could Reason+ mean more frequent full version releases?
here’s an interesting thought experiment...
first, let’s start with some assumptions:
1–R+ is a huge success and they can ramp up their major release schedule to be far more aggressive
2–RS has already stated they’ll continue to charge the same for perpetual license upgrades ($130)
3–current release schedule is about 1½ years per major release
4–current cost for always staying most up-to-date for a perpetual license is $195 per year
5–current cost for staying most up-to-date for a R+ subscription is $240* per year
6–each full version upgrade comes with significant improvements that would make you want to upgrade (hey, these are assumptions, right?)
*setting aside the half price first year offer for existing users
okay, so at what point might you consider going from a perpetual license to a Reason+ subscription?
I highly doubt they’d ever get aggressive enough to make the cost of a perpetual license less appealing than R+, but I was wondering if there was a way they could keep their pricing promises, while simultaneously incentivizing more people to the subscription, and this is what I came up with.
first, let’s start with some assumptions:
1–R+ is a huge success and they can ramp up their major release schedule to be far more aggressive
2–RS has already stated they’ll continue to charge the same for perpetual license upgrades ($130)
3–current release schedule is about 1½ years per major release
4–current cost for always staying most up-to-date for a perpetual license is $195 per year
5–current cost for staying most up-to-date for a R+ subscription is $240* per year
6–each full version upgrade comes with significant improvements that would make you want to upgrade (hey, these are assumptions, right?)
*setting aside the half price first year offer for existing users
okay, so at what point might you consider going from a perpetual license to a Reason+ subscription?
I highly doubt they’d ever get aggressive enough to make the cost of a perpetual license less appealing than R+, but I was wondering if there was a way they could keep their pricing promises, while simultaneously incentivizing more people to the subscription, and this is what I came up with.
More releases? I sincerely doubt it. In fact, I think the high release frequency is actually part of the main problem. A few months back I did a poll which asked fellow forum members about their update frequency, something in the likes of "How many times did you upgrade?" and as it turned out many users skipped on many versions.
My personal story is that I got Reason 4, skipped 5, upgraded to 6 (awesome experience!) and from there nothing happened. I got Reason 10 but only because I had the means to upgrade my entire studio and Reason is a major part of that. Me getting Reason 11 and the RRP was pure luck!
See... my point: despite the current release frequency RS apparently still needed other means of income. And thus we get the subscription model, very predictable IMO. But it doesn't change (too) much. Yes, there will be people who started their subscription and forgot all about it while they also could afford it. But just as much will you have people who may try Reason and then forget all about it. As much as I love Reason for what it is, I think it's fair to say that it isn't for everyone. The workflow is seriously different from your "average DAW".
They needed to generate income, and Reason+ is a means to that. But considering the general skepticism I sincerely doubt that this will give them the means to expand. IMO it's a matter of survival to them: to meet up with the demands of the investment company.
True story: despite writing up nice black numbers several Microsoft investors insisted that they'd break up the company and sell off the "not so good" assets. Something which got fully blocked and veto'd by Steve Ballmer (when he was still CEO). Just because something is a cost factor doesn't automatically deem it useless enough to get rid of it.
Unfortunately most investment companies don't see it this way. They need/want short term solutions to please their members. And if there's an opportunity which can raise the overal value then that's the main goal, even if it means pissing of the entire customer base. Because "that company" is just the same as "that other company" to them. Who cares? Overall value and revenue, that's where it's at.
For contexts sake: I'm active on the stock exchange and I love every bit of it. I'm not getting massively rich but I do manage to generate a decent bit of extra. And there are some aspects I avoid like the plague Things like investment firms which go onto the stock exchange, because when they get it into their heads that a bad decision can get them a lot of money they'll just go right ahead despite all signals going red and warning them about it. I'm well aware to be generalizing here, but I've experienced this myself once (got out in time but it did cost me), a friend of mine experienced the same thing (he wasn't so lucky) and I've read plenty of similar stories on an investment forum I've been part of during the last year.
</vent>
My personal story is that I got Reason 4, skipped 5, upgraded to 6 (awesome experience!) and from there nothing happened. I got Reason 10 but only because I had the means to upgrade my entire studio and Reason is a major part of that. Me getting Reason 11 and the RRP was pure luck!
See... my point: despite the current release frequency RS apparently still needed other means of income. And thus we get the subscription model, very predictable IMO. But it doesn't change (too) much. Yes, there will be people who started their subscription and forgot all about it while they also could afford it. But just as much will you have people who may try Reason and then forget all about it. As much as I love Reason for what it is, I think it's fair to say that it isn't for everyone. The workflow is seriously different from your "average DAW".
