Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Adobe Systems Inc pricing policy  (Read 8751 times)
Mike_Dougan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 42


WWW
« Reply #20 on: July 31, 2008, 10:44:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Well, many people seem to think Adobe is some big, massive multi-national company with offices in every country they sell into to...that is not the case. Adobe is a US based corporation with some real "offices" in other countries...there's a German corporate office with staff and engineering as well as Japan and India (that I know about). In many countries Adobe works with semi-independent marketing and distribution companies. Are they a part of Adobe? Yes, in that there's a contractual relationship. Does Adobe US have total control over those companies? No... Can Adobe US dictate the price the local companies charge? I don't think so.

I won't defend the appearance of unfair pricing....but I suggest that the situation is a lot more complex than most people realize. If you want YOUR country's pricing to be more in line with the US, I would seriously suggest you go after the people in those local branches (in whatever form they may be) and request more fair pricing. If the local companies feel the heat there will be more likelihood they will feel the need to change the pricing. This is also one of the reasons why somebody in Europe (for example) can't buy software from the US store...because there are agreements in place for regional distribution and the regional sales must be done regionally.

As far as the Photoshop marketing, engineering and management team is concerned, they hear you all...but there's diddly-squat they can do about it. So, if you want change, it will have to come country by country on your own turf.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=212219\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I hear you Jeff but I bought your PKS recently and your not a big company. $99 download!

I do understand that Adobe has various agreements in place etc around the world, sometimes good sometimes bad but I tried to buy LZ2 but Adobe online store (the closest one being Singapore) won't accept my card.

I rather stupidly converted my catalog to LZ2 as I knew no matter what I'd be buying the product now I've 28 day's left of the trial and then I'm screwed, well not totally as I now have the pirated copy from the local market but I'm here with the $138.04 willing to pay the price. However I do find it unfair that I have to pay more but pay it I will. My main beef is that I can't buy it!

I'm leaving for Japan in 10 days, the retail product will not be available here for at least another month so I'm stuck with the "market bought" copy.
Logged
David Sutton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 899


WWW
« Reply #21 on: August 01, 2008, 01:19:59 AM »
ReplyReply

This is not just an economic issue: to suggest we are purely economic beings is clearly nonsense.
Of the software and photo gear I've purchased that work well, some are cheap like PTLens, and some are eye-wateringly expensive, like RRS gear (which as far as I can tell is made by Swiss jewellers somewhere, but is such a joy to use).
I have always found that the people behind the scenes of these companies respond quickly to requests or comments, and while I may not agree with the reply they have always been courteous and have listened. This engenders something important.
Brand loyalty.
What does this mean? Well, if I see someone with a pirate copy of say, Qimage, I may take them round the back of the house and explain to them the use of a computer as a suppository. So to speak.
With the development of Lightroom I guess we have known something of the people behind the scenes and appreciate  their work and that they listen to input from photographers. And their software is really a pleasure to use.
None of the aforementioned people would say to you "because you are in a wheelchair I'm going to double the price" or "because your skin is white I'm going to charge 50% more" or "because you live in Italy I'm going to charge 95% extra". And we are not talking shipping here.
But through the distribution structure Adobe have set up, they are doing just that in my opinion. I think it is unjust. No wonder people get exercised over this: it affronts their sense of justice. You can see the confusion it creates. On the one hand there is this software they like and are really interested in its development. On the other hand the business structure of Adobe appears to be saying that the human values of loyalty and courtesy have no place in their business. In other words: "You are not a human being - you are a number on a balance sheet". Think about it. Who wants to be made to feel like that?
David
Logged

N Walker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 303


WWW
« Reply #22 on: August 01, 2008, 02:21:47 AM »
ReplyReply

70% more. So this is a worthwhile expense or not? You don't HAVE to buy it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=212109\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]


Andrew,

If the GPB/US dollar rates were in reverse that would be my tough shit for being a UK resident - but they 'aint.' Its about principles not the actual cost - Adobe are playing dirty period.

I am not interested in other companies and deflecting the argument, this is about Adobe's pricing policies. I have to take responsibility for my own actions in life and not lay the blame, or excuses, elsewhere.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2008, 02:34:07 AM by Nick Walker » Logged

Andy M
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 333


WWW
« Reply #23 on: August 01, 2008, 03:06:51 AM »
ReplyReply

I'd love to hear how Adobe can even attempt to justify the 60%(!!!) price differential for the exact same product supplied to two differing markets, The US and The UK.

