Light-Up v2 - Bad customer experience !!
-
edited -
Firstly, thanks for all your support.
So, notwithstanding an angry Christophe, is there a better way of charging for software upgrades? I'm happy to listen and learn.
Currently, LightUp sells for $149 and you get many free minor (1.x) upgrades, bug fixes and enhancements. As LightUp has developed, the scope and functionality it offers has increased enormously.
So the thinking was to come out with v2.0 at a modest upgrade cost but once you're on the 2.x line you again get free upgrades - which will include the Timeline editor as well as features such as advanced GPU-based rendering that being developed.
I guess from my side of the fence, I put months and months of work into LightUp and if somebody feels it saves them $149 of their time in producing content, then its a no-brainer to buy it. If it doesn't save you $149 of your time, then don't. Ditto for the $69 upgrade cost; if you feel its not giving you $69 worth of help in your work, look at another solution. Or am I missing something here?
I'm not sure there's much in practical terms could be done while keeping in mind I am trying to make a living out of this, but happy to have that discussion - PM me if you want to talk in private.
Adam
-
You can please some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time. Some will slip through the net. If you are being sincere from your point of view, then you are doing the best that you can. You can not make everyone happy all of the time, and IMO, have to stand up to those that try to bully you.
-
I think the simple point that was being made initially before it descended into acrimony was that AdamB seemed to have introduced an anomaly in his upgrade pricing structure.
Forget the actual tool costs etc for a moment...
BUT think of it this way...
Let's imagine that you buy something [v1] for $150.
If a new version [v2] of it comes out that costs $200 you can buy v2 and then you will have spent a total of $350.
If v1 still works as expected then you can stick with it and 'save' $200.
If v2 has new features that you want, then if you think it's worth it, you spend the extra money .If the seller offers a discounted upgrade to v2 for 'existing customers' that should be seen as a benefit.
So let's say the v2 upgrade costs $100: you have saved $100 because to buy the v2 'from scratch' would have cost you $200.
However, at this stage you will have spent $250 in total... BUT remember that you have had the earlier use of v1 and now v2 for much less than buying both of them separately.The rub comes from buying v1 and then finding that the much better v2 is available only a days later.
Had you know of this impending update then you could have delayed spending the initial $150 and spent $200 instead on v2. So you'd 'save' $50... BUT then you would not have had the use of v1 for those days whilst you delayed making your purchase.The purchaser must decide if the $50 saved is balanced by the lack of having anything useful at all during those days.
Products are updated on a regular basis and it costs time [and thereby money] to do that, so it is reasonable to charge for the product and any major upgrade to it.
In this hypothetical example v2 is better than v1 so it costs more, but even if it cost less it doesn't matter.
Assuming there is something like an 'annual upgrade' of the software you could view it this way...
Of course a product is always 'full-price' to all new customers, but for 'existing customers' you could have an alternative 'sliding scale' - thus:-
If the update is taken say 1 year or more after the last purchase it is 'full-price'.
If the update arrives 1 week after the last purchase it is 'free'.
AND if the update arrives between 1 week and 1 year it'd be costed pro-rata [on perhaps a monthly increment] - with the upgrade starting at the v1/v2 price difference and stepping up each month thereafter.
That way no one wouldn't feel bad ?
In the example given you'd have spent $150 on v1 and let's assume you'd used it for 1 month, then the slightly more expensive v2 arrives and you upgrade immediately - so ($200-$150) + ($150 x 1/12) = $62.50 - total cost $212.50 more than $150 but only a little more than $200 for v2 as a new user... AND then you DID get to use v1 for a month for only $12.50 !
If it's 12 months between the upgrade and the v1 purchase it costs ($200-$150) + ($150 x 12/12) = $200 - that is the 'full-price'.Thus users are encouraged to upgrade early and at least within one year of the original purchase [or last upgrade], as they'll clearly 'save money' and get new features: if they upgrade within days it's 'free' and upgrading within a few months is relatively inexpensive...
If the v2 product price doesn't change or is less than compared to v1 [or last updated version] then the upgrade cost is proportionately less, but it still costs the user something the longer they wait to upgrade as they are getting the use out of the earlier version of the product during that time...
Of course the 'time-limit' to upgrade doesn't need to be as illustrated and the 'increments' could differ but the principle of paying for what you've used would seem fairer to users and keep them 'on-side'
-
If we put it this way however, David (and all) - staying with a hypothetical solution that v.1 costs $ 150 and (imagine) v.2 also costs $150 (just like different versions of SU cost the same), should there be an upgrade fee for existing v.1 users?
Edit here with an example: if both versions cost the same and the upgrade fee were $ 34-35 only, would it be all right then?
Normally there is always an upgrade fee. True that many software developers have a certain policy that if someone purchases a version shortly before the next version comes out, the upgrade is free (TIG's solution is rather difficult and however logical it would be, it would probably be hard to implement in an automated paying system).
Now Christophe seems to "feel" that the two months period is "short enough" to be fit into this general practice. I dunno. With some software, it does. With SU for instance, with this latest version 8, Google gave one month (i.e. who bought it in August, could get a free upgrade) although they did not advertise it too much.
Nevertheless no software developer is obliged to do this - and especially not obliged to apply a certaintime period (say 2 or 3 months).
The fact that Adam also raised the price of the new version just adds confusion to the situation. The upgrade price is (generally) not the difference between the previous and current versions (otherwise we would never have to pay for SU upgrades).
-
Hi Adam
I think i understand what's Christophe Hebert point in this matter (not that i thnk he's doing in the right place or in a polite way).
From what I understand Lightup v1 costs 150 and v2 is 185 and the update fee is 70 (please correct me if this is wrong). Now the problem seems to me that there was a lack of knowledge about the release of v2 so if people bought a day before release and the v2 cames out after, they have to pay 150+70= 220 and that's more than the full v2 (so i think this part could be a litle better tought adam). Now because people didn't know when there was going to be a released and how the updates would work, they couldnt choose either to wait for the new release or just buying the current. If you put yourself in their shoes, and knew the v2 was coming out you would probably wait for the realease (specially because v2 i supose, it does everything v1 does plus more), but if you don't know this and have to pay an update within a ver short time frame it makes no sense paying more than a full version release. If it would happen to me i would probably be upset too.Please don't take this as an attack to you adam, I'm just saying that the updates price politic cold be a litle more tough out (BTW i'm not a Lightup user so this doesn't affect me directly). And i don't think it's worth a reaction like this (speccialy with this prieces we are talking about).
If i fail to understand correctly what's going on here then just forget this post Adam
.David
-
Just to inform people earlier about price changes in new versions, give the chance for decisions.
That's why companies uses a resonable time to a free upgrade or inform about a release date.
In this case it was fair to pay the difference ( 40 $ )for all new customers in a time period; otherwise people should keep informed when new releases are in the pipeline. -
@burkhard said:
people should keep informed when new releases are in the pipeline.
Lots of software developers do not do that (look at SketchUp for instance - even Beta testers do not know until the day before).
-
Gaieus, i don't think the problem here is prices, the problem seems to be lack of information that leads to a lack of choice.
Imagine that there's no discounts policie, and you want to buy a new software that costs 3000$ but you know that in an month and update version will come out and the update fee is 1000$. Would you buy now at 3000$ and then pay extra 1000$ for a total of 4000$ or would you wait a month, and keep working with your current tools in the meantime, and pay 3000$ for an update version that does everything the other does plus more?Companies do this discounts prior to new releases to don't hurt sales in that months and keep a costumer base happy and sales fair.
I've used more expensive values to help making a point, because i still don't think it's worth all this hassle for the values we are talking, and i serious doubt Adam wanted or didn't care if something lke this happen. I'm just saying this as an advice in sales politics to Adam, it's not meant to hurt is image.David
-
...or keep informed.
My point is, when nothings happened ( like agreements, rules... ) what should people decide when to buy a software?
LightUp is a small one. Do you think if Adobe make such a deal with 1200 € and you have to pay a week later for the same package ( Remember you don't know the release date and there are no arrangements) 1900 € ( Full package + update ), you are happy?
The difference is they have rules and everybody can inform itself how it is managed.
Informations and arrangements!...and leave or leave not is a kick in the ass answer for every customer.
DacaD beats me
-
Yes, I exactly understand that point. In fact, even though I would have already needed it, I did not buy SU Pro 5 because I wanted to avoid the upgrade fee (although as it turned out later, there was no fee between 5 and 6). I was simply quite broke around that time (and salaries are also not that big in this part of the World).
What I was saying is that there is also a common practice; not to announce release dates. Especially with "one-man-shows" like Adam's, as you never know when you can actually finish a new release (or when Google releases its new version where certain bugs are fixed therefore you constantly rely on 3rd parties). It is probably not that easy.
Look at the Thea development. According to the original roadmap, it should be out of Beta for about a year now.
-
The developer of Cheetah3D is also a one man operation; he usually offers a grace period that he will announce before a new version release.
So, without actually announcing a release date, he gives a free upgrade if you bought the previous version after a certain date.
With LU, because ver 2 costs more than ver 1, perhaps a period of time where the consumer is offered the option of buying ver 1 and then upgrading or paying the higher ver 2 price and then they receive ver 1 until ver 2 is ready and then it is a "free" upgrade.
I would have gone for this option, for sure. Instead, I was one of the few who got caught in the middle, but, oh well, S%$^ happens. FWIW, I think the upgrade price is very fair and that ver 2 costs more than ver 1 makes sense, too, especially when considering the soon to arrive timeline editor.
-
Which way Adam want to go is his decision. A release date is not needed, but then there must be an arrangement, in any way, to keep customers informed.
-
Plenty of software vendors do offer free upgrades to new versions for customers who purchased the older version within a certain period of the new version being released. Just how long such a period should be is open to debate and there is nothing to force vendors to do this at all, but it would be a good way of treating customers!
I've bought software on more than one occasion where the vendor stated up front that because a new version was soon to be released that I would get the newer version free of charge when it became available.
-
I have received a mail by Adam who said to me "That software cannot charge for upgrades? That is just the reality of software development. Nobody is forcing you to upgrade."
Of course this is not my point and some of you understand. To be clear, If I buy one year ago a full license and pay this reasonable 69$ upgrade I would be happy. If it was 6 month ago, I would be unhappy but no complains. Three month ago... If the v1 price + 69$ upgrade is the same as V2 full license especially for recent customer... I do not have complains.
License and upgrade are as rent and they have to be balanced on time.
A version number 2 is not a new product it's an improvement of a version 1.
Some of you said bigger software company do worst, but some of them pay the price of their strategy ! Do you remember Quark X Press ? Another example is music. In France ten years ago a music CD coast 40 to 50% more than anywhere, just like that for no reason. The result is many artist have now to produce themselves and government multiply anti-piracy regulations...
For some of you who develop and sell plugins or resources for SketchUp, I would like to share with you some advice and remarks from people we met.
Selling, trading is a profession and you have to understand customer basic psychology, trade strategy and habits, if your business... and price grow up ! If the price is low, your strategic mistakes doesn't matter !
Notably because SketchUp user's may be enthusiast and share their experience. I do it now as a professional since more than three years as trainer.
People are very interesting to discover third party solution for specific problems, and regularly some buy them. We buy our softwares, don't ask privilege from developers and help them to buy it without they know it !
About the new price of Adam's plugin, it's another debate but I'm not sure he is right (I don't test benefits of V2), but his product is specific. It's not a rendering plug-in that may replace other plug-ins.
Unfortunately I push the button this morning and we are done with Adam. What I asked for, is not for me but for every new customer. It's basic and I have no more time for that.
About LightUp, the reply from the director from my company is short and clear : "Thanks for the advice, information will be relayed". -
@john.warburton said:
Just how long such a period should be is open to debate and there is nothing to force vendors to do this at all, but it would be a good way of treating customers!
He did buy the software 2 months prior to the new release. But like you said, its debateble.
Putting on my lawyer hat, the retailer is bound by law
not to mislead or deceive the consumer. Consumer laws
are very tight and strict but this customer was
not mislead or deceived into any purchase. Now, if during the period of
purchase, Light up CO. made false claims that no new upgrade is
to be released i see no reason to fit this transaction within
confines of deception. In certain transaction silence can be construed
to mislead but that usually involves hiding certain additional costs,etc.
This is just the gist and additional elements have not been accounted for,
example, terms of the purchase contract/license that bounded the parties. -
@fuzzion said:
Putting on my lawyer hat, the retailer is bound by law
not to mislead or deceive the consumer.This is not a question of law, and if so I do not care.
It is a matter of commercial software and in any case, I realize that this is the first time this has happened to me! ( but maybe I had much luck so far...! )
As someone had said, Adam is notobliged to to be friendly with new customers and nothing forbids me to express my displeasure about, to discourage its product in our network .
And "icing on the cake, " I sometimes write articles ... I actually dropped one day a product.Anyway, even if Adam changed his mind, it is you who would benefit, because in our case we made a final decision.
This discussion has enlightened us! (laughter)We can not afford to take the risk of discontent from one of our clients deal with such petty practices.
-
What I find quite amusing about this whole dialog is the amount of billable time that was sacrificed in order to rant about $33. When we first purchased ICG's Builder's Cad software in 1991, it was somewhere in the neighbourhood of $10,000, mind you, you did have this cool isometric view that was...wait for it...'shaded'.
If $33 is too much to pay for a full version upgrade, with free incremental version updates, then you're expecting a bit too much from the developer...unless of course, as a registered architect, you're only charging $1.81/hr. for your valuable time.
Just because there are incredibly generous contributors out there, like TIG, THOM THOM, FREDO, etc., a precedent is not established that says everything needs to be free, or it's a rip-off. According to what I've read prior, the version 1 software was used for 2 months...is it remotely tactful complaining about a usage fee of 55 cents/day?
Maybe the global economy is worse than I thought...
-
@john.warburton said:
Plenty of software vendors do offer free upgrades to new versions for customers who purchased the older version within a certain period of the new version being released.
Exactly...
Adobe was mentioned somewhere and they do give a free upgrade if you purchase shortly prior to a release of a new version...
I don't think they need to, but they just do it because they want to please their customers - even the new customers... -
Boy you sure like to talk about how connected you are and speak about how you will tell everyone and their brother about your bad experience and how they should not use Adam's software. Sounds more like slander to me as most of Adam's customers seem pretty pleased with the software. Was your hope to threaten Adam with all your connections and possible lost clients if you spoke bad about a product in the hopes he would say "please no, don't tell all the millions of people who worship your opinion.....Here take this upgrade at no cost". I love how in your mind everyother software company is OK for their practices although Adam is SO wrong for the same style upgrade charges. Why didn't you ask Adam BEFORE you purchased, "Is there a major upgrade in the future and if I buy now what will the policy be for the upcoming upgrade?". Sure seems like that would have saved your heart and mouth from running out of control....JUST SAYIN!
Scott
Advertisement