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?

Back to post

Comments

MyST wrote on 3/7/2004, 1:13 PM

"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."

Sony's first chance was actually the release of Sound Forge 7. That release was handled exactly like previous SoFo releases.

I'm sorry Acidsex, but you keep taking the fact that previous version owners got to use Vegas for X amount of time out of the equation. When you do that, then your theory becomes more tangible... but you can't take that out.
Until you understand that, then yes, we'll all be wrong, and you'll be right.

M

p@mast3rs wrote on 3/7/2004, 1:25 PM

"I'm sorry Acidsex, but you keep taking the fact that previous version owners got to use Vegas for X amount of time out of the equation. When you do that, then your theory becomes more tangible... but you can't take that out.
Until you understand that, then yes, we'll all be wrong, and you'll be right."

it isnt a matter of being right or wrong. Its a matter that new customers get the same functionality yet paying less than I did to arrive at that. Perhaps charging new customers higher prices is something that can offset the costs to long time users.

But by your theory, long time users should be penalized for adopting a company's product before the masses? Just kind of makes me mad to think that some new customer who will getting into the same business as me can get in cheaper and turn a profit quicker.

Jack the prices up on the new customer. I dont care. it wont affect me. One way to reward long time customers may be to offer a discounted rate on additional licenses. That way the same cash flow is coming in from upgrade and new sales yet you can still reward long time customers.

aussiemick wrote on 3/7/2004, 2:22 PM

I think the point that is missed here is the word "competition".
Sony would have a very large marketing team who would have their own handle on pricing. This would be as a result of considerable research, they don't release a product at any old price, it fits the market where it will be positioned.
Vegas will be priced where Sony sees its greatest profitable market position. If that is where it is at the present, then existing users will be encouraged to continue with the upgrade (discounted pricing) but if their is a shift to a new market position price differences between existing users and potential users will not be as great.
So basically the interest in Vegas 5 will be more where it is going in the future rather than the pricing policy. Pricing will only guide us as to what place Sony sees its new software fitting into its company strategy.
Remember it is a big company and as consumers we are only a market and if we don't fit in that market we are unimportant.
It boils down to wait and see.

PeterWright wrote on 3/7/2004, 5:20 PM

> " Its a matter that new customers get the same functionality yet paying less than I did to arrive at that. "

You've said that so many times.

New customers pay MORE, not less. We, the existing customers get it CHEAPER at a special upgrade price.

The money we have spent on previous versions, some of which were also at discounted upgrade prices, is to pay for what we've already had and done. Over the past two years, using Vegas has enabled me to keep my family fed, purchase lots of equipment, have a holiday in Europe. Is that worth nothing?

Matt_Iserman wrote on 3/7/2004, 5:40 PM

Out of curiosity, Acidsex, is there an existing software company that operates using your pricing scheme? If there is, who is it and how are they doing? If not, why do you think no one is doing it?

Also, a grade in a business class does not necessarily translate to the real world. As I recall, the original proposal for FedEx received an "F" as it "wasn't realistically possible".

Additionally, have you considered that within this thread you have had many people tell you that you are offbase but no one has come to your aid. Now, it is possible that everyone else is wrong, but have you considered the possibility that the majority is right?

It seems that, to satisfy your complaint that the new customer pays less, Sony will either have to raise the price for new users of Vegas to the point that they pay greater than the amount you intially paid plus the amount to upgrade. That is, if you paid $500 for Vegas and $250 to upgrade then the price for new users must be greater than $750. However, considering we are on version five of Vegas, then the price for new users must be the price of Vegas 1 plus the price for each upgrade since. What would that be, what, about $1500?

Or, if Sony wishes to keep the price of Vegas to new users the same, they must make sure that you, their loyal customer, paid less. I guess I'll be waiting for Sony to pay me to upgrade to version five. You see, if I paid $500 dollars to support Sony way back when and now some yahoo is coming along to pay $500 too, well, Sony should reward me for being such a loyal customer. I shouldn't have to pay as much as the Johnny-Come-Lately. So, whip out the checkbook Sony and get ready to pay me and Acidsex to upgrade.

