What happens if I DON'T upgrade to PT11 before December 31st?

[Mattiasnyc]

Originally Posted by Park Seward

If I read Tony right, he is saying that current owners of PT 11 can pay $199 to upgrade to the support/upgrade plan anytime in 2015 and you get one year of coverage.

He's talking about PT11 because that's what he was responding to in that post. I quoted him because he states the prices, and they're consistent with what's stated on the FAQ.

Originally Posted by Park Seward

I guess the price will go up in 2015 for 9x and 10x users to upgrade to 11 since that deal expires at the end of 2014. Or so I surmise.

What makes you think the deal relates to 9/10 users only? In the second quote he talks about the special offer but it only says you get what amounts to extra time added to the support plan. It says nothing about it being only for 9/10 users.

Here's what the FAQ says:

For a limited time, get all Pro Tools upgrades and ’round-the-clock support extended through March 31, 2016

[Southsidemusic]

Originally Posted by upscaps

If those of us on PT 11 have one year before we have to deal with this issue, why are folks on PT 11 getting bent out of shape because Avid hasn't come with a specific plan for us yet?

We haven't had to pay anything extra and don't have to pay anything for a year. It's weird to me how some folks see that as a conspiracy or "screwing" us.

Exacly!

Happy Hollidays

Christopher

[Bill Denton]

Originally Posted by Park Seward

Back on topic, there are two groups. One who may upgrade from 9x or 10x to 11 (upgrade) and the group that already owns 11 (support/upgrade).

We know the deal for the upgrade but not for the support/upgrade.

Pricing for support/upgrade is not being released while the upgrade program is in effect. Why? Could it be the support price may be lower than the full upgrade and that may effect sales?

Since the 11 users have already paid for their upgrade, all they need is support. Should that be cheaper than full upgrade/support for the 9 and 10 owners?

By not releasing the 11 support pricing, users get the feeling someone is going to get screwed.

Not totally correct...

For non-HD product, since the announcement of the new licensing plan, the "sale" of PT has actually been:

The sale of a one-year service contract that includes a license for any "release"* of Pro Tools available during the term of the service contract for $199.00 USD.

For those who don't own a previous version of Pro Tools, there is an additional $500 fee to "join the Pro Tools club", bringing the total to $699.99.

What we are missing in the non-HD world is:

Price of a service contract for those who already own PT 11...and I have the feeling that will also be $199.00.

Price of service contracts for year two and greater.

In the HD world, all we know is that a one-year service contract that includes a license for any "release"* of Pro Tools available during the term of the service contract for $599.00 USD.

*I have begun using the term "release" as opposed to "version", as a I believe Avid will be moving to a "versionless" model in the very near future.

NOTE: The following is my own opinion, based on the same information readily available to anyone.

I think it was absolutely necessary for Avid to move to the new "service contract + license" service model prior to 01/01/2015 in order to fully resolve their accounting issues. So the accountants worked out the $199/$599 model (+ the $500 "initiation" fee for non-HD non-owners...included with the hardware purchase for HD). Then they sent out the memos.

At which point, the marketing and customer relations folks went through the roof, as they probably felt Avid was royally screwing their existing customers.

So, here we are, less than five days before BOATI day, with a whole lot of stuff still up in the air.

Problem is, and I'm not an accountant, Avid may not have any choice but to go with what accounting wants...having to modify things now could be a disaster!

So, until Monday, I guess we can only wait...

[YYR123]

I just hope the dot updates keep fixing stuff,

[Bill Denton]

Originally Posted by Southsidemusic

Exacly!

Happy Hollidays

Christopher

Christopher...

You do realize that the only thing you get through 2015 is that you won't have to do a "new purchase" now priced at $699.00?

From what Bruce is saying, those who wait until 2015 to buy a service plan will not get the $199.00 price, which many people were counting on.

How will you feel if you find out on Monday that it won't be $199 starting on 01/01/2015, but will be $299 or $399?

I have been puzzled by this since day one...personally, I didn't feel three extra months of a service contract and license was enough to get me to jump in December instead of waiting until 2015, especially since it would have been nearly impossible for me to come up with the money during December.

But now that we were hit over the weekend with the information that by waiting until 2015, not only will we only get 12 months instead of 15, we also won't get the $199 price, I can well understand a lot of people getting upset.

You know I'm about as far as from an "Avid conspiracy theorist" as they come, and that I have been defending what Avid is doing from day one, even though it will hurt me personally.

May I ask that you give this a rethink?

[YYR123]

Originally Posted by Bill Denton

From what Bruce is saying, those who wait until 2015 to buy a service plan will not get the $199.00 price, which many people were counting on.

