FORUMS: list search recent posts

Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout

COW Forums : Adobe Creative Cloud Debate

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
David Lawrence
Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 1:38:53 am

I found this document fascinating. Thanks to @Rainer Schubert in the thread below for the link:

http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/investor-rela...

I think page 6, The New Adobe, is my favorite:



Create and monetize the world's content. Okaaaay.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Greg Andonian
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 1:48:57 am

[David Lawrence] I think page 6, The New Adobe, is my favorite

Yeah, I saw that too. I see in the middle that they want to "increase the % of recurring revenue". I'm starting to feel even more that creating that Facebook page was the right thing to do. :P

Greg Andonian, a.k.a. Derek

______________________________________________
https://www.facebook.com/Adobe2014

http://www.adobe2014.tumblr.com

#adobe2014


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 2:08:59 am

So uh.
It's not about the money, but its about ... the money?


Return to posts index


David Lawrence
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 2:15:14 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "So uh.
It's not about the money, but its about ... the money?"


For Adobe, it's all about the money.

For customers, it's about way more than that. That's why Adobe has a problem on their hands.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Paul Neumann
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 3:11:06 am

Would've been so much better if they'd said something like, "Never change. Never innovate. Let Apple and Corel kick our ass. Never be first to market with leading technology. Always play catch up."

That'd been cool.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 3:20:04 am

[Paul Neumann] "Would've been so much better if they'd said something like, "Never change. Never innovate. Let Apple and Corel kick our ass. Never be first to market with leading technology. Always play catch up.""

Yeah, because nothing says innovation like "Increase % of recurring revenue".

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index


Greg Andonian
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 8:08:35 pm

[Paul Neumann] Would've been so much better if they'd said something like, "Never change. Never innovate. Let Apple and Corel kick our ass. Never be first to market with leading technology. Always play catch up."

You get your wish, only because your line about Apple and Corel made me laugh.



...But if you're suggesting that Adobe's move to the subscription-only Creative Cloud model represents a very innovative change that had to be done for them to stay ahead of the competition, I strongly disagree. In fact I think that line about Apple and Corel just might start to come true if Adobe continues down the path that they're on.

Greg Andonian, a.k.a. Derek

______________________________________________
https://www.facebook.com/Adobe2014

http://www.adobe2014.tumblr.com

#adobe2014


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 3:23:35 am

[David Lawrence] "For Adobe, it's all about the money.

For customers, it's about way more than that. That's why Adobe has a problem on their hands."


Adobe has a plan.

It's going to cost something. They also have a plan in what users get in return.

It seems to me to be business as usual, and they also seem to be fairly serious about it.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 3:28:05 am

Adobe isn't the only one who is serious about it.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 3:31:51 am

Indeed.


Return to posts index

Ricardo Marty
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 3:10:28 am

Creatives of the world Unite!

Yes a monopoly is born. Everything through adobe. Monitizing the creative process. Its a brave new world.

Ricardo



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 12:19:29 pm

[Ricardo Marty] "Creatives of the world Unite!

Yes a monopoly is born. Everything through adobe. Monitizing the creative process. Its a brave new world.
"


Unless you work for free, or video production and post isn't your main subsistence, you also monetize the creative process.

I am paid for my time, and most of that time is spent being creative.

Adobe is providing tools to help you get the creative job done. They, also, want to get paid for their time.

I'm not saying that its best for every situation, or person, or company, but I'm not sure we need to vilify that statement when at the heart of it, we are creative professionals, we do the very same thing.


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 12:27:12 pm

as you wrote: unless...


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 1:03:25 pm

[Rainer Schubert] "as you wrote: unless...
"


And if not, then there are plenty of more low cost, perhaps even free, tools to use.

There's a big list of alternatives floating around.

I've said this before, and we had a lot of debate about it back when fcpx was released, but the CC forces us to reexamine what it means to be a professional content creator. It is who Adobe seems to be catering to, at least that's what I gather from reading all the material and hearing from company representatives.


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 1:34:02 pm

unless...

Was meant:
You see that from your sight. Maybe from the sight of one, who is working for studios and is payed by time.
Viewpoint of the studio, you are working for, is a different.
Studios are working for money. That´s true. And it´s also OK.
But: Adobe monetizes them to hold all the content, they created. They bind their paying users to their software.
(No matter for you, if you are a freelancer working there...)
Once they filled their Archives with Files only completely editable by Adobe SW its hard to find a way out, some day in the future.

Reexamine if we are professional content creators??? Forcing us to this with this kid of distribution???
Hey, come on...
I think, they are more forcing us to reexamine if we are good tradesmen in case ob buying us into dependency.

I also in contact to some very big advertising agencies. There are voices, that let me see, that they are not amused about the dependency, Adobe will bring them in.
I´m not against paying money for good software (one can name that monetizing, but I would say that´s market).
But this distribution is a step ahead in milking users. Also it´s forcing and binding.
And also there is no real competition in some cases of their core-products.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 3:43:25 pm

[Rainer Schubert] "You see that from your sight. Maybe from the sight of one, who is working for studios and is payed by time.
Viewpoint of the studio, you are working for, is a different.
Studios are working for money. That´s true. And it´s also OK.
But: Adobe monetizes them to hold all the content, they created. They bind their paying users to their software.
(No matter for you, if you are a freelancer working there...)
Once they filled their Archives with Files only completely editable by Adobe SW its hard to find a way out, some day in the future. "


I know that I feel much differently about this than others, but when you get right down to it, none of this has changed.

When you make an Adobe project file, you are locked in to Adobe. You will need some sort of Adobe product to open a project file, be it Ae, Pr, Pl, etc. Image based documents are different.

The only thing that has changed, is that if your subscription isn't current, you will have to pay $20/mo (for one app) to open up your project file. Adobe has also said they are working on a solution to have access to files even if you don't have a subscription. Time will tell what exactly that turns out to be.

So, like it or not, you are bound by Adobe if you use Adobe products. This is true of any proprietary software that you purchase. This is not unique or special to Adobe.



[Rainer Schubert] "Reexamine if we are professional content creators??? Forcing us to this with this kid of distribution???
Hey, come on...
I think, they are more forcing us to reexamine if we are good tradesmen in case ob buying us into dependency."


Even without the subscription model, I am dependent on Adobe. Again, I don't see a huge difference other than the way I have to pay for it differently, and there is a significant increase in cost.

I didn't say reexamine IF we are pros, I said reexamine what it means to be a pro in today's market.

There was major flack thrown at Apple upon the launch of FCPX saying that it was a toy and "unprofessional". Here, Adobe is marketing specifically to professionals and creating professional level software, yet the feedback, at least the vocal contingent that does not like the subscription model, has rejected it.

[Rainer Schubert] "I also in contact to some very big advertising agencies. There are voices, that let me see, that they are not amused about the dependency, Adobe will bring them in.
I´m not against paying money for good software (one can name that monetizing, but I would say that´s market).
But this distribution is a step ahead in milking users. Also it´s forcing and binding.
And also there is no real competition in some cases of their core-products."


I agree that it can make you feel like you are painted in to a corner. But if I look at it very pragmatically and truthfully, I am constantly painted in to a corner as I do not create any of the tools that I purchase and rely on in order for me to get my work completed. I have a heavy reliance on big, global, money making entities, Adobe included. But, I am also really honest with myself about this, why sugar coat it?

Also, just to reiterate, CS6, if you own it, is available perpetually. Adobe has announced that they will keep it on sale, and update it with bug fixes. This means that Adobe is giving CS6 license owners updated software for free for the near future. It's not all that bad.


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 11:45:06 pm

[Jeremy Garchow]

"The only thing that has changed, is that if your subscription isn't current, you will have to pay $20/mo (for one app) to open up your project file."

No. Not the only thing that changed. In mind of freedom of choice I can decide to change software without loses at any time I want. With this decision it´s clear, that I will use an other provider & I don´t need SW from Adobe any longer. From there on I still have the SW to open the (then) old files.
So, the real freedom of choice has changed into a punished choice.
I really even don´t have one day in my business, where I don´t have to open an file between 1 to 3 years old. As i used nearly all Apps of Adobe intensively, that´s paying for min. 3 years only to be able to open files I created.
After that period:
If I have to open older files not so often - for each file I have to:
Download, Install, Verify, Pay, Unistall, Book-Keeping (< that alone is more than $ 50/each file if I have to bill that) & paying the min. $ 20 (if it is not much more then)
At least (for me) a change of Adobe SW is $3000 in the end for Adobe (absolutely minimum). Not included all the hazel with downloading, installing, verifying and the amount for that work. For nothing (compared to classical distribution).
So what also has changed is: My freedom of choice.

[Jeremy Garchow]

"reexamine"

Would agree if I could only see ONE serious argument, pointed out by Adobe, why the cloud as an option has to be killed from sight of customer.

