U-He on Splice Rent-to-Own?

[keel]

What a stupid and patronizing answer. You think we have 500 eur to spend each month on vsts at once?

Still no-rent-to-own and no Black Friday deals in 2020, I'll pass (I mean I have most u-he products already anyway, half of them cracked, half of them friends gave me their licence).

Have fun saving/spending money

You can crack / steal as many plug-ins as you want, as many samples as you want, as many soundbanks as you want, it is only illusion and it will never overcome the lack of talent!

Sorry for off topic, but did you just spend 14 years to post your first post?

For the topic itself, I also would wish U-He to do rent to own. I would buy right away. Maybe some day

[lunardigs]

Why is it called cheesy?

I suppose because cheese has a tender, warm kind of scent reminiscent of feet?
Not sure though.

[FarleyCZ]

I do understand the problem of developing a new licensing scheme and/or combining it with the serial number thing. I don't want to dispute that. But let me offer an counter-argument:

I'm friend with this kid from a community of local producers. The kind of local small town producer community there are literally hundrets of thousands around the globe. I started to teach him producing. That kid had no idea if this is a right hobby for him. He enjoyed it a lot, but he was still too unsure to justify investing any serious money into the hobby. In that community of local producers, I estimate good 65-70% of people do have cracked software. The kid was an inch from falling into that rabbit hole too. As I have all my software legally owned I thought I might hand over a bit of good morals. So I swayed him to a legal and cheap DAW (thank god Reaper exists). I literally uninstalled cracked Ableton and thrown a license of Reaper on his computer.
The other day that kid came to me and went: "Yo! Can you somehow get me these?" and showed me a list of synthesizers. Probably got it as a recommandation from somebody else from that community. Diva was on it btw. I told him I can't as I don't do piracy, but when I explained Serum's rent to own model, he thought that is managable from his point of view. He's just about to finish the payments in a month or two and he's really happy to have a legal synth. He even paid for some other stuff on Splice including some Output plugins and banks too. ...and pays for that sample-download credit subscription they have. Without me even helping or endorsing it.

This is not a one-off. This is quite a normal story these days. I'm not here to lecture you how to do bussiness. I'm too dumb for that, don't worry. But these are straight facts. There are people willing to send you money in that way. They can't. ...and they probably will go pirate your stuff if they can't, because (excluding Vital) none of the free offerings is sufficient for the type of music they want to do. I'm not a prophet, I don't know how many of them are there and if the additional profit would cover the cost of the extra r&d, but I do know they exist. I've seen this exact story played out more than once. And I would like to stress that the estimation of their nubmer has to be done extra carefully, otherwise the opportunity cost might eventually play a role. That's all.

[Urs]

I'll offer a counter argument:

It's safe to assume that many people rent something for a month, then rent something else - they got no money, but they want to try as much as possible. Or they need this today and that tomorrow. That's fine with a normal software rental (i.e. not rent-to-own) which has a relatively low money footprint. If we take Softube on Gobbler as reference, a normal software rental is about as much as rent-to-own over 3 to 4 years. For sake of the argument, let's say it's 2 years. So, everyone who prematurely stops renting in a rent-to-own scenario over 12 months is paying twice of what a common software subscription model would have been.

While I have no insights in the economics of any rent-to-own service, I think that Benford's law will apply to a degree. That means, by far most rentals should currently be idling at 1 month, then 2 months etc. Maybe at some point it turns, so that most people who went through 8 or 9 instalments decide to take it through to 12 in order to own the asset. Who knows. I would absolutely not be surprised if a lot fewer than 50% finish their rent-to-own ever. Meaning, as attractive as it is to people on a budget, I suspect it contributes to their money problem more so than it solves it.

I will say though, it is attractive to software developers because it circumvents the obligation to allow for license transfers - at least for anyone who doesn't pay up full, which I suspect to be the majority. Therefore rent-to-own dries out the second hand market to some degree, poring more people into their scheme who would otherwise had bought a second hand license.

On all accounts however, it will take a lot to convince me that rent-to-own is a "good" scheme. So far, with all assumptions I can make, I find that the arguments made for it are actually arguments I'd hold against it.

[FarleyCZ]

I would absolutely not be surprised if a lot fewer than 50% finish their rent-to-own ever. Meaning, as attractive as it is to people on a budget, I suspect it contributes to their money problem more so than it solves it.

That is a fair concern. On the other hand, with all the respect, the percentage of unfinished payments is again just a guess. And it's negative impact is based on the assumption that without the rent to own option, "a percantage of that percentage" would be pressured to go and pay the full price. I would like to challenge that assumption. Market is saturated and there are other options offering that model. The pressure-scenario will not happen. People take that bit of money they have left each month and go throw it at someone else that allows them to play with their toys right away.

Also, and now i'm entering the "wild speculation" territory, your software is so good, I wouldn't be too worried about people needing it "just for one project". I dare to say they would keep their Divas and Zebras. And even if they did not, even if they really used it just for a month or two, that's still a bit of money that could flow your way instead of flowing somewhere else.

[SneakyBeats]

On all accounts however, it will take a lot to convince me that rent-to-own is a "good" scheme. So far, with all assumptions I can make, I find that the arguments made for it are actually arguments I'd hold against it.

Why don't you test it with one of your products? Like Diva or Zebra? I believe those are the most expensive ones you have to offer.

If it gets all f**ked up, we humbly apologize and never come back to topic again. If someone new requests it, you have some first hand knowledge about it and can say that "sorry, we tried and it failed".

If it's a good thing, well.. We all win.

