ToneBoosters: New License Transfer Policy

[fese]

Apart from the very affordable, nay ridiculous prices, Toneboosters offer fully functional (apart from saving) non time-limited demos so anyone can take as much time as needed to evaluate whether the plugins are useful to him/her/it. Plus they have one of the most uninstrusive copyright protection available, a simple key file. One of the best packages the VST world has to offer, all in all, IMHO.
Personally, I see no problem there, but then I don't intend to sell my TB plugins. I quite like them

People should be complaining about all those damn software stores (Apple, Google, MS, Steam) that seem to be the future of software deployment, at least for the companies...

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Some business isn't worth having... especially from those that publicly throw a dev under the bus for a change in policy that is better for his business.

without customers there is no business. no one here is begrudging him the money, but the fee at 50% renders the whole xfer process completely pointless

in every other way he has a great business model, and i continue to hope he does well. it has nothing to do with throwing anyone under any bus

[sin night]

I think it would have been better to just make all the licenses NFR.

By the way I don't understand going second hand for such low-price items, regardeless of the new policy.

[chk071]

Some business isn't worth having... especially from those that publicly throw a dev under the bus for a change in policy that is better for his business.

without customers there is no business. no one here is begrudging him the money, but the fee at 50% renders the whole xfer process completely pointless

I'd rather say the selling price of just 20 € renders the whole transfer process completely pointless (and the whole discussion as well). Seriously, who couldn't afford to buy it new? If i was the dev, i'd rather change the EULA to NFR. Makes no sense to provied support for a resold copy of a 20 € plugin.

[JJ_Jettflow]

Some business isn't worth having... especially from those that publicly throw a dev under the bus for a change in policy that is better for his business.

No one here is throwing the dev under the bus, the dev is throwing himself under it. He could have easily used a model like U-he has where you pay a percentage if you want to sell it before a certain time has passed; in the case of U-He it is 8 or 9 months. He could have also adopted a similar policy to that of GForce or Audio Damage and just made the product NFR after the first transfer.

There are a lot of ways he could have curbed the license transfers if that was his real intensions but I feel this is more about circumventing the EU ruling and eliminating the option for someone to recoup some of their loses on a product they no longer wish to own, hoping to boost his sagging sales.

[lachrimae]

Ok, I'll keep playing (boring day at work).

If a dev sold a $2 plug-in, according to your logic they'd be ripping you off if they charged a $1 transfer fee, right?
If that's the case, the dev's mistake was the initial plug-in price and not the amount of the transfer fee ("you should have charged me more initially so that the transfer fee was a lower percentage of the original price!").

Here's how I see it (my opinion only): This particular dev charges a fair price for their plug-ins, which earns him some of my trust. So, when that dev makes a change in policy I give him the benefit of the doubt that it's being done in order to sustain his business. It's perfectly fine to choose not to purchase from a dev due to their policies (it's your money afterall), but making assumptions and generalizations about the reasoning behind those policies and then ranting about it publicly is exactly what I mean when I say that "some business isn't worth having".

[JJ_Jettflow]

Ok, I'll keep playing (boring day at work).

If a dev sold a $2 plug-in, according to your logic they'd be ripping you off if they charged a $1 transfer fee, right?

No it would be more like Spectrasonics charging $400 for a license transfer of Omnisphere. There would be no way anyone would sell it because the cost of the transfer would cause the 2nd hand price to be so high either the owner would not want to bother for such a little recoup of losses or for the fact that the savings would be so little, no one would consider purchasing it.

If that's the case, the dev's mistake was the initial plug-in price and not the amount of the transfer fee ("you should have charged me more initially so that the transfer fee was a lower percentage of the original price!").

The dev should have perhaps thought of a more reasonable way to introduce license fees to discourage license transfers. Many other small companies seem to do just fine and are able to charge a reasonable amount for an LT. I guess you overlooked the examples I gave in my previous post so I will mention them again; U-he, Audio Damage as well as KV331 and Sonimus and a host of others.

Here's how I see it (my opinion only): This particular dev charges a fair price for their plug-ins, which earns him some of my trust. So, when that dev makes a change in policy I give him the benefit of the doubt that it's being done in order to sustain his business. It's perfectly fine to choose not to purchase from a dev due to their policies (it's your money afterall), but making assumptions and generalizations about the reasoning behind those policies and then ranting about it publicly is exactly what I mean when I say that "some business isn't worth having".

You are absolutely right...it is your opinion and you are entitled to it as I am to mine. That however, does not make my opinion "ranting" solely because you do not agree with it.

So here's how I see it: When I see dozens of small companies that charge reasonable prices, for both their products and the LTs (many charge nothing), and I see this particular company take such drastic action, I have to ask why does this particular company have to charge this much when all the others don't? Simply for the same reason many other companies charge high LTs; to discourage 2nd hand sales in hopes that the person will buy it new from them. In this case, it is so high that it virtually removes any chance of a reasonable resale value, then I have to ask if this was done to circumvent the whole license transfer process?

[masterhiggins]

nvrmnd

[Burillo]

"why would you ever want to sell it" is a bad point. things happen, sometimes you need every dollar you can get.

[HcDoom]

LOL, those guys who whine about 10€...go find a job or rethink your life completely.

[GaryG]

He could have also adopted a similar policy to that of GForce or Audio Damage and just made the product NFR after the first transfer.

For the record, Audio Damage plugs *do not* become NFR after the first transfer. Only the first transfer by the original buyer is free though, after that subsequent owners have to pay a very reasonable $4 transfer fee.

[Burillo]

He could have also adopted a similar policy to that of GForce or Audio Damage and just made the product NFR after the first transfer.

For the record, Audio Damage plugs *do not* become NFR after the first transfer. Only the first transfer by the original buyer is free though, after that subsequent owners have to pay a very reasonable $4 transfer fee.

not only that, i think it's automated. this is a great way of cutting down support costs which for some reason eludes most developers.

[lnikj]

He could have also adopted a similar policy to that of GForce or Audio Damage and just made the product NFR after the first transfer.

For the record, Audio Damage plugs *do not* become NFR after the first transfer. Only the first transfer by the original buyer is free though, after that subsequent owners have to pay a very reasonable $4 transfer fee.

I wish! They do become NFR because Chris Randall never replies to emails. I've twice had to remove a plugin for sale despite having 'sold' it because of Chris not replying to the transfer request.

[GaryG]

For the record, Audio Damage plugs *do not* become NFR after the first transfer. Only the first transfer by the original buyer is free though, after that subsequent owners have to pay a very reasonable $4 transfer fee.

I wish! They do become NFR because Chris Randall never replies to emails. I've twice had to remove a plugin for sale despite having 'sold' it because of Chris not replying to the transfer request.

But it's all automated now, you buy the transfer license then the plug can just be transferred through the site...?

If it's not working for you then you should email him.

[lnikj]

It is only automated if you don't have to pay the $4.