+1-888-365-2779
Try Now
More in this section

Forums / General Discussions / Sitefinity 4.0 Pricing WAY TOO HIGH

Sitefinity 4.0 Pricing WAY TOO HIGH

70 posts, 0 answered
  1. Ben Alexandra
    Ben Alexandra avatar
    215 posts
    Registered:
    15 Sep 2012
    11 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    HI,

    I just went to your new 4.0 Pricing Page and am blown away by how expensive you are making it

    I really like that you have a version for $499 (although for what you get, even that seems a bit high), but I have lots of sites that are 80-125 pages and would have to pay TWO THOUSAND dollars for a licence.  There's no way that will fly with my clients, many of whom are non-profits with tight budgets (especially in this economy)!

    The other problem is you don't have any developer pricing where we get discounts if we have all our clients on your product.  There should, as I suggested a while ago in a ticket, be a model where we can buy a developer license and then be able to buy domain licenses at a substantial discount.  Below is the email i sent (based on your $899 pricing model).

    Since we have been using Sitefinity for a couple of years we actually have very little in the way of support requirements and when we do have a question that you answer, we can apply that knowledge or fix to all our clients, saving you time and money.
     
    This is the reason to have a developer license, but I understand that when you have a developer license you don't get paid per domain, just per developer.  Might I suggest that with your 4.x model you implement something in between your old and your new model that would work for people like us.
     
    I'm thinking of some sort of a developer license that is a per-year fee (maybe similar to your old model of $1,250 to buy and half that to renew each year) and then a much reduced fee per license.  That way you can keep your per top-level domain licensing but also not lose your shirt on the support.
     
    Let's say that you offered 60% off each domain and support had to go through the developer then a developer would need to buy at least 3 domains before they were saving any money ( (1250+360+360+360)/3) = $777 per domain.  This would, however, make your developers very happy, if they are looking to move more clients to your platform.
     
    If a client wanted to move away and take their licence and no longer be under me as the developer, they would need to purchase the difference in the support & upgrades contract from you directly.  Otherwise they would be on their own.

    Now that you are charging at least $2,000 for anyone who wants a real site using Sitefinity,  the above model might need to be changed.  I don't see how I can possibly stay with Telerik & Sitefinity if these are really the prices and I hope you reconsider your pricing model!

    Thanks

    Ben Alexandra
    (Longtime Sitefinity & Telerik User)
  2. Phill Hodgkinson
    Phill Hodgkinson avatar
    362 posts
    Registered:
    10 Nov 2004
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Wow, I couldn't agree more!! Telerik/Sitefinity has just lost a very loyal customer.

    The ideal usage and target client for me requires the Standard license (unlimited pages being the key) but for $2,000 there's no way in hell my clients would pay that nor would I ever recommend that to a client. 

    I know a developer has to make their money back on time spent developing, so the best of luck to you Telerik, but you won't be getting my $ anymore unless there is a serious change to your pricing model.

    Disappointed to have waited over a year for SF4 only to find out it's been priced out of my range...

    So, any recommendations on competitive products that don't break the bank? Umbraco? 

    Bye bye...
    Phill
  3. Ben Alexandra
    Ben Alexandra avatar
    215 posts
    Registered:
    15 Sep 2012
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Thanks for the reply, Phill.  Well put.  We all love Sitefinity's product and 4.0 looks great, but they are way off on their pricing.  Let's hope they reconsider.  Otherwise yes, I am looking at Umbraco and other free or much cheaper ASP.NET alternatives.

    Good luck!

    Ben
  4. Jason
    Jason avatar
    18 posts
    Registered:
    23 Jun 2006
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    As a long time user of Sitefinity I was pretty dissapointed after the Webinar today. I was mostly interested in pricing. When I work on larger projects I often ask my clients to get a license to RadControls for any other developers on the project.

    My anticipation was that there would be some (reasonably priced) model for those of us that do many sites. A server license or another type of developer license.

    This model really pushes the pricing up for any reasonable site from 899 to 2000 and for a busines that will have 6 or 7 people adding content on it during a given day, it's now pushed up to 8000! Dissapointing.

    I would, at minimum, prefer to see the idea of 'concurrent users' and 'limited pages' removed. I can see features, like the forms builder, or workflow left out of the lower priced editions, but page limits?

    Just downloaded a copy of Umbraco and will be checking that out today. It's a shame to see that Kentico is now a better deal price-wise than Sitefinity.
  5. Jaime Weise
    Jaime Weise avatar
    120 posts
    Registered:
    02 Nov 2008
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Nolonger supports Sitefinity or Telerik
    The cost of the tools per seat are too expensive too. It was okay with a fair priced cms but this is ridiculous. 

    My excitement about SF has turned to sh@%!
  6. raj
    raj avatar
    9 posts
    Registered:
    27 Jun 2012
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post

    I couldn't agree more. Sitefinity has got this pricing absolutely wrong. Even after lets say if one pays $2000 there is a restriction like 5 concurrent users. Just does not make sense. We have clients where in there are different people managing different stuff and they all just keep signed in all day. Sitefinity needs to rethink their pricing or else they are loosing one more valuable customer and many more future projects.

    How can we even propose to customers to upgrade current sitefinity projects to 4.0 by paying more and get restrictions like concurrent admin users etc which they are not use to as such restrictions are not there in current version of 3.7. My company has already started discussions of positioning other cms for future prospects. I am really disappointed. I loved sitefinity and want it to be very successful. SITEFINITY RETHINK PRICING STRUCTURE.
  7. Ben Alexandra
    Ben Alexandra avatar
    215 posts
    Registered:
    15 Sep 2012
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    I agree, Raj et. al with what you are saying.  I would like to reassure Sitefinity, though, that we all love your product and I am pretty sure we ALL want to stay with you so please don't take these comments the wrong way in regards to the product.  This is strictly us being realistic about what we can pay and what our clients can pay.  To go from a product that costs $900 in version 3.7 for the full package to one that costs $20,000 for the full version in 4.0 is just crazy!!!  I know you've redesigned it all and added new features but that's a 22X increase overnight!  This might be great for your new customers who are looking for a "high-end" (aka expensive) CMS and you are positioning yourself in that arena, but you are going to alienate your ENTIRE existing user base that you have worked so hard to cultivate over the past 5+ years.

    Please reconsider!

    Thanks

    Ben
  8. Steve
    Steve avatar
    3037 posts
    Registered:
    03 Dec 2008
    13 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    I think you guys are way off, read Vassils responses in the other post, you are getting a TON of things for the $2000 price tag.  You only need to go $8000 premium if you need advanced workflow, and I really doubt almost anyone but the corporate of corporates needs the source code for the $20,000.

    I initially had sticker shock as well, but sitting back and really thinking about it, the SBE fits all my needs for a small business project.  I'm just holding out hope that they give 2 concurrent users on that license...so following that I can sell 4.0 to clients at almost 1/2 the price I do now.  If I'm going for a larger client then that I think I can sell them on standard just by showing them the page editor which blows away anything on the market right now.

    5 Concurrent users means 5 people editing pages, not 5 logged in site users...I can see that being fine in a standard edition...UNLESS the page editing is so cool more people want to play with it.
  9. Jaime Weise
    Jaime Weise avatar
    120 posts
    Registered:
    02 Nov 2008
    13 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    This will kill our company
    We have been walking around talking about how great Telerik was for the last 18 months. How are we going to explain this doubling in price to our clients when we were talking about a $1000 for the best version last month? Please take off the 8,000 and 20,000 dollar versions and replace it with a call for enquiry.  The perception is now that they pay twice as much and get a version that is missing good stuff. 

  10. Steve
    Steve avatar
    3037 posts
    Registered:
    03 Dec 2008
    13 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    ...but what are you missing with standard?

    Windows Workflow 4 and 5 more concurrent backend page editing users?...literally that's all...if you consider the base to be the $8000 premium, then the $2000 is a bargain.

    Do you NEED to pay $8,000 or $20,000?
  11. John S.
    John S. avatar
    126 posts
    Registered:
    09 Aug 2004
    13 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    I know $1000 is a substantial amount of money on a personal level; however, for a business to throw their hands in the air for this seems unreasonable. If all someone looks at is the price and wants the most expensive because for some reason they think they may need everything in it someday, then it now becomes a sales job to explain that they don't. Futhermore in alot of cases there is a good chance a verison that is actually cheaper and has considerable new features may work. Personally, I don't want to have to enquire. I just want to know what the price is.


  12. Chanan Zass
    Chanan Zass avatar
    123 posts
    Registered:
    21 Aug 2012
    13 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Seems to me Telerik's target audience has changed. Simple as that.
    The new pricing policy aims at larger software houses and larger corporations.
    For us mortal beings a $2,000 or $5,000 price tags translate into $20,000 to $50,000 projects we would have to try selling to potential clients. How many companies are likely to buy that?
    If I were to dump my old Volvo and go buy a new one, I'm sure I'd have a price range in mind based on what I paid a few years back. If then I'd learn that price range could buy me only a two-seater with a 10,000 mile annual limit, I'd understand that the Volvo company has other customers in mind.
    These are marketing decisions.
    We now have to deal with it.
  13. Ian
    Ian avatar
    3 posts
    Registered:
    12 Aug 2008
    13 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    I agree I have just quoted 4 customers on Sitefinity which to be honest I am going to have to reconsider. We already apply a rule that budget sites below a certain cost we use Wordpress for and that price band has now changed!

    Ridiculous!

    Are the Radcontrols going to go the same way.

  14. thelyrist
    thelyrist avatar
    16 posts
    Registered:
    18 May 2007
    13 Nov 2010
    Link to this post

    I have developed numerous sites with sitefinity.  I mostly deal with small businesses with a small budget.  My clients don't usually have more than 100 pages in the sites.  I guess telerik isn't targeting this segment at all.

    I have built several sitefinity standard for the clients who can afford it (and they have renewed for a couple of years already.), but there are also some small businesses and start-ups those cannot afford (or simply refuse) to pay more than $1,000 for a web project.

    While I understand telerik is not a charity and sitefinity is better than the open source alternatives out there.  I am not asking you to provide the product for free, but would you consider an "express" edition that is $199 and requires the display of telerik's / sitefinity's logo? Many clients do not actually mind the logo that much.  You can keep the $499 small business edition for those companies who have slightly better budget.  For the clients who used the standard edition, I guess they will have to settle with the small business edition--they simply won't agree to pay $2,000 for a new license.  The renewal would probably cost more anyway.

    With many good enough and free open source products out there, it is hard to recommend even the$499 small business edition, especially considering the restrictions it has.  I wish I can tell them that they can't get a decent CMS with a $1,000 budget, but there are actually many solution providers who can deliver a decent product at that price.  

    Sitefinity has been the CMS of choice for me as a developer.  The UI is much simpler to use than many alternatives and I like how I can leverage my asp.net c# skills to create additional, customized modules for my clients.  I guess that means I will have to learn a few more open source products Drupal Joomla N2 Umbraco to stay competitive.

  15. Gabe Sumner
    Gabe Sumner avatar
    440 posts
    Registered:
    09 Sep 2007
    13 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Hey everyone,

    There is another very active thread on this topic that can be found here.  This thread also contains comments by Vassil (Telerik's CEO).

    --

    I've read through all of these posts and we're truly open to feedback.  However, it's hard for me to internally relay these "Sitefinity 4.0 is too expensive" comments.  We have too much research that shows otherwise.  Sitefinity at $2,000 is very competitive considering everything it includes.  You won't find commercial competitors who offer the features, polish & productivity advantages of Sitefinity at this price point.  

