. That would be a fair price for the customer and Adobe.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 6:28:04 am

[andy patterson] " I am saying the older CS paradigm was better."

Better or not, the traditional software business model is disappearing and I don't see that course changing. Also, don't forget that towards the end of CS's life Adobe changed the upgrade policy so that upgrade pricing only went back one version. So if you were on CS 5 you could get an upgrade discount to CS 6, but if you were on CS 4 and wanted to upgrade to CS 6 you would have to pay full retail for it. Creative Cloud or not, the Adobe was ending the ability for customers to 'coast' via the upgrade policy.

Hardware companies like Apple and BMD are transitioning software into a 'freebie' to help entice users to buy their hardware (which of course the software is locked to) which means software companies have to adapt or go under. Adobe and many, many other software companies (from video games to productivity apps) are moving to new business models (subscription, ad supported, freemium, etc.,) because they have little choice. Hell, even Microsoft (arguably the biggest computer software company ever) is pivoting away from a company that sells software into a company that sells hardware and subscriptions to software. The ripple effects of Apple's restrictive sales polices in their App Stores and pricing polices for their first party software can't be overstated, IMO.

[andy patterson] "At $14.95 a month more people would probably opt for the CC paradigm instead of the CS paradigm. See my point?"

How did you arrive at $14.95? I'd like Adobe to offer different application bundles for less, but $14.95 for everything just seems like a very low, and arbitrary, number. Avid's annual subscription price is the same as Adobe's yet with Adobe you get significantly more bang for your buck so should Avid charge $1.99 for MC?

Just speaking for myself, I'm less concerned with saving a few bucks today and more concerned with the long term health of the industry that makes the tools that I use to make a living. I'm really not a fan of hardware lock-in and/or race to the bottom pricing because customers ultimately lose in those situations. For example, I'm stuck using BM I/O hardware because I need it for Resolve, yet I'd prefer to be using AJA. I think the new color panels BM released look great, but I'd never consider buying them because they only work with Resolve.

I'd much rather pay a subscription to Adobe for CC than for Adobe to copy BM's game plan and release Adobe brand I/O devices and Adobe Brand control panels that are tied to their software. I think users are best served when they have the freedom to choose what they think is the best hardware and best software for their needs, even if that means mixing and matching hardware and software from different venders.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 7:54:18 am

[Andrew Kimery] "ow did you arrive at $14.95? I'd like Adobe to offer different application bundles for less, but $14.95 for everything just seems like a very low, and arbitrary, number. Avid's annual subscription price is the same as Adobe's yet with Adobe you get significantly more bang for your buck so should Avid charge $1.99 for MC?"

Adobe and Apple offered an inexpensive alternative to Avid. Apple still does.

[Andrew Kimery] "Better or not, the traditional software business model is disappearing and I don't see that course changing. Also, don't forget that towards the end of CS's life Adobe changed the upgrade policy so that upgrade pricing only went back one version. So if you were on CS 5 you could get an upgrade discount to CS 6, but if you were on CS 4 and wanted to upgrade to CS 6 you would have to pay full retail for it. Creative Cloud or not, the Adobe was ending the ability for customers to 'coast' via the upgrade policy."

I agree Adobe got greedy.

[Andrew Kimery] "Just speaking for myself, I'm less concerned with saving a few bucks today and more concerned with the long term health of the industry that makes the tools that I use to make a living."

If Adobe offered the CC for $19.99 a month they would still make millions but Adobe wants to make billions.

[Andrew Kimery] "I'd much rather pay a subscription to Adobe for CC than for Adobe to copy BM's game plan and release Adobe brand I/O devices and Adobe Brand control panels that are tied to their software."

Adobe doesn't have to make I/O hardware devices.

[Andrew Kimery] " I think users are best served when they have the freedom to choose what they think is the best hardware and best software for their needs, even if that means mixing and matching hardware and software from different venders."

I agree.

I am not saying the CC is horrible or way over priced but since we must use the cloud a price of $24.99 would be more reasonable. The CC is more buggy than the CS versions.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 12:09:39 pm

[andy patterson] "I am not saying the CC is horrible or way over priced but since we must use the cloud a price of $24.99 would be more reasonable. The CC is more buggy than the CS versions."

Andy, come on! Your price point keeps shifting. It doesn't seem like you have any knowledgeable justification for the numbers you are suggesting, other than simply a desire to pay less.

And no, I don't see CC as any more buggy than CS. All software is always buggy.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 8:44:50 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Andy, come on! Your price point keeps shifting. It doesn't seem like you have any knowledgeable justification for the numbers you are suggesting, other than simply a desire to pay less."

Adobe could charge $14.95 a month and still make money. They could charge $24.95 and make more money. The more people that are on the cloud the lower the price can be. Phone companies have dropped their prices form 2 years ago and offer better data plans. If we have to be on the perpetual treadmill and there are no DVDs the price should be less than the old school CS upgrades but they are not. We pay for upgrades even if they are not that great. I highly doubt we will see as big of upgrade from CS 4.0 to CS 5.0 again. BMD has offered free upgrades for DR. Having said that regardless if Apple and BMD both make hardware their software is direct competition for Adobe. If Adobe were like Apple we would pay $950.00 for the CC and get free updates for 6 years. And yea, I am aware Apple and BMD sell hardware but competition is competition. Look at Google Docs VS MS Office. It is a competitive world.

[Oliver Peters] "And no, I don't see CC as any more buggy than CS. All software is always buggy."

There are definitely more bugs since CC. I say if we are all going to be beta testers lower the price. I agree all software has bugs but we get more of them now. Adobe has gotten rid of the paid beta testers.











































Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 9:46:24 pm

[andy patterson] "Adobe could charge $14.95 a month and still make money. "

How do you figure?


