Rent-to-own?

Official support for: u-he.com
User avatar
pdxindy
KVRAF
14522 posts since 3 Feb, 2005 from in the wilds

Post Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:34 am

AnX wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 1:09 am
its software, you wont die if you dont have it... i see no reason at all to get in debt or join a bad scheme

imagine using it for 6 months, losing your job and not being able to work on those projects anymore

its all about priorities, go easy on the beers and save up for it.
or Splice goes out of business... could easily happen... then all the work of the dev is wasted and what happens to the people who are partially paid?

User avatar
pdxindy
KVRAF
14522 posts since 3 Feb, 2005 from in the wilds

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:37 am

tony10000 wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:31 am
pdxindy wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:27 am
tony10000 wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:57 am
AnX wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:37 am
installments on a $200 or less synth?

Seriously, just save up the cash for a few weeks :roll:
I have gone from a good paying job to a fixed income in the last year (not my choice). Thus, my discretionary income is limited. Fortunately, I bought everything I needed while I was working.

However, most people live paycheck to paycheck these days with large mortgage, rent, car, Internet/TV payments, etc. That is why the rent to own model (@ $10 a month) is becoming so popular, especially since there is no interest payment or other downsides. It is really not much different than a layaway plan, only you get to use it (with the restriction of an Internet connection check and 2 computer limit) while you are paying for it.
What is Splice paying you to market them in forums??
Ummm, no. I buy some of their sounds from time to time but I don’t even maintain a subscription.i haven’t even bought anything via rent to own.
Then why do you keep linking to their website over and over? Looks like marketing.

User avatar
Urs
u-he
22961 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:38 am

tony10000 wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:02 am
You would just have to develop the code to verify via the Internet every few days.
Hehehe, yeah. "Just" :clown:

And of course somehow link that to some way to process monthly payments. Which I think ShareIt can do, but d'oh, no idea what it entails.

We're down to possibly months of work and testing for something which isn't a necessity. I'd much rather spend this time elsewhere, e.g. "inverse C/R" which lets us lock licenses out of computers when someone transfers them - but allows for normal offline installation when he doesn't. Things that let us continue with unintrusive copy protection rather than making it less transparent.

You must not forget that different ways to license also require different downloads with different copy protection wrapped into the software. It all adds up. There's no easy way to do things with 20+ commercial plug-ins.

tony10000
KVRist
232 posts since 4 Aug, 2017

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:05 am

pdxindy wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:37 am
tony10000 wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:31 am
pdxindy wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:27 am
tony10000 wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:57 am
AnX wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:37 am
installments on a $200 or less synth?

Seriously, just save up the cash for a few weeks :roll:
I have gone from a good paying job to a fixed income in the last year (not my choice). Thus, my discretionary income is limited. Fortunately, I bought everything I needed while I was working.

However, most people live paycheck to paycheck these days with large mortgage, rent, car, Internet/TV payments, etc. That is why the rent to own model (@ $10 a month) is becoming so popular, especially since there is no interest payment or other downsides. It is really not much different than a layaway plan, only you get to use it (with the restriction of an Internet connection check and 2 computer limit) while you are paying for it.
What is Splice paying you to market them in forums??
Ummm, no. I buy some of their sounds from time to time but I don’t even maintain a subscription.i haven’t even bought anything via rent to own.
Then why do you keep linking to their website over and over? Looks like marketing.
Well, contact them and tell them to pay me. I’m up for that! :D

tony10000
KVRist
232 posts since 4 Aug, 2017

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:07 am

Urs wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:38 am
tony10000 wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:02 am
You would just have to develop the code to verify via the Internet every few days.
Hehehe, yeah. "Just" :clown:

And of course somehow link that to some way to process monthly payments. Which I think ShareIt can do, but d'oh, no idea what it entails.

We're down to possibly months of work and testing for something which isn't a necessity. I'd much rather spend this time elsewhere, e.g. "inverse C/R" which lets us lock licenses out of computers when someone transfers them - but allows for normal offline installation when he doesn't. Things that let us continue with unintrusive copy protection rather than making it less transparent.