    Furthermore, speaking to organizations with mature web site needs (unlimited pages, workflow, concurrent editors) it's hard for us to understand an organization that can't invest $2,000 in this important resource.  The feature set they require demonstrates a mature web site.  Creating a platform to support their mature needs involves effort & cost.  Attempting to address these requirements at $500 doesn't make economic sense.  

    This being said, we wanted Sitefinity to be accessible to small businesses.  We had a lot of conversations about this.  We introduced an inexpensive edition of Sitefinity designed for small businesses.  As their web site and requirements mature they would naturally outgrow this light-weight edition of Sitefinity.  If they already have mature web site requirements, then $2,000 seems like a paltry sum to invest in their organization's infrastructure.

    It's also worth noting that there are a lot of discounts currently available for migrating inexpensively to 4.0.  If you already have Sitefinity 3.x, then you're getting 4.0 standard for free.  For people who are selling many licenses of Sitefinity, we have a partner program available with even more discounts.  Email sales@sitefinity.com if you're interested.

    --

    So, from my perspective, it looks like 1 of 3 things is at play here. 

    1.  These organizations don't really have mature web site needs and could utilize a lower-cost edition of Sitefinity.

    2.  These organizations have mature web site needs but aren't placing any real value on this resource.

    3.  Our extensive research is incorrect and we've misread the market.  

    --

    For #1, we can have private conversations to help explore the project's requirements (email sales@sitefinity.com). We want to help, but we need project details to create a solution.

    For #2, we're not really interested in being involved in the project.  I've seen WordPress and a few other open source solutions tossed around.  Our goal isn't to compete with WordPress.  Or put differently, we have no desire to compete for customers who don't put any real value on what we do.  

    And #3, we're listening, but we need use cases & proof.  We've already made some concessions based on your feedback.

    --

    I really appreciate the dialog.  Receiving specifics about your challenges enables us to help.  However, I'm trying to be transparent about our challenges as well.  Hopefully everyone will take this post in the spirit it was intended.

    Gabe Sumner
    Telerik | Sitefinity CMS
  16. Andreas
    Andreas avatar
    49 posts
    Registered:
    29 Dec 2007
    15 Nov 2010
    Link to this post

    I missed the seminar but have been trying to catch up since then. I got ~25 Sitefinity installations running and while the majority of them haven't got more than 50 pages, just the mere fact that the small business version has a page limit makes it harder to sell (to our customers at least).

    Somehow it seems easier to tell someone that "if you pay this much you also get these cool features" rather than "if you pay this much we'll let you make more than 50 pages". One is paying for an addition while the other one is paying for "removing a subtraction" if you get what I mean. Same thing with concurrent users, while I'm rather sure most of our customers would be fine with one concurrent cms user, the fact that there is a limit makes it harder to sell when you're competing with free solutions. 

    More importantly though, I really don't understand the decision to only allow page-level permissions for small-business and standard versions. It's been one of the major weaknesses in previous versions of Sitefinity and I was looking forward to finally have this dealt with. I think I read in the other thread that it would be added to the standard version but I hope it will make it to small-business as well. I can barely believe the feature is missing in the old versions of Sitefinity, let alone the new one. Definately a deal breaker if there ever was one.

  17. Gabe Sumner
    Gabe Sumner avatar
    440 posts
    Registered:
    09 Sep 2007
    15 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Andreas: I got ~25 Sitefinity installations running and while the majority of them haven't got more than 50 pages, just the mere fact that the small business version has a page limit makes it harder to sell (to our customers at least).

    If the page limitation is a concern, then organizations can choose the Standard edition.  The SBE is deliberately designed to be outgrown as the web site matures.  This is a lot of discussion about this.

    Andreas: The fact that there is a limit makes it harder to sell when you're competing with free solutions.