Give me a break...

p@mast3rs wrote on 3/7/2004, 6:19 PM

First, i am not looking for anyoen to come to my "aid." Second, my model isnt used int he real world becuase of one thing:All companies like to make as much as they possibly can. If any company can get their customers to shell out more bucks, they will. Look at MS, they have made a fortune off that model. Windows ME offered VERY little yet they still made a bundle off of it.

My problems with companies today is they dont value old customers as much as they do new customers. Comapnies stand to make more money from new sales.

My model serves the best interest of the client. Then again, I dont have shareholders to answer to. Just because it isnt used alot , doesnt make it a wrong model.

But because my model and theory is not used, personally, I believe that is why piracy is so rampant with software etc... Take a glance over at the Adobe forums and you will see people that are mad a sheck about Adobe's upgrade policies. Many have turned to Vegas.

Users get tired of all the marketing hype that companies do. As I said before, MS promised that Windows 95/98/XP were the last OS' we would ever need. Im sure we will hear the same thing about Longhorn. But users get tired of shelling out more and more money only to find out the marketing was over the top.

I will give you a perfect example. Windows Media Center PC. Before it was released, it was touted as a media center to let you capture shows/movies and back them up on DVDs. When the product hit the shelf, users found out that the recordings were encrypted in a proprietary format and couldnt be archived to DVD for viewing on a DVD player. A year and a half later, third party developers have still yet to develop a stable product that achieves this. Users end up frustrated and mad because of the marketing hype that didnt deliver.

The basis of my original post was that Sony has the opportunity to win over its purchased customer base by rewarding long time users. No one demanded or threatened. Not once did i say, if Sony doesnt that I am changing. I did refer to that is one of the reasons people switch to competitors (me coming over from Adobe.) Sony is in no way obligated to do so. If they did, they would win me over. My loyalty thus far is still to Sonic Foundry. To my knowledge, Sony hasnt provided any features to the version 4 line other than the Sony branding in 4E. So, like most, i am eager to see what they do bring to the table for us now.

Others have said we just have to wait and see. If the new version is slated for actual release at NAB (not sure if its an actual release or just showing the product), then one would expect that if Sony is handling VV% the same way SoFo handled VV4, that we would receive notification of early pricing/features.

cheroxy wrote on 3/7/2004, 6:47 PM

Acid,
have you forgotten that the reason Sony was able to get Vegas was due to SoFo being bankrupt ?! Previous SoFo marketing/pricing therefore is a sure thing for Sony NOT to do. Basically, we have been getting more than we have paid for.

Rob, if Sony does a three tiered system like you said, I think it would be great!

Carson Calderwood

p@mast3rs wrote on 3/7/2004, 6:56 PM

Of course i remember thats why Sofo suffered. Thats why I never felt bad about paying what I did for VV. However, Sony can afford to absorb such losses, unlike SoFo.

Three tiered or discounted additional licenses would be nice. Will they? Who knows.

rmack350 wrote on 3/7/2004, 11:21 PM

Discounted additional licenses is a thought. I wonder what you'll need for network rendering? Hopefully they've got a stand-alone render engine that comes with the package.

Rob Mack

Sab wrote on 3/8/2004, 5:34 AM

acidsex said, "Sony can afford to absorb such losses, unlike SoFo."

C'mon man that is just a plain crazy unsubstantiated assumption. The fact is NO one can absorb losses in the long term, regardless of their size. A company that loses $1.00 on each sale cannot make it up in volume. They simply continue to lose money.

Feeling sorry for one company and expecting the next to give away the store is not good business, not in your business model world and especially not in the real world.