They needed to generate income, and Reason+ is a means to that. But considering the general skepticism I sincerely doubt that this will give them the means to expand. IMO it's a matter of survival to them: to meet up with the demands of the investment company.
True story: despite writing up nice black numbers several Microsoft investors insisted that they'd break up the company and sell off the "not so good" assets. Something which got fully blocked and veto'd by Steve Ballmer (when he was still CEO). Just because something is a cost factor doesn't automatically deem it useless enough to get rid of it.
Unfortunately most investment companies don't see it this way. They need/want short term solutions to please their members. And if there's an opportunity which can raise the overal value then that's the main goal, even if it means pissing of the entire customer base. Because "that company" is just the same as "that other company" to them. Who cares? Overall value and revenue, that's where it's at.
For contexts sake: I'm active on the stock exchange and I love every bit of it. I'm not getting massively rich but I do manage to generate a decent bit of extra. And there are some aspects I avoid like the plague Things like investment firms which go onto the stock exchange, because when they get it into their heads that a bad decision can get them a lot of money they'll just go right ahead despite all signals going red and warning them about it. I'm well aware to be generalizing here, but I've experienced this myself once (got out in time but it did cost me), a friend of mine experienced the same thing (he wasn't so lucky) and I've read plenty of similar stories on an investment forum I've been part of during the last year.
</vent>
---
I’m with you—I very much doubt they’d actually be able to pull something like this off, if they even wanted to try it at all, and that last bit about the updates being so compelling people would want to upgrade every time is crucial to the thought experiment, and the least likely thing they could actually accomplish. just thought it’s an interesting thing to think about.ShelLuser wrote: ↑28 Jan 2021More releases? I sincerely doubt it. In fact, I think the high release frequency is actually part of the main problem. A few months back I did a poll which asked fellow forum members about their update frequency, something in the likes of "How many times did you upgrade?" and as it turned out many users skipped on many versions.
...
- fieldframe
- RE Developer
- Posts: 1038
- Joined: 19 Apr 2016
Reason Studios could start making paid upgrades more frequent, as Ableton has, but anything more frequent than annually has no precedent at all in the prosumer software market, so I can confidently say the 9 and 6-month cycles have zero percent chance of happening.
That leaves only the annual $130 upgrade option from the poll, which I think is at least plausible. To go from approximately 24 months to 12 would probably be accompanied by a lower upgrade price – still an overall increase, but something lower to make it look nicer.
Most likely would be an $80-$100 per year annual upgrade. That's still $160-$200 every two years instead of $130, but I think they could convince people to pay that given the lower per-upgrade price. Annual upgrade programs have plenty of precedent in the market, and most tend to hover around those price points.
Some software has seen some really positive change from a switch like this: Sketch, the UI mockup software, went to an annual cycle a few years back and while it now costs a bit more than before, they've been adding new features and improvements faster, which I would say has been worth it. And unlike a subscription, if you don't feel like the latest updates are worth it, you can wait to renew while using the last version from your paid update period.
That leaves only the annual $130 upgrade option from the poll, which I think is at least plausible. To go from approximately 24 months to 12 would probably be accompanied by a lower upgrade price – still an overall increase, but something lower to make it look nicer.
Most likely would be an $80-$100 per year annual upgrade. That's still $160-$200 every two years instead of $130, but I think they could convince people to pay that given the lower per-upgrade price. Annual upgrade programs have plenty of precedent in the market, and most tend to hover around those price points.
Some software has seen some really positive change from a switch like this: Sketch, the UI mockup software, went to an annual cycle a few years back and while it now costs a bit more than before, they've been adding new features and improvements faster, which I would say has been worth it. And unlike a subscription, if you don't feel like the latest updates are worth it, you can wait to renew while using the last version from your paid update period.
I've skipped the updates because they haven't actually added anything useful.guitfnky wrote: ↑28 Jan 2021I’m with you—I very much doubt they’d actually be able to pull something like this off, if they even wanted to try it at all, and that last bit about the updates being so compelling people would want to upgrade every time is crucial to the thought experiment, and the least likely thing they could actually accomplish. just thought it’s an interesting thing to think about.ShelLuser wrote: ↑28 Jan 2021More releases? I sincerely doubt it. In fact, I think the high release frequency is actually part of the main problem. A few months back I did a poll which asked fellow forum members about their update frequency, something in the likes of "How many times did you upgrade?" and as it turned out many users skipped on many versions.
...