[Jeremy Garchow]

"painted in to a corner"

I own (the right to use) C4D Studio, 3D Studio, Maya, Lightwave & Rhino. Also use Blender sometimes (and more and more often). They are not the same, but they are competitors (Maya & Studio both of Autodesk, OK) widely compareable. And if one of them would come up, with an idea as Adobe - I would say Hasta la Vista Baby. I can completely replace one of them without any harm. Even if I´m not able to write the code of one of the Apps myself (also can´t lay eggs but eat them). That´s market as it should be. Most of Adobes core-Apps I can also replace. Not all. Photoshop is one of them. There is NO competitor with the same functionality & for the moment it even can´t be fully replaced by a combination of competitors. I Have to keep CS6 for that and wait till competitors got it. Will survive that. Also difficult with Flash and a little bit with Illustrator. But also: Keep CS6 and survive. And I have Alternatives for 95% of jobs regarding to them. In case of PS it´s not market it´s monopoly. Also: My PlugIns are more than the Amount of a CS6 MC. Useless in a future after CS6 in a few years. Because I trusted in Adobe as a fair partner.

[Jeremy Garchow]

"CS6"

No, it´s not that bad. It´still good. Didn´t say anything else. And I will keep it alive as long as I can.

Conclusion:
For me, money is not the first aspect (it would be cheaper as to keep my MC6s always up to date - as long as I subscribe).
I don´t like to get in dependency (No one can tell me what the price for one of my files is in 3 years).
And wait until Adobes period of "catching people" has come to an end.
Hard enough, that Adobe has such a great monopoly already.
But binding and forcing it´s customers from this standing isn´t acceptable.

I realize, that you have different sight on this like me.
For me it´s simply not acceptable. For you it is.
So let´s simply live with that - we both know the facts.
----------
CC = Cash Cow = Terminating the word "Archive" in digital future = Lifelong dependency = NoGo = Never


Return to posts index

Ricardo Marty
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 5:48:04 pm

Yes but nobody has to use me. Nor I obligate anyone to go through my services. its an open market based on capabilities. Not for adobe you either pay them for ever or loose your files. Of course they dont have the same stangle on video unless you drink the kool-aid.

Ricardo


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 5:55:08 pm

[Ricardo Marty] "Yes but nobody has to use me. Nor I obligate anyone to go through my services. "

Just as you aren't obligated to use Adobe products, though, right?


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 6:06:56 pm

@ Jeremy: You are if you have many years in Adobe's often complex file formats & hundreds of hours of experience you don't want to lose. Let alone the previous financial investment & permanent easy access to your archive... Need I go on?

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 7:51:58 pm

[Jim Wiseman] "@ Jeremy: You are if you have many years in Adobe's often complex file formats & hundreds of hours of experience you don't want to lose. Let alone the previous financial investment & permanent easy access to your archive... Need I go on?"

Not really as all of your investments are protected. Buy the perpetual CS6 if you don't already have it. It is going to be updated for the foreseeable future.

Can you tell me the same about my FCS3 archive? Do I need to go on?

I understand the concern, but Adobe is giving fair options to those who don't want to subscribe to CC.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 11:00:25 pm

I have CS6. The foreseeable future seems to be relative. According to Todd K, whose response in the AE thread on rendering I appreciate, the future of CS6, re OSX beyond 10.9, is "opaque". Although he did not rule out future compatibility entirely, as I had heard before. Not trying to put him in a difficult position, I am sure engineering could do it, but does management want that?

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 11:59:12 pm

"Fair" would have been the implementation of an Buy-Out.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 12:02:40 am

[Rainer Schubert] ""Fair" would have been the implementation of an Buy-Out."

It's called CS6, no?


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 1:20:27 am

No. That´s different.
CS6 is what they did = Kick in the a. You can hold our old stuff (and all the infrastructure for that)
Buy-Out:
Renting the software for an fixed time (or an fixed amount), get out (quit subscription) with the software-version at that point (unrestricted further use).
A solution without hiring your own archive. (AE & PREM are still not compatible and NO WRITTEN guaranty for compatibility after new features are build in after June 17th for the others. Read the Product Pages: "Which CC applications support export to CS6?" http://www.adobe.com/products/creativecloud/faq.html)

But I think you know exactly.
As I wrote: You like it. OK. I can´t accept. Also OK. Or?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 2:55:57 am

I just don't see the difference between a buyout and perpetual.

If Adobe offers a buyout, then why wouldn't they offer a lifetime membership for an exhorbitant price?

Cs6, is essentially, a buyout. You can buy cs6, use it forever, and you will always have access to it provided you have a machine and OS to run it.

Lets say you use CC for two more years. You then buy it out.

That means from that moment on, you get no more updates, but you can still open the software.

That's exactly what is happening with CS6, but Adobe is updating the software for bug fixes.

Cs6 is essentially a buyout.


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 7:29:30 am

???
I don´t know, how I can explain it better - Seems you even don´t understand me.
CS6 is not comparable with an real buy-out.
After a 2 year usage of Cash Cow, you can´t even open your files with CS6. There is no warranty for that - or what do you try to tell?
Diference between CC with real buy-out or not: You pay monthly as long as you want instead of paying one big amount.
(As Adobe told, they want a more foreseeable income, that would have been a solution...)
I really don´t understand why you try to tell CS6 is a buy-out???


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 3:02:26 pm

[Rainer Schubert] "After a 2 year usage of Cash Cow, you can´t even open your files with CS6. There is no warranty for that - or what do you try to tell?"

But if you stay with CS6, then you can open your files with CS6.

You can "buy out" CS6.

[Rainer Schubert] "Diference between CC with real buy-out or not: You pay monthly as long as you want instead of paying one big amount. "

So, you can pay $20 for one month for Pr and then "buy it out". Essentially, you pay Adobe $20 for the application of your choice? I don't think Adobe is going to want to do that.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Clint Wardlow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 2:35:44 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Cs6, is essentially, a buyout. You can buy cs6, use it forever, and you will always have access to it provided you have a machine and OS to run it.

Lets say you use CC for two more years. You then buy it out.

That means from that moment on, you get no more updates, but you can still open the software."


CS6 perpetual license is just an interim solution. It works for users at this point in time, but does not address the issue of the future. Years from now --say 10 years-- will it be a viable option. In the years to come, Adobe is going to have some alternative to subscription (maybe a buyout). As it stands now, after the wheels fall off of CS6, future CC subscribers are locked into paying a subscription in perpetuity.

I think Adobe will have to address this situation. At least I am hoping so.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 3:00:11 pm

[Clint Wardlow] "CS6 perpetual license is just an interim solution. It works for users at this point in time, but does not address the issue of the future. Years from now --say 10 years-- will it be a viable option. In the years to come, Adobe is going to have some alternative to subscription (maybe a buyout). As it stands now, after the wheels fall off of CS6, future CC subscribers are locked into paying a subscription in perpetuity.

I think Adobe will have to address this situation. At least I am hoping so."


I still am having trouble understanding.

10 years from now, you need to open a CS6 project.

You still have CS6. Can't you open it?

If you buy CS6 now, Adobe has said they will support it for at least the foreseeable future.

10 years from now you need to open a CC project. You pay $20 (remember, you haven't paid Adobe anything in 10 years) and you open it.

What exactly isn't addressed?


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 4:31:20 pm

I´m really not quite sure,if you understand what we are talking about? Do you read post above?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 4:39:39 pm

[Rainer Schubert] "I´m really not quite sure,if you understand what we are talking about? Do you read post above?"

Tell me how you foresee a buy out option happening.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 8:40:05 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Tell me how you foresee a buy out option happening."

possibly a little customer pressure and lacklustre subscription signups?

http://www.adobe2014.tumblr.com
#adobe2014

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 9:32:09 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "possibly a little customer pressure"

It depends. It would have to be an overwhelming amount of customer pressure.

Adobe's official stance was to deflect the first round of "uproar": http://blogs.adobe.com/creativecloud/our-move-to-creative-cloud-an-update/

[Aindreas Gallagher] "and lacklustre subscription signups"

Yeah, that'll certainly get some things changed.

Also, I was asking specifics. Give me in numbers, how a buy out would work as I am not really understanding. Because it's not about the money, but...

From what I Can see form here, you pay $50 for a month of CC, you cancel, and then you expect Adobe to give you perpetual access to that version of CC?

I'm an idiot so explain it like I'm five.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 9:44:06 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "From what I Can see form here, you pay $50 for a month of CC, you cancel, and then you expect Adobe to give you perpetual access to that version of CC?"

Yes, after X number of years and X amount of dollars. The value of X is something that works for Adobe and works for customers.

After you stop subscription, you are left with a working copy of the local software, frozen at the current feature set. You would be free to use this software with no further payment as long as you wish. Cloud-based services would go away or revert to free level.

If you want new features you're free to re-join the Cloud at any time and the loyalty period is reset.

This system guarantees Adobe stable income and guarantees users an exit option that gives them access to their files. It avoids the SOX problem because there is never a new product being sold. It is entirely doable, reasonable, and fair. It is technically trivial to implement. It would end this controversy overnight.

