New Pricing Model ideas vs Yearly Subscription Model (edit)

Pining_for_17

Why are all of the subscription discussions "closed" when you search for them? If Quicken is proud of their model and believes that their subscription model adds value to customers, then it seems like a discussion about why someone should continue to subscribe would be of value? Perhaps there is a better way to win over consumers than forcing subscriptions? Let's help Quicken by making suggestions for a better model or perhaps, multiple models that don't involve an annual fee but still allows Quicken to make money and turn out a great product? I'll start:

Create a product is for sale that is a one time purchase, then charge in-app extras for features that some find valuable like online banking? This works well for the gaming industry!

Any other ideas?

Chris_QPW

First off, they close all the discussions that don't have any activity for a given period of time. They also close discussions that they feel are just argumentative.

You can suggest ideas for people to be voted on by going to the Home page and selecting New Post → New Idea. That is how Quicken Inc sees if any given idea has enough customer support to be worth their trouble.

jacobs

I'll start: Create a product is for sale that is a one time purchase, then charge in-app extras for features that some find valuable like online banking? This works well for the gaming industry!

I understand the desire for such a pricing model, but I just can't see it working. Let's assume that at current prices, Quicken is not rolling in massive profits, but is making enough income to cover its operating expenses and generate enough profit to satisfy the venture cap fund which owns it. So a new pricing model would need to be more or less revenue neutral. In your suggestion, lots of people would buy the perpetual license in year one, but then let's look at years two and three and beyond: fewer people would be paying for the optional online services. So that means they would need to charge even more than they do today for the majority who want to download transactions and make bill payments, because those people would have to make up for the loss of income from the users who opt not to download transactions. The higher annual cost would drive some users away, reducing the customer base, requiring more price increases, leading to a death spiral.

Chris_QPW

BTW a couple of things.

1. They already had an "offline only" version and dropped it because it wasn't worth it to them.
2. They had both Rental property edition (which was extra and had everything in every other edition) and they had Home and Business which as the next step down. They got rid of the Home and Business and just went to selling the Rental as if it as just Home and Business (same price as old Home and Business). So, just maintaining about "edition" wasn't worth the cost.
3. This works well for the gaming industry! → I have the experience of looking at this be very profitable to the game companies. It is basically based on this fact, if you want to get ahead you have to pay. They are aways changing the game so that you need more "things". Your suggestion to make it better cost wise for you, is to be able to pay for the "features you need" and stop. I can't think of anything that would bankrupt Quicken Inc faster other than giving it away free.

Pining_for_17

I have been a Mac quicken user since 1992 and have data back 22 years, so I am quite familiar with their offerings. "I can't think of anything that would bankrupt Quicken Inc faster other than giving it away free." simply does not make since in the context of this thread.

I never suggested "giving it away free." Some games are free, true, but with many games you pay for the basic game and then can pay for extra features (more guns and ammo, for example.) If you have experience in the gaming industry as you suggest, you would know that there is a single main game code thread with hidden options (code block or modules) that could be unlocked, not multiple editions. I am suggesting paying for basic features (e.g. offline) and add-on subscriptions for those that value those extra feature. Nearly every industry has similar models. Think about the auto industry for example; they sell a base model, and then offer up-sell packages. Some of those packages are even subscriptions, like map updates, satellite radio, etc. Tesla has a code unlock for sale to accelerate faster! Quicken used to do this as well. Subscribing to a check service, for example.

Obviously I am NOT looking for your glib suggestion to bankrupt quicken, I am looking for a model that allows quicken to make money off of those loyal customers that do not like the idea of subscriptions to perhaps even pay more for a base product, but not have the annual subscription. Users WILL update as they need patches or new versions that run on new hardware, especially if Quicken adds value and features that users want an need.

jacobs

I am looking for a model that allows quicken to make money off of those loyal customers that do not like the idea of subscriptions to perhaps even pay more for a base product, but not have the annual subscription. Users WILL update as they need patches or new versions that run on new hardware, especially if Quicken adds value and features that users want an need.

@Pining_for_17 I just don't understand how the economics of what you're suggesting would work. They would need to charge a LOT for the initial non-subscription version… which wouldn't be competitive with other products on the market… which wouldn't sell to many users.

The question is: do you expect to pay less over time? If yes, that means Quicken has less income over time. Why would they do that? Or do you feel you'll pay the same amount over time (for initial purchase and for upgrades)? That would give Quicken the same revenue… but if everyone is paying the same amount in chunks every few years rather than evenly every year, why would they do that?