[andy patterson] "If Adobe were like Apple we would pay $950.00 for the CC and get free updates for 6 years. "

Since Adobe is a publicly traded company in the US that would be illegal under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act unless Adobe deferred total recognition of the revenue for six years, in which case the company would most likely fold before the six year mark comes around. Apple, on the other can, and easily defer the revenue from FCP X as long as it wants since it probably only makes up a fraction of a percent of their total annual revenue. BMD isn't a publicly traded company in the US so it doesn't have to follow accounting regulations like SOX.

If you want more info on how the Sarbanes-Oxley Act pertains to the discussion at hand just search for "Sarbanes-Oxley Act" or "SOX" in the forum or the Adobe Creative Cloud Debate forum (it's been addressed multiple times) and you'll find out more about accounting rules than you probably ever wanted to know. 😉


[andy patterson] "Phone companies have dropped their prices form 2 years ago and offer better data plans. "

Yet my cable bill is more than it was two years ago even though my plan hasn't changed at all and Apple is still selling 4yr old tech a near top dollar pricing. What do phones and rigged data plans* have to do with Adobe again?


[andy patterson] "If we have to be on the perpetual treadmill and there are no DVDs the price should be less than the old school CS upgrades but they are not."

DVD blanks cost a fraction of a cent. The cost making the software dwarfs every aspect of producing and distributing discs at the scale that Adobe was doing it.


[andy patterson] "BMD has offered free upgrades for DR."

Apples to oranges as BMD has a totally different business model than Adobe.


[andy patterson] " If I charge$1000.00 to build a website and my potential client find someone to do it for less I loose the business. "

Only if you can't convince them that you offer a superior product and experience which is worth the extra money. Reminds me of the old joke about two competing barber shops that were across the street from each other. The owner of one shop put out a sign that read "Today only, $5.99 hair cuts". The owner of the other shop responded with a sign of their own, "We fix $5.99 hair cuts".

That's not to say that you can't price yourself out of your market, but price tiers are common for a reason.

*I recently worked on a doc about Net Neutrality and the Internet and the pricing on data plans (even cell plans) is beyond insane. It's De Beers level of market manipulation.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 10:31:51 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Since Adobe is a publicly traded company in the US that would be illegal under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act unless Adobe deferred total recognition of the revenue for six years, in which case the company would most likely fold before the six year mark comes around. Apple, on the other can, and easily defer the revenue from FCP X as long as it wants since it probably only makes up a fraction of a percent of their total annual revenue. BMD isn't a publicly traded company in the US so it doesn't have to follow accounting regulations like SOX."

Adobe can change it's structure as well. They could go back to the CS days although I know they will not.


[Andrew Kimery] "If you want more info on how the Sarbanes-Oxley Act pertains to the discussion at hand just search for "Sarbanes-Oxley Act" or "SOX" in the forum or the Adobe Creative Cloud Debate forum (it's been addressed multiple times) and you'll find out more about accounting rules than you probably ever wanted to know. 😉"

I know they have to be accountable to the stockholders. Having said that Adobe owns the market for Photo editing yet they bundle Photoshop and LR for $9.99. Why not AE and Premiere Pro for $9.99. Adobe does not own the market for video editing. In fact there is a lot of competition for the video editing market. Adobe needs to rethink things.



[Andrew Kimery] "[andy patterson] "Phone companies have dropped their prices form 2 years ago and offer better data plans. "

Yet my cable bill is more than it was two years ago even though my plan hasn't changed at all and Apple is still selling 4yr old tech a near top dollar pricing. What do phones and rigged data plans* have to do with Adobe again?"


Only certain cable companies are avialabe in certain cities. The phone companies are every where.



[Andrew Kimery] "[andy patterson] "If we have to be on the perpetual treadmill and there are no DVDs the price should be less than the old school CS upgrades but they are not."

DVD blanks cost a fraction of a cent. The cost making the software dwarfs every aspect of producing and distributing discs at the scale that Adobe was doing it."


I agree but we are still getting less.



[Andrew Kimery] "[andy patterson] "BMD has offered free upgrades for DR."

Apples to oranges as BMD has a totally different business model than Adobe."


Apple to oranges is a non issue because BMD's DR is competition for Adobe.



[Andrew Kimery] "[andy patterson] " If I charge$1000.00 to build a website and my potential client find someone to do it for less I loose the business. "

Only if you can't convince them that you offer a superior product and experience which is worth the extra money. Reminds me of the old joke about two competing barber shops that were across the street from each other. The owner of one shop put out a sign that read "Today only, $5.99 hair cuts". The owner of the other shop responded with a sign of their own, "We fix $5.99 hair cuts"."


You bothered to respond? My point was Scott's analogy was bad. Having said that there are people in other countries that design websites for free and only charge for the hosting. Some people would prefer to hire someone local even if it costs more. Others will opt for the less expensive options. Competition is always good for the consumer but not the business owner. Perhaps Adobe will restructure the CC. Any five programs for $19.99 or any ten programs for $29.99. Who knows?


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 1:54:12 am

[andy patterson] "They could go back to the CS days although I know they will not. "

It's not a coincidence that Microsoft, Avid, Adobe, Apple, Autodesk, Blackmagic, etc., don't sell software the traditional way with perpetual licenses and upgrades at a discount. Those days, the CS days, are vanishing.

[andy patterson] "
I know they have to be accountable to the stockholders. "


It's not about being accountable to shareholders, it's about how companies can report revenue and was born out of the Enron disaster. In our neck of the woods SOX basically turns every software update into potential land mine.