    Our goal isn't to compete with free solutions.  That being said, I realize at some level it's bound to happen.  CMS's range in price from $0 to $300,000+.  Consequently, we'll inevitably get compared to an eclectic mix of products. It doesn't really matter though, the upfront cost of the CMS pales in comparison to the longterm productivity advantages (or disadvantages).  Put differently, people and lost productivity cost a lot more than the CMS.  If the CMS addresses the organization's challenges and enables them to be productive then price becomes a small part of a much larger equation.  For our purposes, we'll pick a fair price and make a case for the features & productivity advantages we offer.  

    Andreas: More importantly though, I really don't understand the decision to only allow page-level permissions for small-business and standard versions. It's been one of the major weaknesses in previous versions of Sitefinity and I was looking forward to finally have this dealt with. I think I read in the other thread that it would be added to the standard version but I hope it will make it to small-business as well.

    As you mentioned, there are indications that granular permissions might be added to the standard edition.  However, it almost certainly won't be added to SBE.  Why does a small business need granular permissions?  The SBE was designed for businesses that were previously using Community Edition for commercial purposes.   We wanted to provide a legitimate entry & growth path for small businesses with basic needs & small budgets.

    The community helped us define the needs of a small business edition and we were very clear that this edition could not cannibalize sales of standard edition & up.  If an organization already requires unlimited pages & granular permissions then they have mature web site requirements.  A $2k investment seems minor for an important organization resource.

    Gabe Sumner
    Telerik | Sitefinity CMS
  18. Steve
    Steve avatar
    3037 posts
    Registered:
    03 Dec 2008
    15 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Hey Gabe, can you comment on the concurrent limit for users in the Backend Role please?  I swear I read somewhere that it only affected users trying to get into the backend...not users trying to log in anywhere.
  19. Adrian
    Adrian avatar
    10 posts
    Registered:
    06 Sep 2010
    16 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Limiting the number of concurrent users definitely is one of the drawbacks for my prospects.

    For instance, we recently build a local intranet site using DNN that supports 800+ users, and 30 microsites altogether. Each of these microsites has one to three editors that can manage the content. In all, we have approximately 100 editors and our experience is that there could most likely be 20 editing at any one time. However, implementing DNN is a chore even though we purchased the professional edition (those who implemented it would most likely have the same sentiments as me). Therefore, we have earmarked SiteFinity as our main CMS provider for upcoming projects and it seems that with the new pricing, the standard edition will most likely fit the bill. But in the above case, we will need more than 10 concurrent access for editors.

    My suggestion is that there could probably be a separate purchase for concurrent usage, maybe up to 2 times or 2.5 times more than the current limit, just to address this particular concern. In this way, you are providing the flexibility of the upgrade, without compromising the value for the particular edition.

    Hope you can seriously consider the above option.
  20. MB
    MB avatar
    302 posts
    Registered:
    09 Jan 2005
    17 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    As I said on the other thread, I believe that features and modules should be the things that separate versions.

    You buy SBE, Standard, Pro, Enterprise, because it has FEATURES that your business can justify spending money on and obviously it's Telerik's task to work out what features are attractive and affordable for each market sector.

    However, you should not be locked into buying a higher version just to obtain basic functionality such as Page count, User Count or Security.

    Granular permissions should be a given for all commercial versions, but I can't see why it wouldn't be possible to have add-on packs for User and Page counts, so you can extend the use of a version whose features you are otherwise satisfied with.

    e.g. If I own an SBE vesion, I might be quite happy with not having Workflow, and have no interest in buy it... but I might well be interested in buying a 50-page add-on for another $xxx... and perhaps a 10 user add-on for $whatever... so that I can tailor the use of the feature set I bought, to suit my needs.
  21. Eric Wallace
    Eric Wallace avatar
    66 posts
    Registered:
    08 Oct 2009
    22 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    I'm sure Telerik will defend it's new pricing scheme tooth and nail...it's to be expected. However, as a long time user of Sitefinity and other Telerik products, I cannot justify spending (whether on my dime or the company's) that amount on a product(s) that is traditionally very buggy and woefully (as well as admittedly)  incomplete in it's documentation. Yes, the support is great, but that is because they have so many opportunities to be great.

