Why don't developers offer payment in instalments?

[beely]

You make it sound like it would suddenly become a full time job, just answering e-mails from all these highly unlikely cases...

I asked you if you'd had any direct experience doing this kind of support, and you didn't reply to it, suggesting you haven't. Looking at the above line, clearly you haven't.

Small one-person indies have a hard time *actually* developing, given the pull of continuous support, and all the other business and marketing stuff that needs to be done.

Lower prices, and more sales, just make this even worse. Ideally, you want the other waya round higher prices and less sales (higher prices and more sales is also good, of course!), and better customers, but it's all a balancing game of what makes the most sense for your business and products.

[pdxindy]

Lower prices means more sales.

And low prices, and more sales, is always better - is that what you're saying?

No. And my proposal has nothing to do with lower prices, does it? My proposal is designed to make MORE SALES at CURRENT prices.

Sheesh, again. What exactly do you want to prove? So many people here can't even understand a basic idea, then seek to attack things that aren't even part of the idea, come up with problems that can't arise, (because they don't understand how DRM works or what it can offer, or how e-commerce packages work, etc.) and then desperately try to cling to whatever (incorrect) 'problem' they came up with in the first place. Sheesh.

Anyway, the idea is out there, any devs who are reading might want to chime in, I'm sure they can understand how it works. It might not be for them, or it might be something they consider trying. No skin off my nose either way.

The idea has been out there for a long time... and this is not the first time the discussion has come up at KVR

[beely]

The idea has been out there for a long time... and this is not the first time the discussion has come up at KVR

What? And all my favourite developers *still* don't offer this?

How come? - It's ridiculously trivial to do!

They must *all* be stupid and lazy...

[pdxindy]

You make it sound like it would suddenly become a full time job, just answering e-mails from all these highly unlikely cases...

I asked you if you'd had any direct experience doing this kind of support, and you didn't reply to it, suggesting you haven't. Looking at the above line, clearly you haven't.

Small one-person indies have a hard time *actually* developing, given the pull of continuous support, and all the other business and marketing stuff that needs to be done.

Lower prices, and more sales, just make this even worse. Ideally, you want the other waya round higher prices and less sales (higher prices and more sales is also good, of course!), and better customers, but it's all a balancing game of what makes the most sense for your business and products.

Plus it is a support nightmare.

As I mentioned in a previous post... what if person A paid 2 installments of $33 each and then in the meanwhile, the Dev updated the software and it is no longer supported on the OS that person A has when they are ready to make the 3rd installement.

[GaryG]

Lower prices means more sales.

And low prices, and more sales, is always better - is that what you're saying?

No. And my proposal has nothing to do with lower prices, does it? My proposal is designed to make MORE SALES at CURRENT prices.

So why do you keep mentioning pre-Christmas sales as justification? Obviously devs make money when they have a sale but your proposal is just a way of spreading payments..?

Seriously, bundle this idea up and sell it to devs to prove us all wrong. I think putting your money where your mouth is is the only way you'll prove how bitchin' this idea really is.

[whyterabbyt]

That's rich, coming from the resident forum policeman...

Erm, no. Policemen arent actually known for ad hominem attacks. Are you a little confused about the meaning of ad hominem or something? I can use small words if you need me to.

Oh, the humanity!
Not a "tripling of scope"! How MUCH more "administration and support" do you think it will involve? More than will be gained by increased sales?

Is that you ducking the question then? ie basically, a default admission that there'll be more overheads.

Kinda thought so.

Where's your evidence if you aren't?

Im not the one with the hypothesis, you are.

But Im finding certain evidence in your avoidance of answering simple questions.

No, my scheme is better for the customer, because they actually get the whole product after the third payment... LOL.

Again, avoiding the question. This is about the vendor.

How is how 'heavy' the DRM is relevant in any way?

Are you saying heavier DRM isnt relevant to customers buying decisions in this market?

Yes, because you didn't seem to understand why my proposal would work

No, there's nothing in my post which would indicate that, that's just a basic fib.

and then you resorted to the 'appeal to authority' fallacy...

As is that. What authority are you claiming I appealed to, exactly?