Mike

Chienworks wrote on 3/8/2004, 6:42 AM

Vegas 5 will be a new product. A new customer pays full price for the software while you get a discount because you have been a previous customer. It really is that simple. The new customer will not have had Vegas 4, Vegas 3 ... etc. I guess if you can't see that having had previous versions to be a benefit and added use that a new customer doesn't get, then we're just not even thinking in the same dimensions. Can you explain why you feel your having had and used the previous versions is of absolutely zero benefit?

planders wrote on 3/8/2004, 7:45 AM

The only way acidsex's complaint has any real merit would be for someone who's bought every version of Vegas but not actually done anything with it--hence the idea that he gets no more benefit from his series of purchases than does a first-time buyer.

Me, I'm a hobbiest. My initial flurry of SF purchases happened very quickly after Sound Forge 5.0 came out, and follow what I think was the wiliest bit of marketing ever seen in the computer biz:

1. Had a copy of Sound Forge XP that was bundled with a sound card. Registered it for free.

2. Received limited-time offer to ALL Sonic Foundry customers to upgrade to SF 5 for $99. This included as a bonus an 8-track audio, 1-track video version of Vegas 2.0.

3. Vegas Lite had an "Instant Upgrade" command. So when I got hooked on it over that first weekend, I could immediately upgrade to Vegas Video with no further downloads and only $299.

4. After that, it was a slippery slope that led me to buy ACID and Noise Reduction. Thus, my initial $99 upgrade resulted in over $1000 of software purchases and a very happy customer.

With all of those purchases under my belt, I felt somewhat obligated to make them work for me. I ended up doing a promo video for a local heavy equipment training company, and this single job paid for all of my software purchases.

With each upgrade of Vegas since then, the upgrade pricing has been $149-$199 (plus DVDA last time). In each case, the upgrade cost was more than covered by a single project. With only as little as two paying projects in a year, an amateur like me is making a profit on his investment that has gone into bigger computers, a good camcorder, and more mundane bills.

If I were to discover Vegas for the first time upon the release of V5, I would indeed spend less money on the software than I already have. But I would not have had even one of the paying projects that I've had over the past three years (keep in mind that I had no prior video background.) I would not have developed the experience I have, nor would I have built up my equipment inventory. It would take me at least three years to get to this point.

So, if you're not getting any return on your software purchases, don't buy the upgrade! If, on the other hand, you are able to translate the upgrade price into profits, there's no point grumbling about the cost. And if your current version does everything you need it to, keep using it!

RichMacDonald wrote on 3/8/2004, 9:20 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?

Let's say you bought the original for $300 and have spent $1,000 total including upgrades. Now you're trying to sell a new customer on a $1,000 amount. New customer won't bite. So this kind of fairness puts Sonic out of biz.

So maybe you set the upgrade price to $300 and the new price to $500. Maybe that's fair, but does that provide Sonic with sufficient revenue? Maybe, maybe not.

Remember, as an existing user you're captive to the price of switching. How much is that worth? Is it unfair for Sonic to gain a piece of that?

You have to balance (1) fairness to existing users, (2) getting new users, and (3) keeping the company going, i.e., maximizing *ongoing* revenue. Frankly, that makes it impossible to be "fair".

Acidsex, I hear you and I would like to agree with you. OTOH, as a programmer I understand the deep and unsolved financial realities software companies face once their past the initial product release. More than a few companies have died from this, and then all the users are screwed. So if you use Vegas, you have to commit to paying more $ than new users in order to keep Vegas alive. That is where *you* have to be fair.

Given all that, I'm one of those hobbyists who doesn't make a penny from Vegas. And I'm currently forced to live on the cheap side, so I'm looking for a path to spend minimum $ and fix the remaining fatal flaws in my work environment. IOW, all the new features may be very nice, but the only critical thing I'm looking for is a fix for DVDA. If the upgrade price is several hundred dollars, I'm going to have to skip an upgrade cycle to Vegas. So what Sonic needs to do is figure out whether or not to provide a separate price for DVDA. If they do, I might take it and skip the Vegas 5. If they don't, I might have to skip it entirely and force myself to learn DVDlab (under $100 is very attractive for those of us in the cheap seats :-) Dilemma. Its going to be very interesting.

