What's new

PA going to Subscription too

JEPA

Senior Member
My only subscription is with the Sonnox Elite Bundle, which I am entitled to own if I wish or I keep subscribed till I reach the cost of the bundle where I will own it. I can pause the subscription when I want.
 

JEPA

Senior Member
From now I will invest only in plugins I need specifically from PluginAlliance (I was doing so anyway) and will wait with patience for a sale if there is one, if not then not.
 

chocobitz825

Senior Member
My only subscription is with the Sonnox Elite Bundle, which I am entitled to own if I wish or I keep subscribed till I reach the cost of the bundle where I will own it. I can pause the subscription when I want.
Thats not a subscription, thats a payment plan on a finite number of plugins at a set value. Subscriptions update their content without a finite price point in mind, but generally with the idea that the entire amount of product you use would probably take years, if not decades to pay off at the price at which you're paying to access them. For example, i think at $24 a month, if the whole of PA's line cost $10,000, it'd take you like 35 years to pay it off. (assuming the line never had anything new added over those 35 years to change the total)
 

chocobitz825

Senior Member
Ah I see now, the gobbler rent-to-own "subscription". Again, its a payment plan. Same way they have rent to own furniture and whatever else. Its a play on words for a concept that is basically just you rent it until you own its and if you fail to pay it all off, you don't get your money back. What you get is decided and finite, and you can pay it off within a reasonable time. To call it a subscription is just trying to make it sound better because payment plans sound like people are too poor to afford what they buy and that had a major negative image over time. The value of a payment plan/rent-to-own vs. a real modern subscription is totally different.
 

JEPA

Senior Member
Ah I see now, the gobbler rent-to-own "subscription". Again, its a payment plan. Same way they have rent to own furniture and whatever else. Its a play on words for a concept that is basically just you rent it until you own its and if you fail to pay it all off, you don't get your money back. What you get is decided and finite, and you can pay it off within a reasonable time. To call it a subscription is just trying to make it sound better because payment plans sound like people are too poor to afford what they buy and that had a major negative image over time. The value of a payment plan/rent-to-own vs. a real modern subscription is totally different.
this was a good clarification, now you are calling me poor... :rofl::shocked:
 

chocobitz825

Senior Member
this was a good clarification, now you are calling me poor... :rofl::shocked:

That was not the intent, what I'm saying is that's why they call it a subscription instead of payment plan or rent to own nowadays. Because the business model of rent-to-own and payment plans in other businesses gained such a negative image that it acquired this image of only being something poor people with bad financial skills did. I DO NOT mean to say that represents you or other people on such plans. They serve a useful function for people, but they are not subscriptions, which are uninterrupted services that remain for the time in which you are in them, and cease when you stop.

People have said they would feel trapped by subscription plans, but rent-to-own programs are designed to make it harder for you to quit. Knowing the bundle is $1000, and that you're paying into it with the benefit of eventually owning, you're far less likely to stop because it feels like throwing money away. So people stay on the plan until its fully paid off. Subscription is generally meant to not come with that burden. You use it for as long as you choose to, and you quit knowing you paid for access only.
 

JEPA

Senior Member
That was not the intent, what I'm saying is that's why they call it a subscription instead of payment plan or rent to own nowadays. Because the business model of rent-to-own and payment plans in other businesses gained such a negative image that it acquired this image of only being something poor people with bad financial skills did. I DO NOT mean to say that represents you or other people on such plans. They serve a useful function for people, but they are not subscriptions, which are uninterrupted services that remain for the time in which you are in them, and cease when you stop.

