CPTK to PT11HD Pricing Proposal for Tony Carridi and Tom Graham

[CPTK]

Do you guys work for free in your studios? Do you not charge money for your songs? If you buy all of an artist’s prior albums do you feel that you’re entitled to take their “greatest hits” compilation at your pleasing? This is apparently the day and age that we’re living in now. People are so used to software being free on their phones and tablets and what not that they’ve forgotten that there are many fine people working behind the scenes at Avid to bring you a complete rewrite of Pro Tools. For those that have no understanding of what this kind of undertaking is like perhaps cannot appreciate it for what it is truly worth. Comments like “PT 11 is a joke” are not an insult to the supposed “corporate machine” that you so despise, but an insult to the people that spent many a late hours to create tools that you will in turn use to create something wonderful.

Personally I think that this is a completely valid discussion to be having considering that Avid will be debating this very subject in the following weeks. If this is a topic that you feel that you've already discussed enough, then by all means, please take your own advice and "move along". Meanwhile, let others express their opinions on this matter if they wish to instead of bullying them into submission. Again, if you don't want to talk about this then walk away. It's also pretty elitist for one to suggest that another's opinions have no value or that one shouldn’t be able to express their opinion because they don't have thousands upon thousands of posts or have some compulsion to reply to every thread or discussion. What are you looking for a merit badge or something? Of the 350+ views it’s the same usual suspects that I’ve been seeing on other people’s threads. So I would also like to hear the opinions of the other 345+ screamin' angry people who’ve seen my (apparently ‘indecent’) proposal. (So lighten up people!)

Question: Can anyone explain why the Pro Tool 9 to Pro Tools 11 upgrade price should be any different than the upgrade price for Pro Tools 10 to Pro Tools 11?

I think what some of you are suggesting is akin to buying a new car and then finding out two years later that your key also unlocks the doors of a newer model at the local dealership, whereby you then decide to drive it off the lot and claim some sort of right to it. Being able to use the CPTK over the different versions was a courtesy than a right. We should all be contributing to the development of the HD software product line and not just assuming that we are "entitled" to it just because it happened to be that way in the past.

Let's face it the CPTK was undermined at the first moment when people started to realize that it was cheaper to buy an HD license than to go with the CPTK. Also, the fact that implementing additional code to sift through the different variants of licenses was probably not worth the effort given the circumstances (Yes, three variants.) That's probably why Avid is now wiping the slate clean because there was no easy way to collect on upgrade costs from CPTK licensees using the old framework. Again, with respect to the CPTK license, we should have been paying for HD-related software improvements all this time, as with hardware licensees, but weren't. So this is why we're now seeing the proverbial hammer being lifted from the tool chest.

If you want to see the CPTK hang around, then you should have made the point very clear to Avid that there needed to be a workable pricing structure going forward and that the CPTK wasn't some assumed entitlement for life. There's the high likelihood that PT11HD will be the last stop for us CPTK owners. We'll probably need registered hardware in our accounts moving forward. That being said, it was important for CPTK owners to not have been shouting "entitlement" from their rooftops all the while but be advocating for some way to make the CPTK a financially viable option for Avid. I don't think that anyone should ever be prevented an opportunity to get into HD software at any point going forward, so long as Pro Tools HD can work with third-party interfaces, but the way things were going with secondhand HD license-only sales and the general sentiment of CPTK licensees I can't blame Avid. Hey, I have no problem if the CPTK freely unlocked the HD features in PT11, but it's for this particular reason why we're seeing it go bye-bye.

To prove that I'm not arguing for anything other than the survival of the CPTK (which is probably too late at this point), how about I suggest a different scenario for us CPTK licensees? What if Avid did NOT charge a premium for CPTK license holders to upgrade to PT11HD and just charge the standard Pro Tools 11 upgrade fee? If in fact PT11HD is as far as CPTK owners will be able to go, then why not just let us have it at the standard PT 11 upgrade cost and be done with the "entitlements" all together? (A sort of “last hurrah” so-to-speak.) Then, continue with the original plan to have everyone buy hardware going forward in order to upgrade to PT12HD? So, yes... I'm not here to pick sides or here for any other agenda than to provide some constructive ideas on how to bring the overall costs of Pro Tools down for everyone. For starters, Avid needs to shutdown non-hardware HD license transfers if they want to continue that policy of HD software being tied to hardware and not allow them an upgrade path to 11HD and beyond. I’ve already seen enough hair-brained schemes on the forums that accomplish nothing but raise prices for legitimate customers.

At the very start of this April 7th CPTK announcement fiasco I was a lot like every other CPTK licensee: angry. Then thinking about it some more I realized that it would be a whole lot worse to lose these features altogether than to pay a little bit more over the long haul with a CPTK upgrade fee. Who knows, maybe the CPTK will make a comeback in PT12HD. I could foresee Avid keeping their two versions of Pro Tools: A standard flavor and an HD flavor. Everyone on hardware would get HD software and upgrade to HD like it is now. Everyone else would be on Pro Tools standard and rent the CPTK license for $100 to $150 a month. This is probably how it should have been all along. Though personally, I’d rather be able to purchase the license outright. Seeing how reactive some people on here can be with a differing opinion has me totally understand why Avid probably thinks the whole Pro-sumer market is more pain than it’s worth.

So I think that some of you are just missing the bigger picture here because you're too concerned about how it affects your pocketbooks now. In the long run it'll be a lot more costly for us all. So name call all you want. Throw all your disparaging remarks and insults at me because it’s not productive at all. Neither is digging a whole in the sand, putting your heads in it and hoping that Avid doesn’t see you. Instead of working together on a solution you'd rather just see your own demise all together. And you know what… that's pretty much how cancer works.

By the way, please add $100 to each pricing tier of my original pricing proposal for PT9+CPTK to PT11HD crossgrades. Thank you. ;-)

Originally Posted by lumcas

I think CPTK won't return....(pun intended)

What pun?

[WKG]

Originally Posted by CPTK

Do you guys work for free in your studios? Do you not charge money for your songs? If you buy all of an artist’s prior albums do you feel that you’re entitled to take their “greatest hits” compilation at your pleasing? This is apparently the day and age that we’re living in now. People are so used to software being free...

Everybody who has valid CPTK asset has paid well for it. Nobody is stealing, cheating a ride or expecting a free ride.

[conleec]

@CPTK: I'm sort of with you. I agree that Avid must survive in order to serve our continuing needs as customers. Where I disagree is in your idea of how best to price this upgrade. Given the huge amount of ill will generated by this, I think it's in their best interests to simply grant the $599 upgrade as if from HD to HD (thus locking all users into a simplified and more costly HD upgrade path in the future).

But further, I seriously question the wisdom of excluding future potential purchasers of HD software who have no need or desire to purchase HD hardware. To me it seems like a losing proposition, but perhaps I'm wrong on that.

It seems to me that PT should rolls most of the functionality of HD into vanilla, save perhaps the VCAs, advanced metering, machine control and, of course, the DSP capability for those with truly huge track counts.

I think their vanilla package would sell more units with the increased functionality, more than offsetting the cost, and the HD product would truly be tailored to the highest end pro market.

Chris

[kazuomik]

Dear Tony Carridi and Tom Graham:

PTHD 10 upgrade price is:
$999 from PTHD 9;
$1499 from PTHD 8; and
$2499 from PTHD 7.

Avid should keep this pricing for PTHD 11 as well.
PTHD 11 upgrade price should be:
$999 from PTHD 10;
$1499 from PTHD 9; and
$2499 from PTHD 8 or before.

Since PTHD is so great, PTHD users will be pleased to pay these upgrade prices instead of only $599. It seems that even adding more $1000 should be no problem.

Of course, Avid should not provide any upgrade path from CPTK to PTHD.

PTHD is the best, and should be only for PROFESSIONAL.

