The, think up a good financing / subscription model thread, ...

[Iapetus 9]

Reason simply ain't DAW enough for me to seriously consider a subscription model. It's no where as powerful as Sonar or even Reaper. I mean damn...we can't even load samples into RE's yet, let alone have a decent enough audio editor. So no, I won't be renting.

I adore Reason for what it is, but if they think a subscription model is the way of the future, then they better get serious and start making the product and the RE's subscription worthy. Right now, and it pains me to say this, it just ain't there for my monthly duckets.

[jayhosking]

So far there is zero evidence of any developers twiddling their thumbs all day because they've got subscriptions. And I'm not just talking about Adobe style subscriptions, in fact what I described wasn't even a subscription but you pay for a year (or two) of updates from your purchase.

Everyone who buys gets the latest features, but from the date they purchased. It works well for the packages I use. And they are constantly introducing competitive features, so again, I call BS on the do nothing theory.

No one but you is talking about a "do nothing" theory, or developers are doing nothing at all, avasopht. Moreover, it's not our job to convince you of anything; it's not our responsibility to show you evidence. If you can't hear what multiple people are saying within this thread, that's not on us. You can choose to hear us or not. Does that make sense?

Maybe I didn't make it clear when I said it, but when ProTools switched to subscription the cost went up substantially for me. This is the primary problem: you pay more for a subscription and get the same value. Worse, with each upgrade, there were still the underlying issues with OS compatibility and playing friendly with other software (e.g. Waves). This is similar for Microsoft Office, which functions like a sack of crap these days and breaks my EndNote compatibility with their almost weekly updates. (For the record, I'd go back to the "buy one time" option for MSOffice if it weren't handled through my work.) Does that all make sense?

I bought in at Reason 7. Reason 8 offered a greatly improved workflow and an extra RE, I think. This was a compelling enough incentive to give them more money. Reason 9 offered the players and a vastly improved soundbank. This was a compelling enough incentive to give them more money. When I am on a subscription, I don't know what I'm buying into beyond using the software I already have. In addition, Propellerhead doesn't have to provide any compelling incentive to give them more money, because they already have me reliant on the subscription. Does that make sense?

And finally, if you're talking about financing, paying a portion of the total each month, then I am totally for that. Most music stores in Canada already offer this service: you put 20-25% of the total down and repay the additional 75-80% across a year or two, with some interest. This is a good service, but ultimately is not a subscription. When you're done paying that total amount (in Reason's case, $400USD), then you own the software outright and do not pay anymore. If this is what you are suggesting, or similar to what you are suggesting, then you and I are not in disagreement on this point. Does that make sense?

I'm going to step out of this thread, now, and just hope that Propellerhead never goes to subscription and continues to offer compelling incentives to upgrade their software. If the last two upgrades have been any indication, they will.

[jayhosking]

At this point I have little interest in arguing personal end-user experience over some blog post from years before I was forced into renting their software for work so I'll leave it at this: I do not want a subscription model for Reason, because I don't believe it benefits the end user. Full stop.

Hear hear.

[joeyluck]

This example of what I was talking about is not a subscription, it is simply renting (rent-to-own):

https://figure53.com/qlab/pricing/

This one is a daily rate. You are not buying into a subscription, hoping for updates. You are simply paying to use the software.
It benefits theatres that don't operate 24/7 so that they can pay just for the run of each show on show days. It benefits smaller theatres on a budget. It benefits designers who need to add extra machines for a show. Within 110 days of renting, the license is yours. It would be similar with a weekly or monthly rate. They use daily as it offers flexibility.

With Reason it would benefit working with a friend or studio that doesn't have Reason. It could benefit you if you are still on Reason 1-8, but you want to use pitch edit for a new project. You have your 30-day trial of Reason, but if you need something beyond that... You need to buy or have the option to rent. And it benefits those who can't afford it.

With QLab the option to buy has always been there alongside the option to rent-to-own. It's really not complicated. It continues to improve and the price to upgrade remains the same. But when you rent, you aren't subscribing to updates, you are renting the software to use it.

[ejanuska]

@FlowerSoldier: Agreed, I think subscription where you must pay to continue using it might be a bit much, but I like the rent to own model.

That being said, if someone came out with a $5/mo DAW with the same features as Live, Reason, FLStudio or Bitwig Studio, you can bet your cotton socks that whatever it replicates will become obsolete within 5 years. Turn that to 2 years if that includes all sounds and an ongoing list of plugins.

You can also bet that someone somewhere is building such a beast for just about every product out there. I think this is why there's a bit of a rush from some to figure out the subscription model ASAP.

$5 a month sub business model is not sustainable without hundreds of thousands of customers instantly. Unless it's developed by elves.

Who is in a rush to figure out the sub model besides you?

[ejanuska]

. Within 110 days of renting, the license is yours. It would be similar with a weekly or monthly rate. They use daily as it offers flexibility.
.

