Arnox
Well-known member
I do love all the screenshots of the software that their website doesn't have.
195$ is a brazen, overpriced pricepoint for xenforo
- Thread starter Smartea
- Start date
I do love all the screenshots of the software that their website doesn't have.
JamesBrown
Well-known member
We moan about the slow pace of development but starve them of funds. :doh: If I ran xf, then to encourage renewals I'd implement a rising scale...Let it lapse once and I'd make renewal 30% pricier, let it lapse twice 60%, let it lapse 3 times, buy a new licence. But that's just me
Suzanne O
Well-known member
Invision is too expensive
Opus X
Well-known member
depends on what you need.
i think my friend paid more than what invision costs for all his plug ins and xenforo.
and his yearly renewals are more than invision charge from what he posts in the staff area.
CedricV
Well-known member
Agreed.We moan about the slow pace of development but starve them of funds. :doh: If I ran xf, then to encourage renewals I'd implement a rising scale...Let it lapse once and I'd make renewal 30% pricier, let it lapse twice 60%, let it lapse 3 times, buy a new licence. But that's just me
That’s what Invision has been saying. Why should customers who pay once every two/three years, get the updates and benefits like a normal paying customer who renews yearly?
I suspect many are here because they believe in the product XenForo. Then why not support them by renewing yearly as you should? I think everyone renews subscriptions on YT, Spotify, whatever streaming you have. So why not XF?
mjda
Well-known member
While I wouldn't mind it if it was a requirement to renew annually, it's not comparable to YT, Spotify, etc. With those services, you're paying monthly, most likely, because you continue to use those services on a monthly basis. For the case of XF, some folks don't/can't upgrade their sites every time a new version comes out, for a number of different reasons, I'm sure. Why would someone want to pay for something they aren't going to use?
Me, for example, I have a few sites that I keep up-to-date. I update those sites, typically, within a few days, or weeks, of a new release. I'm behind one release now, one of those sites, because this is the busiest time of year for my site but later this month it will be updated. For that reason, both of those sites will almost always have a current license. A few others I don't really update until I see a need to. So, if my license expires during a time I don't feel it necessary to update, why would I want to pay for an extension when it expires, versus when I'm ready to update? If I wait, then I'm extended for a year from when I update, saving me some money in the long run. Finally, one of my licenses isn't even currently tied to a site. Why would I want to pay to update that license when I'm not even using it?
In my opinion, the onus is on the devs to continue to develop XF with new features, and updates, that admins want/need. If they do that, folks will keep their licenses up-to-date just because there's value there. Those other software companies, if they're having to force license renewals, it's probably because they aren't continuing to add enough to the software for the cost to be worth it and admins running that software would rather just not upgrade their sites. They should be asking why don't our users want to upgrade their sites to our latest versions, rather than how can we force them to give us their money anyways.
MySiteGuy
Well-known member
I think this is a nonsense idea because you haven't gotten the benefit of those updates during those 2-3 years. This would be like a drive company charging you more to upgrade to a newer SSD drive because you skipped out on two prior versions. It's petty.
Last edited:
Dragonfruit
Well-known member
So if I have none of those, then I don't have to? Because I don't do subscriptions, of anything. I don't have Netflix either.
Renewing annually isn't just updates, it's also for Support. Some of us are perfectly capable of supporting ourselves so we don't need to renew constantly.
Suzanne O
Well-known member
No i quoted the right person.
Because you were talking about cloud as a subscription.
Others in here are moaning due to being fickle about helping a legitimate small business out.
Dragonfruit
Well-known member
You're talking to a wall there.
Anthony Parsons
Well-known member
I have. From when they opened, the legal quagmire, buying lots of licenses and extras, paying developers to write early stuff when XF just hit the market, and made available for everyone to use, etc etc. I have put $10k - $15k directly into XF itself and surrounding XF early addon development. I don't appreciate being told by someone to support XF every year. I don't upgrade my forum every year... when I do, I renew XF and all addons to upgrade my site, then I likely will leave it sit another couple of years before further upgrade. Why? Because users don't like constant upgrades where things go wrong. Users like stability, so I do a major upgrade and then leave the site alone for user benefit.
I don't want much from XF, beyond a stable product that meets consumer demands at that time, for a reasonable price. XF was created because of the nonsense the industry was doing then, VB especially, horrible software by continually adding user suggestions which bloated it into oblivion and made it very clunky and server intensive to use. XF kicked all that to the curb... addons exist for good reason, whether official or third party.
Arantor
Well-known member
That’s because if you can afford it, you can take the time to get a demo from their sales reps.
Arnox
Well-known member
Or I could just view some screenshots. I mean, why do they even have a website at all with that kind of thinking? If you don't know about how amazing Khoros is, then you're obviously too poor.
Sal Collaziano
Well-known member
I must admit I did go look at their website to learn more about their product. I'd kinda like to know why they charge such a premium. But since there was no way to see the product at that moment, I gave up and forgot about it until now.
I have a feeling it's a piece of software sold for ridiculous amounts of money - specifically for organizations that either need to fulfill a budget requirement (for tax purposes) or for those who only purchase the most expensive option assuming it's better.
Arnox
Well-known member
I think I know why. They can charge a premium because they have a bunch of security and compliance certifications, which checks a big corporate box. Oftentimes, software is incredibly expensive like that because they are doing all the work and are jumping through all the regulatory hoops. Since a lot of software makers aren't going to do that, that leaves few options for groups that require certifications.