[Bill Denton]

Originally Posted by nigelpry

Maybe he's one of Bill Denton's new employees, occupying one of the 300+ HDX seats he's bought for his IT geek company?

After all, Bill has told us that he's getting his legs cut off from under him by us CPTK owners .... apparently all that DSP processing power is no match for CPTK user skills ;-0

As confirmed here ...
http://duc.avid.com/showpost.php?p=2...postcount=1106

and here ...
http://duc.avid.com/member.php?u=85514

Glad I'm here to entertain you, otherwise you really wouldn't have much of a life...

Also, reading is truly fundamental (and really not that hard). But you apparently failed to notice the double-quotes around my "legs cut off from under him" comment, which, in context indicated that I was providing a made-up scenario.

And the "tinfoil hat" comment was a sure tip-off to anyone even moderately aware of contemporary culture that my post was totally a joke.

But returning to the topic of this thread, CPTK put forth a proposal, and I commented, "Pretty reasonable proposals to me..."

And there is absolutely no way you can argue that point. I said the proposals were reasonable to me, which is an opinion. You can argue facts, but you can't argue opinions.

I realize that reading is not your strong point, so I will help you out a bit...

I said they were "reasonable proposals", which in fact they are. But I didn't say I agreed or disagreed with them, just that they were reasonable.

And if you go back to the 1,000,000 posts and counting thread you will find that I was, if not the first to suggest the $599.00 upgrade price, I was certainly among the first.

Now, on to another point...

If you mention me or any of my posts in an insulting or disparaging manner, I will go back and report every post in which you have done so, which will quite probably cost you your voice here.

You are more than welcome to disagree with me, but the childish behavior you've exhibited stops now...

[Bill Denton]

Originally Posted by Righty27

^ What Nigel said!

Not sure why CPTK's (and to be fair, Bill's ... although they've never been seen in the same room together) proposal merits its own thread??!! Let's just stick to the main thread before every suggestion spawns its own topic.

Nothing to see here ... move along :)

... and to be fair, Bill's ...

In US law, they have the expression, "the first bite is free". It applies whan a dog that has not previously exhibited aggressive behavior suddenly bites someone. Typically, no civil or criminal liability attaches under those circumstances.

The quote I bolded was your first bite...

I had absolutely nothing to do with CPTK's proposals, I only said they were reasonable in my opinion.

As I said in a previous post on this thread, I did not say that I either agreed or disagreed with the proposals, only that they were reasonable in my opinion.

I also pointed out that I was either the first or among the first to suggest the $599.00 upgrade price for CPTK owners.

The board administrator does not take kindly to "personal" crap, so just end it...

[Righty27]

Originally Posted by Bill Denton

... and to be fair, Bill's ...

In US law, they have the expression, "the first bite is free". It applies whan a dog that has not previously exhibited aggressive behavior suddenly bites someone. Typically, no civil or criminal liability attaches under those circumstances.

The quote I bolded was your first bite...

I had absolutely nothing to do with CPTK's proposals, I only said they were reasonable in my opinion.

As I said in a previous post on this thread, I did not say that I either agreed or disagreed with the proposals, only that they were reasonable in my opinion.

I also pointed out that I was either the first or among the first to suggest the $599.00 upgrade price for CPTK owners.

The board administrator does not take kindly to "personal" crap, so just end it...

To CPTK (re. post #12) - the point about (at least several) reactions to your comments and starting a new thread was ... that you had started a new thread. Whilst it's really not necessarily for me to point this out (in that I alone do not carry that entitlement), of course your views are as valid as everyone else's but you really were not saying much new initially and, in a new thread, the subtelty of the preceding 1,000+ post 'educated' argument was lost. Yet you now (in post #12, possibly as you develop your new/welcome position because of the response) do add new perspectives ... which I felt should be in the main thread.

Bill - taking out my obvious attempt at humour in parentheses (as you've been with us throughout, you may have realised I have occasionally tried to pickup the role of CPTK-issue-comedian!), I shall re-quote my sentence which you appear to have taken offence to:

"Not sure why CPTK's ... proposal merits its own thread??!! Let's just stick to the main thread before every suggestion spawns its own topic." i.e. I was also unsure why your proposal merited this new thread, especially as you were/are an active participant in the main thread. Should everyone start a new thread to reinforce their specific positions ... and every counter argument be re-developed endlessly like this?

You were referred to, in conjunction with CPTK, as participants in voicing ideas, etc. on how to address the 'CPTK issue' in a new thread - I was 'being fair' to CPTK as, although he started the new thread, he/she was not alone in this - unless you were 'on the defensive' and reacting to any mention of your name without properly reading, I cannot see how you would take offence to what I said?! FYI, where some people enjoy offending others on forums, I take care to not (even accidentally) offend ... so my apologies to you as that is what you have perceived and this was definitely not intended.

The 'humour' (not being 'seen in the same room' ... admittedly an old joke!) was as much about earlier (surely also in jest) comments suggesting you would waste time (you seem to me like a straight-talking guy, happy to stand behind your opinions and who wouldn't 'hide' in this way ... apologies again if misplaced as clearly, I don't know you) opening a new user account under the CPTK name ... as it was about the fact that we don't know what each other look like!!!!

So please do not tar me with some 'personal crap'-talking brush. I do not agree with your proposal but you're a professional in this industry whilst I am trying to represent the views of the opposite end of the PT-buying spectrum (who have been referred to disparagingly in the other thread as 'poor people' [do a quick search] and generally not being worthy of being in the presence of HD-touting 'pros'). I have additionally also tried to add some business perspective, gleaned from my own professional experience, to position how Avid shall inevitably, in addressing the CPTK issue, influence the future of a product which we evidently care about.

My overriding view (not backed up by any statistics, commercial scenarios, knowledge of Avid's strategic objectives, etc. ... we're just users here!) is that they should seize the opportunity to make that step change towards the inevitable native future for the majority (with a fully-functional 'vanilla' to compete head-on with other DAWs and leverage the Pro Tools legacy ... before it fades), and leave HD to proper pro facilities (like those which I understand you represent) who require the power of DSP/hardware. As you'll have gathered, I feel that some HD features like surround, disk cache and higher voice counts, should not be withheld for pros ... and I 'don't have a horse in this race' so consider myself unbiased or motivated by how much my PT11 upgrade may cost (I'm a 'poor' $299 guy!)

So, shall we stay here (and possibly rename the thread as a 'Part 2') or go back (my 'move along' comment)? Or shall we let this become another 'you said'/'I said' moment ... which some got close to already with the moderator issue ... in which case I'll leave it to others? This may be a sign that everything has been said so, the next thing I'm interested to read will probably come from Avid anyway!

Keep rockin' Bill! I am not a dog and haven't bitten you :)

[noiseboyuk]

Suggest a thread lock and roll into the main discussion? Just a tiresome distraction, we don't need a separate thread which only muddies the waters.

[Bill Denton]

Originally Posted by Righty27

To CPTK (re. post #12) - the point about (at least several) reactions to your comments and starting a new thread was ... that you had started a new thread. Whilst it's really not necessarily for me to point this out (in that I alone do not carry that entitlement), of course your views are as valid as everyone else's but you really were not saying much new initially and, in a new thread, the subtelty of the preceding 1,000+ post 'educated' argument was lost. Yet you now (in post #12, possibly as you develop your new/welcome position because of the response) do add new perspectives ... which I felt should be in the main thread.

Bill - taking out my obvious attempt at humour in parentheses (as you've been with us throughout, you may have realised I have occasionally tried to pickup the role of CPTK-issue-comedian!), I shall re-quote my sentence which you appear to have taken offence to:

"Not sure why CPTK's ... proposal merits its own thread??!! Let's just stick to the main thread before every suggestion spawns its own topic." i.e. I was also unsure why your proposal merited this new thread, especially as you were/are an active participant in the main thread. Should everyone start a new thread to reinforce their specific positions ... and every counter argument be re-developed endlessly like this?