It's not rocket science. Make sense now?

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 10:13:38 pm

[David Lawrence] "Yes, after X number of years and X amount of dollars. The value of X is something that works for Adobe and works for customers."

So why not just have a lifetime membership?

Pay "X" dollars and you have access forever?

[David Lawrence] "It's not rocket science. Make sense now?"

Mmm. Kinda. X number of years and X number of dollars is the question. What are those numbers?

"What works" would be different for everyone.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 10:41:30 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "So why not just have a lifetime membership?

Pay "X" dollars and you have access forever?"


That would work for me.

[Jeremy Garchow] "Mmm. Kinda. X number of years and X number of dollars is the question. What are those numbers?

"What works" would be different for everyone."


It's not hard to figure out something fair. There are decades of Adobe pricing benchmarks that can be used for reference.

Some folks have suggested 5-years as the loyalty period. I think that's a bit long but I could be persuaded.

After 5-years @$600/year, you've spent $3000 on the Master Collection. I think that would be a very reasonable exit point for both Adobe and customers.

I would add an option for 3-year plan with a loyalty buy-out - i.e. after 3-years @$600/year ($1800 invested) for another X $ amount you can buy-out the local software frozen at the current feature set. X could be as much as $1200 and I would be happy.

This isn't difficult.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 10:49:20 pm

[David Lawrence] "There are decades of Adobe pricing benchmarks that can be used for reference."

But isn't that what got us here in the first place?

[David Lawrence] "Some folks have suggested 5-years as the loyalty period. I think that's a bit long but I could be persuaded.

After 5-years @$600/year, you've spent $3000 on the Master Collection. I think that would be a very reasonable exit point for both Adobe and customers."


OK. So, you pay for 5 years, you get 5 years of updates, and then for whatever reason you quit and, CC version "+5Years" is yours forever.

But you have to pay for 5 years to get that deal.

Why not just pay for 20 years of it and be done (12,000 smackers)?

What if I only want to pay for one year? Or four years? I don't get access to that deal? Why?


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 12:01:14 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "OK. So, you pay for 5 years, you get 5 years of updates, and then for whatever reason you quit and, CC version "+5Years" is yours forever.

But you have to pay for 5 years to get that deal.

Why not just pay for 20 years of it and be done (12,000 smackers)?

What if I only want to pay for one year? Or four years? I don't get access to that deal? Why?"


Sigh.

I think you're over thinking this.

Any of those options could be offered. The 5-year plan is just one idea.

X-dollars could easily be based on Y-number of years.

The important point is everything's based on membership. No new products are ever sold. This lets Adobe get around the SOX limitations. If Adobe continues to innovate, odds are members will continue their membership and spend more then they might have with a perpetual upgrade. Adobe wins.

On the other hand, customers will have safe harbor against forever lock-in. If Adobe fails to innovate over time, or if a customer simply decides to freeze their system, that option is available. The customer wins.

Win-win.

The alternative is after 20 years and paying 12,000 smackers, you're left with nothing.

If that appeals to you, be my guest.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index


Tim Dowse
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 12:28:44 am

[Jeremy Garchow] Why not just pay for 20 years of it and be done (12,000 smackers)?

What if I only want to pay for one year? Or four years? I don't get access to that deal? Why?


I was one of the people that suggested a loyalty scheme. I don't know if I was the first, but I didn't hear it from anyone else before I suggested it. Personally I don't have a big issue with creative cloud, but I suggested it as a potential compromise which I thought might satisfy a large chunk (and I know, not all) of the folks with concerns. My suggestion was that Adobe offer a loyalty status to cusomters who have been subscribing for five years, or more.

My reasoning for 5 years was:

1. The total cost is a similar price to one brand new production premium package plus 5 years of annual upgrades.
2. It's a similar price to a brand new master collection.
3. It's a reasonable length of time to call someone a "loyal" customer.
4. It's a reasonable length of time for a small/medium business to forecast.
5. It would be reasonable for a business to set aside $3000 for software costs in one lump if necessary.
6. It's still competitive when compared to the price of e.g. Smoke, or other sets of competing software packages, given everything CC contains.

My theory is that it will give Adobe AND the customer what they want (ie. it's a win-win) because:

a. Adobe customers are likely to subscribe for at least 5 years to get to loyal status, so Adobe can feel confident about getting subs for 5 years from a large number of customers.
b. Adobe customers will have the comfort of knowing that 3 grand in, then can opt out if it ain't doing it for them any more, with project file access safe and protected, and even software still available to create new projects. That makes CC competitive on price with a current perpetual license of Smoke (without upgrades)
c. Adobe will need to keep innovating, to keep subscribers subscribing. This will improve customer confidence in continued innovation.
d. Adobe customers will have an incentive to keep subscribing, to keep their "loyalty" status intact (because once you're a loyal member, you can opt out at any time after five years). This gives Adobe confidence that people will continue to subscribe.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 12:37:11 am

Adobe - if you are in the clouds - seriously - WWJD?

come on - read that.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 1:06:10 am

I would also say: That´s fair. And if they had done this way, I think the concerns even were a part as they are today.
(Btw: we have to pay much more here in europe. MC is 4726 $ compared to EU - so would be a great deal ;)
May be I had a look on, not likely but would.
But they decided, not to do so in clear knowledge.
I think they want to force and bind as many as possible.
Even if their plans will not go the way they want, there might be a change.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 1:36:47 am

[David Lawrence] "I think you're over thinking this."

Not over thinking, just beginning to think about it.

Is there loyalty programs with any other software company? Or lifetime subscription memberships for that matter?

[Tim Dowse] "My reasoning for 5 years was:...My theory is that it will give Adobe AND the customer what they want (ie. it's a win-win) because:..."

OK. Fair enough.

I'm just trying to think it through in what the advantage would be to Adobe. Lets face they fact that there has to be an advantage for Adobe to offer something beyond a per app monthly/per suite monthly/and a yearly.

I guess I can't see beyond the fact that it is an arbitrary number. I think that the Master Collection plus 5 yearly updates math is valid, but that pricing is based of a completely different set of metrics.

The Cloud is a whole new math equation.


Return to posts index

Tim Dowse
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 2:41:12 am

[Jeremy Garchow] I'm just trying to think it through in what the advantage would be to Adobe.

The advantage to Adobe is that they bring back customers who are otherwise lost to them. The primary concern of many of those lost customers is the threat of losing access to files. This helps alleviate that. It's up to Adobe to calculate whether or not it's worth it to them to try to retain those customers.

[Jeremy Garchow] I guess I can't see beyond the fact that it is an arbitrary number.

It's not exactly arbitrary, as I explained my reasons for suggesting five years. But the precise time-frame is of course the million dollar question. It's obviously a balance between security and lower cost for the customer (shorter time frame) and security and higher income for Adobe (longer time frame). If they were to consider a loyalty option at all, they'll have to figure out the precise conditions and see if it satisfies the worried potential customers.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 4:35:38 am



I hear you, but I'm trying to look at this as pragmatically and truthfully as possible.

If what Adobe says is true, and 80% of purchases have been for the Cloud in some unspecified timeframe , who are they losing, exactly?

While I agree that more or multiple years of purchase available would make sense to some folks (plop down a few thousand dollars and not think about it for a few years), a buyout doesn't make any sense for Adobe, really. It's more management and tracking for no measurable gain. Not only would the software have to phone home, but it would have to know everyone's subscription version to stop all services, but keep the software usable.

As a customer, if I have been paying for four years, why can't I get the buyout if I want it? I'm done paying for Adobe software, but for another year or $600, I could have that future version forever? Can I just prepay another year and get free updates until the clock runs out?

If I was Adobe, how do I justify a three year customer isn't as valuable as a 5 year customer? What if the three year guy takes a year off, then pays for two more years, is he now a five year guy? He loses his loyalty status because he took a year off? What if the three year guy turns in to a 15 year guy, and the five year guy quits as soon as he's paid enough for the perpetual buyout? What do we do with the loyalty now? Free cronuts?

What about guys like us who have multiple license? What do we get for paying more money for more years? Free chocolate covered cronuts?

I know what you're saying on doing the Master Collection math, but that pricing doesn't apply to the Cloud or Cloud customers. It's a whole new method of accounting. It's either on or it's off. The service is available or not. It's really the only way I can see this working fairly across a broad range of situations. It's more fair in the long run from customer to customer and doesn't create a caste system.

Beyond the money, I think the biggest problem is that, The Creative Cloud is sort of expensive. $50/mo for a giant wad of applications that certain disciplines barely use is a lot to ask. To reiterate from another thread, there's not a lot of room between $20 for one app and $50 for the 38(!) products and services listed that come with a full Cloud membership.

For it to be worth it for adobe to sell one app to a customer, it sounds like the price must be $20.

So, $50-$20 = $30. $30/37 remaining products/services is = $0.81 an app or service per month. Lets call it a dollar.

This means that if the base price is $20, every app you add should be $1.00 more per month.

That way, you get exactly what you pay for. If you want it all, $50 it is.

If Adobe can be a bit more aggressive on pricing (even though it is already pretty agro) the licensing will matter less, especially for the future customers for which the word perpetual wont even be in their vernacular.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 5:19:33 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "If what Adobe says is true, and 80% of purchases have been for the Cloud in some unspecified timeframe , who are they losing, exactly?"

Even if this figure is true, it's bogus. It only accounts for new customers buying new subscriptions at the discount rate from Adobe.com

It doesn't account for resellers.
It doesn't account for churn when the year's up and the price doubles.
It's marketing spin.

If this is how Adobe management convinced themselves they can force their entire customer base to the cloud overnight, they're in for a big surprise.

Maybe I'm naive but "We may lose you as a customer" doesn't sound like a winning business strategy.

[Jeremy Garchow] "Not only would the software have to phone home, but it would have to know everyone's subscription version to stop all services, but keep the software usable. "

We have these amazing devices that track this kind of stuff really well. They're called computers.

Once you buy out, the software stops phoning home. That's part of the buy out deal.

[Jeremy Garchow] "If I was Adobe, how do I justify a three year customer isn't as valuable as a 5 year customer? What if the three year guy takes a year off, then pays for two more years, is he now a five year guy? He loses his loyalty status because he took a year off? What if the three year guy turns in to a 15 year guy, and the five year guy quits as soon as he's paid enough for the perpetual buyout? What do we do with the loyalty now? Free cronuts?"

[Jeremy Garchow] "If Adobe can be a bit more aggressive on pricing (even though it is already pretty agro) the licensing will matter less, especially for the future customers for which the word perpetual wont even be in their vernacular."

Jeremy, with all due respect, I think you are way over thinking this. Tim's post above makes the loyalty buy out case crystal clear.

The benefit to Adobe is they keep millions of customers who will otherwise stop paying.

This is not about price, it's about being forced into a lifetime rent obligation to continue using the software in the future. People don't like being forced to pay rent.

Steve Jobs famously said "You don't want to rent your music -- and then, one day, if you stop paying, all your music goes away."

The same is true for digital tools.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 5:46:34 am

Thanks, David. Good post. I was hoping someone would bring up the Job's quote again. I think I have twice. Still true.

http://www.adobe2014.tumblr.com
#adobe2014

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 12:35:18 pm

[David Lawrence] "We have these amazing devices that track this kind of stuff really well. They're called computers."

tee hee.

[David Lawrence] "Jeremy, with all due respect, I think you are way over thinking this. "

er, just a tiny bit - that last one going into dollar fractions across fifty apps kind of went off the deep end.

eyes on the prize people. WWJD. Five year loyalty archive.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 3:26:31 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "er, just a tiny bit - that last one going into dollar fractions across fifty apps kind of went off the deep end."

RIght! Because paying for what you actually use is such a hair brained idea!

AmIRight? (follow the link)


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 2:11:39 pm

[David Lawrence] "Steve Jobs famously said "You don't want to rent your music -- and then, one day, if you stop paying, all your music goes away.""

Though, on the flip side, Spotify might prove that maxim to be incorrect.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 4:53:03 pm

[Gary Huff] "Though, on the flip side, Spotify might prove that maxim to be incorrect."

Hasn't worked out that way. Spotify and others are a very small percentage of iTunes, Amazon, and other sales to keep are very far ahead and will remain that way in the opinions of most who are knowledgeable on the subject.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 3:36:11 pm

[David Lawrence] "It's marketing spin.
"


Certainly, those numbers are skewed, I get that, but as with most everything, the answer usually lies in the middle of two extremes.

[David Lawrence] "We have these amazing devices that track this kind of stuff really well. They're called computers.

Once you buy out, the software stops phoning home. That's part of the buy out deal."


Why would Adobe ever do this? This means that have to build another version of the software that stops phoning home and runs on a traditional license/serial. You say it's trivial, my guess is that it's not.

[David Lawrence] "Jeremy, with all due respect, I think you are way over thinking this. Tim's post above makes the loyalty buy out case crystal clear.

The benefit to Adobe is they keep millions of customers who will otherwise stop paying.

This is not about price, it's about being forced into a lifetime rent obligation to continue using the software in the future. People don't like being forced to pay rent.

Steve Jobs famously said "You don't want to rent your music -- and then, one day, if you stop paying, all your music goes away."

The same is true for digital tools."


Do you really think that Adobe stands to lose MILLIONS of customers? Seriously? What about the people that actually like the CC model? Don't they stand to gain some, too?

There is no doubt that what Adobe is doing here is taking a risk and betting the farm, but my guess is that the risk is highly calculated. My guess is that they already know how many customers they are going to lose.

If it was in the millions, they wouldn't do it.

And Steve Jobs said that because he had a music store that he wanted people to frequent which sold Apple Devices. If he had a rental store that sold Apple devices, he would have said something equally as eloquent. Jobs was a fantastic marketer.

I hear you about a forced rental model. But if the price was $10/mo, or even $20/mo, my guess is that a lot of the fervor would die down as it's an easier pill to swallow.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 5:10:23 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "And Steve Jobs said that because he had a music store that he wanted people to frequent which sold Apple Devices. If he had a rental store that sold Apple devices, he would have said something equally as eloquent. Jobs was a fantastic marketer."

Jobs was correct. Not only did iTunes sale to own model tie into the hardware sales, it has been extremely profitable. More than 25 billion songs sold at .99 to $1.29 each. Yes he was he was the supreme marketer. Unlike what we have seen with this Creative Cloud mess.


[Jeremy Garchow] "I hear you about a forced rental model. But if the price was $10/mo, or even $20/mo, my guess is that a lot of the fervor would die down as it's an easier pill to swallow."

The price is likely to go up if adopted by enough people, not down. Down only if enough people have the common sense to know that they will lose access to their assets, their Legacy with a capital "L", if they quit paying, retire, and even just prefer to switch to other software in the future. The model is flawed for very many, I think in the millions, if there are 12 million licenses out there.

If they have to lower the price, CC is going to be seen as a failure.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 5:26:09 pm

[Jim Wiseman] "Jobs was correct. Not only did iTunes sale to own model tie into the hardware sales, it has been extremely profitable. More than 25 billion songs sold at .99 to $1.29 each. Yes he was he was the supreme marketer. Unlike what we have seen with this Creative Cloud mess."

Yes, iTunes was and is a success, more on price in a minute.

[Jim Wiseman] "The price is likely to go up if adopted by enough people, not down. Down only if enough people have the common sense to know that they will lose access to their assets, their Legacy with a capital "L", if they quit paying, retire, and even just prefer to switch to other software in the future. The model is flawed for very many, I think in the millions, if there are 12 million licenses out there.

If they have to lower the price, CC is going to be seen as a failure."


The idea that Adobe is suddenly going to jack up the price is, at least in my feeble brain, ridiculous. Adobe's products aren't that good that you can't live without them. I'm sorry, but it's true. I lvoe and use Adobe products, but if I am getting bent to the point of broke because I have to pay $20 more a month for Adobe Edge COde CC that I will never open, I will look elsewhere, and so will the rest of the market that won't pay for a bloated suite.

If we want to somehow tie the iTunes example to CC, iTunes actually LOWERED the price of an album vs buying a CD, and also diversified the price structure by selling singles vs total albums.

When you price something fairly, people stop trying to get it through other means. Here's a subscription based service that is working: http://www.slashgear.com/netflix-piracy-rate-goes-down-when-we-arrive-03280...

I stand by my comment, $50/mo for a huge handful of applications that you will not use (an album full of mostly songs you will never listen to) is a harder pill to swallow, then start @ $20 and add a few more crucial applications you need to use for $1 (buy only the songs you like from an album), but I'm sure that probably won't happen.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 5:38:57 pm

Jeremy, I don't disagree that a lower monthly price for CC would help. But, of course that is not what Adobe wants. If it cost the same as an annual upgrade to Production Premium (all I really want, like iTunes allows) and I could end up with permanent working access to my files if I drop off (THE STICKING POINT) I would be on it. Without that, sorry, no sale.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 7:16:47 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Why would Adobe ever do this? This means that have to build another version of the software that stops phoning home and runs on a traditional license/serial. You say it's trivial, my guess is that it's not."

It's completely trivial. I'll put on my former-programmers hat and explain.

When you sign up for CC, Adobe makes a record of the day you activated your account and your account payment status. When you use CC, the software makes a monthly check to make sure payment is current on your account.

As long as you continue paying your membership bill, the software continues running and any updates are available for you to download and install if you wish.

This infrastructure is already in place. This is how CC works.

All Adobe has to do is add a simple switch inside the application manager.

After a pre-determined time or after X dollars have been spent or however it's set up to work, the customer would get an option to buy-out at the current feature set from their account management panel.

When they make this choice, the next time the application manager pings the customer's account, the switch is flipped to "frozen/offline".

From this point on, the application manager no longer pings Adobe and the software runs in its current state forever.