What's more, this is to their current customers - customers who have already invested in their product, and who - if like me - have constantly recommended it to fellow photographers, usually resulting in more sales.

There's zero justification, and it leaves a very sour taste...

Talk of Adobe not being a big company, and not in control of local pricing? Give me a break...  

Edited to add:

Quote
US software company Adobe Systems has reported a 41% jump in second-quarter profit thanks to robust demand from international markets

...

Adobe's net income in the three months to May 30 was $214.9m (£109m), up from $152m in the same quarter a year ago. The company added that sales were flat in the US.

Adobe said it expected revenue in the third quarter to be in a range of $855m to $885m.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7458296.stm
« Last Edit: August 01, 2008, 03:11:12 AM by Andy M » Logged
NikosR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 622


WWW
« Reply #24 on: August 01, 2008, 03:47:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Edited to add:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7458296.stm
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=212261\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

QED, I suppose...
Logged

Nikos
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5544


WWW
« Reply #25 on: August 01, 2008, 08:23:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Talk of Adobe not being a big company, and not in control of local pricing? Give me a break... 

Edited to add:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7458296.stm
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=212261\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Adobe is the 3rd largest software company (Oracle posted revenues of $1.3 billion) but when you compare them to MSFT at Q1 earnings of $14.7 billion, you'll see that with earnings of $214.9m Adobe is pretty small.

Yes, it's a "big" corporation in terms of computer software, but it's pretty small (tiny) to be considered a multi-national corporation.

Again, all of this info is publicly available should you care to know what you are talking about–which I encourage you to do if you want the 'fight" against unfair prices to go anywhere. But posting complaints on forums such as this or even the Adobe User to User forums won't do you any good if you want to bring about change. I suggest you go to the source of the problem–the regional country "office" and make your feelings know, en-mass. Otherwise, this is a useless exercise and all you're doing is playing with yourselves...
Logged
Andy M
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 333


WWW
« Reply #26 on: August 01, 2008, 10:24:43 AM »
ReplyReply

You think a company which has revenues of $3 BILLION, which has over 6,500 employees (mostly in The US) and is the 9th largest software companies in the world - you think that's 'small'?

The way to get the message over isn't to go on mass to Adobe's local offices, it's simply to not buy the product. Maybe then Adobe (who is obviously currently semi-reliant on foreign markets) will get the message?
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #27 on: August 01, 2008, 10:37:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You think a company which has revenues of $3 BILLION, which has over 6,500 employees (mostly in The US) and is the 9th largest software companies in the world - you think that's 'small'?

The way to get the message over isn't to go on mass to Adobe's local offices, it's simply to not buy the product. Maybe then Adobe (who is obviously currently semi-reliant on foreign markets) will get the message?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=212315\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Isn't that want diggy dog said earlier?
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6310


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #28 on: August 01, 2008, 11:28:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
... US software company Adobe Systems has reported a 41% jump in second-quarter profit thanks to robust demand from international markets...
Why would any company on Earth reduce its prices facing a 'robust demand'!? Apparently, not  enough whiners (except, perhaps, on this board   ) who are willing to 'put their money where their mouth is' (or, in this case, 'pull' their money).

Quote
... The way to get the message over isn't to go on mass to Adobe's local offices, it's simply to not buy the product. Maybe then Adobe (who is obviously currently semi-reliant on foreign markets) will get the message?...

Bingo! You got that one right. That is the only message companies in market economies understand.

But rest assured that Adobe has already gotten the message, though I am not sure you are going to like it. The message Adobe got from their international markets is: "Guys, thanks for the great product... your pricing strategy is good enough for us to buy even more of it and help you lift your profit by 41%... keep up the good work"
« Last Edit: August 01, 2008, 04:07:47 PM by slobodan56 » Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
mikeseb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 482



WWW
« Reply #29 on: August 01, 2008, 03:45:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Why would any company on Earth reduce its prices facing a 'robust demand'!? Apparently, not  enough whiners (except, perhaps, on this board   ) who are willing to 'put their money where their mouth is' (or, in this case, 'pull' their money).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=212345\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I love this! It takes a guy from formerly Communist eastern Europe to school the ignorant about market economics.

