Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Sao_Bento

Final Cut Pro X

Recommended Posts

However I do like the fact that Apple is putting downward pressure on the price and is forcing other companies to rethink their pricing structure as well.

 

Don't think so - you get what you pay for and if the price of any commercial product drops below a critical mass to refinance its ongoing development (and e.g. licensing fees associated with using specific CoDecs, media formats, third-party capture tools...), it means the end of the product and ultimately the company's demise. Apple can simply afford to subsidize FCPX massively and not make any operational revenue on this possibly, but what would a company like Adobe do, whose business is producing software for professionals? And I find your price argument also flawed in that it would only be relevant if users would switch their software every half year. Not at all the case for editing. When you build an edit system, you commit yourself to it for a while, be it for the hardware, baseline software, plug-ins, complementary tools... In the end, you are throwing so much money at it either way, what does it matter, if the program itself costs 300 Euros or perhaps 900 when you'll stick with it for 5 years? And isn't it funny that you are suggesting a price drop in a thread that started out very much on that premise: A tool being aimed at so broad and diverse an audience and being so affordable the the "Pros" don't consider it "Pro" anymore? I guess we'll talk about Premiere Not-So-Pro CS6 then next year? ;-)

 

Mylenium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but what would a company like Adobe do, whose business is producing software for professionals? And I find your price argument also flawed in that it would only be relevant if users would switch their software every half year. Not at all the case for editing. When you build an edit system, you commit yourself to it for a while, be it for the hardware, baseline software, plug-ins, complementary tools... In the end, you are throwing so much money at it either way, what does it matter, if the program itself costs 300 Euros or perhaps 900 when you'll stick with it for 5 years? And isn't it funny that you are suggesting a price drop in a thread that started out very much on that premise: A tool being aimed at so broad and diverse an audience and being so affordable the the "Pros" don't consider it "Pro" anymore? I guess we'll talk about Premiere Not-So-Pro CS6 then next year? ;-)

I hardly think a company like Adobe will go bankrupt by being more competitive with their prices. 300 or 900 Euros matters when companies are looking to upgrade a large number of license seats and weighing if the new features justify the upgrade price. Also I think a big point you're not considering is the fact that with a lower price point means more people are likely to buy legit copies. It's like the iTunes store, sure you could hunt around on p2p or torrent sites, but for a dollar you're able to get it instantly and in decent quality. So the pure profit you lose out on a high price tag you offset from larger volume, especially people who wouldn't have considered purchasing it before that.

 

Your last point about broad audiences is justifiable in some ways with regard to FCP X (which is now expanding to reach a mass audience). However there's a difference between a product marketed toward consumers and a "Pro" product simply having a lower price. Example being Maya (Unlimited) back in 2002 was I believe $16,000, it dropped to $7,500 and today is $3,500. Just because it's dramatically cheaper doesn't mean it's "Not Pro" anymore. Same thing when Blackmagic aquired DaVinci and released an option for software only for $995 (and they will be offering a Lite version of Resolve 8 that is Free). It's not always "you get what you pay for", it's simple supply and demand. Apple totally dropped the ball in releasing a product that is initially missing key features that Pros require, that's pretty obvious. But if the major things like multi-cam, XML, etc etc which they said they will update was included in this 1.0 release I think people wouldn't be having the backlash they do and would be surprised to get an editing program for only $300.

 

And yes the other comment about dropping programs adds to the price is valid. I myself am very disappointed they didn't release Color 2.0 as although not perfect it had a lot of potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
300 or 900 Euros matters when companies are looking to upgrade a large number of license seats and weighing if the new features justify the upgrade price.

 

If you don't need it, you don't upgrade. What else is unclear here? Nobody is being forced to upgrade if it doesn't add anything to enhance workflows and it is common practice to skip. You know, real big companies have other priorities like keeping their operations running and not messing it up with some rushed upgrades. Aside from that they will use volume licensing, subscription licensing or maintenance plans, which makes for a very well plannable price. The real cost is in migrating your entire infrastructure, training your staff for the new versions, integrating the workflows and whatnot. If you will, it's more cost-intense to pay those system admins and the months/ weeks of planning... Installing the software is really just a single part of the equation. And no offense, just yesterday I worked at a company who are about to upgrade a few hundred seats of their CAD software at a cost of a few thousand Euros per seat and you are going mad about a few hundred on Adobe software? Doesn't feel right and the world out there very much disproves your point every day - if it's important for their business, people will gladly pay for their software, anything from banking, CRM, BPM, logistics to specialized machinery software. Or where else do you think those billions come from that Oracle, SAP, HP, IBM, Siemens and others make every year?

 

Also I think a big point you're not considering is the fact that with a lower price point means more people are likely to buy legit copies.

 

Cheapskates will always be cheapskates and for some of them the only good price is free. 70% of the people using pirated software do so quite consciously and freely admit to never having any plans of buying the genuine article. Just look around - forums like Video Copilot and creativeCOW are full of them. Those kids and hobbyists would never pay anything, even if you tell them that they already can have an entire Production Premium for 400 bucks via edu licensing or they could at least buy Premiere Elements. So what would any further price drops achieve here? Very much nothing, I believe....

 

Mylenium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...