Thoughts on the upcoming VV5

p@mast3rs wrote on 3/6/2004, 5:55 PM
As many of us sit here, impatiently waiting the next great release from the Sofo team, (still cant get used to giving Sony claim to the programming), many have wondered about just what will be included. While I am looking forward to any and all new features, the one thing that has concerned me since Sony took over was the cost.

Several months ago, someone posted a link to an article that said Sony was seriously considering raising the price of VV so that it is more inline with competitiors such as Adobe, Avid, etc... and that it would help gain acceptance by other video professionals.

The sad thing I have noticed in thsi down economy (save my political rant for some other time), is that no company has stepped up and taken care of its customers. It seems these days, every developer is concerned with bringing in more money than they are about being loyal to the customer. Companies like MS are considering putting out another OS (XP reloaded) that is supposed to contain fixes for their poor coding and charging users for it. Somehow, it doesnt sit well with me when a company expects you to pay more for a fix for their errors or incompetence.

I think is a great opportunity for Sony to step up to the plate and to show what arguably is the most loyal userbase to NLEs. Sony has a chance to offer the upgrade for a reasonable price. Sadly, MS continues to screw its customers over. Each upgrade starting with Windows 95 cost users $89-$99. But a user who came in on Windows 95 was allowed to upgrade to XP for the same price as someone who came all the way from Windows 3.1 and continually paid the average $90 price tag.

Will Sony force users to upgrade to XP ala Adobe with Premiere Pro and abandon Windows 2000? It remains to be seen. Will DVD Architect finally be worth the price charged? With Vegas, I feel there is no other in its class. With DVD-A, well, thats another story. For the same price, DVD Encore offers a slew of other features that simply were overlooked/not implemented in DVDA1.0

Personally, I think more companies are concerned with new sales (full price) than they are with upgrades (lower prices.) I am reminded of those promotional deals that DirecTV offers. I was a subscriber for 3 years and only had one box. But they had a deal running with 4 hook ups and X amount of dollars for 6 months but it was ONLY open to NEW SUBSCRIBERS. So because I was a good customer for three years and they made money off of me, i got screwed on a great deal while someone else who hasnt paid crap got an awesome deal from the start.

Perhaps I may be getting off the point here. The fact is I believe it is time for all companies to stand up and do the right thing with regards to making things better for the customers who have supported them from the start. Why shouldnt they? They derrived their success from us so its only normal for them to give back to us.

Now before I get flamed about this is how business works etc..., I understand. However, let me ask you all this. If you had a client that kept coming back to you for work, arent you more likely to cut them a deal on work then you would for a new client who hasnt paid anything?

Hopefully Sony's pricing will reflect its commitment and loyalty to the customers it has boguht/inherited from SoFo.

Your thoughts?

Comments

David_Kuznicki wrote on 3/6/2004, 7:15 PM
I have to admit-- I've been very, VERY surprised at the skeptisism about the pricing for Vegas. But then, this popped up with the V3-V4 upgrade, too.

I can only imagine that the upgrade will fall into the $150-200 range. I'm perfectly comfortable with that number, PROVIDING that there have been enough improvements to justify buying it. You'd better believe that, when I upgraded from V2 to V4 (I skipped 3, entirely), that it was worth my money. But, if it's a minor upgrade, I won't fork out the cash. For that reason, I'm still using Sound Forge 5.
Remember, just because it's new, doesn't mean that we HAVE to buy it!

David.
Spot|DSE wrote on 3/6/2004, 9:08 PM
Skeptics abound for everything Vegas-related. First it was "Vegas 4 is gonna cost too much!"
Then it was "Sonic Foundry's gonna go under, how do I protect my reg codes?"
Then it was "Sony's gonna kill Vegas in favor of consumer tools!"
Then it was "Sony's gonna merge Vegas with Xpri and kill our access, it will be too expensive!!"
Now it's "I can't wait for Vegas, but damn, they're gonna screw us on pricing!!"

