Don't Fear Adobe Increasing CC Subscription Rates: With the increased revenue for first 3 qtrs of 2017, why would they even consider raising subscription rate? I expect many comments...

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

With the increased revenue for first 3 qtrs of 2017, why would they even consider raising subscription rate? I expect many comments to the contrary. I was just posting the article.
https://www.dpreview.com/news/8938513475/adobe-announces-record-breaking-1-84-billion-in-revenue-for-q3

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

markngolf wrote:

With the increased revenue for first 3 qtrs of 2017, why would they even consider raising subscription rate?
https://www.dpreview.com/news/8938513475/adobe-announces-record-breaking-1-84-billion-in-revenue-for-q3

Because they can?
Seriously, how many of the subscribers would even blink if Adobe raised the monthly fee by 25 cents. Not too many I'm sure and it would certainly be a major increase in their bottom line.
note: I'm an optimist by nature with a strong sense of the pragmatic.

That can be conflicting at times.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

I can never find the number of subscriber/customers. How many are on the $10 plan? How many are on the $50 plan?

For those reading the topic, you can cut your cost to about $7.50 a month by buying an annual subscription when it is "on sale" at B&H. There is no sales tax and the price is reduced for a few days. The way to spot it is to get on the daily "specials" email from B&H.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

bsprague wrote:

I can never find the number of subscriber/customers. How many are on the $10 plan? How many are on the $50 plan?

For those reading the topic, you can cut your cost to about $7.50 a month by buying an annual subscription when it is "on sale" at B&H. There is no sales tax and the price is reduced for a few days. The way to spot it is to get on the daily "specials" email from B&H.

You can also cut it to $0 as I did by dropping Lightroom and CC altogether and purchasing a product with a perpetual license.

Then you don't need to upgrade at all (with all of the surprised and headaches that might entail) unless you recognize a new feature that you absolutely can't live without.

Capture One Pro is arguably just as good and it accommodates new camera models with no hassell.

Jim-Pops Loc: Granbury, Texas

selmslie wrote:

You can also cut it to $0 as I did by dropping Lightroom and CC altogether and purchasing a product with a perpetual license.

Then you don't need to upgrade at all (with all of the surprised and headaches that might entail) unless you recognize a new feature that you absolutely can't live without.

Capture One Pro is arguably just as good and it accommodates new camera models with no hassell.

Once you have Lightroom running your photo library database it is hard to make a switch.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

markngolf wrote:

With the increased revenue for first 3 qtrs of 2017, why would they even consider raising subscription rate? I expect many comments to the contrary. I was just posting the article.
https://www.dpreview.com/news/8938513475/adobe-announces-record-breaking-1-84-billion-in-revenue-for-q3

I pay more than 2x that for annual membership in PPA. It's the best deal in editing software out there. I do like Capture One, but I feel a bit claustrophobic when using it, and it still is just a raw converter which can't perform serious local-adjustment and layer/layermask based editing. I couldn't imagine doing image restoration or a full fashion edit (which I do on occasion) without the tools in Photoshop.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Jim-Pops wrote:

Once you have Lightroom running your photo library database it is hard to make a switch.

That's why they developed the catalog approach - to trap you into staying with Adobe. It's part of their business model just like the forced subscription pricing.

Trouble with the Lightroom catalog generates more questions than any other issue. Their database is neither stable nor user friendly.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

Adobe doesn't trap you into anything. They don't hold your feet to the fire. We choose to be customers. We can choose one of many programs.

Could it be that they have lots of revenue because those paying like what they get?

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

markngolf wrote:

With the increased revenue for first 3 qtrs of 2017, why would they even consider raising subscription rate? I expect many comments to the contrary. I was just posting the article.
https://www.dpreview.com/news/8938513475/adobe-announces-record-breaking-1-84-billion-in-revenue-for-q3

That's like saying, "The cost of living went down so I don't want a pay raise."
Businesses aren't in business to be nice, they're in business to make money.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

selmslie wrote:

That's why they developed the catalog approach - to trap you into staying with Adobe. It's part of their business model just like the forced subscription pricing.

Trouble with the Lightroom catalog generates more questions than any other issue. Their database is neither stable nor user friendly.

Mine has about 35,000 images. Last month I added 75 GB of RAW photos and 4K video clips from a trip. I am thoroughly enjoying using Lightroom.

The program and it's database has been stable and friendly since I started using it 6 years ago.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Adobe subscription existed long before it was generalized and mandatory to use their newer products. At the time they did not raise the price of their products. So I am not exactly concerned.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

Mac wrote:

That's like saying, "The cost of living went down so I don't want a pay raise."
Businesses aren't in business to be nice, they're in business to make money.

Any business (other than Comcast) gets paid because they nicely offer a product or service in exchange for some money. If they aren't nice, the customers go away. Come to think of it, even Comcast has customers that have gone away!

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

bsprague wrote:

Any business (other than Comcast) gets paid because they nicely offer a product or service in exchange for some money. If they aren't nice, the customers go away. Come to think of it, even Comcast has customers that have gone away!

I don't know. Businesses are going to charge whatever they think they can get away with, and that includes Adobe. If Adobe's research shows that customers will accept a price increase the price will increase.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

bsprague wrote:

Adobe doesn't trap you into anything. They don't hold your feet to the fire. We choose to be customers. We can choose one of many programs.

Could it be that they have lots of revenue because those paying like what they get?

I was addressing Jim-Pops statement that, "Once you have Lightroom running your photo library database it is hard to make a switch." That sounds like an inducement not to switch.

So was their previous requirement that you had to upgrade Lightroom if you changed cameras or operating system. That happened early to me and I moved away from Adobe.

Lately they have removed 16-bit support for PS elements , also to force you to upgrade.

They have a big customer base because they got there first with a superior product. They are hanging on to them by making it hard to switch.

Now there are plenty of products that can do all you need. Some of them are free or very inexpensive.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

I started using Elements at version 9. It is now on 15. I never saw 16 bit support until the "real" Photoshop.

Adobe provides a few things that makes it easy to switch. Lightroom is non-destructive and leaves your originals alone. And, if you drop your subscription, the Develop module stops, but you can continue to use the Library module. To prevent forced upgrades for new cameras, Adobe provides the "DNG Converter" for free to anyone.

Adobe is growing revenue partly because they are adding new customers. Their customer base is not shrinking!