KVR Audio

memyselfandus · Post by **memyselfandus** » Thu Jan 29, 2015 3:02 pm

What are the pluses and minuses of Not having a subscription based service for Daws? For you as a customer.

Edit to add more questions

Why do you think a couple companies are switching to subscription based? what is the motive?

Didn't the video game industry try to go this route? where you wouldn't be able to buy used games anymore? Isn't subscription based the same in this regard? you can't buy a used/second hand copy of the software with a subscription based plan?

What are the benefits to the companies? I say companies because it seems the only one's that are going strictly subscription are owned by large companies. The more independent devs seem to be staying away from this. Is it because they (independent) are closer to their user base? or because it's easier for the larger companies to put something like this in place? money wise?

What I mean is. would more developers switch to only subscription if they could? or are they more in touch with their user base? I'm assuming the people who are in touch with the users are not the ones who are making the decisions? or

are independent models better for the Customer than the more corporate models? or vice versa?

Acid Mitch · Post by **Acid Mitch** » Thu Jan 29, 2015 3:17 pm

It would depend on what the subscription offered.
If your one of the people who upgrades every year or 2 then your pretty much on a subscription anyway, weather it's called that or bot.

rod_zero · Post by **rod_zero** » Thu Jan 29, 2015 4:11 pm

I think the biggest issue with subscription model is the uncertainity of "updates" and "features" you get over time.

With a paid upgrade/update you know what new features you get, you can make a cost/value comparission and decide if you wanna pay or not. Upagrdes for major daws go for something like 100 to 200 USD.

With subscriptions even if you pay the same 200 USD over the same two years cycle of the normal updates but what you get apart from use time?

>It's more blurry to calculate the cost/value relationship.

With normal updates you can also skip a version or two if you want, you have to keep paying with subscription models.

chokehold · Post by **chokehold** » Thu Jan 29, 2015 4:13 pm

Minus:
You have to pay everything at once.

Plus:
Everything else.

It's just one more ploy to avoid dealing with license transfers.
"Don't want it anymore? Stop paying."

masterhiggins · Post by **masterhiggins** » Thu Jan 29, 2015 4:21 pm

I think its horsesh*t, personally. Most developers I support have released many free updates without having to resort to nickel-and-diming schemes like subscriptions. However, for companies like Steinberg that charges you up the *ss for minor updates I can see how subscriptions might be tempting for buyers.

She Changed Her Mind · Thu Jan 29, 2015 4:47 pm

Hard to say. Though I know that, or; people will stop contributing after a year. Maybe two. Or; the company has to lower the contribution gradually each year, thus: moving towards a bottom price.
Let's say you pay $50 per month. That's $1800 in 3 years. Just saying that is not the average price, nor a discount as regarded to major releases: now the most common used practice by companies in question.
I guess $15/$20 is more reasonable in the long run. Depending on the app's progression/stability. And diversity; in expectations they will meet - and satisfy regarded to their contributors, of course. 'What formats will they use?' 'What is their general VST status? And so on.
PS it also will depend on the status of the term 'DAW' itself, speaking of how we use technology in the future.

memyselfandus · Post by **memyselfandus** » Thu Jan 29, 2015 5:00 pm

Why do you think a couple companies are switching to subscription based? what is the motive?

Didn't the video game industry try to go this route? where you wouldn't be able to buy used games anymore? Isn't subscription based the same in this regard? you can't buy a used/second hand copy of the software with a subscription based plan?

memyselfandus · Post by **memyselfandus** » Thu Jan 29, 2015 5:09 pm

What are the benefits to the companies? I say companies because it seems the only one's that are going strictly subscription are owned by large companies. The more independent devs seem to be staying away from this. Is it because they (independent) are closer to their user base? or because it's easier for the larger companies to put something like this in place? money wise?

What I mean is. would more developers switch to only subscription if they could? or are they more in touch with their user base? I'm assuming the people who are in touch with the users are not the ones who are making the decisions? or

are independent models better for the Customer than the more corporate models? or vice versa?

BERFAB · Post by **BERFAB** » Thu Jan 29, 2015 5:28 pm

IF you could work out a way that the money wasn't really a big deal (i.e. approximate cost to a loyal user is about the same), and assuming the actual VALUE was similar (regular updates and improvements) then I would STILL have a problem with a subscription for the very simple reason that I don't want any dev to be that involved in MY studio.

I don't want the intrusion that would be required for a company to determine whether I'm paid up and whether or not THIS is going to be the day that they shut me down.

Yes, I regularly hand Steinberg $100 or $200 to stay current, but that's my choice. I can stop at any time and keep making music. Hell, I can go off the grid entirely and still make music. But having them reach their virtual claw into my business and pull the plug at THEIR convenience would be too much intrusion.

Cheers
-B

Gamma-UT · Post by **Gamma-UT** » Thu Jan 29, 2015 6:22 pm

She Changed Her Mind wrote:Hard to say. Though I know that, or; people will stop contributing after a year. Maybe two.

Yup. I wonder whether the companies moving over to subscription have factored in churn. It's the bane of any subscription system because, after a while people look at their bank statements and think "hey, I'm barely using that, why am I paying $30 a month for it? I'm cancelling". It's why magazines send out ten or more letters a year begging for you to resubscribe for a new year.

The number of emails I get from Adobe offering me cheap first years for Creative Cloud suggests the plan might not be going all that way in reality - and that's for tools where, if you need 'em, you need 'em. I suspect Avid can make it work for a significant subset of their user base, but they will lose bucketloads through churn.

The great advantage of one-off purchases is that they attract impulse buyers. Subscriptions give impulse buyers a cheaper entry point and an easy exit, although obviously you can't resell anything at the end.

However, I think Slate has picked a good strategy that is more likely to keep people onboard as long as the company can develop the software - provide a voucher equal to the subscription value so the customer can buy a perpetual. In effect, it becomes a very long trial system – I think Compyfox made the point on another thread.

BMoore · Post by **BMoore** » Thu Jan 29, 2015 6:43 pm

The motive behind subscriptions?
Not money, that's for sure!

LawrenceF · Post by **LawrenceF** » Thu Jan 29, 2015 8:01 pm

Edit. Never mind. You said "not" having a subscription.

lfm · Post by **lfm** » Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:15 pm

memyselfandus wrote:What are the benefits to the companies? I say companies because it seems the only one's that are going strictly subscription are owned by large companies. The more independent devs seem to be staying away from this. Is it because they (independent) are closer to their user base? or because it's easier for the larger companies to put something like this in place? money wise?

What I mean is. would more developers switch to only subscription if they could? or are they more in touch with their user base? I'm assuming the people who are in touch with the users are not the ones who are making the decisions? or

are independent models better for the Customer than the more corporate models? or vice versa?

One reason could be companies that are publicly enlisted at a stock marketplace. Subscription means even income, not a burst of money coming in at major release, but evenly all the time. A subscription become like a new sales every month, kind of.

Many has claimed this to be the reason for Avid at least, creative book keeping to keep investors happy. There were a vacuum while PT 11 was developed for years.

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:20 pm

memyselfandus wrote:Why do you think a couple companies are switching to subscription based? what is the motive?

Make more profit. End of story.
That's why it's called a business.

The Dissonance · Post by **The Dissonance** » Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:41 pm

welp, there goes the resale value of my slate plugins.

What are the pluses and minuses of NOT having a subscription based service for Daws?