The discount to go to Vegas Pro from VMS never really amounts to much more than what you see now. Typically about $100 off the list price of Vegas Pro. But that makes sense, because if VMS itself is only $75-$100 outright, then you wouldn't expect it to create a discount more than that towards purchase of another product.

The $300 B&H deal might be the cheapest way to get your foot in the door with Vegas Pro. As musicvid points out, the B&H deal does not include DVD Architect, but you likely could get by with your existing DVD Architect Studio. DVD Arch Pro adds lots of pro features -- like multiple camera angles, closed captioning, etc. -- you'd have to decide whether those features were important to you.

Are there any particular features motivating you to move to Vegas Pro?

As musicvid points out, the B&H deal does not include DVD Architect, but you likely could get by with your existing DVD Architect Studio. DVD Arch Pro adds lots of pro features -- like multiple camera angles, closed captioning, etc. -- you'd have to decide whether those features were important to you.

That's how I got Vegas Pro (ver 8) and I used my DVDA studio. However, realize that if you later upgrade to a newer version of Vegas Pro .. then you will get the newest DVDA Pro with it.

More tracks, think it's easier to use titling from one project to another.

stabilization and multi-cam also look cool.

Most of my projects are short and DVD studio is more than enough so far.

I probably don't need Pro and could stay with VMS. If there was a compelling deal i would upgrade.

I'm not sure what version of VMS you are presently using, but the current version VMS 10.0 -- which came out last May or so? -- now allows up to 10 video tracks and 10 audio tracks (compared to only 4 of each in previous versions). It also has the same stabilization feature (had it before Pro did), but it does not have multi-camera support.

currently have version 9. Wow, 10 tracks in 10 would make a big difference. But track grouping and nested tracks makes a lot of sense.

I don't agree with the poster's opinion that $100 off the pro version makes sense. You'd think Sony would try to maximize profits. Truth is you can buy the software outright on sale at a lower cost than buying an upgrade through Sony. This is true both for VMS 10 as well as Pro.

With an upgrade, Sony gets 100% of it. If I buy elsewhere, Sony gets some much lower royalty percentage of the purchase price.

But what do I know, I'm not Sony's CEO.

Most any business that sells a product -- whether it's software, or soft drinks, or dog food -- depends on distributors for most of its sales. For example, Best Buy, Frys, NewEgg, Amazon, etc., sell a lot of Sony software (I'm guessing).

So when Sony sells the same product directly to the customer, Sony needs to generally set it's price high enough that it doesn't undercut its distributors (or they'd get mad and drop the Sony product), but low enough to keep them honest (so the distributors don't gouge the consumer).

It's all a balancing act, but in general -- even though it seems counter-intuitive -- you would not necessarily get the lowest price buying direct from the supplier. If you could always buy it cheaper from Sony, why would other places bother to carry the product. And if Amazon, Best Buy, etc., all dropped the Sony software, Sony loses a lot of visibility, loses a lot of "impulse" sales at brick-and-mortar stores, etc.

I agree with everything you said.

With the exception of the concept of upgrades. If the producer sells "discounted" upgrades at a higher price then the outright purchase - it defeats the purpose.
Also, the distributors are not selling upgrades, and producers need not let distributors sell upgrades. So that reasoning does not apply.

Remember that when someone has already purchased something like software, only a portion of the new version is new to the buyer. Stated another way, the buyer already paid for, and has, a good portion of the new software. That is why upgrades are generally priced less. But when a new buyer can leap frog someone who already supported the company in buying the older version, then the upgrade cost was too high from a fairness point of view.

Again, producers are free to price how they want. Subject to limited federal laws on collusion, monopolistic pricing, etc. (Which for some reason does not apply to college tuition, but I digress)

My original point is not one of fairness, but that Sony ends up receiving less dollars if upgraders pay their money to Sony indirectly through distributors - netting Sony only a fraction of the lower price.