They could make paid update more frequently all they want, but if they don't add anything worth the value no one's going to take the bait.
-
- Posts: 380
- Joined: 15 Jan 2016
They would have to be a hell of a lot more transparent for most people to even consider this, which is why I dont expect the subscription service to do that well. If R12 isn't an absolute banger for features it's not going to incentivize anyone to pay monthly for sound packs, and its gonna have guys like me looking at my R11 Suite as good enough to take with me to Ableton.
I dont think its about frequent updates but quality updates.
Ableton goes years without major updates but when the update come, it come with so many features and features that caters to their wide user base.
They also do a pretty good job with minor releases. Some of Ableton's best updates IMO were unexpected minor releases.
Frequent updates if done poorly would be bad as it can introduce bugs.
Reason is at version 11. Ableton is going to 11. Studio One is at 5 (about where Reason was 10 years ago). They all are being updated at similar rates from a major release standpoint. The big thing is getting critical elephant in the room issues resolved timely. Every DAW manufacturer struggles with this to a point,
But when diehard users can't predict 25% of the features in a major release, there will be alot of disappointment.
Ableton goes years without major updates but when the update come, it come with so many features and features that caters to their wide user base.
They also do a pretty good job with minor releases. Some of Ableton's best updates IMO were unexpected minor releases.
Frequent updates if done poorly would be bad as it can introduce bugs.
Reason is at version 11. Ableton is going to 11. Studio One is at 5 (about where Reason was 10 years ago). They all are being updated at similar rates from a major release standpoint. The big thing is getting critical elephant in the room issues resolved timely. Every DAW manufacturer struggles with this to a point,
But when diehard users can't predict 25% of the features in a major release, there will be alot of disappointment.
the voting on this is funny, because of the three options where people (granted, only two of them) would subscribe, they chose the least value option--paying $240 a year for a R+ subscription, if RS was releasing versions every year for $130.
I dont even think its transparency thats needed necessarily. I have no idea what Ableton, FL, or Presonus are up to. They key is having a level of predictability in updates. Every update needs some features that caters to the wide userbase. Its ok to have audio centric focused updates but throw a couple of midi features in as well that alot of midi users are requesting or vice versa, as well as something where plugin users won't feel left out. (Or any area can be heavily focused but dont completely neglect everything else).OverneathTheSkyBridg wrote: ↑28 Jan 2021They would have to be a hell of a lot more transparent for most people to even consider this, which is why I dont expect the subscription service to do that well. If R12 isn't an absolute banger for features it's not going to incentivize anyone to pay monthly for sound packs, and its gonna have guys like me looking at my R11 Suite as good enough to take with me to Ableton.
- MannequinRaces
- Posts: 1543
- Joined: 18 Jan 2015
I think the whole point of the subscription service is to provide a drip feed of content... through this drip feed RS will entice its users to switch to a subscription service. Let’s say they drop R12 and then after a lot of non-subs update, then they drop even more features... but for subscribers only. As a non-sub how would you feel having to wait a year or more to get this new feature?
yeah, the thought of having content locked behind a subscription is definitely a concerning possibility. I do still take Mattias at his word, which was seemingly that there wouldn’t be any change to how the major releases are handled. hopefully that means that would never happen. if it did, I think they’d get blowback that would dwarf what they’ve seen this week. not that it would change anything...MannequinRaces wrote: ↑29 Jan 2021I think the whole point of the subscription service is to provide a drip feed of content... through this drip feed RS will entice its users to switch to a subscription service. Let’s say they drop R12 and then after a lot of non-subs update, then they drop even more features... but for subscribers only. As a non-sub how would you feel having to wait a year or more to get this new feature?
I will most likely never go for subscription because I just don't like the idea of tying to a fixed amount every month and then update or buy a RE when I need and when I have money for it. Only subscription I have is netflix and that's only because of my son. I need to put food on the table every day and I do not need to feed RS employees every month I'll do that when they have something new that I like and need.
I wouldn't wait, I would move on. There are other DAW's I can useMannequinRaces wrote: ↑29 Jan 2021As a non-sub how would you feel having to wait a year or more to get this new feature?
- MannequinRaces
- Posts: 1543
- Joined: 18 Jan 2015
So you think the subscription is just a refill of the month club?! Of course they’re going to lock content behind the subscribers only wall!guitfnky wrote: ↑29 Jan 2021yeah, the thought of having content locked behind a subscription is definitely a concerning possibility. I do still take Mattias at his word, which was seemingly that there wouldn’t be any change to how the major releases are handled. hopefully that means that would never happen. if it did, I think they’d get blowback that would dwarf what they’ve seen this week. not that it would change anything...MannequinRaces wrote: ↑29 Jan 2021I think the whole point of the subscription service is to provide a drip feed of content... through this drip feed RS will entice its users to switch to a subscription service. Let’s say they drop R12 and then after a lot of non-subs update, then they drop even more features... but for subscribers only. As a non-sub how would you feel having to wait a year or more to get this new feature?