    You guys can talk about value-per-dollar all you want, but the bottom line is you've priced it too high and decreased user productivity with a concurrent user restriction, and you will likely lose the majority of your strongest supporters. We just got done building our corporate intranet on SF 3.7. The very reason we chose SF over Sharepoint was it's price tag. Now it seems it will be worth it to pay the extra coin for SP 2010. Very unfortunate.
  22. Ben Alexandra
    Ben Alexandra avatar
    215 posts
    Registered:
    15 Sep 2012
    22 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Hi Eric,

    Well put.  I think the big sudden jump has turned a lot of people off. The other thing that is one of the big selling points for Sitefinity is that they have new features and therefore it costs more.  This is great, but I know that as a consumer I EXPECT new features with a new release but that doesn't mean I expect the price tag to jump up!

    Take OS X, for example.  Every version they come out with has a ton of new features and the upgrades are great, but the price is always the same (except for the last upgrade which was only $30).  Same thing with MS Office.  New features every year or so, same price tag (although they've actually lowered their prices too recently, it seems, and released a home version for just over $100).

    Most software packages are being improved over time and that is expected.  That's why we pay yearly renewal fees to get the new features and improvements.  When you choose a product, you choose it based on features, future features (usually seen in the roadmap) and pricing.

    Telerik gave us the price, the features and the future features and many people jumped on board based on this information (assuming the price was the price).  Then overnight they jump it up 2.2 fold for a few new features.  To me this comes across as greedy and it's them trying to position themselves at a certain place in the market at the expense of alienating their current ardent supporters. I find this disappointing and I hope they reconsider or do something to help out people who have multiple sites on Sitefinity and are their developers in the real world (and their evangelist).

    Ben
  23. Gary
    Gary avatar
    17 posts
    Registered:
    22 Apr 2009
    22 Nov 2010
    Link to this post

    simply my humble opinion,
    I saw the same thing happen with Telligent’s ‘Community Server’ just a few years back.  There was a similar uproar within that community when a similar change occurred with that product.
    Note: “enterprise” is now the second word in the product tag line.   Also, I don’t think they second guessed themselves much, or ever looked back at the community of “evangelists” that they were seemingly letting down.

    But why bid farewell to having solutions attractively priced to the smaller guys?
    simple…  they can’t ask as much from the large enterprise level customer if there is only a small disparity in usability between the enterprise level solution and the ‘lesser’ versions.  It is just business.    Some might argue, even a natural cycle.
    Company develops community behind product by making it an extraordinary value.   When product becomes mature, you no longer need that community, as the product sells itself.   The only thing that typically throws exception to this cycle is when there is much broader ‘brand’ loyalty at stake.

    I agree Ben, a change in where they want to be in the market, indeed.   Their new target?...possibly fewer, higher paying customers?    Instead of starting with the sweet spot being a price/value that gets folks in the door, they are confident that their product/name is mature enough to start at the high end and price the smaller fish out?
  24. eserigos
    eserigos avatar
    3 posts
    Registered:
    24 May 2010
    24 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    What concerns me most about the new pricing is that Telerik seems happy to make feature limitations that are arbitrary.  That gives me no confidence that future features that i need will be included in the edition I purchase today.

    For example, load balancing and source code are sensible Enterprise requirements, so they are natural features to add to the Enterprise edition.  If I buy a lesser edition, I wouldn't expect those features.  Allowing fewer concurrent users and limiting the number of content items also seems natural to me.  But when you start disabling features, that scares me.  How can I be assured that future features will make it into my edition?  Perhaps they decide that ecommerce is an enterprise level feature.  But by then I will have sunk a lot of time and money into a product that isn't what I expected it to be.

