Stability of Adobe CC Pricing?

[HSakols]

I am ready to upgrade from lightroom 4 and photoshop 5 to version 6.  I'm not a big fan of the new subscription model, but find $10.00 a month to be reasonable.  However, I'm not sure I trust Adobe and they don't have the best reputation of being helpful.  My fear is that within a year or less the subscription will go to say $25.00 a month.   If I knew I had some guarantee (especially as a teacher) I would pull the trigger and go with the cloud subscription.  So what does Adobe have in mind? Is the cloud packaging working for them or could they go back to stand alone versions of photoshop?  Are you worried about their pricing strategy? 

[brianrybolt]

If Adobe does raise their prices, you can bow out at that time.  There are plenty of other applications out there which will probably satisfy your needs (a speculation of course).  I've been keeping my eye on alternative software if Adobe gets weird. There are enough applications on the market to satisfy my needs although I'll have to spend a fair amount of time learning and finessing the new applications.
Brian

[eliedinur]

Of course, any vendor should raise prices if his costs increase and one of the first principles of capitalism is to find the best balance between price and the number of buyers, moreover it is hardly a new practice to start with an introductory price and once the market is established to raise it. However two points to consider - a) the "Photography Plan" has remained at $10 for well better than a year now and b) the more competition there is in the field, the less likely Adobe is to boost prices inordinately.

[Simon Garrett]

I can't find a reference, but a year or two when I subscribed, originally it was a limited-period offer.  Then they made it permanent and there was a statement from Adobe that the $10 was a permanent price as opposed to an offer, and they did not forsee it rising other than in line with other CC software prices.  Not exactly a promise, but some indication.  Forgive me if that's not quite right, but it's as I remember it.

It hasn't changed in a couple of years, and in fact for me in the UK it's gone down slightly, but I think that's a tax change in Ireland (AFAIK Adobe sells in Europe via Ireland, and levies an Irish tax rate on software subscriptions). 

[ButchM]

I'm not too concerned about any significant price increase in the short term. Although as has been pointed out, the executives at Adobe have an established track record of making hasty, wide ranging decisions without much forethought or warning. So anything can (and has) happen. It's purely a matter of record.

What I am concerned about, is over the long haul, will there be enough new features/improvements/additional enhancements to warrant continued investment.

Before the apologists start crying FUD from all corners of the planet, hear me out.

It's not a matter of affordability. It's not a matter the offered price point. It is purely a matter of Return on Investment. I have concerns that once Adobe has reached saturation of the market, will they continue to offer the same pace, quantity and quality additions to their products moving forward?  More important, how much effort will Adobe expend on the features and concerns I have for the products I use. I learned my lesson with the Book module in Lr to be extremely cautious about what you wish for. While it is an aid for some, for those of us that wish to use book/album printers and binders other than Blurb ... the module is a waste of time and effort.

I have to say, for my work, Ps CC 2016 and Lr CC didn't really bring much extra to the table that wasn't there before. While I appreciate the effort ... I'm not sure the new additions have yet or will have any measurable impact on MY bottom line. I have been a Ps license holder for well over 23 years and Lr since the very beginning. Many of the features that I use in my daily workflow with both apps, I have already paid for.  Some, many times over it seems.

Yes, $9.99 a month (plus tax) isn't much of an amount to be concerned about and it's only a couple of cups of coffee at Starbucks ... but if the barista started to deliver to you week old coffee and stale, dry and tasteless muffins for your morning fare ... $10 a pop isn't much of a bargain any longer. My grandfather instilled in me a wise slogan from Poor Richard's Almanac ... take care of the pennies and the dollars will take care of themselves. I just want to be assured that not only is my monthly stipend to San Jose affordable ... but also a worthwhile investment to my effort.

Bottom line, even though I am content with CC for the time being, Adobe is going to have to work a little bit harder to restore my faith in their cause.

[Simon Garrett]

What I am concerned about, is over the long haul, will there be enough new features/improvements/additional enhancements to warrant continued investment.

I share your concern. 

Many technology-based products eventually approach a plateau where innovation in that product declines.  This may be because the product itself is mature, or because the company becomes stale.  Since around CS4, to my observation the rate of innovation in Photoshop (or innovations useful to me) has been slowing down.  (IMHO, Photoshop is showing its 25 years age - and not in a good way - and really needs a rewrite from the ground up with a much better UI; that that isn't going to happen, as the discontinuity would upset too many people.)

LR has continued to develop, but LR6 doesn't really have that much beyond LR5, so is LR innovation also slowing down?   

All of which underlines why Adobe are so keen to move people to rental.  No one in their right mind would pay to upgrade to a product only marginally improved. 

IMHO Adobe are perhaps becoming a bit stale and complacent, but they can afford to be unless some major innovation comes elsewhere.  At the moment, I don't see anything else coming close to meeting my needs.  But if Adobe were to put the price up, I think I might start looking harder. 