Only if they use the money to employ enough new coders. What percentage of DSP coders currently looking for work there are fluent in Swedish? I'm sticking with the theory that requiring Swedish speakers means they have a smaller pool of talent to draw from, which means it is more difficult for them to recruit than Ableton or NI.
So more income doesn't necessarily mean higher productivity.
So more income doesn't necessarily mean higher productivity.
ha, no, $20 to continuously rent Reason? no, that’s not refill of the month.MannequinRaces wrote: ↑29 Jan 2021So you think the subscription is just a refill of the month club?! Of course they’re going to lock content behind the subscribers only wall!guitfnky wrote: ↑29 Jan 2021
yeah, the thought of having content locked behind a subscription is definitely a concerning possibility. I do still take Mattias at his word, which was seemingly that there wouldn’t be any change to how the major releases are handled. hopefully that means that would never happen. if it did, I think they’d get blowback that would dwarf what they’ve seen this week. not that it would change anything...
and no, I’m not so pessimistic. if half the bad shit happened that people have been saying for years, Props would have gone out of business when it was still Props, or the new hedge fund billionaire owners would’ve already sole Reason to someone else and all this would’ve ended by now. time will tell what’ll happen, but I doubt it will be as dire as some people think—even if I do think the last few announcements have been utter failures in the messaging department.
- MannequinRaces
- Posts: 1543
- Joined: 18 Jan 2015
Yes, there’s lots of doom and gloom around here. I agree that this announcement could have been done a lot better (either waited until R12, or not shaft the 3rd party RE developers). Time will tell indeed. Until then, let’s make some music, oh, and b i t c h on the forums, lol.guitfnky wrote: ↑29 Jan 2021ha, no, $20 to continuously rent Reason? no, that’s not refill of the month.MannequinRaces wrote: ↑29 Jan 2021
So you think the subscription is just a refill of the month club?! Of course they’re going to lock content behind the subscribers only wall!
and no, I’m not so pessimistic. if half the bad shit happened that people have been saying for years, Props would have gone out of business when it was still Props, or the new hedge fund billionaire owners would’ve already sole Reason to someone else and all this would’ve ended by now. time will tell what’ll happen, but I doubt it will be as dire as some people think—even if I do think the last few announcements have been utter failures in the messaging department.
done, and done.MannequinRaces wrote: ↑29 Jan 2021Yes, there’s lots of doom and gloom around here. I agree that this announcement could have been done a lot better (either waited until R12, or not shaft the 3rd party RE developers). Time will tell indeed. Until then, let’s make some music, oh, and b i t c h on the forums, lol.guitfnky wrote: ↑29 Jan 2021
ha, no, $20 to continuously rent Reason? no, that’s not refill of the month.
and no, I’m not so pessimistic. if half the bad shit happened that people have been saying for years, Props would have gone out of business when it was still Props, or the new hedge fund billionaire owners would’ve already sole Reason to someone else and all this would’ve ended by now. time will tell what’ll happen, but I doubt it will be as dire as some people think—even if I do think the last few announcements have been utter failures in the messaging department.
-
- Posts: 3822
- Joined: 20 Oct 2017
- Location: Norway
- Contact:
If users here viewed those poor blokes who will sub (bless their hearts) as financing the development of the product us perpetuals use and actually own, we'd be talking nothing but nice things about it in order to not scare any of those people away from pulling the trigger after coming for the first time to the forum Reason Studios themselves gave a shout out to on their live stream.
You don't need to be fluent in swedish to work and live in Stockholm. Everyone there speaks english, albeit with horrendous accents.dioxide wrote: ↑29 Jan 2021Only if they use the money to employ enough new coders. What percentage of DSP coders currently looking for work there are fluent in Swedish? I'm sticking with the theory that requiring Swedish speakers means they have a smaller pool of talent to draw from, which means it is more difficult for them to recruit than Ableton or NI.
So more income doesn't necessarily mean higher productivity.
Plus certain stuff could probably easily be outsourced to independent developers in other countries. I mean, several of Abletons instruments and effects are made by AAS (Canada) and Cytomic (Australia)
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: _andreypetr_, MirtazapineDream, parma and 12 guests