Updates are no longer available. Cloud-based services revert to free level or go away entirely.

No second version is needed.

It's trivial to implement. Most of the work already exists as a necessary part of the CC accounting infrastructure.

[Jeremy Garchow] "Do you really think that Adobe stands to lose MILLIONS of customers? Seriously? What about the people that actually like the CC model? Don't they stand to gain some, too?"

Well, if Adobe currently has ~12 million paying customers and if Tim's right in his thread above and Adobe thinks they can lose up to 30% of that customer base, do the math. That's 4 million users.

That's a lot of money being left on the table.

Not to mention tons of bad will expressed by customers who feel they've been burned. People are really angry and using social media to amplify their dissatisfaction. Adobe has completely lost control of the message.

The saddest thing to me about this whole fiasco is how Adobe has blown a chance to win the industry. Instead of talking about how awesome the tools are, the debate is about business models and boycotts. What a waste!

[Jeremy Garchow] "I hear you about a forced rental model. But if the price was $10/mo, or even $20/mo, my guess is that a lot of the fervor would die down as it's an easier pill to swallow."

It would for some, but not for all. I have no doubt Adobe will use price to try to entice users. Look for the first year discount to reappear or be extended when subscription numbers fail to meet projections. Adobe desperately wants to capture and monetize their customer base. But to do that I truly, believe they'll have to shed millions of users. That may be too much for even Adobe to swallow.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 7:58:05 pm

[David Lawrence] "It's trivial to implement. Most of the work already exists as a necessary part of the CC accounting infrastructure."

I have no doubt that this could happen. But it seems like the CC model will simplify a lot of the licensing BS that I am sure Adobe goes through.

And doesn't this mean I can transfer my offline software to anyone I want, potentially giving it all away for free?

[David Lawrence] "Well, if Adobe currently has ~12 million paying customers and if Tim's right in his thread above and Adobe thinks they can lose up to 30% of that customer base, do the math. That's 4 million users.

That's a lot of money being left on the table.

Not to mention tons of bad will expressed by customers who feel they've been burned. People are really angry and using social media to amplify their dissatisfaction. Adobe has completely lost control of the message.

The saddest thing to me about this whole fiasco is how Adobe has blown a chance to win the industry. Instead of talking about how awesome the tools are, the debate is about business models and boycotts. What a waste!"


I, too, think it's a shame that there's a toolset coming that people actually want, yet it's not even really being talked about or discussed. It is a bit of a waste, you are right. That might change when the software is actually released.

As far as 12 million subscribers, this is also a numbers game, just like the numbers games we played with FCP back in the other debate days. Of those 12 million, how many get yearly updates? That's exactly who Adobe is looking to monetize and count on. The rest is gravy.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 8:26:27 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I have no doubt that this could happen. But it seems like the CC model will simplify a lot of the licensing BS that I am sure Adobe goes through."

Seems to me the opposite will be more likely. Lots more licensing foo to deal with once everyone's software starts phoning home every month for a DRM check.

[Jeremy Garchow] "And doesn't this mean I can transfer my offline software to anyone I want, potentially giving it all away for free?"

It's still tied to your machine ID. Copying it would still require an initial set-up and account check to set the "frozen/offline" status.

I suppose you could share your Adobe account and credit card info but I doubt many people will do that. Honest users will stay honest.

[Jeremy Garchow] "As far as 12 million subscribers, this is also a numbers game, just like the numbers games we played with FCP back in the other debate days. Of those 12 million, how many get yearly updates? That's exactly who Adobe is looking to monetize and count on. The rest is gravy."

Agreed. The question is whether the yearly update numbers are large enough to offset revenue from users who will park at CS6, or stop paying altogether. Time will tell.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Tim Dowse
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 3:32:04 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] a buyout doesn't make any sense for Adobe, really. It's more management and tracking for no measurable gain.

If it results in more customers, then it results in more money for Adobe. That's measurable gain.

[Jeremy Garchow] it would have to know everyone's subscription version to stop all services, but keep the software usable.

My guess, given that their software demonstrates quite a large amount of programming genius, is that they could figure this out. I don't know how it would work, but I bet someone there does. They'll likely benefit from keeping people's details on file anyway (information is valuable these days)

[Jeremy Garchow] If I was Adobe, how do I justify a three year customer isn't as valuable as a 5 year customer? What if the three year guy takes a year off, then pays for two more years, is he now a five year guy? He loses his loyalty status because he took a year off?

Yes, he loses his loyalty status. That's the incentive to keep subscribing for five continuous years. As a thank you, Adobe grants five-year subscribers loyalty status. End subs before that? Sorry, but you didn't show enough commitment to Adobe to be granted the prestigious "loyal member" status. As folks frequently mention $3500 smoke as an alternative (or $6k with five years worth of support and updates), I think $3k is a reasonable amount to set aside to effectively "buy" a perpetual license of CC in five years time.


[Jeremy Garchow] What about guys like us who have multiple license? What do we get for paying more money for more years? Free chocolate covered cronuts?

Multiple subscriptions/seats means multiple buyouts after the five year time frame.



Look, I'm not suggesting this is perfect. There will still be people who are left unsatisfied. And I have absolutely NO idea whether Adobe will do it. I suggested it initially because I thought that it was a good idea, and that other people might agree. And I thought that if enough people submitted it as a feature request, perhaps Adobe would consider it. It's a compromise, but one that could benefit both users and Adobe.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 3:45:41 pm

[Tim Dowse] "If it results in more customers, then it results in more money for Adobe. That's measurable gain."

But do you really think, when you look at the vast and giant pool of Adobe customers from PDF jockeys, to video, to print, to web, a buyout option is going to be the Golden Egg that incites customers to stick around for five years and then simply stop paying?

[Tim Dowse] "Yes, he loses his loyalty status. That's the incentive to keep subscribing for five continuous years. As a thank you, Adobe grants five-year subscribers loyalty status. End subs before that? Sorry, but you didn't show enough commitment to Adobe to be granted the prestigious "loyal member" status. As folks frequently mention $3500 smoke as an alternative (or $6k with five years worth of support and updates), I think $3k is a reasonable amount to set aside to effectively "buy" a perpetual license of CC in five years time."

Is there a software service that offers something like this? I would be curious.

I know some airlines do it, and it's rather goofy. United has put the loyalty services on sale so you can buy the loyalty options (better seats, cheaper baggage check, first in line, etc), so that the million miler could be sitting next to the infrequent traveller that is willing to pay more money. Does Adobe need to do this? Is it fair? What about the guy who is a loyal United customer but can't afford to pay for the extra features?

I just think a monetary based software caste system is goofy. Keep it simple, you pay for a service and use it.


Return to posts index

Tim Dowse
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 5:12:31 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] But do you really think, when you look at the vast and giant pool of Adobe customers from PDF jockeys, to video, to print, to web, a buyout option is going to be the Golden Egg that incites customers to stick around for five years and then simply stop paying?

I don't know. I'm just making a suggestion. If enough people like it, they might consider asking for it. If enough people ask for it, maybe Adobe will consider it. Maybe not. Who knows.

[Jeremy Garchow] Is there a software service that offers something like this? I would be curious... Does Adobe need to do this? Is it fair?

I don't know. Maybe not. Maybe they don't need to do it. But they might choose to if a cost-benefit analysis shows them that it will result in subscriber growth.

Let's say, just for arguments sake, that a loyalty scheme will trigger a 10% increase in subscriber growth. Are you saying Adobe will just ignore a 10% increase in growth? I don't know whether it will be 10% or not. None of us actually know anything. But I did see an Adobe representative on another thread say he supported Aindreas when he talked about a loyalty buy out. So maybe it isn't so very ridiculous. If Adobe judge that this scheme will result in more growth for them in the long term, they'll go for it. If they don't, they won't.

[Jeremy Garchow] Keep it simple, you pay for a service and use it.

Well, I've made my case for why adobe might do just that on another thread. We'll just have to wait and see.


Return to posts index

Tim Dowse
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 5:29:35 pm

[Tim Dowse] But I did see an Adobe representative on another thread say he supported Aindreas when he talked about a loyalty buy out. So maybe it isn't so very ridiculous.

Just to be clear, this is what I was talking about:


[Kevin Monahan on May 31, 2013 at 2:49:07 pm] I like a lot of your ideas Aindreas and have actually shared them with my superiors. You've got a supporter here, just so you know.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 5:34:48 pm

[Tim Dowse] "Just to be clear, this is what I was talking about:"

And this makes two: http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/1200


Return to posts index

Tim Dowse
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 5:47:25 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] I do think it would hard to peg subscriber growth on a loyalty scheme.

I doubt it would be that hard. More people will subscribe as a result of the safety net that such a scheme would provide, including what I judge to be a majority of those with concerns on this forum. The question is just how many more. I think Adobe could pretty easily model the impact of a scheme like that on subscriber growth.