    I would prefer to see all editions using the same full-featured product, so we can all experience the same benefits but just on different scales.  Keep the content and concurrent user limits, and give the enterprise people the load balancing and source code they need.  That would at least make me confident that the product I buy today will be the product I need tomorrow.  I don't have that confidence now.

  25. IT
    IT avatar
    52 posts
    Registered:
    30 Sep 2008
    24 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Did you consider taking care of your existing customers by grandfathering them in?

    Look, you've been touting features (granular permissions in our case) for nearly a year and promising that when the time came, we'd get a no-cost upgrade as long as we were current in our support agreement. Now we're being offered a product that is severely crippled. If we want to use the new version, we need to re-do all the permissions and/or create second accounts for our users (which we/they will hate). We also have to ditch our second web server since we can no longer do load balancing. 

    Gee thanks! Can't wait until you do this again in version 5!

    At least you could have offered existing clients the opportunity to upgrade to any version they want for free, but with the understanding that we would inherit the new support costs. Seems that would be in your best interest. Here's the reality:

    1. You give me the new $2,000 version of 4.0 for free. I muck about to make things work with our handcuffed version of 4.0. I no longer evangelize your product. I tell people that if we weren't so invested in it, I'd be looking elsewhere. You get our $399 a year in support and in the next 10 years you'll get around $4,000 and a ho-hum customer. Everyone goes about doing their business.

    2. You give me the enterprise version of 4.0 for free. I happily go about doing business as usual. I tell my friends in the development community how great Telerik continues to be. I tell them that this is a company interested in keeping customers happy and developing better product. You get our $3999 a year in support and in the next 10 years you'll get around $40,000 and a satisfied customer.

    Think about it. In the first year of scenario 2, you get 10 years worth of renewals, keep me happy, and make an additional $36,000 over the next nine years. Your marketing department must have been working under the assumption that we'd just happily give you a bunch more up-front money without complaining. Well, they were wrong. We can use the crippled version and you can miss out on an extra $3600 a year in support.

    -Stormy.
  26. MB
    MB avatar
    302 posts
    Registered:
    09 Jan 2005
    24 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    @KMan: I would prefer to see all editions using the same full-featured product, so we can all experience the same benefits but just on different scales.  Keep the content and concurrent user limits, and give the enterprise people the load balancing and source code they need. 


    I respectfully disagree, and consider separating products based on features to be the norm for software.

    I see the problem as being the decision to demarcate the products based both on features AND licensed use, setting arbitrary values for the second of these, and forcing customers to pay for the usage licenses even if they only wanted the features.

    Again, offering my 2c worth, I believe that this could be better managed by taking a leaf from Microsoft’s server product pricing book... even if only in concept.

    Instead of bundling each version with licensed access/use for an arbitrary number of users, pages and items, the values of “Concurrent CMS Users”, “Number of Sitemap Pages”, “Number of Content Items”, could instead be MAXIMUM SUPPORTED values for each version, but with each version only being bundled with the lowest possible values of each setting, i.e. the free version’s values.

    The customer buys the version which provides the features, applications and capacity limits it provides.

    The customer then buys license keys to allow use of the version they bought, to match the demands of their implementation environment.

    e.g. So, just to create an example... I might buy a copy of Professional simply because I want a specific feature it offers. It also has higher maximum capacities for CMSUSERS, PAGES and ITEMS, but, it only comes packaged with licensed values of CMSUSERS:1, PAGES:25, ITEMS:250. I pay more for the Professional version than the Standard version because of the extra features and maximum capacities it provides, but I don’t pay an excessively inflated price for an arbitrary packaged license of users, pages and items. Instead, I work out how many CMS users, pages and items I need to provide access for, and I then buy the appropriate usage license keys (in blocks) to match my requirements. I pay for what I need, both in features and usage, and I don’t pay for unused license fees of users, pages, items that my installation may never require.
     
    This could allow Telerik to reduce the nominal price of each version, while allowing them to charge for higher use of each version.

