-
please explain the new business model to me
-
[Scott Witthaus] “My question to the “enlightened ones” is what happens when Adobe raises the monthly rental fee? It’s gonna happen, right? Sooner or later the way to raise revenue is charge higher prices. Everyone cool with $69 ($800+ per year) or $79 ($900+ per year) per month? “
No and at that point I and many others will unsubscribe and the model will no longer work
[Scott Witthaus] “And if you’re not cool with that, you lose what you paid for and your projects are gone?”
I would have planned to switch NLE’s for new projects and I won’t care about the projects I have finished on PPro because they are finished! If I need to access them I’ll pay a months subscription and pass the cost on to the client.
Do you seriously think that those of us who subscribe haven’t considered our options?
-
[Scott Witthaus] “My question to the “enlightened ones” is what happens when Adobe raises the monthly rental fee? It’s gonna happen, right? Sooner or later the way to raise revenue is charge higher prices”
Offering less (or the same) but charging more will almost certainly start a death spiral. (See also: Quark.) There’s another way: offering more and charging for it.
Instead of squeezing their customers until they’re gone, Adobe can continuously monetize their subscriber base by layering additional products and services on top of the core CC offering, for additional fees. They can make more money by making their customers happier, providing them more of what they need and want.
More of this here:
https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/378/10800#10818Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
[Walter Soyka] “Instead of squeezing their customers until they’re gone, Adobe can continuously monetize their subscriber base by layering additional products and services on top of the core CC offering, for additional fees. “
See Fotolia: Adobe spent $800 million to buy it (in cash no less) and there’s been no increase to offset. The belief is that it will add enough value, with enough ease of use and access, that the investment will monetize itself with in-app purchases.
To Oliver’s point disputing the notion that price increases are inevitable, there’s no model anywhere in this industry for that being the case. Not cameras, not storage, not I/O, not standards converters, not switchers, and definitely not software. It just doesn’t happen. Ever.
Am I wrong about this? Can anyone point to even one example? I’m sure somebody can, but I absolutely cannot.
(Cell phones and cable bills aren’t anywhere near this industry’s product lineup, so I don’t think I’m being reasonable to exclude them.)
The risk that people describe is real enough to be worth talking about, but not realistic for Adobe to actually DO. A subscription model has no friction on the way out for anyone but the handful of people who NEED access to a no-longer-supported version years from now. Those people obviously exist, and at least two of them who ACTUALLY do this, rather than stating a theoretical concern or philosophical stand, regularly post here. Their concerns are both valid and accurate, and not at all to be trifled with…
…but well outside mainstream use cases. So those folks should indeed not go this route, but for the rest of the world, it’s easy enough to fit this into the toolbox….and easy enough to leave if the price gets out of hand, the value is no longer there, or because something more compelling comes along.
But with Adobe needing to keep customers around for four years and three months to equal the price of one new box of CS with no upgrades, it’s in their interest to keep up the pace, keep the quality within normal ranges, keep adding value, and NOT raising the price.
The subscription model isn’t at all new, even in this industry, and certainly in other industries, but significant price increases for anything related to this industry are all but unprecedented.
Right?
-
-
[Scott Witthaus] “Many of feel X is a superior product.”
er, you’ve got to be joking me mate. Not to go football teams, but premiere kicks its ass into next week..
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[Steve Connor] “If I need to access them I’ll pay a months subscription and pass the cost on to the client.”
I guess you missed the part about not being able to pay for a month!
While they list their subscription in monthly terms, the shortest contract is 1 year!!! It’s like late night advertising scams that list 5 easy payments for $19.95 because no one would buy it if they said it cost $100.
I know this because my son is taking graphics design in college and while video editors might have a choice in tools, Graphics Designers DO NOT! If you don’t know and own Photoshop and Illustrator you don’t work in Graphics Design. Adobe has a tight monopoly on that.
So while in school I he wanted to pay for Adobe CC just for the 4 months of his semester but he could not. He had to subscribe for a full year. They did offer a student discount but that’s when I found out that the monthly fee is a marketing gimmick.
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com -
[John Rofrano] “I guess you missed the part about not being able to pay for a month! “
An individual monthly plan, no annual commitment, is $74.99/mo.
[John Rofrano] “I know this because my son is taking graphics design in college… So while in school I he wanted to pay for Adobe CC just for the 4 months of his semester but he could not. He had to subscribe for a full year. They did offer a student discount but that’s when I found out that the monthly fee is a marketing gimmick.”
The student plan, which heavily discounted and pales in comparison to the cost of textbooks (or traditional collegiate social lubricants), is not available monthly. Regular plans are.
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
[Aindreas Gallagher] “er, you’ve got to be joking me mate. Not to go football teams, but premiere kicks its ass into next week..”
No, it doesn’t. (typed while working in Premiere) You’re starting to sound suspiciously like a fanboy Aindreas. 🙂
————————————————————-
~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Tim Wilson] “(Cell phones and cable bills aren’t anywhere near this industry’s product lineup, so I don’t think I’m being reasonable to exclude them.)”
Sorry – below turned into a screed a little – but – I do kind of wonder about that. We all know in our bones there are no market functioning competitors to PS and AE and ID and ILL. Nor are there likely to be ones cohesive enough that we can all wander off anytime soon, given the facilities would have wanted to have made the same decisions? And how likely is that realistically?
I think there is a cable risk with adobe if I’m being honest. It’s already sixty channels in the package with maybe 6-8 each discipline generally touches on any regular basis. I think it’s a bit ESPN or SKY Sports in a padded cable package in a way – adobe know they have 4-5 mortal locks that allow them to set master suite prices for the subscription.
[Tim Wilson] “Not cameras, not storage, not I/O, not standards converters, not switchers,”
The thing is – none of those are a subscription scenario. Some, say cameras, have been rental in the past, but it’s a chunk of metal electronics and glass you make use of and then pop back. People don’t subscribe to cameras or storage. Photoshop isn’t a camera, neither is after effects or premiere. They are software creation tools used daily by millions in a million different use cases, and out of those three, the only one with valid competition is premiere. And Adobe know, because they were good enough to build it for us, that the taste of avid or X to the classical FCP editor is bllleeeuuugghhh.
I think walter is really smart, and he thinks they won’t go to town on the subscription. But, leaving the hand wringing aside, you’d wonder about human nature in corporations. They’re still not making anything like what they should be making from CC. They’re not in this for the good for their health. I’ve lost track, but I’m pretty sure CC PS+LR bundle discount city isn’t getting the profit where it should be. Something’s got to give sooner or later. I think the board still view subscription increase as radioactive – and I’m not sure when they will feel clear ground. But subscriptions without valid core competition increase in price – I’d almost say that’s human nature gravity. We can walk away – but where exactly are we walking to in the context of PS or AE? Ultimately they can set any price they think can be borne. Getting people to maybe buy from their stock photos instead of shutterstock etc isn’t going to really move the billion dollar needle.
Not like a sweet 10% subscription increase. Or two. Sooner or later they’re going to begin staring at that subscription price and letting their minds go. They’re not amazon. Sooner or later they need to start making the profit numbers they pitched investors three years ago. The subscriber uptake is fine, but the cash value is not?
Unless I’m totally wrong about all of that. My days of reading every adobe investor report are a bit behind me…
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[John Rofrano] “The choice should be mine to do what’s right for my business… not Adobe’s business.
“It is Adobe’s business if you want to use the software that they purchased and developed over the decades. They can make it available however they damn well please. The only choice is if you want to use it or not.
Some of us do want to use it. And if you don’t, good luck to you.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up