• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


662 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

4734 profile views
  1. This might actually be intended as small time users add very little value, in general, to the company
  2. This is an amazing option for smaller businesses. If I have a single house to design I can factor in the cost of the rental into the design fees. And if a business can't afford that, again, the business is simply not viable.
  3. EXACTLY. CAD design software from a company that intends to provide a professional tool for professional users cannot accommodate' low-level businesses and it's the low-level businesses that provide Chief with no revenue. Chief has accommodated low-level businesses for far too long and thier business cannot tolerate that user any longer.
  4. The point is that a business should be designed to include the cost of the tools required to perform that business.
  5. Then you reevaluate the business and consider the amount of business done currently and the amount of business forecast for the future and the cost of the software needed to keep doing business. If you can't (don't want to) afford the cost of the software needed to do your business then you might be in the wrong business. One could even set aside a special small business account (a sinking fund) with a meager deposit of $50 a month which would cover the cost of the current yearly SSA fees. If the business cannot set aside $50 a month then that business is probably not a viable business as currently structured.
  6. I get the frustration but the analogy is flawed and points out the problem with software businesses. Unlike other hard goods like cars and washing machines that eventually wear out and need to be replaced, software doesn't only last a long time but sometimes, and in your case perhaps, it lasts forever. Maybe there will be a change in operating systems or something that will force an upgrade but your copy of X11 (as well as others' copies of X12, X13, and X14) will never wear out and never need replacing so software companies never realize the revenue from legacy products that really never wear out and never need to be replaced. Not saying anyone should be happy with the change but the reality of the software business leaves those companies with few options to maintain a revenue stream. I've got X14 and will pay the $600 (and certainly to go up) SSA fee when it comes due in June and be sure to include that cost in the cost of running my business.
  7. The price research is much appreciated but those are apples and Chief is oranges. I have absolutely no use for Revit or ArchiCad or AutoCAD as my business is focused on small residential remodels and the occasional new home. I simply wouldn't use Revit or any of the others shown even if they were free. Doesn't make any of the programs bad but one has to know and understand their business niche as Chief does, and has over the years. Will new users who are focused on small residential remodels understand that Chief might be a better choice than otherCAD? No way to know, but that's the concern of the higher ups in Chief and for some reason, even though the demise of Chief has been predicted many times on this forum (not in this thread so much) because they aren't Revit et al and should gear the software towards bigger more commercial projects, they, as have I, stayed focused on the market niche they are best at and continue as a going concern. I'll give this news 3 months tops before the hubbub dies and we all get back to work and wishing you all the best and success no matter your choices.
  8. This is the same problem all software companies face when their software becomes so capable there's no longer any need to upgrade, or in this case renew the SSA contract. Think of Microsoft Word or Excel. They have been way more than capable for 95% of their users for a decade at least giving user no need to upgrade - ever - giving the software company no renewal revenue. It's bad business model. One thing this change might bring about, from Chief's top line revenue at least, is it may encourage (force?) current users to renew their SSA and keep renewing their SSA to avoid the subscription costs and provide CA with their needed monthly/yearly revenue.
  9. I think that if your design pricing will increase (4n) over your current pricing because the price of the software you use will increase $00.00 after you renew your SSA and that somehow that will increase your design fees by (4n)? Not getting the logic, or perhaps the business model needs a closer look.
  10. I'm pretty sure the policy does not consider whether or not someone sells their company.
  11. This IMO is a very important point. The good folks at CA have not taken this step lightly and without a great amount of thought to the consequences of their decision but to a new user the choice is not as easy as it is for me or other long time users to continue with our SSA. To the new user. "Why Chief?" "Why not (insert other CAD here)?" Is Chief compelling enough for first time users who will have little to no understanding of its power and focus on smaller residential construction? "Oh wait, I can buy Revit, or SoftPlan or... for the same price and this review or that review says they are better than Chief." So again, why Chief for the first time user/buyer? Like as has been stated Chief has not taken this step lightly and must have asked themselves the same questions but if it were me, and I was just beginning and knew little to nothing about design software and how it might work in my business I would look elsewhere with the new subscription pricing model. Would I choose Chief after that look elsewhere? Dunno. Really don't know.
  12. Pretty sure we should not be surprised that CA is going to a subscription model versus one time purchase (with its associated SSA renewals) as this is really the only way for modern software companies to stay in business. The phenomenon is clearly illustrated by posts in this thread alluding to users who are still using older versions with no intention of upgrading and most importantly no future income for CA from those users. Subscriptions, as distasteful as they can be, are the only modern solution to modern software business models. I see a few comparisons to the cost of Revit, or ACAD and Archicad but the comparisons are not comparing apples to apples IMO. If Revit et al is a better fit for your business model then the price is not important and becomes a line item in your cost of doing business. If Chief fits your business model then the same applies. And that's the big question. Does either the SSA or the new subscription model fit your business model? Do you design 250 homes a year like Joshua above? In that case the cost of CA (or any competitor) is no more than $10 - $15 per house (depending on number of licenses of course) and can be absorbed easily. One or 2 houses a year then the equation changes but any of the CAD design software should not place a burden cost-wise on a well itemized business model. Don't have enough money set aside when SSA comes up for renewal? Why not? Can't afford the subscription model? Why not? Those costs should be anticipated, built into the business model, and paid with funds set aside for just that purpose. None of that makes software subscriptions good or bad but they are a reality in todays world and have to be accounted for when costing design jobs.
  13. Probably over kill but so is a Ram TRX and a Raptor 'R' but also probably a lot of fun - for a price. Let us know what you end up with please.