    Obviously, Telerik’s challenge would then be to develop features and applications that would be of benefit to each market sector, and use them to separate the products, along with the capacity limits they consider appropriate to each version.

    This is the conceptual approach that Microsoft take with their server products... each version of a product offers varying features and capacities that create implicit usage limits, and is priced accordingly. However, each version only comes with a minimal access license, and you purchase additional access according to your needs.

  27. thelyrist
    thelyrist avatar
    16 posts
    Registered:
    18 May 2007
    24 Nov 2010
    Link to this post

    I know telerik had argued that it wasn't feasible for it to maintain two editionback in the sitefinity 3.x days. I am wondering why it didn't look at a different licensing mechanism for 4.x.  I think most of us are more concerned with the lack of flexibility instead of merely just the price.  It seems that we are forced to go with a higher price edition rather than to pay for what our customers want.  It is very difficult to sell to the customers that way.

    Has telerik considered the licensing model below?

    For example, all editions can share the same code base, but one needs different sets of license keys to unlock certain features.  Each edition comes with a pre-packaged license key that unlock multiple features, and users of may buy additional features a la carte.  You can buy the analytics package, 50-content items pack, 100-content items pack, etc. 

    For instance, inputting a small business edition license key will unlock the appropriate number of content items, etc. The pre-packaged edition offers better price than that of a la carte options.  Heck, I won't be opposing restricting certain features (ie: load balancing) to certain base package.

    This way, we will have the flexibility to buy what our customers really need, while at the same time it gives us room to grow as needed.  It also makes it easier to market to our customers.  Instead of buying a package that with many features they don't need, the customers now have the options to buy what they need in additional to the base package.  The upgrade pricing can be proportion to the items one has purchased so that telerik won't be losing renewal money under this scheme.

    I suppose that telerik might be worried about pirates who might create keygens and refuse to buy the product.  Perhaps you guys can withhold certain binaries (and comment out the appropriate sections in the web.config) until they have paid for the more advanced features?

  28. Markus
    Markus avatar
    2763 posts
    Registered:
    25 Nov 2005
    25 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    @thelyrist

    I think its a bit lat in the process for such a discussion. This was a strategic descition way back then made by Telerik and we have to live by it.

    If you take the car business its exactely like this.

    You buy a car with basic functionallity:  It drives you from a to b

    Then you buy upgrades, Better radio, navi, day lights, sun ruf, leather seats as far as you need it or can afford. This way every one can drive a car.

    But then again there is the High End car market where you simply have every thing in it for a base price. That's why not every one is driving a 250'000 USD car.

    Again - The business model is a up to Telerik. The problem is that you have been driving a certain car for the past 20 years (if you take car years to it years) only to find out that your next car will cost either 8 times as much as your last car or you end up without the radio you allways took for granted in your car.

    But as live goes on - you might be buying another brand of car.

    It's just the history you are sorry about. Loved Telerik, Loved Sitefinity and now the end of a long lasting relationship might come.

    There are other products on the market that will drive you from a to b. But probably none with such a great support team behind it.

    Just my 2cent on this.

    Markus

    PS: Sure hope to keep driving the same car, sorry CMS I have been driving the past years :-)
  29. Keith
    Keith avatar
    8 posts
    Registered:
    25 Oct 2010
    01 Dec 2010
    Link to this post
    I just don't understand the limitations on concurrent users, especially with the Standard edition. A user being able to log in at will and create/edit content is at that very core of why a CMS is needed! I can understand 1 user for the Community edition, it's free and that's fine. Small Business Edition should have at least 2, but for the Standard Edition, costing $2000, that should definitely be unlimited. That's my $.02.
  30. Dawn
    Dawn avatar
    37 posts
    Registered:
    17 Sep 2012
    01 Dec 2010
    Link to this post
    I'm curious to know if Telerik talked to any non-profits about these prices?
    For non-profits, this is a serious beating on budgets. 


70 posts, 0 answered
1 2 3