Also, keep in mind that for decades, they sold a new version of the product every year. It worked for three years with online services, then continued to work for manual entry, but people needed to buy a new version to continue to have any online services. They moved away from that pricing model because there were multiple flaws with it; I don't think there's any chance they'd move back to something similar.

Can you devise a pricing scheme which would work better for users and not adversely affect the company? I don't think you can, because "work better for users" means users would pay less over time, which means Quicken would have less revenue over time, which would lead to less investment in the product, which would lead to people not paying to upgrade. (Sort of what happened at the tail end of being owned by Intuit!) Or perhaps they'd curtail support (remember when Intuit eliminated phone support entirely?). Or if you're advocating for a less expensive option for users who don't want online services, that loss of revenue would require them to raise the price for those who do subscribe to online services. The higher price would drive some people away, which would require still-higher prices for a smaller customer base, and so on until the death spiral runs its course. How would you propose to be revenue neutral for the company without customers collectively paying the same amount over time?

Chris_QPW

I don't think you understood what I was saying.

In a game there are endless "options" to add, because they have constructed the games that way, and they are "easy to create".

In personal finance there are just a limited number of features that anyone would want, and they are a lot harder to develop than a "new token" you buy to get ahead in a game.

And let's face it, you came in here basically to complain about the price of Quicken. And you are suggesting a model that you hope to pay less with. I get that, but guess what? Quicken Inc is looking for the opposite, how to increase revenue not reduce it.

The "gaming model" can't be applied to Quicken and make more revenue. They can't endlessly sell Quicken users easy to create "features/tokens/bullets".

Pining_for_17

"And let's face it, you came in here basically to complain about the price of Quicken"

Nope. I have Quicken CDs going back 3 decades and have bought them all. I simply prefer to pay upfront and not be tied into subscriptions, EVEN if it costs me more upfront. (Sort of a Dave Ramsey approach?) You are certainly defending the subscription model, but I am merely trying to discuss alternatives.

I think you are missing my points. Toyota sells low end cars like Corollas, and had sports cars, minivans, etc and STILL ADDED Lexus to their line up. They did not STOP selling Toyotas. Their goal is to get you to stay in the family and upgrade from Corolla to a Camry, then onto Lexus. Jacobs suggested that they tried that model then switched. Yes, they switched model. I am suggesting that they ADD to the model. I do believe it would be more revenue in the long run, not less. Get the basic functionality in the hand of younger users. As they grow, add budgeting, add investments, add mobile, as options. Online banking could be a subscription model add on. You don't need ENDLESS options ("features/tokens/bullets") to add on, just valuable ones.

Offer a cash on the barrel model, even if more expensive, for those that prefer that option. I DO believe that if you make a superior product, people will come back, even if it costs more. For example, I am typing this on my Mac, which is not the cheapest option out there, but I pay more for what many perceive as value. Trying to lock people into subscriptions is more of a gym membership ploy, let's keep it there.

BTW, even though Microsoft sells O365, they still sell a stand alone version of office.

jacobs

@Pining_for_17 Since I find this an interesting discussion of business strategies, let me add a few responses…

Toyota sells low end cars like Corollas, and had sports cars, minivans, etc and STILL ADDED Lexus to their line up. They did not STOP selling Toyotas. Their goal is to get you to stay in the family and upgrade from Corolla to a Camry, then onto Lexus. Jacobs suggested that they tried that model then switched. Yes, they switched model. I am suggesting that they ADD to the model. 

But Toyota and other car manufacturers adopted that strategy strictly in order to sell more cars. They had the starter car, and they added higher end cars to keep their users in the family as they got older and had more money to spend on finer vehicles. What you're asking for is for Quicken to start with the current high-end product and to now offer stripped down lower-end versions. I just don't see how that would drive any increase in sales. Especially since they invested in creating their lower-priced Simplifi product to attract a newer (and presumably younger) generation of users who welcome an online-only product. If Quicken offered a stand-alone, non-subscription version of Quicken Classic, I only see it cutting their revenue, not adding to it.

Offer a cash on the barrel model, even if more expensive, for those that prefer that option.

I think you're in a small minority who would be happy to pay more for a non-subscription version of Quicken. A Quicken Deluxe subscription now costs $70/year. So if they sold a stand-alone version assuming most people wouldn't pay to upgrade for at least three years, they'd have to charge $200 or so for a stand-alone copy. (Microsoft perpetual licenses sell for 4x the annual price.) For long-time users who were used to buying it for $30 or $50 a year, I just don't see that selling to more than a small number of users.

Let's also not lose sight of the fact that they used to have three "annual" versions they had to continue to support. So that meant when a bug fix was developed, they had to go back into at least three versions of code (or more if it was a fix affecting both Mac and Windows versions) to integrate the code fix, to compile it and test it to make sure they didn't break anything in the process. It took a lot of time away from the development teams to have to support multiple years of products. So unless you propose that they sell a stand-alone copy with no updates after purchase — which is not user-friendly and would surely draw protest from people paying a premium price — they'd be taking a step backwards into a development problem they've rid themselves of. (Just imagine calling support 6 months after your premium purchase to find out that you have Verizon 7.5.2, and the problem you've run into was fixed in version 7.6.4, but you can't get it because you're not a subscriber.) and because they'd want past stand-alone purchasers to upgrade periodically, they'd be back in the business of dreaming up splashy features to try to lure purchasers as they did in the old days, rather than keeping their development teams focused on what they think are the most useful, desirable fixes and new features.

Trying to lock people into subscriptions is more of a gym membership ploy, let's keep it there. BTW, even though Microsoft sells O365, they still sell a stand alone version of office.

Microsoft sells stand-alone copies, but many software developers now don't. Adobe, which sells much higher-priced software than Quicken, went to subscriptions only. I used to use Adobe software at work, but don't since retiring. I'd pay to buy a stand-alone version of Adobe software I could use for 5+ years, but it's too expensive for me to pay for a subscription as just a light hobbyist user. So Adobe lost me as a potential customer… and I don't think they care, because they locked in their core users to ongoing subscriptions with more and steadier revenue. And lots of other software companies use the Software As A Service model, so you have annual subscriptions for cloud storage services (Dropbox, iCloud), backup services (iDrive, Backblaze) just like you do for Internet service and streaming services. I don't think the SaaS subscription model is going away, and will likely only take over software more over time. It's not just for gym memberships.

Quicken is a small company, so each separate product they need to put on the market, from locking down the code and releasing it to packaging it and managing retail sales, takes more effort comparatively than it does for a behemoth like Microsoft. It would not be a trivial effort for them to offer both subscription and stand-alone versions, and I think the disadvantages to them far, far outweigh the benefits to a small number of users who would pay a large premium for a non-subscription copy of the software.

Jim_Harman

One difference between a software product and autos is that software requires ongoing support by the provider in order to keep it working and thus has ongoing costs. Without regular updates, the software will lose features and/or stop working entirely over time.

Using your Toyota example, you could have bought a Corolla in 2004 and changed the oil yourself and it will still be running 20 or more years later. You can still buy gas and tires for it. It is still compatible with the roads that it runs on.

But with software, the operating system in 2004 would have been Windows XP. Unless you never cared about online access, that software and the computer it runs on would be useless today.

Do you think Corolla customers would be happy if the car they bought in 2004 would not start or could now only be used to drive up and down their driveway?

Ps56k2

Create a product for sale that is a one time purchase,
then charge in-app extras for features that some find valuable like online banking?
This works well for the gaming industry!

SO - create a "Starter" manual version with most all features stripped out…. is this your idea ?
Just looking at some Quicken Tabs - and strip out all these functions - and make them "extras" -
- Online downloading of any kind
- Investments (like with Starter)
- Most Reports (add more with Deluxe or Premier)
- Business & Rental (current HB)
- Tax Planner
- Spending graphics screens
- Manual Bills & Income Reminders
- Planning - Budgets - Goals
- Mobile App & Web access (Quicken Cloud)
- etc…

Jim_Harman

Another idea would be to offer multi-year renewal subscriptions at a discounted price, much the way traditional magazines do. That would be a way to reward committed customers, and Quicken would get the money up front.

Chris_QPW

@Pining_for_17 said:

I think you are missing my points. 

And I think you are missing my main point. The most important part of this for Quicken Inc's profit.

So, far I have seen nothing proposed that would increase, or even keep it the same, only proposes that would reduce it.

You can talk about car companies and such all you want, don't know much about that, but I do know software. I have been doing it for 40+ years. Every "if than, and but" costs money. They cost money in the implementation, they cost money in maintaining them, and they cost money in support.