[Jeremy Garchow] I am all for making this whole situation more palatable for everyone. I think the best way to do that is through price.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I'd say most folks here feel that the price is not the main concern. Of course they'd prefer a lower price, but that's not the barrier. The barrier is access to project files after the subscription ends. I've stated elsewhere that I think Adobe's target market is people who make money from their software, and I don't think that price is, for that market, prohibitive.

[Jeremy Garchow] And this makes two: http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/1200

Well, there you go! Two Adobe folks, with no influence on pricing. But they are at least Adobe folks. I doubt they'd write that it they thought it was just too absurd to think about.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 6:07:20 pm

[Tim Dowse] "I doubt it would be that hard. More people will subscribe as a result of the safety net that such a scheme would provide, including what I judge to be a majority of those with concerns on this forum. The question is just how many more. I think Adobe could pretty easily model the impact of a scheme like that on subscriber growth."

Maybe, I just don't know. I can't think of anything that allows a 5 year loyalty buyout.

I have no idea if it would work or not. I still think that 5 years is arbitrary.

It seems to me that people would then ask for a one year loyalty buyout, and Adobe is moving away from that model.

[Tim Dowse] "Perhaps I'm wrong, but I'd say most folks here feel that the price is not the main concern. Of course they'd prefer a lower price, but that's not the barrier. The barrier is access to project files after the subscription ends. I've stated elsewhere that I think Adobe's target market is people who make money from their software, and I don't think that price is, for that market, prohibitive. "

I guess my thinking is that if it's cheap enough and you aren't a current subscriber, but need access to the archive, it won't feel so bad to pony up and pay for it.

$50 is sort of a lot of money to open up a project, change a title, reexport, and put the app away for 6 more months.

But for $20?


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 6:23:23 pm

Jeremy: >$50 is sort of a lot of money to open up a project, change a title, reexport, and put the app away for 6 more months.

But for $20?<

People like myself who have, and continue to make our living with creative software, but look forward to a time when we can concentrate on our non-paying projects, ones we have looked forward to for many years in some cases, aren't going to be impressed by a one time opening for $20, even 5 dollars. We want to and need to have full time working access to our software and our media/files.

There is more to this than just an industry and Wall Street. There are real people out here who count on this software for their creative expression on a plane beyond the commercial. I think the original creators of the software we are talking about, certainly back to Photoshop, had that in mind. I spoke with them when PS was first introduced in San Francisco. That was certainly the buzz at that show. It is a shame if those people are just going to be thrown under the bus and their work and enthusiasm devalued to nothing.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 7:03:50 pm

[Jim Wiseman] "People like myself who have, and continue to make our living with creative software, but look forward to a time when we can concentrate on our non-paying projects, ones we have looked forward to for many years in some cases, aren't going to be impressed by a one time opening for $20, even 5 dollars. We want to and need to have full time working access to our software and our media/files. "

I hear you, and I understand the concern.

Bluntly, I think Adobe is going after working creative professionals, for better or worse. The same was not said when Apple released FCPX and they got a heap of sh*t for it.

[Jim Wiseman] "There is more to this than just an industry and Wall Street. There are real people out here who count on this software for their creative expression on a plane beyond the commercial. I think the original creators of the software we are talking about, certainly back to Photoshop, had that in mind. I spoke with them when PS was first introduced in San Francisco. That was certainly the buzz at that show. It is a shame if those people are just going to be thrown under the bus and their work and enthusiasm devalued to nothing."

Certainly. The argument could be made that the software is now being assigned more value than ever.

Yet, Adobe is not the only software around. You don't have to choose for-pay Adobe products to express yourself creatively. Adobe engineers work really hard to make new features that we wouldn't have thought of, as well as implementing user requested features and formats. I am 100% sure there are inspired people that are working on Adobe products.

But besides the interns, my guess is that they don't work for free. I'm sorry Jim, but unfortunately, it is an industry, a global one at that.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 7:17:32 pm

Adobe was/is a profitable business before this change to rental. I believe this is almost entirely about being more profitable, regardless of the consequences of their actions to loyal customers. They have more than a few dollars of my and my clients money. More about stockholders than users. Look at the title of this thread and what that handout says.

Monetize creativity. Not just theirs, they want to monetize mine for themselves.

I would be paying the same amount as I was when using the software for commercial work if they had not jerked the rug out from under us. Why are we no longer useful to them? Makes no sense. I'm not dead yet.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Tim Dowse
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 6:24:40 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] It seems to me that people would then ask for a one year loyalty buyout

Well, it's supposed to be a compromise. I don't think people will get everything they want, but they might get something. A one year buy out clearly won't give Adobe what they want from the cloud model. Five years might.

[Jeremy Garchow] I guess my thinking is that if it's cheap enough and you aren't a current subscriber, but need access to the archive, it won't feel so bad to pony up and pay for it. $50 is sort of a lot of money to open up a project, change a title, reexport, and put the app away for 6 more months.

If you're only working with Adobe software two months of the year, as suggested by your example, then that's only $140 a year (at the month-by-month price of $70). It would take you ten years at that rate to buy production premium, with no updates.

If you just need one app at a time, and it's just $30 per month... $60 per year in your scenario.

Doesn't seem prohibitive to me.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 6:47:07 pm

[Tim Dowse] "Well, it's supposed to be a compromise. I don't think people will get everything they want, but they might get something. A one year buy out clearly won't give Adobe what they want from the cloud model. Five years might."

I guess we will know if 5 years as Adobe will have the 5 year subscription track record.

[Tim Dowse] "If you're only working with Adobe software two months of the year, as suggested by your example, then that's only $140 a year (at the month-by-month price of $70). It would take you ten years at that rate to buy production premium, with no updates.

If you just need one app at a time, and it's just $30 per month... $60 per year in your scenario."


Hey, that's been my point all along!

I am just throwing out the scenario of some who has stopped subscribing, but has an Adobe project archive. That is what we are talking about now, right? Access to the archive of a non or former subscriber?

If you lower the price of the overall suite, the seemingly cost prohibitive action of paying for archive access becomes lessened because you have less trouble paying $20 vs $50.

It is much simpler than Adobe tracking everyone's loyalty status.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 7:29:28 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "$50 is sort of a lot of money to open up a project, change a title, reexport, and put the app away for 6 more months.

But for $20?"


Jeremy, just out of curiosity, do you play any kind of musical instrument? Like guitar, keyboard, etc.?

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 7:51:08 pm

Not anymore, but yes I can read music.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 7:56:08 pm

[David Lawrence] "
Jeremy, just out of curiosity, do you play any kind of musical instrument? Like guitar, keyboard, etc.?"


Adobe, please don't take my "guitar"...

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 8:06:42 pm

[Jim Wiseman] "Adobe, please don't take my "guitar"..."

It's software, not hardware.

I'm sure, sooner than we can imagine, hardware as we know it, will go in the Cloud as well.

Adobe Anywhere for Everyone.

Upload your media, rent some server time, and control it from your thin client of choice.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 8:29:55 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Upload your media, rent some server time, and control it from your thin client of choice."

The future is now.

I rented 1,383 hours of computer time last week for rendering.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 9:17:39 pm

[Walter Soyka] "The future is now.

I rented 1,383 hours of computer time last week for rendering."


You have to watch those 1383 hour work weeks, Walter.

They can really wear a person down.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 8:49:26 pm

Jeremy: >It's software, not hardware.<

I'd say creating art, music in this case, is more than just the hardware, the guitar. In the case of digital art, it is a combination of software, hardware, and proficiency, and talent. No software with which you are proficient, no digital art. Or with the guitar analogy, no practice, no songs, no music.

I think what David was saying, is there is more to life than commerce, and for many of us Adobe has become a large part of our artistic, creative lives. Ignoring that part of ourselves leaves one somewhat incomplete. That's how I see it, at least.

And don't pull out the Adobe has to make money argument. I'm willing to pay. And I have. But not to drive into a blind alley.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 9:19:23 pm

[Jim Wiseman] "I'd say creating art, music in this case, is more than just the hardware, the guitar. In the case of digital art, it is a combination of software, hardware, and proficiency, and talent. No software with which you are proficient, no digital art. Or with the guitar analogy, no practice, no songs, no music.

I think what David was saying, is there is more to life than commerce, and for many of us Adobe has become a large part of our artistic, creative lives. Ignoring that part of ourselves leaves one somewhat incomplete. That's how I see it, at least.

And don't pull out the Adobe has to make money argument. I'm willing to pay. And I have. But not to drive into a blind alley."


Jim, I hear you, but Adobe's software doesn't have to be every artists tool, especially if you aren't willing to sign on the dotted line and sell your soul.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 9:48:06 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Jim, I hear you, but Adobe's software doesn't have to be every artists tool, especially if you aren't willing to sign on the dotted line and sell your soul."

Actually, I must have sold my soul with v.1.x of Photoshop in 1990. Didn't know it then. Didn't even know it until early this May. There is nothing that replaces PS, certainly not at the moment. To say it is replaceable now is silly. It will be if they keep this up, but not on a time-frame I would be interested in. Premiere has competition, but it was moving up fast, and I had decided on it. Guess I will have a look at FCPX and Motion 5 now at least for the long term if CC stays as Adobe seems to want it. I know there is other Adobe software that is indispensable to many others.