For example, say I'm a publicly traded company and in January I sold you an NLE for $200, and then in May I released a free update adding multicam functionality. In the eyes of SOX I sold you an incomplete product in January and later delivered the 'missing piece' in May. So I'm not allowed to record a $200 sale in January, I can only record some of the revenue and I must defer the rest until the update comes out in May. And I can't just defer an arbitrary amount until May, I have to figure out what a reasonable and customary amount for multicam functionality would be if it was sold as a standalone product on the open market.

With how frequently software is updated these days I'm sure you can see impossible it would be to figure out the monetary value of each and every update for each and every piece of software. A way to avoid this is to charge for each and every update but consumers don't really like that (I don't know if you remember when Apple charged users for things like Facetime updates and iOS updates for iPod users).

Avid presumably got stung by this a few years ago when they mishandled an update. They stopped filing required SEC paper work to fix some 'accounting errors' and eventually got de-listed from NASDAQ. When Avid 'reemerged' their old software sales model of perpetual licenses and discounted upgrades was gone and in it's place was a subscription option and a perpetual license with a mandatory support contract. Upgrades are no more.


[andy patterson] " Adobe needs to rethink things. "

Their growing revenue and stock price say otherwise currently.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 6:37:34 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "For example, say I'm a publicly traded company and in January I sold you an NLE for $200, and then in May I released a free update adding multicam functionality. In the eyes of SOX I sold you an incomplete product in January and later delivered the 'missing piece' in May. So I'm not allowed to record a $200 sale in January, I can only record some of the revenue and I must defer the rest until the update comes out in May. And I can't just defer an arbitrary amount until May, I have to figure out what a reasonable and customary amount for multicam functionality would be if it was sold as a standalone product on the open market."

I know they are legality's but that is not the issue. If you purchased CS 4.0 they would make minor updates with bugs fixes and a few new features. Same with CS 5.5 and CS 6.0.


[Andrew Kimery] "With how frequently software is updated these days I'm sure you can see impossible it would be to figure out the monetary value of each and every update for each and every piece of software. A way to avoid this is to charge for each and every update but consumers don't really like that (I don't know if you remember when Apple charged users for things like Facetime updates and iOS updates for iPod users)."

As I stated if you purchased CS 4.0 they would make minor updates with bugs fixes and a few new features. Same with CS 5.5 and CS 6.0.

Adobe could change the CC paradigm by stating if you subscribe to the CC for at least 3 years you can stop your monthly payment and still have access to the software but you will not get any more updates until you start paying again. As some have suggested Adobe could change the CC paradigm by offering any 5 programs for $19.99 or any 10 programs for $29.99. Competition will determine the fate of the CC. As I stated the CC is not super expensive but for video editing the competition is getting tougher and tougher and less expensive. For example BMD lowered the price for DR. I imagine BMD are still making money form DR. BMD and Adobe can make millions or billions depending on what they want to charge. Stating BMD sells hardware is a moot point because DR is competition for Premiere Pro. DR is getting better and better and also getting less expensive. The same cannot be said of the CC. Do you finally see my point about competition? $49.99 for the CC in another two years may seem expensive depending on where the competition is at.


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 7:34:38 pm

[andy patterson] "$49.99 for the CC in another two years may seem expensive depending on where the competition is at."

Or when more people who use the "Adobe Big Five" realize they are paying for the development of software they will never use (the rest of the CC).

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 7:49:43 pm

[andy patterson] "Competition will determine the fate of the CC. As I stated the CC is not super expensive but for video editing the competition is getting tougher and tougher and less expensive. For example BMD lowered the price for DR. I imagine BMD are still making money form DR. BMD and Adobe can make millions or billions depending on what they want to charge. Stating BMD sells hardware is a moot point because DR is competition for Premiere Pro. DR is getting better and better and also getting less expensive. The same cannot be said of the CC. Do you finally see my point about competition? $49.99 for the CC in another two years may seem expensive depending on where the competition is at."

Well, that's kind of the point, Andy. How does a software company compete with a hardware company that can give its offerings away for little or nothing? Surely, not by lowering it's prices! Subsidized software shields users from the true costs of development, so non-subsidized applications will always seem expensive by comparison. I have two roaming licenses for Resolve Studio, yet I haven't paid a penny for either seat or any subsequent updates to the application... yet, I think $50.00 for a monthly CC subscription is completely fare, and to be honest, less expensive than I would expect it to be. I can certainly see where they could be more flexible in their subscription options, but come on... Adobe isn't exactly Autodesk.

Lastly, and even further off-topic, I'm just waiting for Maxon to announce it's great new subscription model OR its acquisition by Adobe or Autodesk. Perpetual licensing isn't dead, but I think it's on life support. ☺

Shawn



Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 8:01:59 pm

[andy patterson] "As I stated if you purchased CS 4.0 they would make minor updates with bugs fixes and a few new features. Same with CS 5.5 and CS 6.0."

What companies were able to get away with a decade or more ago is moot. Those infractions are now being caught (see my previous mention of Apple and Avid) so software companies have become much more mindful of the regulations.

[andy patterson] "Adobe could change the CC paradigm by stating if you subscribe to the CC for at least 3 years you can stop your monthly payment and still have access to the software but you will not get any more updates until you start paying again."

I raised the exact same point years ago and got a good explanation from Tim Wilson about how that violates SOX. Basically a company is either offering software as a subscription service or selling software as a product, the two can't intermingle. Hence why Avid offers two distinctly separate paths for Media Composer. There has also been discussion about why didn't Adobe do the same thing as Avid did, but IMO that wouldn't work for Adobe even though it works (clunky as it is) for Avid. Again, all this is retread from multiple, in-depth discussions in this forum and in the Adobe CC Debate forum.