And you can't compare Quicken's features to game features that can be created basically by changing some data in a database and maybe making some new images. This reminds me of managers that wanted to use "lines of code" to judge developers. A guy working on GUI might be using a tool or such and turn out a hundred lines of codes in a blink of an eye. A "systems" programmer might spend weeks on one page of code.

Tell me the features that will keep you buying every year.

You have this assumption that there is "always more to buy". I buy a really nice desk I love it, it perfect for me. Am I going to keep buying more desks from the manufacture? No, I'm done was long as that desk keeps serving the purpose. You seem to think there is an endless list of features that can be added to Quicken in a cost-effective manner. I don't. Is Quicken missing some features, yes? Are they profitable? That is the real question.

If you talk "online features", then you are talking subscription because you need to pay for the ongoing costs.

If you are talking offline, then you run out of profitable features really quickly.

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20426568#Comment_20426568

I think one has to remember that Quicken Inc started out with 2-year subscriptions and dropped that. Clearly, they didn't think it was worth it.

Ps56k2

more and more - everyone wants the Free App or program to run… browser, email, etc

Sets the bar - but then, think about your various monthly “utilities” - cellular has changed, what about cable bundles or cutting cord and just doing streaming - Every service is trying different tactics to react to customers wanting cheaper products… just include ADS in viewing, etc

BK

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20426568#Comment_20426568

@Jim_Harman , I like and support you idea - of course that's how Quicken somewhat used to be for a while, right? Unfortunately, every one of my favorite magazines that had that model went out of business. One of them switched back to annually, increased the price and halved the # of issues!

I hear what the OP is saying and topics like this pop up frequently. IMO one of the reasons that we read about issues introduced at various releases is lack of proper funding to attract talent. The product meets my needs, there is nothing this comprehensive out there and well worth the money for me.

Chris_QPW

BTW I have yet to see anyone suggest that they would pay extra to get any of this, it is always "at a discount" or at best the same price "starting price", but not have to pay for a subscription. That comes out to a loss for Quicken. Where are the suggestions to pay what Quicken Inc would have made off of you if you paid for the subscription for all the same years?

According to @Pining_for_17 somehow the base price that people are willing to pay plus paying for "extras/new features" will somehow be better. I see that, but it is only better for the users, not for Quicken Inc.

For anyone one where the driving force of keeping Quicken isn't an online service. I can't really name a single feature that wasn't already in Quicken 2013. Can you?

Jim_Harman

For anyone one where the driving force of keeping Quicken isn't an online service. I can't really name a single feature that wasn't already in Quicken 2013. Can you?

We may disagree about how popular, complete, and bug-free they are, but here are some non-online features that are new since 2017, as reported in the Release Notes. Note that several of these are for Premier and up only, which helps to distinguish between Deluxe and Premier.

• New "Modern" Home tab dashboard
• Lifetime overview report
• Crypto support (8 decimal places)
• Investment partnership support
• Simple investing mode
• Ability to change the account type between traditional, Roth, and other types of IRAs
• Income by Security report
• RSU support
• Additional asset classes
• Additional Portfolio views
• "Affects investment performance" option for advisor fees
• "Buy and Hold" option in Growth of $10,000 chart
• Move and archive investment transactions

Chris_QPW

@Jim_Harman note I personally think they have added/changed quite a bit, but my question is really more like would any of these features be enough for you to buy it every year to get these features?

I think there are ones there for "some people" like crypto and RSU, but I can't see how that would be enough to pay for the loss of revenue that the subscription brings. Or put it a different way, there is 7 years from 2017 to 2024, can you pick out 7 things from your list that you would pay extra for? And would that come up to what you would have paid for 7 years of subscription?

In truth I would bet that a good part of the cost of Quicken is in fact the supporting of online features, and that most of that is pretty much a fixed cost. Other than the fear that if one doesn't keep up with the latest version their software might stop working, the online features and support are what people pay for, and they all have ongoing costs, that a one-time purchase wouldn't capture unless it was really high.

BTW at least for the Windows users, the "fear it won't work on the newest operating system" hasn't really come true. I can run Quicken 6 (as in 1996) on Windows 11, with the only problems being printer and help. Maybe if Microsoft did the same thing Apple did and stopped supporting 32-bit, but guess what? That would kill Quicken Windows period. As discussed before there just isn't any way Quicken Windows can go to 64-bit without a total rewrite.