People have said they would feel trapped by subscription plans, but rent-to-own programs are designed to make it harder for you to quit. Knowing the bundle is $1000, and that you're paying into it with the benefit of eventually owning, you're far less likely to stop because it feels like throwing money away. So people stay on the plan until its fully paid off. Subscription is generally meant to not come with that burden. You use it for as long as you choose to, and you quit knowing you paid for access only.
I know it was not your intention, I'm only joking a little bit. Thank you for your clarification, it states clear the difference between these two paying plans and contributes a lot to this thread! :2thumbs:
 

JEPA

Senior Member
and you quit knowing you paid for access only
this is interesting, paying for access only. I don't see myself paying for "access only" for plugins use, but maybe I would pay for access like information, Jstor scientific magazines (musicology), or something like forums for specific music related issues (ethnomusicology, programming, etc.). In my personal case I have to receive something in exchange and I see plugins like objects more than information. Plugins for me are virtual objects like tools instead of e-books (pdf) or magazines where I can be subscribed (like a library where I can always go in and out, I know the books stay there). So with objects I could rent / lease a Mac Pro, but I prefer to buy it. If I had a huge basement (music school) maybe I would lease some Macs, but the difference is that it turns huge and impersonal. Like you have 100 students learning audio (and playing games ;) ) making use of the computers. But for my personal work I prefer to own the tools I need. That's personal, that is my case...
 

JEPA

Senior Member
I understand that facilities like companies working for the music industry at top levels would use the subscription more like than buying licenses only for two or three computers. If you have a team of 15 or more composers working like Bleeding Fingers or Dynamedion or producing libraries like SpitfireAudio I could believe the best option is to be subscribed and have the software you need in different studios and rooms throughout the facility.
 

chocobitz825

Senior Member
I understand that facilities like companies working for the music industry at top levels would use the subscription more like than buying licenses only for two or three computers. If you have a team of 15 or more composers working like Bleeding Fingers or Dynamedion or producing libraries like SpitfireAudio I could believe the best option is to be subscribed and have the software you need in different studios and rooms throughout the facility.
I think thats the major distinction and both sides are valid. I’m not sayin everyone should be on the subscription model, because really it makes no sense for some users. The only problem I see is previous arguments about how it either traps users (despite still having the option to buy perpetual licenses), or that its some how more expensive than buying licenses. We all have different needs, and this model fulfills a need for many users, I think.
 

dzilizzi

I just hang around pretending I know something
As a hobbyist, subscriptions rarely make sense. I do buy one to Groove3, but also buy classes I want to keep when they have sales. A subscription for a month or two to try out a product also makes sense. Otherwise, for me, no because I don't have consistent time to do music and I would be paying for stuff I'm not using.

But for a business, it does make sense in that it can allow you to offer more services that you might not have been able to do if you had to pay full price for it. plus it is a set business expense as a subscription which makes it easier to price your product. And if you quit business, you don't have to worry about unresellable assets.
 

rrichard63

Perpetual Novice
Forgive me if this has already been answered and I missed it. If you have a voucher for a discount on the subscription (I have one for $149.99), does the lower price apply to renewals after the first year or only to the first year?

This is the first time I have been tempted by the subscription model. But I added up my purchases from PA over the last 3-1/2 years and they have averaged $520 per year. At $150 a year, it seems that I could subscribe, evaluate everything when I feel like it rather than having to do so during a limited trial period, eventually buy the few I end up using frequently, and break even or come out slightly ahead.
 

ckeddf

New Member
Forgive me if this has already been answered and I missed it. If you have a voucher for a discount on the subscription (I have one for $149.99), does the lower price apply to renewals after the first year or only to the first year?
The discounted price stays for renewals - as long as you keep your initial subscription active.
 

JEPA

Senior Member
from the newsletter:

"
Voucher Codes for MEGA Bundle yearly intro offers:
Extended until August 31
We heard from a lot of users that they loved the MEGA Bundle yearly "Deal of your lifetime" voucher codes for the early adaptors, but some of you just need some extra time to be prepared to subscribe. We are happy to announce that we have extended all the voucher codes for the MEGA Bundle yearly intro prices until August 31. Just use the codes you have already received, they will work through all of August."​

..so I am interested to see how this evolves... Maybe after thinking again about it and reading @rrichard63 statement, it makes sense...

Again,
quickly question: Who has already subscribed? Y/N
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom