Three weeks ago on v2021.6, I found the perfect Bin Background colors... I am absolutely convinced I have correctly chosen the BEST to go along with my other customizations. Makes me glad each time I see it. It may all be an illusion, but who cares.

I just googled it, seems this may be a trend. I like it. 

https://www.twikit.com/news/7-reasons-why-product-customization-brings-added-value-to-your-business/

pierreh:

I wasn't going to post this thing I received within an hour of the Avid price increase... but since you mentioned it:

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/media/release/20210819-02

Support of the new Apple chip with a 3X speed increase... meanwhile we're still hoping for GPU acceleration.

Yes I know, I feel frankly embarrassed now defending Avid's slow/no development for M1, over on the Mac forum, a while back. Especially since the 25% price hike.

The initial Avid statement explained the additional cost to Avid of support of keeping older versions updated and compatible. One of the reasons perpetual users chose that route. Subscription users are expected to be on current versions.

So the increase reflects the higher support and development cost over subscription. 

And if Avid where to achieve only current version supports Adobe do they could put more resources into current devolpment. Maybe even fix the Titler + disaster. 

But of course the Avid would lose one of its USPs and that would impact user take up. 

Pat Horridge:

The initial Avid statement explained the additional cost to Avid of support of keeping older versions updated and compatible. One of the reasons perpetual users chose that route. Subscription users are expected to be on current versions.

So the increase reflects the higher support and development cost over subscription. 

I'm sorry but that makes absolutely no sense at all. Time and time again when I have questioned facilities, where I work, as to why they are still on 2018, they have told me it is because the new interface and Titler+ are too problematic and unreliable for editors. And so if they had got them right in the 1st place, as they should have done by now, there would be no need to maintain old versions. And since I am on perpetual, by choice (and you can use 2018 on subscription, I believe) and wished to remain so, and on 2021.6 it wasn't a reason for me to choose that route.

Pat Horridge:

the additional cost to Avid of support of keeping older versions updated and compatible.

Pat,

This is a self inflicted problem. Your desired main customer group can't be broadcast with its need for backwards compatibity and consitent workflow evolution and at the same time have a latest feature/version that needs 1-2 years of development after introduction to be stable enough to be used in those environments. 

Avid can't have ot both ways. Either the product portofolio is developed in sync and stable or you keep older versions under support and development where needed. Wanting to make more profit does not mean anyone has to accept tools that do not work.

Pat Horridge:

Yes sopke to my reseller and they are invoicing me now. My contract will then extend to Dec 2022

Can someone by more than one year support at lower cost prior to deadline?

fdooman:

Can someone by more than one year support at lower cost prior to deadline?

Yes.

As I mentioned before, I purchased renewals for my perpetual licenses this week (from Videoguys, for 385 USD), and that has changed my renewal date from Dec 2021 to Dec 2022.

And just before the previous price increase, in August, I bought two renewals per license, and that changed my renewal dates from Dec 2019 to Dec 2021.

So yes, they are incremental.

Of course, we could shift the focus of this conversation to asking Avid to define who their target market is and whether they are priced competitively for that market. I guess if Hollywood is their target market then the price is irrelevant. If, however, they are trying to compete for the market attracted to the likes of Premiere, FCPX and Resolve then I would say that they are not priced competitively.

I understand that if you are a professional editor working in a distributed environment on main stream content (movies, tv, netflix, etc.) then you probably benefit from the proven workflows offered by Avid (they really are, arguably, second to none). However, if Avid expects to attract what is becoming the vast majority of editors (YouTube and other social media content creators) then their price-point needs some retooling, in my opinion.

I love Media Composer and I have a real soft spot for the fantastic front-facing folks at Avid so I am not here to dump on the product or these excellent folk. Also, the members of this forum and the moderators are first class and I come here often just to catch up on the challenges folks are having and the thoughtful answers provided by experienced members so my comments and questions here come from the heart and my motivation is aimed at Media Composer's survival.

Does that make sense or should I take another Tylenol, lol?

Yes. Buy one year, make sure auto renew is off then buy another. I tried and I'm now renewed until 2023

I agree with Barkingmad.

For Broadcast work/Hollywood etc Avid is still by far the best tool. And the cost is relatively insignificant to most users in those markets.

And yes to editors outside those areas other NLEs are very suitable and more attractively priced.

If the perpetual market licensing accepts ongoing increases maybe that will allow or more competitive pricing for Avid subscription? But my fear would be the loss of Key Avid features in the subscription model to prevent the Broadcast /Hollywood users jumping over.

For me the Avid support people, the beta people and the whole Avid community sets it apart from other NLEs and that's an important element. 

BarkinMadd:

I understand that if you are a professional editor working in a distributed environment on main stream content (movies, tv, netflix, etc.) then you probably benefit from the proven workflows offered by Avid (they really are, arguably, second to none). However, if Avid expects to attract what is becoming the vast majority of editors (YouTube and other social media content creators) then their price-point needs some retooling, in my opinion.

Agreed 100%. And it is my believe that the current license model, First, subscription, ultimate, enterprice, perpetual is Avid's attempt to appeal to both groups. How well they have managed that... from this discussion and many others it is clear there is room for improvement. I think that the needs in professional environment are holding back development for the fast majority of social media creators/editors. Wanting to serve both with 1 product is a difficult task at best, but that is what they chose to do.

If that is a good or bad choice? If every editor on social media wants to work for film or the niche called broadcast including paytv I guess it is. For me the question would be, is there money to be made at the price point underneath the current one?

And if we take that to its extreme? If resolve becomes a full blown editor and Blackmagic keeps giving it away for free, what would be the argument to use MC? Project sharing on Avid storage? Other integrations? Should MC First get all the features except the integration? I don't know. 

It doesn't matter whether the cost is negligble to enterprise customers. I repeat the cost is not an issue for me either, against what I earn. It's about the value for money and why and how Avid are justifying a massive price increase in the face no perceived justification. Davinci Resolve is used at the highest end of the market as well as a lower consummer base, too.

The software is identical whether you are on subscription or perpetual - only the licencing methodolgy/technology is different, so there is absolutely no creedance in the quoted excuse that it costs more to mantain perpetual users. The reason enterprise perpetual users are still on 2018 is because there is a problem in the development of the newer versions and they are at the least percieved as unreliable and problematic.

To make it sound as if it is the customer's fault that they are sticking to older versions and therefore costing Avid more money maintaining them is frankly insulting to those customers - this is as has been said Avid's own goal and now the customer is being penalised for that, where this is not happening elsewhere.

It's not a question of how good or widely used Avid is in the industry - I earn my living from it too - but this doesn't mean they can take anything for granted. Again the actual price rise is negligle to me but I don't like being stung and then waffled to about the reason.

I just bought some perpetual licences for $399 and I think that's a pretty good deal. I don't have to ever upgrade again if I don't want or need to. I don't need to pay for a subscription. How long was it $299, 10 years? (I have no idea, but sounds about right) 3% a year increase, that's the rate of inflation/COLA. Most of us fail to raise our rates to keep up with COLA.  How many of you are charging the same rate you were 10 years ago? Maybe AVID should have done a rate increase 5 years ago, so it would have been more gradual and not a 33% increase before 8-30 and 66% after.

I too am frustrated by all releases to fix things and then other things break. And I don't like paying for "upgrades" when they are bug fixes. We've all done that with all types of software. I had 6.5 seats for many years as it was rock solid and did everything we needed it to do. XAVC and 4K drove me to upgrade to 2020.6.

I don't have the option with Adobe for a perpetual licence. It costs me $600 a year per seat and I dont need any of their upgrades except every 3 or 4 years to stay current with others I interface with. In 30 years Ive never called their support. I wish I had the option to have a perpetual licence. Adobe does seem to send out a very solid build of their products.

I get the economics behind SaaS from the software companies' point of view but it can but tough on the user base. (I haven't had any work since COVID, and I wont work for $25 an hr.)  As for the rate increase, luckily we're not in the constuction biz. They're been hit hard with material cost increases and they have to pass the cost onto their customers. I'm floored how low the rates editors are charging now. What has happened to our industry? it seems to been decimated.

Not 100% positive, but I think it was $199 for a few years, then its been sneaking up over the past couple. Definitely not $299 for the last 10. Its definitely doubled within the last 2-3 years. 

ramz434:

Not 100% positive, but I think it was $199 for a few years, then its been sneaking up over the past couple. Definitely not $299 for the last 10. Its definitely doubled within the last 2-3 years. 

Yes and let's not forget there are currently 4 versions being maintained! 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021! Why on earth there are 3 versions with essentially the same new interface says it all really. I am onlining at the first facility where I have experienced the new interface being used - 2020. I have asked them to install 2021 if possible because there are definitely issues on 2020 with that interface that I am not experiencing in my suite on 2021. They are naturally reluctant to jump to the latest version, and it is not a licencing issue.