Rent-to-own?

[andrew71]

Plus someone who bought via the Splice method can still resell the plugin after full purchase.

True. The point I was trying to make, perhaps unsuccessfully, was that there could be money to be made from people who might rent for a few months before losing interest and cancelling the plan. People who might never consider spending $150+ on a plugin. Either way, I was only offering my experience as a customer who has used Splice's rent to own service.

[tony10000]

I really like the idea of rent-to-own on paper, but it's risky business-wise and I hope that all companies deploying it have done their sums right and are confident that it's sustainable or them in the long run. A lower bar to entry is pro-consumer but going bust because your business model can't be sustained, most definitely is not.

I am sure that if it wasn't lucrative, the devs involved would have dropped it and gone back to direct sales. The fact that more devs are adopting it means that it must be at least somewhat profitable.

As to how sustainable that proftability is, only time will tell.

However, it may be giving new life to very own plugins. Sylenth 1, for example.

Every dev is different and so are their overhead and expenses. So, it isn't a "one size fits all" business model.

[PieBerger]

Plus someone who bought via the Splice method can still resell the plugin after full purchase.

True. The point I was trying to make, perhaps unsuccessfully, was that there could be money to be made from people who might rent for a few months before losing interest and cancelling the plan. People who might never consider spending $150+ on a plugin. Either way, I was only offering my experience as a customer who has used Splice's rent to own service.

It's a fair comment to make. Imo it's a question of whether enough additional revenue can me made from dabblers such as yourself, to warrant paying commission or upfront costs to Splice (one has to assume that they're taking a cut, because they're a business after all and need to make money) or to pay for your own team to develop a suitable platform, whilst also potentially diverting resources away from developing actual products for customers to buy and for companies to profit from.

[pdxindy]

I am sure that if it wasn't lucrative, the devs involved would have dropped it and gone back to direct sales. The fact that more devs are adopting it means that it must be at least somewhat profitable.

It does not mean that.

Once a Dev has put the effort into doing it, it does not take much more effort to keep it, so it might be marginal or zero and they can just leave it there.

More Devs adopting it might only mean there are some desperate Devs looking for some way to not go out of business. We have no idea what, if anything, it means.

[tony10000]

I am sure that if it wasn't lucrative, the devs involved would have dropped it and gone back to direct sales. The fact that more devs are adopting it means that it must be at least somewhat profitable.

It does not mean that.

Once a Dev has put the effort into doing it, it does not take much more effort to keep it, so it might be marginal or zero and they can just leave it there.

More Devs adopting it might only mean there are some desperate Devs looking for some way to not go out of business. We have no idea what, if anything, it means.

I doubt that any dev would commit to continuing a practice that is not profitable, no matter what the sunk costs are. And given the success of the companies involved (Xfer, D16, iZotope, PreSonus), I doubt that they would just "leave it there". That doesn't make any sense.

[PieBerger]

More Devs adopting it might only mean there are some desperate Devs looking for some way to not go out of business. We have no idea what, if anything, it means.

Indeed market pressures could be forcing developers' to adopt unsustainable practices in order to compete in the short to medium term, while they try to come up with something more profitable in the long term. Unless devs start publishing their data, we have no idea as you say.

[pdxindy]

I am sure that if it wasn't lucrative, the devs involved would have dropped it and gone back to direct sales. The fact that more devs are adopting it means that it must be at least somewhat profitable.

It does not mean that.

Once a Dev has put the effort into doing it, it does not take much more effort to keep it, so it might be marginal or zero and they can just leave it there.

More Devs adopting it might only mean there are some desperate Devs looking for some way to not go out of business. We have no idea what, if anything, it means.

I doubt that any dev would commit to continuing a practice that is not profitable, no matter what the sunk costs are. And given the success of the companies involved (Xfer, D16, iZotope, PreSonus), I doubt that they would just "leave it there". That doesn't make any sense.

Just cause it is not profitable, does not mean it is necessarily losing money. Also, some companies might have decided to give it a couple years even if it is not immediately increasing sales. Likewise, Splice could be quietly giving some incentives to developers to keep them from leaving because they do not want their business to fail.

And there might be very different results and thinkings from company to company. Having no sales data, it is not possible to draw any conclusion. We just don't know.

[tony10000]

Indeed market pressures could be forcing developers' to adopt unsustainable practices in order to compete in the short to medium term, while they try to come up with something more profitable in the long term. Unless devs start publishing their data, we have no idea as you say.

Market pressures? I sincerely doubt it. Xfer Serum was the first one to try it and they are still doing it at least two years later. And Serum is a plugin that NEVER goes on sale.

[tony10000]

Just cause it is not profitable, does not mean it is necessarily losing money. Also, some companies might have decided to give it a couple years even if it is not immediately increasing sales. Likewise, Splice could be quietly giving some incentives to developers to keep them from leaving because they do not want their business to fail.

And there might be very different results and thinkings from company to company. Having no sales data, it is not possible to draw any conclusion. We just don't know.

You are making assumptions that don't comport with good business practice. You must also remember that there is some support involved and that is borne by the developer. I know that because I see the requests on the Xfer User Forum.

I doubt that Steve Duda (or any other developer) would bear that type of additional responsibility if it wasn't profitable.

Also, I am also sure that Splice has to provide some data/case histories/success stories to get other major companies to buy into the model. And it is clear that some have.

I don't care if Urs and u-he decide to adopt that business model or not. That is their decision.

[Urs]

I don't care if Urs and u-he decide to adopt that business model or not. That is their decision.

We made that decision. Not adopting rent-to-own as business model.

Would be nice if we could put it to rest now.

[tony10000]

I don't care if Urs and u-he decide to adopt that business model or not. That is their decision.

We made that decision. Not adopting rent-to-own as business model.

Would be nice if we could put it to rest now.

Yes, please!!!

I'm done.

[soundpeaks]

Will just leave +1 here. I really need it

[Mushy Mushy]

^ I’m a big advocate of rent to own but just put that money aside for 6-9mths and buy here secondhand.

[X86]

I would love a rent to own model for u-he products. I'm currently trying to buy a 90$ DIVA license transfer, as it's all I can afford right now and I just can't afford 179 Euros in one shot like that. What I can afford however, is 10 dollars/euros a month for a product maybe even 20 a month for a mini bundle.

EDIT: never mind I just read you're not adopting a rent to own model.

That makes me quite sad.

[EvilDragon]

If you can afford 10 <currency> a month, just put it in a sock then after x months, buy it in one go.