Such charming language! Touche, you've excelled yourself...

Not even slightly. Its merely the response in kind you deserve.

Lower prices means more sales.

This wouldnt be a lower price, though. So, not more sales, then. And definitely not 'a lot' more.

You seem to be absolutely terrified that my idea might work. Why? You sure are touchy and get over involved with things on this forum...

More ad hominem? You really are grasping at straws. Why cant you actually spend any effort on providing evidence for your scheme?

I would imagine that you regard most people who dare to think, or disagree with you, as "assholes"...

Your imagination is lacking, then.

(edited to fix quotes)

[SJ_Digriz]

As stated before "this great, insightful" idea is already being done. The processes already exist. In most cases it is not viable (in market dominant products it's a different thing). And it clearly isn't going to matter on products that are basically less than a weeks/days/hours/minutes wages. The system already allows for that. And why in the world would anyone rent $100 or 100 pound software? It's like paying a $3 fee to get $10 out of ATM.

[whyterabbyt]

Lower prices means more sales.

And low prices, and more sales, is always better - is that what you're saying?

No. And my proposal has nothing to do with lower prices, does it?

Then why did you state that lower prices increasing sales as a direct response to my question about how your proposal would increase sales?

[SJ_Digriz]

1) One month expiry product, £33, with 10 free points when you buy it.
2) Already existing full product, £99. Use 20 points to reduce the price to £33 on checkout.

That's it. That's all there is to it, as far as the e-commerce site goes. Do you disagree?

So, how long do you think that it would take to set up an ecommerce site to do that? How much management do you think it takes? Who programs that into the ecommerce site? Who manages the differences between rental users and real users?

And most of all, what is attractive about this process that is different than using a credit card? Why would I spend my time setting that up? Even assuming, wrongly, that it only takes 5 minutes. When there are already 100000000000 ways to split payments without me lifting a finger?

So again,
If this is a rental thing, it makes ZERO sense on commodity priced goods.
If it is split purchase thing, there are already a zillions ways to do it without me lifting a finger.

EDIT: I meant to ask if you were reading the IK Multimedia guide to simplified product sales.

[basslinemaster]

OP in thread on Sonar's installments-to-buy-outright model :

"We ALL need to boycott any company who tries to rent us software."

Context makes it clear that he is talking about that model, which is no way different from his own proposal.

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 8#p6009758

Hypocrisy?

THANK YOU Whyterabbyt! While doing the washing up, I was thinking about the Sonar thread that I posted on... and then I realised - Cakewalk are ALREADY doing exactly what I am proposing, but they worded it so badly on their site that most of the people on that thread (at least in the beginning) thought it was just SaaS, like I did - and apparently everybody on this thread either thinks that, or had forgotten that Cakewalk's 'Membership' actually gives you the software after you've paid for twelve months!

So I apologise for my original post, which is actually exactly what Cakewalk are ALREADY doing. I had forgotten all about them, and as Whyterabbyt showed with my quote, I believed they were offering SaaS, not a twelve month payment plan to buy Sonar.

https://www.cakewalk.com/Products/SONAR/Membership#FAQ

Is this like a subscription? Adobe Creative Cloud and other software with "subscription" models won't let you keep anything.

No. The big difference with our model is that after your first 12 months of SONAR Membership you get to keep everything you have received.

If I choose Monthly Membership payments, can I cancel before 12 Months?

Yes, but 12 consecutive monthly payments are required to permanently activate SONAR and any updates you have received. If you cancel payment or don’t pay for at least 12 months, SONAR will revert to demo mode. This means you can’t save or export projects, however anything you saved up to that point will still open and play in the demo. Once you resume payments, you can make new edits and save them.

This is exactly what I was proposing, and I hadn't realised it.

So can I retitle this thread "Why don't OTHER developers offer payments in instalments, like Cakewalk does?"


Perhaps all the detractors can now tell me and everybody else why Cakewalk are doing something wrong, and explain how they cope with all the imagined problems you all came up with...

LOL.

https://www.cakewalk.com/Products/SONAR/Buy-Now

That is precisely what I have been suggesting. "If you cancel payment or don’t pay for at least 12 months, SONAR will revert to demo mode." - except Cakewalk's method is more sophisticated (and better) than the simplistic version I suggested (which I deliberately made as simple as possible, to counter the naysayers). The more I look at the Cakewalk site, the more attractive it becomes. (Well, not to me, I'm an FL Studio user, so I get lifetime free updates, but I would welcome this on more expensive VSTs.)

[basslinemaster]

Lower prices means more sales.

And low prices, and more sales, is always better - is that what you're saying?

No. And my proposal has nothing to do with lower prices, does it?

Then why did you state that lower prices increasing sales as a direct response to my question about how your proposal would increase sales?

I meant "not lower OVERALL prices" or "not lower FINAL price"... The lower INTRODUCTORY price for one month's use would bring in more sales - final sales, that is, not just one month's use of the software (which would still be better than NO sale at all, anyway).

[basslinemaster]

1) One month expiry product, £33, with 10 free points when you buy it.
2) Already existing full product, £99. Use 20 points to reduce the price to £33 on checkout.

That's it. That's all there is to it, as far as the e-commerce site goes. Do you disagree?

So, how long do you think that it would take to set up an ecommerce site to do that? How much management do you think it takes? Who programs that into the ecommerce site? Who manages the differences between rental users and real users?

And most of all, what is attractive about this process that is different than using a credit card? Why would I spend my time setting that up? Even assuming, wrongly, that it only takes 5 minutes. When there are already 100000000000 ways to split payments without me lifting a finger?

So again,
If this is a rental thing, it makes ZERO sense on commodity priced goods.
If it is split purchase thing, there are already a zillions ways to do it without me lifting a finger.

EDIT: I meant to ask if you were reading the IK Multimedia guide to simplified product sales.

LOL, don't tell me, tell Cakewalk...

https://www.cakewalk.com/Products/SONAR/Membership#FAQ

[beely]

This is exactly what I was proposing, and I hadn't realised it.

The Cakewalk thing is interesting.

They are not marketing this as a "pay for your licence in installments" (I wonder why they chose not to market it as this - is there some market resistance to the idea in general?)

Instead, they are marketing this as a "Membership" scheme, which you pay monthly for, and while in the "scheme" you can use Sonar. Stop paying, or fall out of the scheme (within a year), and Sonar reverts to demo mode.

So far so much like the Adobe CC "subscription". The move Cakewalk made is to recognise the benefits of a subscription model in terms of revenue generation (as opposed to dwindling upgrade fees on mature software which we all know about) but also recognise that the subscription model has downsides which a lot of people don't like (it also has upsides which a lot of people like, too).

So, by permanently unlocking the last version of the software you had while in the Membership Scheme (subject to completing a full year), you give users a reasonable out point so they are not suckered into repeatedly paying for new software that they don't want, or paying to use their software for ever - which is a smart move. I don't know what the costs are but I assume it's in the ballpark of a previous regular yearly update, or something.

So, Cakewalk are *not* selling this as a "installment plan for their software", but a "subscription model that you don't have to pay for forever to use the software up to the last version that existed under the membership".

Sort of the best compromise of all three things really - you don't have to keep paying a subscription if the software is ok, you can jump in and out of the scheme, you don't have to pay a large up front cost to use the software, free updates while your are in the scheme.

So, more advantages than a "permanent license by installments" model.

Oh, I bet it only took them, hey maybe 30 minutes to set that up...

[Nielzie]

The idea has been out there for a long time... and this is not the first time the discussion has come up at KVR

What? And all my favourite developers *still* don't offer this?

How come? - It's ridiculously trivial to do!

They must *all* be stupid and lazy...

Maybe it's too much of a hassle for smaller developers. Administration, people not paying, website adjustments, etc.

[beely]

Maybe it's too much of a hassle for smaller developers. Administration, website adjustments, people not paying, etc.

Which is mostly the counter-argument that everyone bar the OP is making.

But according to the OP, this stuff is irrelevant, no extra work, and only takes five minutes to do.

Which is, y'know, bollocks.