Slobodan, do you now realize that you are wasting your time trying to convince anyone? I admire your faith that logic will win out in an online forum. The level of economic ignorance, willful or otherwise, is appalling online.

Bottom line: the software is Adobe's private property, which they can sell at whatever price they want. They have no obligation to anyone, besides that to their shareholders to maximize the value of their shares. This is accomplished by selling the software as profitably as they can to as many customers as they can. Presumably, pissing off a great many customers with their pricing policies could affect their willingness to buy. One surmises they've taken this into account, and are happy with the current state of affairs.

This seems to be Jeff Schewe's point--if you don't like it, make your feelings known to the folks in charge of selling in your country.

Such threads as these are a total waste of server space.
Logged

michael sebastian
Website  |  Blog
ruraltrekker
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 69


« Reply #30 on: August 01, 2008, 04:44:42 PM »
ReplyReply

I remember when the first 1Ds was announced and many bitched about the 8k price tag
here we are 6 plus years later and it is still 8k

give it a rest. if you are doing anything serious with the software then the cost is pretty insigificant

ken
« Last Edit: August 01, 2008, 04:48:45 PM by ruraltrekker » Logged
bjanes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2882



« Reply #31 on: August 01, 2008, 05:16:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'd love to hear how Adobe can even attempt to justify the 60%(!!!) price differential for the exact same product supplied to two differing markets, The US and The UK.

What's more, this is to their current customers - customers who have already invested in their product, and who - if like me - have constantly recommended it to fellow photographers, usually resulting in more sales.

There's zero justification, and it leaves a very sour taste...

Talk of Adobe not being a big company, and not in control of local pricing? Give me a break... 

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=212261\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It is not unusual for the exact same or essentially equivalent products to have wide price differentials in various countries. For example gasoline (petrol) costs twice as much in many EU countries as in the USA. Some Europeans like to buy cameras in New York. Some of this differential may be justified by different costs of doing business in different countries. Import duties, government regulation, wage levels, availability of workers and taxes all may play a role. In addition, Adobe has to support multiple languages in some areas, and some of these markets may be small. I would imagine that the English versions are buy far the biggest sellers and thus cheaper to maintain relative to sales volume. Some countries do not respect intellectual property, which drives up the cost for legitimate users. Some countries are litigious and legal costs may be a factor. Microsoft is spending millions defending itself in the EU [but I can't say that I feel sorry for them ]

Bill
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5544


WWW
« Reply #32 on: August 01, 2008, 06:41:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
This seems to be Jeff Schewe's point--if you don't like it, make your feelings known to the folks in charge of selling in your country.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=212404\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Yes, exactly...Adobe US needs users in different countries/regions to make their feelings known IN THIER OWN COUNTIES that the local pricing sucks...
Logged
ksmed
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


WWW
« Reply #33 on: August 02, 2008, 08:52:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
They have no obligation to anyone, besides that to their shareholders to maximize the value of their shares. This is accomplished by selling the software as profitably as they can to as many customers as they can.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=212404\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, but then why not maximize profit even more and let all, US costumers included, download from the server in Ireland.  

Thanks Kjeld
Logged
mikeseb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 482



WWW
« Reply #34 on: August 02, 2008, 09:56:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Yes, but then why not maximize profit even more and let all, US costumers included, download from the server in Ireland.   

Thanks Kjeld
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=212542\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Because someone knowledgeable [ie, exactly NO ONE speculating/bitching here or elsewhere,] about Adobe's interests, considered as a whole, has determined that this procedure will not best serve the needs of the largest number of its customers in such a way that maximizes Adobe's profit. There's no ethical or moral reason they couldn't do just that, if in their view it would better serve customers--as they are able to determine this--and maximize their profits.

Understanding all this is really quite simple, folks, once you've discarded the socialist / collectivist notions that profits are evil; or that corporations exist merely to provide a pot of money to fund the aspirations of grabby governments or statist do-gooders.

Corporations are merely organizing structures. Their ONLY purpose is to harness the collective expertise of groups of people, and manage the flow of invested capital, towards the production of products or services customers want to buy, at a price that exceeds production cost by a large enough margin to ensure an acceptable return on invested capital.

Every other role heaped upon corporations by outsiders is little more than expropriation of private property, called by whatever name is in fashion at the moment.
Logged

michael sebastian
Website  |  Blog
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad