You can see the advantage for companies by comparing how it works for physical instruments - because people know a Moog will tend to appreciate in value, it means buying one feels like less of a risk, precisely because it can be resold. And it’s good branding, because it makes their new products more appealing for the same reason.jamcat wrote: Wed Mar 08, 2023 9:30 amI’ve never seen any company do that. I’ve seen companies give money back guarantees, but outside of multi-level marketing pyramid schemes, I’ve never seen any company advertise the reselling of their products as a selling point.Jac459 wrote: Wed Mar 08, 2023 5:26 am Another point is that the capacity to sell your purchase means the capacity to make a mistake and then legitimate "impulse buy". It is very comforting for a buyer to buy something knowing that it can be resold if it was a mistake... So this "resell-able licence" are actually part of the marketing of the companies...
“Go ahead and buy our product, and when you figure out it’s crap, go ahead and make it someone else’s problem!” isn’t a great sales pitch.
I have made a few purchase mistakes. Expressive E Arché Collection was a $120 mistake. But I’m not going to sell a product I know is bad on to someone else. Why would I want to be that person?
Many things that have exploited and abused people have been legal throughout history. Many still are. But those things have always been wrong, unethical, and immoral, regardless of what the law said. “Is it legal” has never been synonymous with “is it right.”Jac459 wrote: Wed Mar 08, 2023 5:26 am So basically I don't think you should shame people because they buy second hand. That is not where we should draw the line. The line is "is it legal or not". End of the story.
This is a very good and valid question. And I think the deciding factor is the developer. Any price the developer sets is fair game. That is the amount they are willing to take for their work. It is their choice. The problem arises when you take it upon yourself to take that choice from them, along with their rightful revenues.Jac459 wrote: Wed Mar 08, 2023 5:26 am If you start to shame people buying the second hand, then where to draw the line ? Why not shaming also people trying to get discount or sales as a next step ?
Plugins are obviously different but I think the premium brands have an incentive to create the same vibe. I’ve seen Urs say on here that one of the reasons for not discounting Zebra Legacy is to protect the second hand value of Zebra 2 and ZebraHZ. It makes it easier for U-he to maintain a premium price, it means customers think of their plugins as assets as well as tools which feel more valuable - and that’s important for creating a good feeling around new products too.