Howzabout waiting til Sony actually releases the next version, and THEN pointing sharp sticks at them? Sony cares about their users, expanding their user base. As much as Sony hopes their Vegas users might be drawn to using Sony broadcast gear, they also hope their broadcast gear users might be drawn to Sony. Pricing is a big factor in all of that process. They obviously know what they're doing, or else they wouldn't be one of the largest companies in the world. They wouldn't have acquired Vegas. They wouldn't have kept the engineering team intact. They wouldn't be pushing it in the markets that they're pushing it in. So, how about relaxing, letting them do their thing, and getting emotional one way or another when it happens rather that getting into a lather before hand?
MyST wrote on 3/7/2004, 5:48 AM
I believe there was a discounted upgrade price for Sound Forge 7, and that release was under the Sony ownership.
Why would Vegas be any different?

M
p@mast3rs wrote on 3/7/2004, 6:22 AM
Spot, at no way was my intent a shot at Sony. I just think this is a great opportunity for Sony to step to the plate in a down economy and show its customers how loyal they are. Honestly, it would be quite refreshing since no other company is doing that.

People are getting ancy because there isnt enough info out right now. The 10 hour press release didnt help much.

I am positive Sony will do the right thing. My rant mainly had to do with how other companies continually take advantage of its customer base and I surely hope Sony doesnt go the route.

My apologies if I came off like I acting like Chickne Little and the sky is falling. Not my intention.
GaryKleiner wrote on 3/7/2004, 7:08 AM
Acidsex,

You obviouly have some thorn in your side about software pricing as we also saw when you misinterpreted the pricing for the Excalibur upgrade.

It is pointless at this point to get worked up about pricing for Vegas that has not been announced. Also pointless to hope that what you post here will affect Sony's pricing structure.

Gary
JJKizak wrote on 3/7/2004, 7:09 AM
I am one of those who believe that the software "direction" will be improved and the performance. I am mentally gearing up for the HDV stuff and will be purchasing same if it looks decent. As of now the cost of the software is miniscule compared to the equipment especially if your into full "HD" instead of "HDV". I thought creating the new format was a kool idea marketing wise to get the little guy into HD. Only big companies acting together can pull this kind of stuff off.

JJK
craftech wrote on 3/7/2004, 7:24 AM
I don't want to see the discounted upgrade price for DVDA 2.0 tied to buying
B0TH programs. Many of us feel that DVDA 1.0 left a lot to be desired and really warrants an update rather than a new version. If that isn't technically possible and DVDA needs to be reworked from the ground up I think we should get a really good upgrade price for the new version BY ITSELF or I for one will not give them another nickel for any of their products.

John
p@mast3rs wrote on 3/7/2004, 7:29 AM
"Acidsex,

You obviouly have some thorn in your side about software pricing as we also saw when you misinterpreted the pricing for the Excalibur upgrade.

It is pointless at this point to get worked up about pricing for Vegas that has not been announced. Also pointless to hope that what you post here will affect Sony's pricing structure."


Gary, thats the problem right there. Youre right. I do have a thorn in my side about software gouging. I wont call it pricing because its not what it is. I think its a complete joke that customers who help a company have success financially are typically not as valued as new customers are. How fair is if customer pays $50 for a software product when most developers say that money goes to help create future versions. Then the next version comes out, Customer A is charged $20 for the upgrade and Customer B pays $50 for the same program? Sure Customer B is paying $30 more but Customer A has paid $70 and Customer has paid $50 all for the exact same functionality.

I am not here trying to force Sony to charge a specific price. But you are WRONG if you think that people (consumers) dont dictate pricing of a product.