I think that is speculation at best, the whole idea behind a subscription plan is the price is relatively affordable

They would be a fool to raise the price....look at Microsoft and adobe, really affordable plans


I don't buy it, it will still be $199 for native come Jan 1 - relax people

[FilterDecay]

Originally Posted by YYR123

I think that is speculation at best, the whole idea behind a subscription plan is the price is relatively affordable

They would be a fool to raise the price....look at Microsoft and adobe, really affordable plans


I don't buy it, it will still be $199 for native come Jan 1 - relax people

the price isnt relatively affordable. Its double what it was 2 years ago and that price is double what it was 2 years before that. I am referring to hd.

If Avid fails at the market (and only god knows the reason they mismanaged their way from a virtual monopoly to delisted from the stock exchange) they shouldnt expect the ever dwindling user base to pick up the slack of thier incompetence.

[FilterDecay]

Honestly at this point so many people hate them they need to die and sell it to someone who doesnt need a board of business panel people to figure out why creative types pull away from corporate types. You got to be a savvy mofo to be corporate and get your user base to not think you are just using them as your atm card whenever you get into a panic about your stock price. And nobody in upper management at avid comes across as savvy to me.

[FilterDecay]

eh im chatty today

Lets look at another company thats kinda like avid but from a while ago:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak

Although Kodak developed a digital camera in 1975, the first of its kind, the product was dropped for fear it would threaten Kodak's photographic film business.[38][39] In the 1990s, Kodak planned a decade-long journey to move to digital technology. CEO George M. C. Fisher reached out to Microsoft and other new consumer merchandisers. Apple's pioneering QuickTake consumer digital cameras, introduced in 1994, had the Apple label but were produced by Kodak. The DC-20 and DC-25 launched in 1996. Overall, though, there was little implementation of the new digital strategy. Kodak's core business faced no pressure from competing technologies, and as Kodak executives could not fathom a world without traditional film there was little incentive to deviate from that course. Consumers gradually switched to the digital offering from companies such as Sony. In 2001 film sales dropped, which was attributed by Kodak to the financial shocks caused by the September 11 attacks. Executives hoped that Kodak might be able to slow the shift to digital through aggressive marketing.[40]
Under Daniel Carp, Fisher's successor as CEO, Kodak made its move in the digital camera market, with its EasyShare family of digital cameras. Kodak spent tremendous resources studying customer behavior, finding out that women in particular loved taking digital photos but were frustrated in moving them to their computers. This key unmet consumer need became a major opportunity. Once Kodak got its product development machine started, it released a wide range of products which made it easy to share photos via PCs. One of their key innovations was a printer dock, where consumers could insert their cameras into this compact device, press a button, and watch their photos roll out. By 2005, Kodak ranked No. 1 in the U.S. in digital camera sales that surged 40% to $5.7 billion.[40]
Despite the high growth, Kodak failed to anticipate how fast these digital cameras became commodities, with low profit margins, as more companies entered the market in the mid-2000s.[41] In 2001 Kodak held the No. 2 spot in U.S. digital camera sales (behind Sony) but it lost $60 USD on every camera sold, while there was also a dispute between employees from its digital and film divisions.[42] The film business, where Kodak enjoyed high profit margins, fell 18% in 2005. The combination of these two factors resulted in disappointing profits overall.[40] Its digital cameras soon became undercut by Asian competitors that could produce their offerings more cheaply. Kodak had a 27 percent market-leading share in 1999, that dwindled to 15 percent by 2003.[42] In 2007 Kodak was No. 4 in U.S. digital camera sales with a 9.6 percent share, and by 2010 it held 7 percent in seventh place behind Canon, Sony, Nikon, and others, according to research firm IDC.[43] Also an ever-smaller percentage of digital pictures were being taken on dedicated digital cameras, being gradually displaced in the late 2000s by cameras on cellphones, smartphones, and tablets.
In a critical essay, physicist Frank Duarte has argued that several major analog-era imaging companies (including Canon, Nikon, Leica, and Fuji) successfully transitioned from analog to digital, thus indicating that the switch to digital technology is not the only reason for Kodak's decline.[44] A significant factor, in addition to managerial ineptitude, he argues, was the change (begun in the early 1990s) from a widely diversified chemical manufacturer to a company mainly focused on imaging.[44] And he writes: "In 2005 the hypothesis of a flat world was used to support the vision behind the... digital transformation. The notion of a flat world is completely erroneus even in a metaphorical sense."[44]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC8Zb_IALew

See what happens when a company resists change? Change is inevitable and it is the only constant and a company may have to make significant changes it does not want to make to stay afloat. Those that refuse that change will die.

We are going to see it again in the automobile sector. With driverless cars coming in a lot of companies are going to resist it because it reduces how many cars are needed. those that transition too slowly or just refuse will go out of business.

[musicman691]

Originally Posted by YYR123

I think that is speculation at best, the whole idea behind a subscription plan is the price is relatively affordable

They would be a fool to raise the price....look at Microsoft and adobe, really affordable plans


I don't buy it, it will still be $199 for native come Jan 1 - relax people

We don't know the latter and Bruce has said as much. According to him Avid hasn't released what's what come 1/1/15 yet.