[keel]

I bought Serum on Splice, and I would do it again. It was superb experience. There is no hidden fees or anything, you can even pause it anytime and resume it later. I would have never bought Serum on full price at once. This type of payment thing encourage people to try out those expensive products, when the demo version is not enough. I personally found out that even I used Serum on couple of my tracks, it didn't get so much use, that in end, I ended up selling it. Do I regret to buying it? No, hell no. Splice gave me opportunity to test synth properly. Do I actually use it, and if I do, how much. And I pay for that 9€ per month. Couldn't be more happier.

I was totally ok for that, I needed to allow Splice check lisence on every third day, if I remember right. However, I was wondering at some point, why it is only 3 days, if you pay it like 30 days at once. Why not check it just once in month? Anyway, like I said, it was totally fine for me. Splice app was running in background all the time anyway. I would buy U-he products, if they were on Splice, or in similar rent to own system.

[Urs]

Why don't you test it with one of your products?

Because, you know, the original concern remains: We will not switch to online activation

My input on the topic was about my concerns to the different software rental models and its social aspects, in reply to the points FarleyCZ made.

Also, I think there are easier ways to find out about this than running a test over a few years. If someone would like to research the issue of spending on music software through the different models and how it relates to their social situation, I'm sure a few emails to the right people with the right questions would bring them far enough for a good picture.

Our own research has so far been down to our customer surveys, and in general the interest in rent-to-own seemed rather limited.

[FarleyCZ]

Our own research has so far been down to our customer surveys, and in general the interest in rent-to-own seemed rather limited.

I dare to suggest a customer survey doesn't paint the whole picture. If you ask only the people you already have in a database, you're missing the opinion of all the ones that are not in there yet. And it's fairly safe to assume that all the guys struggling to save up long enough to pay for the whole thing at once won't end up in that very database at all, despite their potential interest in your product.

Even when the survey is posted on a site like KVR and presented to a broader community, the picture might come out incomplete. Formus like this is full of people with strong passionate interest and in most cases some history in purchasing software.

But the market area rent to own model targets is novices. Kids. Young producers, that are slightly annoyed by their cracked version asking for a fresh serial every other day. Guys that would gladly have a legal soft-synth, but 180 Eur hole suddenly appearing in their bank account is just a chunk too big to swallow. Yes, I know, I get the "if they really want it, they will save up" argument, but with so many cheaper options and so much other stuff they need to invest in to start this hobby in the first place (computer, speaker, interface, DAW, keyboard, some samples), the "really want" part of that euqasion is just not feasible for them. In the better case, they send the money to some other dev who's ok with the "kinda want" approach and trust them enough to borrow them a working version for a monthly fee. In the worse scenario they just label the whole thing as "economically irrational anyway" and go pirate all their software.

Edit: Oh btw none of the producers I know that use pirated stuff (but might be interested in r2o and possibly in leaving piracy) are even aware of KVR, Gearslutz, VI Control or any other of these community hubs. A survey of any kind has no way of reaching them.

[AnX]

ibtl

[FarleyCZ]

ibtl

Yeah, sorry if that happens, but I do think r2o is one of the very few effective ways to fight against piracy. Had to mention that.

[schmerzschlag]

Maybe those "producers" should be aware of KVR et al, so they would see it's not necessary at all to go with cracked shit since there's so much great free and cheap stuff around these days. Even if they are dirt poor and have to use their cracked shit on a shoe box they could get a U-He fix for free.
Personally I would appreciate an U-He Rent-to-own experiment since I have a rigid buying policy in place to save me from the GAS. But I don't think it's ever going to happen. I don't understand all the technicalities behind it. What I understand is U-He doesn't want to go this way. It's okay. I don't judge at all.

[FarleyCZ]

It is ok and you're totally right. Especially now with Vital (and previously Surge) the free offerings are better than ever. But word of mouth is still a thing. Those, as you beautifully named them, dirt cheap producers will hear about u-he stuff despite all the free offerings, which is a good thing. ...but the easy access option is not there, so they just forget about it, if they are honorable. ...or do worse stuff if they're not. (Not gonna poke the dragon with a stick, but you know what I mean.)

But yeah, I have to back-track that into the point, that it still comes down to that potential earinings estimate and r&d costs. That I don't feel even remotely qualified to comment on.

[Urs]

We're internally discussing a modernised update to Tyrell N6 accompanied by an entry level paid-for "pro version" to refinance the upkeep of the synth. We're also discussing similar offerings as Zebralette/Zebra2 for Diva and Hive, either as stripped down free versions or as entry level payware with a direct upgrade path. Nothing of this kind is being in development right now though, these are just thoughts we're looking at for the next few years.

Again, regardless of how attractive rent-to-own may be, it does not work for us on a technical level to begin with.

[pdxindy]

I would absolutely not be surprised if a lot fewer than 50% finish their rent-to-own ever. Meaning, as attractive as it is to people on a budget, I suspect it contributes to their money problem more so than it solves it.

That is a fair concern. On the other hand, with all the respect, the percentage of unfinished payments is again just a guess. And it's negative impact is based on the assumption that without the rent to own option, "a percantage of that percentage" would be pressured to go and pay the full price. I would like to challenge that assumption. Market is saturated and there are other options offering that model. The pressure-scenario will not happen. People take that bit of money they have left each month and go throw it at someone else that allows them to play with their toys right away.

Also, and now i'm entering the "wild speculation" territory, your software is so good, I wouldn't be too worried about people needing it "just for one project". I dare to say they would keep their Divas and Zebras. And even if they did not, even if they really used it just for a month or two, that's still a bit of money that could flow your way instead of flowing somewhere else.

Since Urs has said he doesn't want to do it and has shown no interest in it, why are people trying to convince him? Is it just to argue? (most likely). It is certainly not for the benefit of u-he.

This thread should have stayed locked. What a complete waste of time to over and over say the same basic speculations.