GaryKleiner wrote on 3/8/2004, 10:12 AM

Clyde goes to Miss Margaret (a very skilled prositute that keeps on improving her skills) on the first Monday of each monthn (unless it's raining and he goes on Tuesday instead), and boy does he feel good all over when they are done.

Clyde pays Miss Margaret $100 for each visit, except gets a free visit after 11 months.

Frankie goes to Miss Margaret for the first time just as Clyde is leaving after his 12th visit. An hour later Frankie is on his way out, and boy, does he feel good all over.

An hour later both Clyde and Frankie are still feeling pretty good, yet at this point Clyde has paid $1100 but Frankie has paid only $100.

How can this be fair for Clyde?

vitamin_D wrote on 3/8/2004, 10:51 AM

My thoughts: wait and see what happens.

p@mast3rs wrote on 3/8/2004, 10:52 AM

Ill answer this for you. Its fair for Clyde because he didnt have to pay for use of the whore for the service on the same day. On that day, he got the booty for FREE and the his buddy had to pay. See, she rewarded a long time customer. Thank you for proving my point.

tserface wrote on 3/8/2004, 10:56 AM

Hi Gary,

I'm not sure I understand your point in this reasonably colorful example, but I will say that SOFO was always very fair to me when it came to upgrade prices and I never minded paying the additional price for the upgrade. If Sony is as fair then I will continue to be happy I'm sure. According to your example, though, Frankie should have paid around $600 for his first visit and $100 for subsequent, ahem, upgrades :)

Tom

p@mast3rs wrote on 3/8/2004, 11:01 AM

"Hi Gary,

I'm not sure I understand your point in this reasonably colorful example, but I will say that SOFO was always very fair to me when it came to upgrade prices and I never minded paying the additional price for the upgrade. If Sony is as fair then I will continue to be happy I'm sure. According to your example, though, Frankie should have paid around $600 for his first visit and $100 for subsequent, ahem, upgrades :)

Tom"

Exactly, Gary proved my point rather than his own. Im sure it wasnt intentional though <grin>

ibliss wrote on 3/8/2004, 11:13 AM

so Clyde has paid $1000 more than his mate for the same thing, boo hoo, it's not fair, why didn't his mate have to pay $1100 considering they endup feeling the same that day. Matey was a late-comer (ooh-er missus) but is now at the same level of 'pro' as clyde for less $.

but then Clyde realises that has had 12x the ammount of service as his mate and doesn't regret spending a single penny for the experience he has had over the last year.

Cheno wrote on 3/8/2004, 11:20 AM

Nice analogy, Gary! Just be glad you can't get an STD from Vegas! I really feel bad for the friend getting the sloppy seconds too....

why don't we just wait until the darn thing is released. All of this speculation is just speculation until Sony releases the product. Maybe something new is in the works pricewise maybe not. Why not go out and enjoy some fresh air instead of bantering on and on. If the upgrade is too much, raise your pricing.

Mike

Chienworks wrote on 3/8/2004, 12:05 PM

Patrick, read Gary's story again. He's proving the exact opposite of your point.

ibliss wrote on 3/8/2004, 12:30 PM

yes indeed.

laffTrax wrote on 3/8/2004, 12:36 PM

In response to the original thread subject - i'd like to see VV5 offer more text options. For example, if i want to roll credits over an image - i'd like to be able to add an outline to my text to make it easier to read. You cannot do that in VV4. Other than that, i'm extremely happy with the current version. I'm actually anticipating DVDA 2.0 even more! I love making dvds with vegas and DVDA! Rock on Sony (sonicfoundry)!

p@mast3rs wrote on 3/8/2004, 12:57 PM

Patrick, read Gary's story again. He's proving the exact opposite of your point.

How so? The long time customer got a fribbie because of his return business.

1 2 3 4 … 5

of 5