Wanting your work to remain plastic and accessible I would think would be a number one consideration for most people. A form of wisdom, I should think, vs. the short term.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 9:28:36 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "It's software, not hardware.

I'm sure, sooner than we can imagine, hardware as we know it, will go in the Cloud as well.

Adobe Anywhere for Everyone.

Upload your media, rent some server time, and control it from your thin client of choice."


I disagree. software and hardware work together. It's a system and I want to own my system.

The point about music is these are creative tools. This isn't just an office suite. For many of us the boundaries between work, art, and life are blurry.

There's a reason Adobe rather than Autodesk is the standard for digital creativity. There's a reason "Photoshop" cultural significance to the point that it's now a verb.

These tools are about more than commerce.

For many of us, they are the foundation of our creative practice. We need to own them, just as a musician needs to own their instrument, or a painter needs to own their brushes. Digital tools are exactly the same from an artist perspective.

[Jeremy Garchow] "Upload your media, rent some server time, and control it from your thin client of choice."

That's not CC. Maybe one day, but not right now.

As long as it lives on my hard drive and runs on my processor, it's software, not services.

Doesn't mater what Adobe management says. Customers know a DRM lock-in scheme when they see it and and they don't like it. That's a big reason why so many are upset.

Customers hate always on DRM. Case in point, Electronic Arts Sim City 2013 and Microsoft Xbox One.

BTW, EA has been rated "Most Hated Company" by Consumerist readers. I think if Adobe digs in their heels, they'll soon have a good shot at this crown.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 10:13:26 pm

David and Jim, I understand your position, I really do. I just hope Adobe does, too.

I do not think a 5 year buyout plan is your best option.

Lower prices are.

Adobe takes a hit on the almighty reveune, and we get more palatable access to the tools that you choose to use.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 10:27:34 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "David and Jim, I understand your position, I really do. I just hope Adobe does, too.

I do not think a 5 year buyout plan is your best option.

Lower prices are.

Adobe takes a hit on the almighty reveune, and we get more palatable access to the tools that you choose to use."


Thanks Jeremy. I enjoy these discussions with you because even when we disagree, they always force me to sharpen my thinking.

I guess where I'm still not convinced is with price. How does that fix the problem of rental obligation to access files? Even Adobe seems to understand this is a real problem and has publicly promised a solution.

If their solution is truly fair the complaints will likely go away. But they need to be careful and really listen and understand because customers are smart and won't accept half measures. I guess we'll know more in ten days.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 8, 2013 at 1:34:01 am

[David Lawrence] "Thanks Jeremy. I enjoy these discussions with you because even when we disagree, they always force me to sharpen my thinking."

[Jim Wiseman] "Same here as David stated, Jeremy. Access is the issue for me. I enjoy the exchanges. Keep us on our toes"


I hope this doesn't feel like me vs you. In have a skin in this game as well. I'm an Adobe user, and fcp7 orphan with no clear path to the immediate future.

I often play a bit hard on ideas as I want to see what they are made of and where they come from. I honestly didn't understand what a loyalty buyout might bring. I see the points made here, but I don't think Adobe would go for it. We need to go for something Adobe will like. They've said they are sticking to the Cloud.

Ok.

Then give me the cloud at a price that won't hurt as much, or let me build me own cloud for $20 plus $1 an app. $50 all in.

They get customer subscriptions, we get cheaper services.

[David Lawrence] "I guess where I'm still not convinced is with price. How does that fix the problem of rental obligation to access files? Even Adobe seems to understand this is a real problem and has publicly promised a solution."

Right. So why stop there? We have yet to see what this solution will be so why not make the long term deal as cheap as we can for us? A 5 year buyout isn't the best for us. Lower overall pricing, is.

You do realize that Adobe just doubled our yearly costs, right? Doubled.

I'm all for the Cloud, I am all for giving the really smart and talented Adobe engineers a longer leash for making better products, that will help me, but please prove to me it's worth double the current price.

I don't have that proof yet. I cant get half of the fracking native formats that Pr supports in to Speedgrade quickly and easily, and then get a signal out to a video monitor. I'm supposed to pay double for five years?

No thanks, give me lower pricing now.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 10, 2013 at 4:27:13 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "I hope this doesn't feel like me vs you. In have a skin in this game as well. I'm an Adobe user, and fcp7 orphan with no clear path to the immediate future."

No worries, it doesn't. We all have skin in this game. I'm pushing for more and better licensing options because I truly believe we will *all* benefit - even folks who like the cloud. Even Adobe. I want a win-win.

[Jeremy Garchow] "I honestly didn't understand what a loyalty buyout might bring. I see the points made here, but I don't think Adobe would go for it. We need to go for something Adobe will like. They've said they are sticking to the Cloud."

I don't see why Adobe wouldn't like this. It lets them have their cake and eat it. If they can offer customers the security of perpetual access without directly selling perpetual copies, why wouldn't they? 4 million lost customers is a lot of money left on the table. Adobe would still be sticking to the Cloud. A buy-out would simply be a change in DRM rules based on some fair amount of time/dollars spent. I don't see what's not to like.

[Jeremy Garchow] "We have yet to see what this solution will be so why not make the long term deal as cheap as we can for us? A 5 year buyout isn't the best for us. Lower overall pricing, is.

You do realize that Adobe just doubled our yearly costs, right? Doubled."


It's actually much worse than that.

Not only has the cost doubled, after a few years if you decide to stop paying, you're left with nothing. Including access to your work.

I'm all for lower prices. But lower prices doesn't fix the problem of having to pay rent to Adobe in order to open my files.

I'm honestly perplexed that the access issue doesn't bug you more. Even lower prices add up fast when you're forced to pay them forever.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 10, 2013 at 4:12:47 pm

[David Lawrence] "It's actually much worse than that.

Not only has the cost doubled, after a few years if you decide to stop paying, you're left with nothing. Including access to your work.

I'm all for lower prices. But lower prices doesn't fix the problem of having to pay rent to Adobe in order to open my files.

I'm honestly perplexed that the access issue doesn't bug you more. Even lower prices add up fast when you're forced to pay them forever."


I guess I pick my battles. I am also happy to receive better products.

If Adobe's Creative Cloud allows them to get me better products in a more timeline manner, then this is OK with me.

I am a working professional, and not a hobbyist. I am also a ways away from retirement. Having a yearly fixed cost actually helps me plan. I do not mind paying, as I usually don't work for free.

As far as the software perpetuity, I guess I am being too realistic. Adobe announced it, then a few weeks later said they are sticking with it amidst the first round of public "shaming". Also, how long can a software really last? It is obvious to me that development, constant development, is picking up at a rapid pace. What is new today is old and broken tomorrow. So, if the software is cheap enough for me to come back to after an extended period of time of me not using it, then what is the difference? It just needs to be cheap enough. And if I'm working all of the time, then paying for it isn't a big deal either, but with the rising costs of daily living, it needs to be a fair price especially considering I will use the Production Premium apps, and not the Master Collection apps 99.8% of the time. It feels weird to pay for so much that I won't use.

I am not 100% sold on the state of Adobe products, especially their video line. I feel like they need some major work in a few key areas. The Adobe engineers have been doing really great work the past few cycles, so I am sticking around, and if the Cloud allows them to even further fine tune the products and add features that I need plus features that I didn't think I needed but put in to use immediately, then that is a win for me, and I won't have to wait a whole year and half for the next CS release.

I have said this before, I am being asked to do much more, with much more cameras/footage, in much less time. The only tool that I have seen that understands this general concept really well, is FCPX. But FCPX is far from perfect, and it needs time to mature and stabilize, so, I need to keep my options open. I am a long time Adobe user, and I want them to succeed. I am not worried about accessing my work if the price is cheap enough for me to access it.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 11:09:42 pm

Same here as David stated, Jeremy. Access is the issue for me. I enjoy the exchanges. Keep us on our toes.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 5:32:57 pm

[Tim Dowse] "Let's say, just for arguments sake, that a loyalty scheme will trigger a 10% increase in subscriber growth. Are you saying Adobe will just ignore a 10% increase in growth? I don't know whether it will be 10% or not. None of us actually know anything. But I did see an Adobe representative on another thread say he supported Aindreas when he talked about a loyalty buy out. So maybe it isn't so very ridiculous. If Adobe judge that this scheme will result in more growth for them in the long term, they'll go for it. If they don't, they won't."

That was Todd K. Todd is great, but Todd has no control over the pricing structure. He did say it was a good request, yes.

I do not think that Adobe would ignore a 10% increase is subscriber growth, but I do think it would hard to peg subscriber growth on a loyalty scheme.

I am all for making this whole situation more palatable for everyone. I think the best way to do that is through price.

[Tim Dowse] "Well, I've made my case for why adobe might do just that on another thread. We'll just have to wait and see."