You were referred to, in conjunction with CPTK, as participants in voicing ideas, etc. on how to address the 'CPTK issue' in a new thread - I was 'being fair' to CPTK as, although he started the new thread, he/she was not alone in this - unless you were 'on the defensive' and reacting to any mention of your name without properly reading, I cannot see how you would take offence to what I said?! FYI, where some people enjoy offending others on forums, I take care to not (even accidentally) offend ... so my apologies to you as that is what you have perceived and this was definitely not intended.

The 'humour' (not being 'seen in the same room' ... admittedly an old joke!) was as much about earlier (surely also in jest) comments suggesting you would waste time (you seem to me like a straight-talking guy, happy to stand behind your opinions and who wouldn't 'hide' in this way ... apologies again if misplaced as clearly, I don't know you) opening a new user account under the CPTK name ... as it was about the fact that we don't know what each other look like!!!!

So please do not tar me with some 'personal crap'-talking brush. I do not agree with your proposal but you're a professional in this industry whilst I am trying to represent the views of the opposite end of the PT-buying spectrum (who have been referred to disparagingly in the other thread as 'poor people' [do a quick search] and generally not being worthy of being in the presence of HD-touting 'pros'). I have additionally also tried to add some business perspective, gleaned from my own professional experience, to position how Avid shall inevitably, in addressing the CPTK issue, influence the future of a product which we evidently care about.

My overriding view (not backed up by any statistics, commercial scenarios, knowledge of Avid's strategic objectives, etc. ... we're just users here!) is that they should seize the opportunity to make that step change towards the inevitable native future for the majority (with a fully-functional 'vanilla' to compete head-on with other DAWs and leverage the Pro Tools legacy ... before it fades), and leave HD to proper pro facilities (like those which I understand you represent) who require the power of DSP/hardware. As you'll have gathered, I feel that some HD features like surround, disk cache and higher voice counts, should not be withheld for pros ... and I 'don't have a horse in this race' so consider myself unbiased or motivated by how much my PT11 upgrade may cost (I'm a 'poor' $299 guy!)

So, shall we stay here (and possibly rename the thread as a 'Part 2') or go back (my 'move along' comment)? Or shall we let this become another 'you said'/'I said' moment ... which some got close to already with the moderator issue ... in which case I'll leave it to others? This may be a sign that everything has been said so, the next thing I'm interested to read will probably come from Avid anyway!

Keep rockin' Bill! I am not a dog and haven't bitten you :)

Please accept my apology...I did totally miss your injection of humor...

And JFTR...while I was once a "sorta low-end" pro (probably back before your parents were born!), these days I'm just a guy making songs in his basement.

I've got a 003 Rack and PT 9, and like you...I'm having to calculate how many meals I'll have to skip to afford to upgrade to PT 11 ($399 for me since I'm onPT 9).

Basically, I was just commenting on a post. And, given the level to which the original thread has often drooped, I really didn't disagree with the creation of a new thread. Sometimes it's better to "stick out" from the crowd just a little bit.

I came within an inch of dropping Pro Tools entirely (not that Avid would miss me), but I have decided to go with PT 11 and see what happens next.

I think I've said it before, but I don't own CPTK as I have never needed its features. And if I ever needed those features I'd probably just sell a kidney or something and go HDX.

But I have been around the business world (in general) and the software world (in particular), and I was simply trying to help some good folks who may get hurt bad financially. I was trying to get everybody to come to a reasonable consensus and push for that.

Thank you for your post...I was very impressed by your words and your attitude, and maybe I'll see you on the ramparts when PT 12 comes along. And again, please accept my apologies for my less-than-diplomatic post...

[Righty27]

Apology not necessary; clearly a misunderstanding ... all cool Bill :)

Slightly off topic, looks like 10.3.5 is out!