How about yearly subscription pricing for MTotalBundle?

[sampliist]

It's maybe good for some people/institutions or schools perhaps...

I am a home guy and I will likely continue picking up a few deals here and there, though..

I find the Total Bundle a bit large for my own needs in general.. You guys overall already have competitive sales dept.. In fact I find it a tad aggressive recently.

Very nice plugins!

[chaos318]

I like the idea of a subscription! Fits to my way of work and needs. I guess its a win win situation for the customer and the developer.

[Nobdi]

The whole thing reminds me of axisplugins.
I was very interested in their MatchEQ - and only their MatchEQ.
With their subscription model I'd get ALL their plugins for 39,-€ / year.
But ... well ... I only wanted the one plugin and don't have any use for the
other 9 in the bundle. For me (and for any other potential customer) that
sounded like wasting 35,10€ (9/10th) every year for useless stuff.
- Yes - I know that it still looks very cheap - but not in the long run.
Needless to say that I didn't went for it and simply looked for plugin alternatives.
(btw.: same story with every company that wants me to use an ilok -> I just
go away and search somewhere else for alternatives )

[Breeze]

@ plexuss: I was under the impression that if you discontinued the Creative Cloud service, you still could use all these softs indefinitely at their current versions. Is this not the case?

@Melda: I always thought it was rather insane of you to offer free updates for life. I could see that as a time-limited early-game promotional offer designed to gain market share that would cut off after a certain number of plugins or bundles were sold. But to do this indefinitely for a small specialized market like this is not really sustainable. In order to adjust fairly to a new system, you may have to respect that original agreement for people who bought under those terms, possible freeze the current lineup while creating new plugins and bundles in the future under a new system.

As far as daily or weekly license checks: a definite no on that! I don't mind having a system that requires checking but I do mind a system that requires checking that will lock me out if the internet is down for whatever reason. Such a system must have the ability to retry a number of times over consecutive days and advise the user of some kind of countdown. The worse thing in the world is being on a deadline and being locked out of mix because of some stupid license check. I've been there.

As crazy as this is going to sound, and despite all the bad blood they generated in the past, I find Waves's WUP to be an example of a sustainable system that works. You pay for a term of updates, and if you don't need updates you don't pay and your plugins continue to work at their current versions indefinitely. You get new plugins in each bundle you own during the paid term. Their maximum pricing for owning a number of plugins and bundles is actually reasonable. Even though a lot of the larger bundles include very old algorithms and aren't as interesting as they used to be, these provide compatibility support for legacy plugins which is important to some. The only other thing I don't like about their system is that they're all or nothing about support: even minor bug-fixes require an active WUP to access them. This could be managed more humanely by offering two levels of update support, using two levels of WUP.

I totally understand why you're thinking of this. I believe there are ways to achieve a fair crossover from the original system, but it will require some delicate management in order to be fair to everyone that has supported you so far.

[woodsdenis]

No no, it would be optional. And yes, after years you'd pay much more, it would be everyone's option if they want to just "try for a year", or just "pay every year", or just buy the normal licence.

Personally not for me as I have all the Melda plugs I want now. It may work for others who are starting and as long as its optional and runs alongside the traditional model I am ok with it.

[Quasar]

For creative work, I continue to keep my DAW in an offline environment, as I prefer old-fashioned privacy (think of a diary with a little lock and key on the book cover). So I use license key software, and challenge/response or those little license applets are fine— provided that the processes can be transacted on another computer and ported.

Anything that would require that my DAW computer "check in" over the internet is an absolute, 100% deal breaker for me. Just my 2P.

[Mosvalve]

It appears that DAW manufaqcturers and plugin maufacturers are going this route now. I can understand the need for constant cash flow, we all have that need. Meldaproduction's make a good product. Products that are good and priced resonably are an example of what competition causes. Take away the competiton with subscriptions the consumer looses out. Subscriptions may be a good idea for professional studios or those who earm money with home studios and can justify the cost but the hobbiest can't afford the cost. Companies figure they have everyone buy the balls now. If Melda has to go this route they should take a look at Cakewalk's Sonar subscription. I think the subscription choices they have are ok but I can't see subscriptions for plugins. I am assuming that the plugins I already bought will not be a part of this subscription thing.

[musick66]

I would use a year subscription as an 'extend trial' period before deciding buying a permanent license or not.

[lukemacneil]

One of Meldaproductions greatest selling points is free for life updates. Another is the easy license model. I dont mind subscription models if they are extremely affordable and functional on multiple computers offline.

Im sure everyone knows how easy it is to use cracked plugs, so I dont see how constantly polling for valid licensing is helpful to anyone. Once Ive bought a license, I expect to be able to install it across my machines without hastle. Per computer licensing is dumb, as is an internet requirement. Anyone thats purchased a license has done so because theyre already honest.

Iloks, license centers, online activation verification.... All pointless hastle. Sell licenses. The people that are going to steal your work are going to steal it regardless of your efforts to stop them.

If Ive left my studio daw up with a project open and I come downstairs and jump on the laptop to do something else... Who cares.

[virgulino lampiao]

Just don't do like Slate Digital that put a rental model that ends up being cheaper than purchasing the licenses.

[distante]

As a person who lives in a country where only the "losers" use Original software I must vote nope, no, not, nein, etc. I know some people that went away from Adobe's Original soft to use pirated ones because their new "rent" model.

Somebody said that the "free for life" isn't a good for the company. I don't (completely) agree. As an audio teacher, I know that every day there are several new potential customers without count the hobbyists or audio enthusiast, the market will never really end, just, well the struggle for bring that potential customers is hard.

But, let's think for a moment that the number of potential customers end, from the buyers point of view, charge for new versions (as the tech advances) will means kind of paid for keep using something you already own. If you don't have to pay for an actualization, then the developers have to think in new tools so the market returns. That's a beauty.

BTW, personally I don't like anything from waves, even when then (finally) left the iLok thingy, I don't find their plugins creative. Just a copy of a copy of a copy of themselves sponsored by paid well know audio techs/eng. Of course they had a very good marketing department (like avid). But you can totally replace every single one of their plugins with cheaper (even free) options.

I can complain of the same thing with Melda's plugins

PD: I also think that a internet check it's a deal breaker! but (pd2)

PD2: @Melda Have you think in a payment fragmented? (sorry my English is kind of well bad) I mean something if you sell MTotal now for 999€ how about the ability to paid it in six, twelve or X parts monthly? I think no Plug or DAW developer does this. Will be like the subscription model but having as goal the final purchase of the product.

[PaulB23]

I think your plugins are excellent quality and competitively priced with a customer centric ethos around lifetime updates - subscription model just doesn't seem to align with that

[wst3]

Have you considered the model Cakewalk is trying, where there is a monthly - or annual - fee, and if you meet that obligation you own the software? It's an interesting model me thinks!

[paterpeter]

Nope, I didn't like the idea for Slate, I don't like it for Melda. As a hobbyist, plugins are not that essential to me to justify any rental plan.

[plexuss]

I see the dillema. if you offer free lifetime updates then unless you continuously make new products, eventually you erode your market and spend more time working for free. I like the upgrade scenarios where minor upgrades are free and major upgrades are a nominal price to existing licence holders. this was the old way of doing it and frankly I think the best way. the upgrade price has to take into consideration the sale price of your products. so if a product is on sale for $30US, the upgrade could maybe be $10. this way you pick up market share and keep a wave flowing for your existing customers to easily stay on top of it. I also like it when a dev updates older versions to work with newer hosts and OSes. build in the code to do this so that at least current customers can run their shit on the latest platforms. maybe its a 2 tiered system: 1/6 the sale price to update to latest platform (if it stops running) 1/3 sale price to upgrade to current version. minor updates free until the next version is released. something like that.