...And it's a good case!


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 12:56:30 pm

The advantage for Adobe would be the foreseeable income, they wanted (or say, they wanted)


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 7, 2013 at 5:06:56 am

I think possibly a higher price to the buyout with a shorter period should be an option for people near retirement or who wish to to move to other software if it becomes more attractive. Say three years. Period of Applecare or the average predictable life of a computer. Five years can be a long time at certain points in one's career or if circumstances change. The metric should be the payment in dollars. The result should be the ability to use the software at a frozen point perpetually when that commitment is met.. There is always the ability to rejoin rental if necessary.

http://www.adobe2014.tumblr.com
#adobe2014

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Clint Wardlow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 4:45:00 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "10 years from now, you need to open a CS6 project.

You still have CS6. Can't you open it?"


I am talking about future users. The guys who come onto Adobe in the years to come __ not current users.

That assumes you have a machine that can run CS6. In five years will modern OSs support CS6? A new artist that begins 5 years from now, will they have the CS6 option...will they be able to buy a machine that supports it?

Does Adobe think in the future, we will all be cloud based. That perpetual licenses will be an ancient memory? I am hoping that Adobe will address this issue so future users only options are not subscription or work in dusty old software.

Part of the problem with the subscription-only model is we seem to see only what is in our faces now. What are the future implications? What ways will our working modes be affected? Is the subscription only infrastructure going to have some sort of planned methodology by the companies instituting them and the vendors needed to supply it? Or is it going to be a free-for-all made up as they go--with the quarterly profits driving a jerry-rigged architecture.

This whole subscription thing could be a major change in the way, we the end user, deals with software. Whole new workflows and methods of software distribution could spring up.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 5:04:12 pm

[Clint Wardlow] "I am talking about future users. The guys who come onto Adobe in the years to come __ not current users."

They will be able to buy CS6 for a while, of course, not indefinitely but at least for the forseeable future. So, if you don't want the new features and CS6 is good enough, there's the option. If not, you pay to play.

[Clint Wardlow] "Does Adobe think in the future, we will all be cloud based. That perpetual licenses will be an ancient memory? I am hoping that Adobe will address this issue so future users only options are not subscription or work in dusty old software."

I'm pretty sure Adobe has addressed it as they said they are sticking to the Cloud. I am sure they will modify the decision if subscriptions aren't up to what they thought, but for now, if you want the new software, you have to sign up for it.

[Clint Wardlow] "Part of the problem with the subscription-only model is we seem to see only what is in our faces now. What are the future implications? What ways will our working modes be affected? Is the subscription only infrastructure going to have some sort of planned methodology by the companies instituting them and the vendors needed to supply it? Or is it going to be a free-for-all made up as they go--with the quarterly profits driving a jerry-rigged architecture."

This is what I have been saying all along. There has yet to be proof that this is a good idea, we only have what is being told to us through company communications. Rightfully so, people are wary of this style of marketing. They want proof and that will take some time.

If you can look at the improvements from CS6 to CC, then that might give you a little bit of an idea of what is to come.

Adobe has said that they are going to keep CS6 alive, so you will have a lot of time to review your options, keep your eye on the Cloud development, and see if Adobe keeps good on their promise. And during that review period, you have a fully functional perpetual copy of CS6 that will be updated with bug fixes. If for some reason CC won't meet your needs, you can keep using CS6 until you find other production tools. It is, as someone who is going through the FCP7 EOL, a very fair exit strategy and won't cost current perpetual CS6 owners a dime.

[Clint Wardlow] "This whole subscription thing could be a major change in the way, we the end user, deals with software. Whole new workflows and methods of software distribution could spring up."

That's the up side. Adobe does seem to have a plan. To me, it doesn't seem as half baked as people make it out to be here on the Cow. This isn't a scramble, this isn't a last minute venture, this isn't all about a money grab, this isn't because of a development stale mate. Don't get me wrong, it's about the money, but it's also about providing a service that people will want to purchase, and having those people stick around. It would be impossible to do that with a service that people are not willing to pay for.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Clint Wardlow
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 6, 2013 at 5:27:23 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "[Clint Wardlow] "Does Adobe think in the future, we will all be cloud based. That perpetual licenses will be an ancient memory? I am hoping that Adobe will address this issue so future users only options are not subscription or work in dusty old software."

I'm pretty sure Adobe has addressed it as they said they are sticking to the Cloud. I am sure they will modify the decision if subscriptions aren't up to what they thought, but for now, if you want the new software, you have to sign up for it."


The issue is that if your subscription ends are you going to be able to open your files you created using CC software? Adobe has said they agree that the user should be able to do this and will address it. They just haven't said how other than backward into CS6. That is a viable option for now --that is why I called it interim. However, in five years I am not so sure it will be so. Maybe if a user has frozen a computer in time and it doesn't break. But for a new user, maybe not so much.




[Jeremy Garchow] "[Clint Wardlow] "This whole subscription thing could be a major change in the way, we the end user, deals with software. Whole new workflows and methods of software distribution could spring up."

That's the up side. Adobe does seem to have a plan"


Yes it could be a good thing. It could also be a bad thing. It depends on how this subscription thing plays out.

If it makes it too costly for most users to keep any kind of large palate of software, making only such options affordable to successful business, that is bad IMHO. Or allows software companies to stagnate because it knows folks are locked in to monthly payments just to work, that is bad also. If it provides for focused innovation so many evolving subscription-based applications are available to users at prices they can afford, that is good.

I am sure unforseen pitfalls and advantages will pop up as this whole thing unfolds. As with all innovations and changes there will probably be good and bad. We can only hope the good outweighs the bad. Time will tell.


Return to posts index

Ricardo Marty
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 6:14:25 pm

Nope unless you are in cc.

Ricardo


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 10:10:10 am

There still can be found some more informations about their plans at:
http://www.adobe.com/investor-relations.html

Beside all the hazel with this new distribution model, I find it horrible HOW Adobe did that.
It came without any announcement. They told the CS2 - CS5 users a few month ago, they have to upgrade to CS6 as this is the last upgradeable version.
And now? No more upgrade - only a different product called CC.
They did, to get the max amount of that individuals, who are not willing or able to do every update.
They are flooding the market of buyers with arguments like "you will never lose access to your files..." and investors "monetizing world´s content (=creativity)".
For me that´s telling half-truth or bellow.
They decided to kick out great parts of usership and tell us we have a choice. And care about their users.
Also no word about, what´s with the subscribers prices in the future (and under the condition, that their plans will not exactly fit with their estimation)

This is not the behavior, of Adobe as I know it. They always were a bit "over-high-glossy" in the last years, going a little bit in Apples direction.
But in the past I had not the feeling they were unfair. Or lying.
They were one of the last companies, I had the feeling of "Serious behavior".
(If this had been done by MS, than it´s part of a philosophy I know and can foresee)

That has got an 180 degree turn around on May 6th.
As I heard, I first couldn´t believe. After thinking about all the lacks I thought I understood something wrong. Really.
I called the german support. I asked the guy, if it is true, that I lose the file access in the way No software - No access.
That guy first don´t want to believe itself. Had to ask an colleague before I got the answer: Yes, but I can resubscribe in that case.
and so on.

My sight on Adobe has changed completely. Really I loved to use their products, but now - as long as I have to do - I´m a little bit ashamed with every use.
May be, I´m naive. And, yes I know, that money is the regent of the world.
Also nothing against money for Adobe to make innovations.
But at the other side, I don´t want to take every pill.

I think it´s a hard situation now. As in many cases software isn´t as easy to replace as they will tell us.
There are infrastructures and workflows to clients and suppliers which are based on Adobes Fileformats.
(BtW: I am not yet assured, that thy will go away with that, when I look at the law aspects in some regions.
They are a monopolist in graphic business [not so much in video-editing] and that changes their situation and the possibilities to act - we will see)
But I will move away. I also moved away form iTunes as it wants to be the "One and Only" to hold my music (not so difficult as in case of Adobe, but...)

An interesting part of all that financial materials, they offer, is the sentence "No plans to sell perpetual licenses"
As they don´t write "No perpetual licenses any longer".
As they have to be very careful, when talking to investors:
Don´t you are also of the opinion, that there is something implemented?
There is a high risk for Adobe to do that all. And they know that. Everything is based on very difficult to foresee estimations.
And they also were surprised by the overwhelming refusal.


Return to posts index

Tim Dowse
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 2:23:18 pm

Same thing in their investor relations in 2012...

http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/invrelations/pdfs/ADBE_Investor_Handout_Jul...



Return to posts index

Dave LaRonde
Re: Adobe May 2013 Investor Handout
on Jun 5, 2013 at 4:12:38 pm

Gee, you'd think that with all that cool software lying around, they might have changed the graphic design from one year to the next.
Not logos, mind you, but that "panels in the big dark room" look.

Dave LaRonde
Former Sr. Promotion Producer
KCRG-TV (ABC) Cedar Rapids, IA


Return to posts index

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