This is one of the major reasons we have piracy. While its very wrong to steal most people justify their theft for that very reason. I am willing to bet there are plenty of people who use a pirate copy of Windows XP but plan on purhcasing Longhorn. if they followed MS pricing with each upgrade, they would be shelling $100 each time. Where the customer could pretty much purchase their OS and use pirated ones until they see the exact need to shell out the same $100 for the new version and still receive the same functionality that someone else who has paid for each upgrade cycle.

Are they forced to? No. But in MS' case, sometimes you are if you need a fix for programming/exploit errors.

But to think comsumers dont dictate price is ridiculous. If the forum members made it clear to Sony that they wouldnt pay more than X amount of dollars for an upgrade, do you really think Sony would charge more than that and lose the customer base it inherited with NO gurrantee that they can make that back up in new users?
MyST wrote on 3/7/2004, 7:40 AM
"How fair is if customer pays $50 for a software product when most developers say that money goes to help create future versions. Then the next version comes out, Customer A is charged $20 for the upgrade and Customer B pays $50 for the same program? Sure Customer B is paying $30 more but Customer A has paid $70 and Customer has paid $50 all for the exact same functionality. "

It's very fair. You're forgetting that customer A has had the software for X amount of months that B didn't, and made X amount of dollars with it.

M
p@mast3rs wrote on 3/7/2004, 7:45 AM
"It's very fair. You're forgetting that customer A has had the software for X amount of months that B didn't, and made X amount of dollars with it."

Thats not always true. Not all customers profit with the software they purchase. Some are hobbyist, some are non profit. Thats why companies like MS, Adobe, etc.. all have commerical/corporate pricing.
Chienworks wrote on 3/7/2004, 7:45 AM
Patrick, there is another aspect that your argument doesn't take into account. You don't pay to buy the software, you pay to use it. Customer A may have paid $20 more than customer B, but, customer A also had use of the software for some period of time before customer B, possibly months or years. Now, if customer A had paid that much more money and had NOT had use of the software until customer B made a purchase then you would have a valid point. But the fact is that customer A paid more because he also got more ... more time to use the software.
MyST wrote on 3/7/2004, 7:59 AM
Actually, I AM a hobbyist that hasn't made a penny using SoFo/Sony software.
Maybe you should explain how YOU would go about structuring a pricing policy for software.
Free upgrades for life doesn't seem feasable to me. It seems your revenue base would top out after a few upgrades. The next best thing is discounted pricing for existing customers. Also, as Kelly pointed out, we pay for the use of the software. You paid X amount of dollars to use Vegas 4. Now, because you used V4, you are "rewarded" with a discounted price to use V5. The guy who didn't have V4 will pay full price to use V5.
I wish other purchases were like that. "Well sir, since you now own a Denon home theatre, I'll sell you the new model for half price."

M
p@mast3rs wrote on 3/7/2004, 8:09 AM
While I understand the arguments each of you make, one thing still seems to escape everyone is that the company continues to make money. When is customer loyalty rewarded?

For a business class i took, we had to create a fictional product. The main goals of the project was functionality, price, customer satisfaction, and return business. In my model, I utilized the concept that you reward your long time customers since they are the ones who kept you in business and with success. Surprisingly, classmates acted as customers. In my model, everyone started at the same entry price. Those who were customer longer, got the deeper discount on upgrades for software products. Why? Because they helped further research and development. By offering a discount becuase of a customers loyalty, they continued to return. I was the only A in the class.

I transferred my business model to my video hobby. Sure enough, Im making decent money based on my concepts. I see that no one else answered the question I asked if they continue to charge past clients the same price or if they give a discount to customers who give continuous business on a regular basis.

If Client A comes in and says they want me to shoot a corporate function for $1000 and they bring me the same business 2-3 a year, why wouldnt any smart businessman cut them a deal to keep them from checking out other competitiors? That is exactly why people switch to competitors proucts/ services. They want more bang for their buck and they want their loyalty rewarded.