[andy patterson] " Stating BMD sells hardware is a moot point because DR is competition for Premiere Pro."

It's not moot from a money making perspective and companies have to make money to keep the lights on. Understanding the business model is required to understanding what options are viable and what aren't for each company. It reminds me of people that use to say that Apple was doomed because all of their computers are too expensive compared to what Dell offers.

I think you are putting too much weight on price and not enough weight on value. If price was absolutely paramount then everyone would flock to Resolve and Media100 because they are free. For example, is $299 a more attractive price point than what I pay to Adobe and Avid? Yes, but for my needs Adobe and Avid represent a significantly better value so eschewing them for FCP X or Resolve based solely on price would be penny wise and pound foolish. Going back to Apple, they survived the race-to-the-bottom computer wars by because many customers viewed Apple's products as a better value even if the price tag was higher.

[andy patterson] "Do you finally see my point about competition? $49.99 for the CC in another two years may seem expensive depending on where the competition is at."

I always saw your point and continue to disagree with it. Your position is built on random price changes, baseless assumptions, and ignoring the changes in the software market that have helped shape the various business models that are in play today. You prefer the old software business model. I get. I generally preferred it too. I also preferred when gas was $0.75 a gallon and I could get a Coke and a bag of chips for a buck. Just because it was viable in the past doesn't mean it's still viable today.

By what metric is Adobe failing and in dire need of a change of course? Their revenue continues to grow. Their subscriber numbers continue to grow. Their stock price continues to hit record highs. Go back to the beginning of the Adobe CC Debate forum and you'll see a bunch of people saying Adobe is doomed and they'll never come close to hitting their subscriber and revenue goals... Obviously things turned out differently and that's a big reason why the Adobe CC Debate forum has been a ghost town for months. When Adobe's numbers start to level off they will have to take corrective action, but expecting them to drop their price by more than half when they having this much success is wishful thinking.

[andy patterson] " If it was not for the CC subscription I imagine some of the people would have stuck with Premiere Pro although FCPX and DR are both good NLE."

If it wasn't for the subscription model they probably wouldn't have been able to afford going with Adobe at all. $400 for FCP X, Motion and Compressor vs $1900 for the CS6 Production Premium bundle.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 10:03:51 pm

[Andrew Kimery] " For example, is $299 a more attractive price point than what I pay to Adobe and Avid? Yes, but for my needs Adobe and Avid represent a significantly better value so eschewing them for FCP X or Resolve based solely on price would be penny wise and pound foolish."

For your needs? No is arguing about your needs. I am saying many YouTubers will opt for FCPX or DR because of the costly rental paradigm when compared to Premiere Pro. No one is saying that for a post production house $50.00 a month is to expensive. In fact I said just the opposite. I just remember the day when Adobe wanted to compete with the competition by offering a good product at an inexpensive price. Premiere Pro is not inexpensive when compared to DR.


[Andrew Kimery] "By what metric is Adobe failing and in dire need of a change of course? Their revenue continues to grow. Their subscriber numbers continue to grow. Their stock price continues to hit record highs. Go back to the beginning of the Adobe CC Debate forum and you'll see a bunch of people saying Adobe is doomed and they'll never come close to hitting their subscriber and revenue goals... Obviously things turned out differently and that's a big reason why the Adobe CC Debate forum has been a ghost town for months. When Adobe's numbers start to level off they will have to take corrective action, but expecting them to drop their price by more than half when they having this much success is wishful thinking."

Please read my posts. I have said time and time and time again $49.99 a month is not bad but no one really knows what the future holds. CS used to get great upgrades. CC not so much. With BMD adding Fairlight into DR and dropping the price that is a huge game changer. Premiere has gotten some of the audio capabilities of Audition but I like what BMD has done with Resolve. I am not saying all the post production houses are going to start using DR. I am saying some of them might make the switch. Bottom line is where will DR be in two years from now and where will Premiere Pro be in two years from now and what will the price of both programs be? Like I said DR has been getting great upgrades for the past two years and the price dropped. If I had said last year at NAB 2016 BMD is going to lower the price of DR in 2017 I imagine you and many others would have said " you are on crack dude" but it happened. Didn't it?

[Andrew Kimery] "[andy patterson] " If it was not for the CC subscription I imagine some of the people would have stuck with Premiere Pro although FCPX and DR are both good NLE."

If it wasn't for the subscription model they probably wouldn't have been able to afford going with Adobe at all. $400 for FCP X, Motion and Compressor vs $1900 for the CS6 Production Premium bundle."


Apple is make an awesome set of tools for less than the competition. We may see Adobe change the CC paradigm slightly. I think BMD really wants to get the CC subscribers and the FCPX users.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 8, 2017 at 12:30:44 am

[andy patterson] "I am saying many YouTubers will opt for FCPX or DR because of the costly rental paradigm when compared to Premiere Pro."

Based on what? My experience with YouTubers parallel's Oliver's in that PPro is popular in that sector. Of course "YouTubers" itself is a vague term that covers everyone from vloggers making $10/mo to Video Game High School that had a budget of $2.3 million for it's final season.