I think renting for 110 days is goofy. Can't the customer just save money for 110 days and buy it outright? With most plans the customer would save money buying since monthly plans usually cost more when you add it all up.

And who is going to manage all these payments systems, billing, etc.? PH would have to hire a bunch of extra people just for a rental or sub program, reworking the web site, more backend systems. Sounds more like a money losing proposition to me more and more.

[joeyluck]

. Within 110 days of renting, the license is yours. It would be similar with a weekly or monthly rate. They use daily as it offers flexibility.
.

I think renting for 110 days is goofy. Can't the customer just save money for 110 days and buy it outright? With most plans the customer would save money buying since monthly plans usually cost more when you add it all up.

And who is going to manage all these payments systems, billing, etc.? PH would have to hire a bunch of extra people just for a rental or sub program, reworking the web site, more backend systems. Sounds more like a money losing proposition to me more and more.

That is a daily rate that makes sense for something that benefits from a daily rate
The 110 days is a not a goal. It is a safeguard.
Unsure if you should buy a full license? Not sure if you might end up renting more than you think? No worries...

Hey, I'm supposedly a giant fanboy here who will be glad to tell everybody to just upgrade. And tell them to stop complaining if a new version doesn't have what they want—buy it or don't—you aren't paying into a subscription plan when you bought a previous version. Upgrading when new versions are released works for me. But I understand it doesn't work for everybody, so I'm not against it.

I can't wait for the threads to begin with people asking if they should buy Reason 9 or wait for 10. I think the ones predicting Reason 9's release began a year before it was released. Some of those people might have liked the idea of jumping in and renting momentarily or renting-to-own. Rather than worrying about a new version being released right after they upgraded a little late.

[Kaosis]

The thing is, subscription models are anti-consumer, there's no way around that. If I buy reason 9 today for 400 bucks, use it like crazy 18 months and get sidetracked with work for 6. I can still open up reason 9 and play around when I have chance.

Throwing an arbitrary number in, say 17 bucks a month for 2 years would be $408. But if we extend that busy time where I might get to play around an hour or 2 a week to say 12 months. So 30 months I've either owned reason 9 outright or payed 17x30 ($510) and the tab would keep on rolling.

Another 6 months passes and reason 10 comes out, I've now payed $612 but the updates are fairly minor. Or in the current scheme I just stick with reason 9 that paid 400 for 3 years ago.

Another 3 years goes by, you've spent $1224 had a couple of minor upgrades in the middle and reason 11 drops with more minor changes. But combined with 10's changes its a good time to upgrade at 125, so now I've spent 525.

Let's be fair and say each version had 3 changes, and you, the subscriber got them 1 each year. Total of 6 improvements at a fairly reasonable pace.

This is why subscription models are anti-consumer. But rent to own is different, and if while renting to own reason 9, reason 10 drops, then they could add the upgrade price to the financing.

[Soft Enerji]

There is one way I'd like a subscription: if it enabled props to give us something they couldn't normally give us: like vst support.

You had to go and do it didn't you

LMAO!!

Please never ever give Reason VST support. You want VSTs go buy Sonar (they ain't payin' me....honest), or Cubase or.....whatever!

[sdst]

Reason + Softube Tube-Tech $25 per week, $99 per month

(free upgrade) I'm in with this.

[avasopht]

[If this is what you are suggesting, or similar to what you are suggesting, then you and I are not in disagreement on this point. Does that make sense?
.

That's exactly what I am suggesting. Read the first post in this thread.

Also I do understand all the "does this make sense," I've also explained very clearly why I mentioned that phrase specifically and how it relates to what some people were saying.

Maybe you missed one of the comments or didn't understand.

Besides I'm curious about good ideas, and the suggestions so far seem to be around the rent to buy idea.

All in the spirit of good ideas.

[selig]

[If this is what you are suggesting, or similar to what you are suggesting, then you and I are not in disagreement on this point. Does that make sense?
.

That's exactly what I am suggesting. Read the first post in this thread.

Also I do understand all the "does this make sense," I've also explained very clearly why I mentioned that phrase specifically and how it relates to what some people were saying.

Maybe you missed one of the comments or didn't understand.

Besides I'm curious about good ideas, and the suggestions so far seem to be around the rent to buy idea.

All in the spirit of good ideas.

To the casual (non-business) user, the only advantage to any of these options that I can see is a lower entry price. For a larger business, subscriptions can make sense because they present a known (and constant) cost, which is easier to work with than a more random upgrade cost/path. But for everyone else, the regular cost isn't justified by any advantage other than it's less to pay up-front.

In this light, the "rent to own" model is what I've always suggested and always assumed was the only possible scenario that would make any real sense to Reason users. Otherwise you end up paying MORE in the long run.

That being said, the addition of REs into the equation potentially complicates the model to some degree - but for the application alone, I would imagine there is probably only a small fragment of the market that would want any model other than the existing one (just guessing, of course).