Waves' new/old subscription model

[BERFAB]

I got a Slate email yesterday with a baffling subscription offer. "Starting at" $9.99/month for everything.

Turns out "Starting at" means that you're locked in for a year with $9.99 for the first 6 months, and then $14.99 for the next 6 months. OK, that's certainly some deception. But here's the headscratcher: "Or, just $149.99 up front, per year." Huh?

The 3rd option was also nutty, but not completely crazy: $24.99/mo. but cancel anytime.

Thank you, no.

[onerob]

Seems straightforward enough to me.

[BERFAB]

Seems straightforward enough to me.

Wouldn't you expect a discount for paying up front? The first two options work out to the same money.

[dionenoid]

Seems straightforward enough to me.

Wouldn't you expect a discount for paying up front? The first two options work out to the same money.

They just give you an option to pay monthly for a yearly plan, while still getting a discount.

[onerob]

The $149 amount would apply each year, whereas the six month discount is once only. I guess maybe you could unsubscribe and re-subscribe to keep claiming the six month intro period each year, but I imagine they'd block that.

[roman.i]

This Waves subscription model is specifically assuming some people are stupid. Waves Gold was on sale recently for $75. But instead of owning it outright, you can pay then $10/m forever. Waves thinks that there are plenty of stupid people that would take that deal, and stupid people must be parted from their money.

There are several situations when you want the subscription model, and these are definitely good news Waves has one.
For example, you want to try these plugins, 7 days trial is not enough to try all plugins in the Gold/Platinum package, so you may start with the Gold subscription for month or two and the decide if it worth buying or not. The subscription also has a longer trial.
Another example is when you need these plugins only for a month or so for a specific project, and you don't plan to use them on a regular basis.
Also, the price is $99 per year, that's basically the price I paid for it on the Black Friday sale, and if I'm deciding to keep it updated every year, I won't have to wait for the Black Friday to get this price. Because right now, it's not on sale for $299.
I don't understand why there is so much hate around these subscription offers, similar to what credit cards did, the purchase only becomes more agile and affordable for people who don't have money to buy the package.

[yellowmix]

I don't understand why there is so much hate around these subscription offers, similar to what credit cards did, the purchase only becomes more agile and affordable for people who don't have money to buy the package.

Because the logical conclusion of a subscription (software as a service) is what happened with Adobe, where there is only the subscription. So it is incumbent on a company to provide sufficient assurance that this will not be. Which is contingent on their previous behavior and business practices.

Waves has an indisputably idiosyncratic retail and support model. Yes, you can read all the fine print, but you can also critique how this is a form of obfuscation. As others have pointed out, there are other consumer hostile practices such as discouraging second-hand sales (via WUP and pricing model) to the point it's effectively killed the second-hand market for Waves plugins (note the few sales are largely done via account takeover). This and other practices has eroded trust in Waves for many people.

This isn't what credit cards did. You can pay off a credit card. You can never pay off a subscription. The analogous model is rent-to-own software, like Xfer Serum. You want to make things more affordable for people that is the consumer-friendly way to do it.

[roman.i]

Because the logical conclusion of a subscription (software as a service) is what happened with Adobe, where there is only the subscription. So it is incumbent on a company to provide sufficient assurance that this will not be. Which is contingent on their previous behavior and business practices.

Waves has an indisputably idiosyncratic retail and support model. Yes, you can read all the fine print, but you can also critique how this is a form of obfuscation. As others have pointed out, there are other consumer hostile practices such as discouraging second-hand sales (via WUP and pricing model) to the point it's effectively killed the second-hand market for Waves plugins (note the few sales are largely done via account takeover). This and other practices has eroded trust in Waves for many people.

This isn't what credit cards did. You can pay off a credit card. You can never pay off a subscription. The analogous model is rent-to-own software, like Xfer Serum. You want to make things more affordable for people that is the consumer-friendly way to do it.

Subscription model already has killed the retail model in a software world, it's just matter of how much time it will take for all companies to align to the new reality. So Waves did another step to the subscription model, to align with Slate and PA offers, but still far away in the value they provide.
It's much more fair and simple for everyone to pay a small price on a monthly basis for the products and work of a company that you like and use. This also assumes you'll get new plugins every few month or so, otherwise it doesn't make any sense to pay a subscription. This is the case with Xfer, a one man company, they have nothing to offer for a subscription, so they're offering the rent-to-own which is less attractive in my opinion.
All the hate around the subscription is coming from conservative people not willing to accept anything new, even if it's better.

[imrae]

What if you're not interested in the new plugins coming out every month? And what happens if they stop coming and you're already on a subscription?

I'm not really seeing a case here for how these models are "better" for anyone other than shareholders.

And, as I mentioned in the thread speculating about Logic as subscription, Adobe is a special case because they already have such a stranglehold on that industry. Audio is more competitive, so we can (and will) choose payment plans that give us more freedom.

[burnt circuit]

What if you're not interested in the new plugins coming out every month? And what happens if they stop coming and you're already on a subscription?

I'm not really seeing a case here for how these models are "better" for anyone other than shareholders.

And, as I mentioned in the thread speculating about Logic as subscription, Adobe is a special case because they already have such a stranglehold on that industry. Audio is more competitive, so we can (and will) choose payment plans that give us more freedom.

Is it so hard to grasp the fact that some people choose to lease cars and some people buy cars?

There are options, that's it...

[imrae]

Is it so hard to grasp the fact that some people choose to lease cars and some people buy cars?

There are options, that's it...

Options are ok as long as they are not a complete ripoff/time-waste. I was responding to

Subscription model already has killed the retail model in a software world, it's just matter of how much time it will take for all companies to align to the new reality.
...
All the hate around the subscription is coming from conservative people not willing to accept anything new, even if it's better.

Apparently there are people who defend subscription-only models.

[roman.i]

What if you're not interested in the new plugins coming out every month? And what happens if they stop coming and you're already on a subscription?

I'm not really seeing a case here for how these models are "better" for anyone other than shareholders.

And, as I mentioned in the thread speculating about Logic as subscription, Adobe is a special case because they already have such a stranglehold on that industry. Audio is more competitive, so we can (and will) choose payment plans that give us more freedom.

You are probably interested in some of the new plugins. For example, if you use the Pro-q 2 has a new version Pro-q 3, the Pro-q 2 being discontinued and the company drops the support for it. You'll probably have to buy the newer plugin. Software is not the same as hardware, it evolves very fast. Every year or two it has a new de-facto standard, resizable menus, oversampling, new VST standard etc. So I guess you would like to have all these technologies in all your plugins. In retail model, the developer doesn't have to improve anything, except fixing bugs and supporting newer operating systems.
And all this headache with shopping process, sales waiting, second hand market risks, non-existing support, all this doesn't exist in the subscription. Just grab the plugin you like from hundreds the company has to offer, and continue with your work.
Regarding the new plugins, and updates that stop coming are just your consumer fears. In reality a healthy company wouldn't do this, because they will loose the potential new customers and eventually the existing ones.

[imrae]

In the retail model, AIR released a full-price upgrade from Loom to Loom 2, it was completely underwhelming and I didn't buy it. Under a subscription model, you would have already paid for it. Which is better for incentivising good development?

Support can be dropped for products in a subscription as well - at the developer's discretion, you could simply lose access to something that was working fine for your system and your needs.

[burnt circuit]

Options are ok as long as they are not a complete ripoff/time-waste. I was responding to

"Time waste", like replying to this thread for you?

[imrae]

Options are ok as long as they are not a complete ripoff/time-waste. I was responding to

"Time waste", like replying to this thread for you?

I see that as more of a community service