[andy patterson] "I just remember the day when Adobe wanted to compete with the competition by offering a good product at an inexpensive price. Premiere Pro is not inexpensive when compared to DR. "

When was the Production Premium suite inexpensive compared to Apple's Final Cut Studio package? I think Premiere (not Pro) was cheaper than FCP back in the day, but demand for Premiere was so low from Mac users that it wasn't worth Adobe's time to make an OS X Premiere Pro version until Apple switch to x86 (which greatly reduced Adobe's cost to make a Mac version). Coming back to the present, FCP X is expensive compared to the free version of DR. Again, I think you are placing way too much emphasis on price alone. If price outweighed all other factors so decisively then the free version of DR should just be crushing it to the point that charging any amount of money for an NLE would be borderline impractical.

You also seem to be relying on a common fallacy that dropping prices would inherently lead to an inversely proportional increase in customers and revenue (ex. if Adobe cuts the price by half then twice as many people will sign up) even though there doesn't seem to be any evidence to support that. What if the biggest roadblock to potential subscribers isn't price at all but the concept of renting software in general? In my experience that's the more common complaint than cost. Similarly, I'd say price isn't the problem for many/most people not adopting FCP X. Apple could make it $99 and they people that are saying "screw you and your magnetic timeline" will still be saying 'screw you and your magnetic timeline'.


[andy patterson] "Like I said DR has been getting great upgrades for the past two years and the price dropped. If I had said last year at NAB 2016 BMD is going to lower the price of DR in 2017 I imagine you and many others would have said " you are on crack dude" but it happened. Didn't it?"

I agree that DR has been getting a lot of great updates, but many of them have been features to provide parity with the competition as BMD continues to improve DR's NLE functionality. As with Premiere, MC and X, the 'wow' upgrades will be fewer and farther between as DR matures. Will being a 'super app' (top level NLE, grading and audio mixing all in one piece of software) be enough of a differentiator that people will leave Avid, Adobe, or Apple in large numbers? Only time will tell. It's certainly something that many users have pined for and no company has gone there yet like BMD has w/DR.

With regards to the price cut, I didn't expected it but given BMD's MO I wasn't shocked by it. They've always given away a free version that had nearly 100% feature parity of the paid version, and even give away copies of the paid version for free if you buy a BM camera. It's not like the price drop will suddenly make DR more accessible to a wider audience than it had been in the past. The paid version has always been for the niche of a niche market that wanted/needed those specific, higher end features, and if you are in that market a one time fee of $999 isn't really a barrier to entry.Tell me BMD is going to cut their camera prices by 2/3 and I'll say yer on crack. ;)


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 8, 2017 at 5:02:03 am

[Andrew Kimery] "You also seem to be relying on a common fallacy that dropping prices would inherently lead to an inversely proportional increase in customers and revenue (ex. if Adobe cuts the price by half then twice as many people will sign up) even though there doesn't seem to be any evidence to support that."

I never said that. I am saying competition is out there. Many people have left Adobe and some have even posted here in the Cow about it. They stated they did not like renting the software.

[Andrew Kimery] "What if the biggest roadblock to potential subscribers isn't price at all but the concept of renting software in general? In my experience that's the more common complaint than cost."

I agree 100%. I never said other wise.

[Andrew Kimery] "Similarly, I'd say price isn't the problem for many/most people not adopting FCP X. Apple could make it $99 and they people that are saying "screw you and your magnetic timeline" will still be saying 'screw you and your magnetic timeline'."

Once again I agree but there are people who can use FCPX and Premiere Pro but ditch Premiere Pro because of the CC paradigm.

[Andrew Kimery] "I agree that DR has been getting a lot of great updates, but many of them have been features to provide parity with the competition as BMD continues to improve DR's NLE functionality. As with Premiere, MC and X, the 'wow' upgrades will be fewer and farther between as DR matures."

I agree.

[Andrew Kimery] " Will being a 'super app' (top level NLE, grading and audio mixing all in one piece of software) be enough of a differentiator that people will leave Avid, Adobe, or Apple in large numbers? Only time will tell"

I agree. I am not ditching Premiere Pro just yet but where will money be at NAB 2018? It depends one who offers the best bang for the buck.

[Andrew Kimery] "With regards to the price cut, I didn't expected it but given BMD's MO I wasn't shocked by it. They've always given away a free version that had nearly 100% feature parity of the paid version, and even give away copies of the paid version for free if you buy a BM camera."

I am not shocked by DR but I am impressed.

[Andrew Kimery] " It's not like the price drop will suddenly make DR more accessible to a wider audience than it had been in the past."

There are some Youtbuers and bloggers who are getting hip to DR. Adobe may or may not care that much about the bloggers.

[Andrew Kimery] "Tell me BMD is going to cut their camera prices by 2/3 and I'll say yer on crack. ;)"

You are talking about hardware that is manufactured. For some people Google Docs works OK but fore others they still need MS Office. I don't doubt MS would like to get as many users as possible but the only way that will happen is by beating the completion. Will Google Doc surpass MS Office in 2019? Who knows?


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 10:20:25 pm

In hindsight, I admit that my gas and chips analogy is poor.

-Andrew


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 10:16:44 pm

[andy patterson] "Adobe could charge $14.95 a month and still make money"

Do you have access to their financials in order to make that determination?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 12:47:28 pm

Andy -

Just curious to know that if a client of yours asked you to cut your rate by well more than half because they thought you were making too much profit, would you agree to do that? Probably not. So why would Adobe? A publicly held company like Adobe is not going to simply give up huge revenue.

I think you will see the rate increase in the future, not decrease. Probably small tick up. Or, what I would like to see, Adobe might consider offering an a la carte option for CC. Say $25/month for any five products in the cloud.

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 8:53:50 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "Just curious to know that if a client of yours asked you to cut your rate by well more than half because they thought you were making too much profit, would you agree to do that? Probably not. So why would Adobe? A publicly held company like Adobe is not going to simply give up huge revenue."