Personally, that was one of the main reasons i switched from Premiere was the cost and stability. VV met both of those needs.

p@mast3rs wrote on 3/7/2004, 8:18 AM
"Maybe you should explain how YOU would go about structuring a pricing policy for software.
Free upgrades for life doesn't seem feasable to me. It seems your revenue base would top out after a few upgrades. "

Free upgrades for a lifetime would kill most businesses. However, why shouldnt users that have bought VV3 and VV4 receive a deeper discount than a user who has only bought VV4?
winrockpost wrote on 3/7/2004, 8:41 AM
acidsex
:If Client A comes in and says they want me to shoot a corporate function for $1000 and they bring me the same business 2-3 a year, why wouldnt any smart businessman cut them a deal to keep them from checking out other competitiors?

There is always a "cheaper" deal out there, do quality work and most likely you will have the 2 or 3 more projects. Once you discount a client , every job will be expected at that discounted rate, regardless if its 1 a year or 10. Of course the client will say he has 10 more coming,, At least thats the lesson I learned the hard way. Have a price you feel comfortable with and do quality work.
As far as Vegas pricing goes, updates dont happen without a paid team of specialists . When the update is released, is the price fair for the features offered ? If not, keep 3.0 or 4.0 and explore other products that may suit your needs. Who knows what price sony will come with, only you will know if its worth it.


my 2 cents
roger_74 wrote on 3/7/2004, 9:07 AM
"When is customer loyalty rewarded?"

When you get your V5 at half the price.

I just don't see the problem. You can't expect them to give bigger discounts every year, what happens when the market gets saturated and there are only "upgraders"? No more updates, that's what. And no more company.
p@mast3rs wrote on 3/7/2004, 9:56 AM
"I bought Vegas Video 3 for about $600 and Vegas 4 cost me around 250 bucks after postage and import tax. The upgrade itself was $150 and included two Vision Series CD's. According to your theory, I should expect to pay less than $150 for a future upgrade? Meanwhile the prices for IT-related products continue to drop while almost everything else rises in cost.
"

Yes, especially when a new user who comes along and ends up paying less then your total purchase and receives the exact functionality that you do.
p@mast3rs wrote on 3/7/2004, 10:08 AM
No, what I am saying is this. Why is it fair for a longtime customer to have to pay hundreds or even thousands more than a new customer who gets the EXACT SAME FUNCTIONALITY?
p@mast3rs wrote on 3/7/2004, 10:29 AM
"You pay less for the upgrade AND had the right to use the software all that time before the new version was even finished. This point has been covered repeatedly in this thread already."

Just because it has been covered doesnt mean I or anyone has to agree with it. But this the same attitude that companies love to take advantage of. This is way pricing doesnt go down because most people just accept that this is the way it is and do nothing to try and change it.
Chienworks wrote on 3/7/2004, 12:20 PM
I guess the point you're not getting is that the loyal customer got Vegas 1 for a year, Vegas 2 for a year, Vegas 3 for a year, Vegas 4 for a year, and will get Vegas 5. The new customer will get only Vegas 5. That means that even though the loyal customer has paid more, he also gets much more total for his money. The upgrades really are buying new products. If you bought a new car from a dealer every year would you expect the dealer to eventually start giving you cars for free? Even if you traded in your old car you wouldn't get as big a discount as you do by upgrading software.
p@mast3rs wrote on 3/7/2004, 12:44 PM
Dude, first off, dont patronize me. Software is much much different than tanglible items such as cars, electronic equipment, etc..

Explain to me just what "extras" I get as a customer for supporting a company's product for 4 staright years compared to a new customer. Use of the previous product is not a benefit when the new customer will SHARE THE SAME BENEFITS of the new product. Only the new customer gets it for a cheaper cost.

Personally I dont think its fair that past customers fund research and development so that new customers can come in for a much lower cost to have the same tools available to them.

Now, put aside your theory for one moment. Past customers make it possible for companies to continue development. Hypothetically, lets say Customer A reflects my feelings and decides to hold off until VV6 (because they will get the same product as the ones who paid for VV5 and VV6). Sony will lose money on one sale when they could have rewarded Customer A for being a long time customer. Lets say other Customers feel the same A and practice the same thing. Sony then only brings in sales on new customers which may not be enough to fund future development. All because the company didnt reward long standing customers.

If you dont think business works this way, youre crazy. Its the same concept as dancing with the girl who brought you. But by most theories here, its as if once a company has your money that you are no longer important to them. Surely none of us on this forum treats our clients that way otherwise we would be out of a job.

Now, to date, we dont know what Sony is going to do. How Sony handles this version is very important considering this is the first chance to provide long time users and new users. Perhaps I am spoiled by the way SoFo took care of us but until Sony demonstrates that same level of commitment to us, one cannot be sure of what to expect.

I am not one for conspiracy theories but isnt it possible that last week's "accidental" press release was intentional to gauge the initial demand for VV5 so Sony could set their pricing accordingly? Naturally, if you are guarranteed x amount of sales, you can set your price higher and maxmize profits. But if demand/intrest is low, you set your prices lower to generate more interest/sales until demand becomes higher. Not saying this is happening but it is a very real possiblity and it does happen at many companies.

I, for one, dont know what to expect from Sony as do others since we havent had the chance to be service through this product as of yet. With other companies already beginning their mailings with NAB products, one would think it would be imperative for Sony to get info out there quickly. The more interest, the more sales. The more sales, the more funds and purpose they have to further develop the program we all love/live for.


JL wrote on 3/7/2004, 12:54 PM
Rather than fretting over the outcome of an event still in the future, why not just wait and see? At such time you can then evaluate whether the price of upgrading is worth it to you. If on the other hand the point of this thread is to influence Sony's pricing strategy, well isn't that kind of like trying to use a canoe paddle to steer an oil tanker?
rmack350 wrote on 3/7/2004, 12:59 PM
Sure, I can answer the question on discounts.

As a grip/electric I almost never ever gave discounts. (okay, my rate varied between $400-500/10 hr day so there was essentially a discount). This was because:

1. I would be torn every time a better paying job came around.
2. Those customers would be more likely to choose "higher end" crew for "higher end" jobs.
3. No one else worked for discount rates so I couldn't afford to replace myself
4. I couldn't recommend the best crew people because the rates were too low.
5. Other people wouldn't recommend me if my rate was too far below theirs.
6. People you give discounts too want the discount forever
7. Cheap customers do cheap work.

So what would I do? I could do free location scouts. I could throw in gear. I could do pre-production tasks. And I could bring enough experience and professionalism to the job to make it worth the money.

A lot of these seem to relate to the question at hand. Should Sony give upgrade pricing? Of course. Should they take into account that I've now paid for both VV3 and V4? No but they could offer the upgrade price for users of either one.

It's pretty obvious to me that no one will base their upgrade prices on the number of years you've used the product. They can't pay for development that way. On the other hand, no one wants to drive away the customer base (except perhaps for the pests. There were a few customers who I declined later on).

There are all sorts of strategies Sony could use. For instance, while network rendering may be very good, it could be sold as an add-on. Not everyone needs it. If you DO need it you can probably pay for it. I've always advocated for a suite of pro tools at additional expense. Basically a three tier product:
--Screenblast for new users and for basic capture and logging tasks done by interns.
--Vegas for everyday DV editing
--V-pro for long form, HDV, and higher production needs.

Rob Mack

p@mast3rs wrote on 3/7/2004, 1:00 PM
"If on the other hand the point of this thread is to influence Sony's pricing strategy, well isn't that kind of like trying to use a canoe paddle to steer an oil tanker?"

Do you really think that customers cant influence pricing? Do you honestly think for a moment that if all the users on this forum said that they wouldnt pay no more than x amount that Sony would set its price higher than that? Level of demand wll always dictate pricing.