[chez]

I'm not too concerned about any significant price increase in the short term. Although as has been pointed out, the executives at Adobe have an established track record of making hasty, wide ranging decisions without much forethought or warning. So anything can (and has) happen. It's purely a matter of record.

What I am concerned about, is over the long haul, will there be enough new features/improvements/additional enhancements to warrant continued investment.

Before the apologists start crying FUD from all corners of the planet, hear me out.

It's not a matter of affordability. It's not a matter the offered price point. It is purely a matter of Return on Investment. I have concerns that once Adobe has reached saturation of the market, will they continue to offer the same pace, quantity and quality additions to their products moving forward?  More important, how much effort will Adobe expend on the features and concerns I have for the products I use. I learned my lesson with the Book module in Lr to be extremely cautious about what you wish for. While it is an aid for some, for those of us that wish to use book/album printers and binders other than Blurb ... the module is a waste of time and effort.

I have to say, for my work, Ps CC 2016 and Lr CC didn't really bring much extra to the table that wasn't there before. While I appreciate the effort ... I'm not sure the new additions have yet or will have any measurable impact on MY bottom line. I have been a Ps license holder for well over 23 years and Lr since the very beginning. Many of the features that I use in my daily workflow with both apps, I have already paid for.  Some, many times over it seems.

Yes, $9.99 a month (plus tax) isn't much of an amount to be concerned about and it's only a couple of cups of coffee at Starbucks ... but if the barista started to deliver to you week old coffee and stale, dry and tasteless muffins for your morning fare ... $10 a pop isn't much of a bargain any longer. My grandfather instilled in me a wise slogan from Poor Richard's Almanac ... take care of the pennies and the dollars will take care of themselves. I just want to be assured that not only is my monthly stipend to San Jose affordable ... but also a worthwhile investment to my effort.

Bottom line, even though I am content with CC for the time being, Adobe is going to have to work a little bit harder to restore my faith in their cause.

Well if Adobe reaches saturation in the market as far as customer base...then the competition has done a shitty job and you really have no better choice than stay with Adobe. Our best scenario is competition which will drive Adobe to innovate and keep the price down.

[ButchM]

Well if Adobe reaches saturation in the market as far as customer base...then the competition has done a shitty job and you really have no better choice than stay with Adobe. Our best scenario is competition which will drive Adobe to innovate and keep the price down.

Well that's is the pitfall of consumers propping up a single solution to the point of it becoming a pseudo monopoly. There is nothing wrong with patronizing and supporting the best option in the market, though once that option reaches the pinnacle in the marketplace ... it is only human nature for the producers to eventually become complacent in their decisions and efforts.

For photographers, there is plenty of competition for Photoshop (at least on the Mac platform) Pixelmator, Acorn and now Affinity Photo are all quite viable and extremely affordable options that can handle pixel editing quite nicely and even push the envelope in the graphic arts arena. Although these options cannot replace all that Ps CC is capable of, very few photographers actually need every capability that comes with the bohemouth app. Fewer still are actually familiar enough with all those capabilities to actually employ them with ease.

Lightroom, really has few other options. Which is unfortunate. I'm hoping some enterprising startup recognizes the opportunity to explore an alternative option to Lr.

As you have pointed out, we all benefit from a competitive market place.

[HSakols]

I guess I'm being a little bit collage about this.  My desk is still made up of plastic milk crates.  Sure I could just use GIMP.  However, I think my work will benefit from adopting a smart object workflow.  Being able to jump back to the RAW file is a big advantage that no one else can provide.

[chez]

Well that's is the pitfall of consumers propping up a single solution to the point of it becoming a pseudo monopoly. There is nothing wrong with patronizing and supporting the best option in the market, though once that option reaches the pinnacle in the marketplace ... it is only human nature for the producers to eventually become complacent in their decisions and efforts.

For photographers, there is plenty of competition for Photoshop (at least on the Mac platform) Pixelmator, Acorn and now Affinity Photo are all quite viable and extremely affordable options that can handle pixel editing quite nicely and even push the envelope in the graphic arts arena. Although these options cannot replace all that Ps CC is capable of, very few photographers actually need every capability that comes with the bohemouth app. Fewer still are actually familiar enough with all those capabilities to actually employ them with ease.

Lightroom, really has few other options. Which is unfortunate. I'm hoping some enterprising startup recognizes the opportunity to explore an alternative option to Lr.

As you have pointed out, we all benefit from a competitive market place.

Unfortunately, there is very little insentive looking at and going with a lesser functional product when the leader is so affordable. I haven't even looked at alternatives since the Adobe suite does everything I need at a bargain price. Until that changes...why look elsewhere?

[rob211]

In addition, consider that Adobe has a similar problem to MS. They've got a very widely used application in many businesses. Sure, Joe Independent Photographer can rather easily switch over to a new product. But that's not so easy if you're managing 10 seats and other software that interacts tightly with Lr or Ps. And even if those shops aren't inclined to take risks with new products, even a majorly revamped Lr or Ps would pose issues for them: lost time and productivity while learning the new Lr or Ps.