That is a very bad analogy Scott. I am talking about competition. If I charge$1000.00 to build a website and my potential client find someone to do it for less I loose the business.


[Scott Witthaus] "I think you will see the rate increase in the future, not decrease. Probably small tick up. Or, what I would like to see, Adobe might consider offering an a la carte option for CC. Say $25/month for any five products in the cloud."

Your a proving my point and I do hope we see Adobe change it's paradigm but it will not be because of anything I said or you said but because of the competition.


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 3:01:40 am

[andy patterson] "If I charge$1000.00 to build a website and my potential client find someone to do it for less I loose the business. "

But wait, FCPX costs less than CC in the long run. So is Adobe losing business to Apple in this model? Pure cost?

[andy patterson] "I do hope we see Adobe change it's paradigm but it will not be because of anything I said or you said but because of the competition."

For me, and probably many others, I use Pr (when forced to), PS, AE and some Illustrator. That's it. I don't need, nor want, the bloated CC package of, what, 15-20 some-odd softwares. So really I should be paying about $10 - $15/month for the five I want (maybe that is where you got your $14.99 number). If I need more, I pay more a la carte. But at $49/month I am being forced to pay for the development of software I will never use. At least in Avid-land, one can assume the monthly fee is going to something close to the core editing software.

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 5:00:45 am

[Scott Witthaus] "[andy patterson] "If I charge$1000.00 to build a website and my potential client find someone to do it for less I loose the business. "

But wait, FCPX costs less than CC in the long run. So is Adobe losing business to Apple in this model? Pure cost?"


There are a lot of Youtubers that use Macs that have ditched Premiere Pro in favor of FCPX. I don't blame them. Cost is the only real factor for most the YouTubers since most of them could just use iMovie. I admit a post production house is not going to be as concerned about the cost as opposed to workflow paradigms.

[Scott Witthaus] "For me, and probably many others, I use Pr (when forced to), PS, AE and some Illustrator. That's it. I don't need, nor want, the bloated CC package of, what, 15-20 some-odd softwares. So really I should be paying about $10 - $15/month for the five I want (maybe that is where you got your $14.99 number). If I need more, I pay more a la carte. But at $49/month I am being forced to pay for the development of software I will never use. At least in Avid-land, one can assume the monthly fee is going to something close to the core editing software."

That is my point. Adobe may loose some CC members to the competition. I like what I see from BMD. In fact BMD fulfilled my marker request. Adobe ignored it. I have heard Premiere's new Essential Graphics Panel and Markers will get more features. I hope so because the updates from Adobe at NAB 2017 were kind of weak.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 11:54:19 am

[andy patterson] "There are a lot of Youtubers that use Macs that have ditched Premiere Pro in favor of FCPX. I don't blame them. Cost is the only real factor for most the YouTubers since most of them could just use iMovie. "

I'd be surprised if that actually panned out in hard numbers. FWIW - my casual observation in the NAB press office this year of people cutting video reports for websites and blogs was 100% Premiere. As far as users who aren't professional editors, my guess is that Resolve will win this battle. It's super-easy to learn (outside of the color page) and free.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 6:43:41 pm

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "There are a lot of Youtubers that use Macs that have ditched Premiere Pro in favor of FCPX. I don't blame them. Cost is the only real factor for most the YouTubers since most of them could just use iMovie. "

I'd be surprised if that actually panned out in hard numbers. FWIW - my casual observation in the NAB press office this year of people cutting video reports for websites and blogs was 100% Premiere. As far as users who aren't professional editors, my guess is that Resolve will win this battle. It's super-easy to learn (outside of the color page) and free."


You are proving my point because there are people on YouTube who have switched form Premiere Pro to DR (not a lot). If it was not for the CC subscription I imagine some of the people would have stuck with Premiere Pro although FCPX and DR are both good NLE.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 4, 2017 at 8:30:11 pm

I've never spoken out against subscriptions per se.

Only against subscriptions linked to user access to their own Intellectual Property.

Heck, *I* do subscriptions at XinTwo. But you need to unsubscribe it's as easy as subscribing and you keep all the knowledge you've gained and I control NOTHING outside my own IP.

I have thousands of photos in Lightroom with metadata that I have painstakingly created concerning cropping, color correction, and a thousand other creative decisions.

When my subscription ends this month, Adobe will wall me off from that prior creative work unless I pay them again.

Not acceptable in my opinion.

And it's MY fault for working in a system that allows someone else to gatekeep my IP.

The other software systems seem to understand that, and come with IP terms that don't put them between me and my own work.

I don't know what AVID or others are doing in this area. Just publicly hoping that they develop similar environments where they respect my rights to IP ownership as NOT subservient to theirs.

FWIW.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 12:17:25 am

[Bill Davis] "Only against subscriptions linked to user access to their own Intellectual Property."

I'm not sure about Lightroom, but in regards to Premiere Pro, After Effects, and Photoshop, that simply is not true. I realize it's a sore point for you, but you keep saying that just to be inflammatory. However, that doesn't make it so. Yes, you cannot open a project file unless you have a paid-up version of the app. However, you still have possession of it. It's not in the cloud. Nothing prevents you from taking it to someone else who does have an active account and making changes. Or paying for a monthly use when you need it. Of course, if you had bought CS6, you still own those apps and things function at that level, assuming you didn't upgrade your projects.

[Bill Davis] "I don't know what AVID or others are doing in this area."

In the case of Avid, you have two options with Media Composer. In one plan, you pay a larger fee upfront and then an annual support contract (subscription) from there on. If you lapse on the annual support, MC continues to work, but is frozen and not upgradeable beyond the last valid updated version. In the other plan, it's pure subscription just like Adobe.

So what do you feel about Microsoft then? Do you use Word or Excel? Current or a legacy version?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 4:12:50 pm

Oliver.

Inflamitory no. Cautionary yes. I think people deserve another view about this. Then they can decide for themselves. That's all.

I am a bit surprised at the "access to your property via take it to somebody else who rents it" idea. How is that remotely equivelent to keeping control of your own IP? Wait, I get it. Adobe just wants me to maintain a lifelong friendship with at least one CC subscriber to enable me hastle free alteration of my own property if need be. They are clearly just out to encourage me to have more friends! (I should have picked up on that sooner.)

And yes, I actually have dumped the use of both Word and Excel.

Word is (to me) bloatware now. Much happier with Omwriter for disappearing into just writing without so many distractions - and Pages when I need formatting.

Excel offers nothing to me (at my level of use) I can't do in Numbers.

I'm *trying" to evaluate my tool approaches on their actual merits rather than on the inertia of choices I (or even clients) made long ago and for which superior options might exist if only I keep open to them.

That's seemed to work out pretty well the past decade for me.

YMMV.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 4:27:28 pm

[Bill Davis] "I am a bit surprised at the "access to your property via take it to somebody else who rents it" idea."

All I'm saying is that you never loose access to your IP. First, the finished, exported master is unaffected. The project file - your "exposed workings" - stay in your possession. You merely lose access to opening it back up, if you quit paying. I'm simply saying you could open it anywhere else, since you still have access to the actual project file. That's what clients do all the time when they take an existing project to another facility to revise it.

[Bill Davis] "And yes, I actually have dumped the use of both Word and Excel."

I agree there are valid alternatives, but not if you have to regularly exchange document files with clients. Things like "tracked changes" are hit or miss. So opening a Word document in Pages doesn't guarantee that you are getting the right info. Also Numbers, in particular, has the age-old Apple problem of not being able to scale large. Huge, complex spreadsheets are a dog in Numbers compared with Excel.

[Bill Davis] "I'm *trying" to evaluate my tool approaches on their actual merits rather than on the inertia of choices I (or even clients) made long ago and for which superior options might exist if only I keep open to them."

Which is fine, but has nothing to do with the pros and cons of subscription as a business model.

But, let's turn the tables...

Apple software is a risk, because they are holding my IP for ransom:

1. I can't open old FCP7 or Color files anymore, because I can't buy the software any longer.
2. I can't open my project and document files, because Apple requires that I use their hardware.
3. My footage is all in ProRes, which is a format only controlled by Apple.

See, the argument cuts both ways. ☺

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 4:48:40 pm

[andy patterson] "Adobe doesn't have to make I/O hardware devices. "

It was just an example, but if Adobe wanted to drop software prices to compete with the price points Apple and BM are offering then Adobe would have to do something to fill that revenue void out since selling software to creatives would no longer be their primary source of income.

By creating other sources of revenue targeting creatives (Adobe Stock, Team Projects, etc.,) I think raising the CC subscription price is the last thing they want to do in order to boost revenue. Adobe also has two other company pillars (Marketing Cloud and Document Cloud), and while Marketing Cloud is growing a lot, Creative Cloud is still the biggest revenue generator by far. If the other two segments keep growing then I think that will help keep Creative Cloud prices stable which would be a win/win situation (Adobe revenue increases w/o a need to raise CC prices).

[Oliver Peters] "If you lapse on the annual support, MC continues to work, but is frozen and not upgradeable beyond the last valid updated version."

I'll add that even get bug fixes are unavailable once you stop paying, and if you want to get back on the train you have to pay full retail price again (no upgrade discounts).

[Bill Davis] "I am a bit surprised at the "access to your property via take it to somebody else who rents it" idea. How is that remotely equivelent to keeping control of your own IP? "

This situation is decades (if not a century or more) old. People rent gear (and/or rent crew) all the time and if they want to continue to use the equipment/crew beyond the scope of the original rental agreement they have to pay for it. Honestly, it's not much different than a relationship we might have with a client. We do an agreed up amount of work for an agreed upon amount of time at an agreed upon price. Once it's done the client is, by your definition, effectively locked out of their IP until they pay us, or a competitor, more money to access it again.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 5:12:35 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "This situation is decades (if not a century or more) old. People rent gear ... Honestly, it's not much different than a relationship we might have with a client."

I think the "sin" here is that software companies are changing the business relationship away from what people have been used to. You NEVER owned the software to start with. You only bought a perpetual license to use it. Now software companies are shifting from the perpetual license arrangement to a timed/payment-based model. People don't like change.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 5:50:28 pm

[Oliver Peters] "People don't like change."

Especially editors!

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 5, 2017 at 5:56:36 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I think the "sin" here is that software companies are changing the business relationship away from what people have been used to. "

And of course what people are used to varies from person to person. Much of my journey through the industry was along the 'everything is rented' path so when FCP got to the point of being 'good enough' *and* it was cheap enough to own that was novel to me.

I'm rather ambivalent about software subscriptions, but given the market conditions it's either adapt (via alt business models like subscriptions) or die for many software venders.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 12:18:36 am

Fascinating that it's a post about Autodesk and no-one is talking about Autodesk.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 12:33:04 am

[Michael Gissing] "Autodesk"

Who? ☺

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 1:23:40 am

I realize that for some, subscription is a sore spot, but quite frankly it's just a business decision. However, let's put a little perspective on it. The monthly cost is $50/month for an annual subscription. For most here, this means if on average you bill just 1 hour/month of time, you've paid for it. That's a pretty low bar, unless you are retired or working only pro bona or just as a hobby.