You must not forget that different ways to license also require different downloads with different copy protection wrapped into the software. It all adds up. There's no easy way to do things with 20+ commercial plug-ins.
Understandable. Not as easy as it looks if you are going to offer that many plugins. Of course, Lennar and Xfer only have one plugin each that uses that model, so much easier to manage.

User avatar
bmrzycki
KVRAF
4083 posts since 11 Aug, 2006 from Austin, TX

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:09 am

One of the things I love about uhe plugins is the very non intrusive licensing. I really don’t want to see that change to support a rent to own model...
Feel free to call me Brian.

tony10000
KVRist
232 posts since 4 Aug, 2017

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:13 am

bmrzycki wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:09 am
One of the things I love about uhe plugins is the very non intrusive licensing. I really don’t want to see that change to support a rent to own model...
Absolutely agree...I like non-intrusive licensing. That is why I bought Serum rather going with the rent to own (even though I did use it for the free trial period on Splice).

User avatar
pdxindy
KVRAF
14522 posts since 3 Feb, 2005 from in the wilds

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:27 am

tony10000 wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:05 am
pdxindy wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:37 am
Then why do you keep linking to their website over and over? Looks like marketing.
Well, contact them and tell them to pay me. I’m up for that! :D
Ahh... so you are doing free marketing for them in the hopes you will get paid later :hihi:

tony10000
KVRist
232 posts since 4 Aug, 2017

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:32 am

pdxindy wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:27 am
tony10000 wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:05 am
pdxindy wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:37 am
Then why do you keep linking to their website over and over? Looks like marketing.
Well, contact them and tell them to pay me. I’m up for that! :D
Ahh... so you are doing free marketing for them in the hopes you will get paid later :hihi:
Yeah, right...who does that??? :)

User avatar
pdxindy
KVRAF
14522 posts since 3 Feb, 2005 from in the wilds

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:34 am

tony10000 wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:32 am
pdxindy wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:27 am
tony10000 wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:05 am
pdxindy wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:37 am
Then why do you keep linking to their website over and over? Looks like marketing.
Well, contact them and tell them to pay me. I’m up for that! :D
Ahh... so you are doing free marketing for them in the hopes you will get paid later :hihi:
Yeah, right...who does that??? :)
It's more common than you would think! :wink:

tony10000
KVRist
232 posts since 4 Aug, 2017

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:40 am

It's more common than you would think! :wink:
Then hook me up! :-)

andrew71
KVRist
461 posts since 16 Jun, 2003

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:28 am

Urs wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:57 pm
chk071 wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:40 pm
You can stop or pause the payment at any time. I can't see how it would remotely resemble paying with a credit card.
It sounds to me like all the advantage is on the customer side, and a lot of it. But what exactly do we get?
I've used Splice's rent-to-own service for Serum (nearly paid-up) and Ozone/Neutron 2 (cancelled the plan). In both cases I could probably have bought the products cheaper new or second-hand licenses where the developer wouldn't get any money from me, but I simply didn't have the money at the time and didn't want to use a credit card, with the interest that would be incurred.

I ended up cancelling the Ozone 8/Neutron 2 after a few months. At the time I was fairly deep into a project and was using them to mix and master my tracks. Once the project was finished I cancelled the plan as I didn't have any immediate further use for them. A couple of months later there was a good upgrade deal for the advanced product and, as I then had the money, I bought the upgrade (from Neutron 1, which I already owned) outright from iZotope. I probably spent more money on the two products than if I had bought the upgrade outright at launch, but I don't feel I lost out majorly.

Obviously Splice would be able to give developers an idea of how many people abandon the payment plan without completing it, but I'd be looking at those customers who cancelled as the reason for offering instalments in the first place. How many people buy a plugin, only to resell it a few weeks or months later (six months in U-he's case)? Nothing from those resold licenses goes to the developer unless there is a transfer fee. With a rental scheme you will still have a few months money in the bank and less second-hand licenses floating around in the marketplace.

Just my thoughts and experiences...

PieBerger
KVRist
135 posts since 23 May, 2012 from London

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Tue Jan 15, 2019 5:53 am

andrew71 wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:28 am
How many people buy a plugin, only to resell it a few weeks or months later (six months in U-he's case)? Nothing from those resold licenses goes to the developer unless there is a transfer fee. With a rental scheme you will still have a few months money in the bank and less second-hand licenses floating around in the marketplace.

Just my thoughts and experiences...
In this case, u-he, or any other dev gets 100% of the license money upfront, after which they take on the risk of a loss of revenue as a result of that second hand license being sold and resold etc. With rent-to-own schemes they might not get paid the full amount within the year or at all, in the case that someone decides to abandon their plan altogether for whatever reason and the risk then is that the loss revenue from slow payers (from pause at anytime) and abandonment, is less than the loss from second hand sales, undercutting sales of new licenses. For every 1 new perpetual license purchase sold, devs would need to be guaranteed 20 new renters (based up Serum's ~5% monthly repayment model) to commit to at least one month, not to lose revenue relatively speaking.
Always Read the Manual!

User avatar
pdxindy
KVRAF
14522 posts since 3 Feb, 2005 from in the wilds

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Tue Jan 15, 2019 8:24 am

PieBerger wrote:
Tue Jan 15, 2019 5:53 am
andrew71 wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:28 am
How many people buy a plugin, only to resell it a few weeks or months later (six months in U-he's case)? Nothing from those resold licenses goes to the developer unless there is a transfer fee. With a rental scheme you will still have a few months money in the bank and less second-hand licenses floating around in the marketplace.

Just my thoughts and experiences...
In this case, u-he, or any other dev gets 100% of the license money upfront, after which they take on the risk of a loss of revenue as a result of that second hand license being sold and resold etc. With rent-to-own schemes they might not get paid the full amount within the year or at all, in the case that someone decides to abandon their plan altogether for whatever reason and the risk then is that the loss revenue from slow payers (from pause at anytime) and abandonment, is less than the loss from second hand sales, undercutting sales of new licenses. For every 1 new perpetual license purchase sold, devs would need to be guaranteed 20 new renters (based up Serum's ~5% monthly repayment model) to commit to at least one month, not to lose revenue relatively speaking.
Plus someone who bought via the Splice method can still resell the plugin after full purchase.

PieBerger
KVRist
135 posts since 23 May, 2012 from London

Re: Rent-to-own?

Post Tue Jan 15, 2019 8:45 am

pdxindy wrote:
Tue Jan 15, 2019 8:24 am
PieBerger wrote:
Tue Jan 15, 2019 5:53 am
andrew71 wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:28 am
How many people buy a plugin, only to resell it a few weeks or months later (six months in U-he's case)? Nothing from those resold licenses goes to the developer unless there is a transfer fee. With a rental scheme you will still have a few months money in the bank and less second-hand licenses floating around in the marketplace.

Just my thoughts and experiences...
In this case, u-he, or any other dev gets 100% of the license money upfront, after which they take on the risk of a loss of revenue as a result of that second hand license being sold and resold etc. With rent-to-own schemes they might not get paid the full amount within the year or at all, in the case that someone decides to abandon their plan altogether for whatever reason and the risk then is that the loss revenue from slow payers (from pause at anytime) and abandonment, is less than the loss from second hand sales, undercutting sales of new licenses. For every 1 new perpetual license purchase sold, devs would need to be guaranteed 20 new renters (based up Serum's ~5% monthly repayment model) to commit to at least one month, not to lose revenue relatively speaking.
Plus someone who bought via the Splice method can still resell the plugin after full purchase.
Exactly, a dev might be waiting two years or more for someone to payoff their plan, only to see that new perpetual license appear in the transfer list the next day, because the user is bored of the synth now and wants to sell it to fund the purchase of the next one. I really like the idea of rent-to-own on paper, but it's risky business-wise and I hope that all companies deploying it have done their sums right and are confident that it's sustainable or them in the long run. A lower bar to entry is pro-consumer but going bust because your business model can't be sustained, most definitely is not.
Always Read the Manual!

Return to “u-he”