For this you are getting the equivalent of the old Master Collection. I looked it up and when Adobe started introducing the Master Collection as a subscription option, the monthly rate was $129/month for an annual subscription. So, Adobe has actually reduced, not increased, the subscription rates.

When you had to purchase the Master Collection, it was $2600 (rounded off) and upgrades after that were $900 (rounded off). Typically updates weren't every year. So let's say you bought MC and did two updates to it. That would cost $4400 total. This means that purchase+updates is equal to 88 months (7 1/3 years) of subscription, before you hit parity. Odds are that you'd actually have more than 2 updates during this time, which would mean an even longer time before parity would be reached. If Adobe did an annual CS update, like they more or less do with CC - and each update was another $900 - then this would average $75/month (just for the update, not factoring the initial purchase). This would be more than the monthly subscription for an annual account. Plus CC covers two activated machines, whereas CS on covered one at a time.

Obviously you can argue the relative value for what you are getting, as well as a cost comparison with FCPX/Motion/Compressor/Logic or BMD Resolve/Fusion, but that's a separate issue. The bottom line is that if you are a working professional editor/designer/VFX artist, a pretty solid business case can be made for Adobe CC.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 1:49:54 am

[Oliver Peters] "I looked it up and when Adobe started introducing the Master Collection as a subscription option, the monthly rate was $129/month for an annual subscription."

You have to ask how many people bought into at that price?

[Oliver Peters] " So, Adobe has actually reduced, not increased, the subscription rates."

Probably because of competition. I have already stated competition is a good thing and we may see Adobe rethink the CC.


[Oliver Peters] "When you had to purchase the Master Collection, it was $2600 (rounded off) and upgrades after that were $900 (rounded off)."

The Master Collection could be bought for $2400.00 and they have holiday specials to get the Master Collection upgrade for 10-20% less. That is when I make the upgrades. Having said that some of the other Creative Suite upgrades were under $600.00 and that is why some say with the CC they pay more and get less.


[Oliver Peters] "Obviously you can argue the relative value for what you are getting, as well as a cost comparison with FCPX/Motion/Compressor/Logic or BMD Resolve/Fusion, but that's a separate issue."

I think After CS 6.0 Adobe knew it would be hard to constantly make the same big of upgrades as they had been.

DR and FCPX have to be part of the equation. I don't just benchmark Adobe against Adobe nor should anyone else. BMD has upgraded DR a lot over the last two years. Some CC user might jump ship.

Once again I am not saying the CC is super expensive but then again the upgrades are not all that great compared to the past.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 12:08:17 pm

[andy patterson] "DR and FCPX have to be part of the equation. I don't just benchmark Adobe against Adobe nor should anyone else. BMD has upgraded DR a lot over the last two years. Some CC user might jump ship. "

I would agree that BMD and Resolve are the ones to watch. Grant runs a private company, so he's not encumbered by the same financial rules that govern others. He's also amassed a ton of software IP that he can freely use across product lines without the concern of paying licensing fees. He has a very aggressive attitude towards product development and a zeal to democratize, or at least an interest in sticking it to the (now other) big guys in the industry. Bolting in Fairlight within 6 months of buying the company is nothing short of phenomenal in terms of software and something I could never see Autodesk, Adobe, Avid, or Apple being able to accomplish.

That being said, I don't see Resolve as a serious threat yet to FCPX, Media Composer, or Premiere. However, since I started this thread talking about Autodesk, I do see it as a major threat to Smoke/Flame, especially with the inclusion of Fusion. Bottom line, I think for Autodesk, is that this will kill their market for "lower end" software-based editing/compositing products and probably leave them to retreat back to the higher-end, hardware-accelerated effects/compositing market that is still willing to pay for that. The same position SAM is in with the Quantel products. Probably why Autodesk is now aggressively trying to move customers totally over to subscription. Especially for the 3D animation and CAD products, where they still have a stronghold.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 2:02:01 am

[Oliver Peters]"The bottom line is that if you are a working professional editor/designer/VFX artist, a pretty solid business case can be made for Adobe CC."

Yes I've never understood the price issue. It seems some get caught up on the principal and don't break the costs down as you have done. In the end the cost is trivial compared to the use and preference of the editing professional. I nearly started a CC subscription but Resolve is working for me so I milked CS6 and FCP7 to bridge the gap to when it was able to be a complete finishing tool and no need to round trip back to finish.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 6, 2017 at 2:23:54 am

[Michael Gissing] "Fascinating that it's a post about Autodesk and no-one is talking about Autodesk."

It is about subscription based software.


Return to posts index

Ben McCarthy
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 7, 2017 at 11:32:12 pm

How about pay per use, i'll go for that, $1 to open the program each tim! Resets everyday...$20 a week sounds about right if you're making money off of it :)


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Autodesk subscription model
on Jun 10, 2017 at 8:37:13 pm

[Ben McCarthy] "How about pay per use, i'll go for that, $1 to open the program each tim! Resets everyday...$20 a week sounds about right if you're making money off of it :)"

Not "secure" enough.

Hey, how bout we incorporate one of those "pinprick" blood glucose monitors on the keyboard?

The software takes a simple "drop of blood" each time you launch the software, and does a DNA scan to make sure the individual with that DNA is properly licensed to use the software?

Enables consistent auto-pay - prevents piracy - and allows for lots of add-on sales!

And with the medical data, we can maybe sort out the healthiest editors and sell them low cost insurance policies right in the app?

Incremental revenue, here we come!

Winner winner chicken dinner?

/s/

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]