Pro Account increase

1246711

Comments

  • PlayswithrocksPlayswithrocks Big grins Posts: 15Registered Users Big grins
    edited September 1, 2012
    It is $8.33 extra per month. Smoke one less pack of cigarettes, drink one less six-pack of beer, if you can't sell one more 5x7.

    Carbonite is $229 for the small business plan, and that is just storage. Zenfolio's premium plan is comparable to SM Pro, and is $250. Yes, they have a $120 pro option, but watch how fast that goes up or disappears after October.

    I'm confused... how did the difference between $20/mo and $30/mo become $8.33? I don't smoke and I don't manage to down a six pack even every other month, so those options are out for me. I'm a full time student supporting a family who's trying to improve my photography as I go. I had high hopes of at least being able to sell a print here or there to offset the cost of my hobby and maybe, just maybe, one day make a few bucks off of it.
  • austinlsaustinls Big grins Posts: 20Registered Users Big grins
    edited September 1, 2012
    New Plan Costs
    We were just getting ready to go Pro, for our high school football SmugMug site. At $150, we were going to support the site cost by charging for digital downloads. Now the $300 definitely precludes us from moving forward. We may go with a lower cost solution and not sell anything.

    Personally, this is a steep increase in today's economy.
  • PlayswithrocksPlayswithrocks Big grins Posts: 15Registered Users Big grins
    edited September 1, 2012
    Rogue 1 wrote: »
    Hi Plays - I just shot you an email -

    Received. :) Thank you.
  • MontecMontec Waiting for the light... Posts: 823Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 1, 2012
    Playswithrocks; I think there are probably many like you and I who are not costing SM a dime. We should not be held responsible for the mega users. I buy more of my own prints in large 20x30 etc. than anyone else. SM makes profit on those.

    I also cannot get my head around allowing SM to just sell my images without me even being aware of it and making a profit. Just because I choose them as a host they get to sell my copyrighted content at a profit and I have to pay for that privilege.
    This is a license to steal. They are not giving us merely webspace for the cost of being a member, they are profiting off every single print ever sold weather it be a wedding or simply a picture of the kids Gramma buys.

    I shot a Provincial girls softball tourney a few years back. SM made more money on that weekend than I did for this tourney, this happens all over the World every weekend. Many many of us who want the ability to set prices are not costing SM more money. There needs to be a better solution. The higher rates should be paid by Superusers.
    Cheers,
    Monte
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft GWC for hire Portland.ME.USAPosts: 2,977Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 1, 2012
    I'm confused... how did the difference between $20/mo and $30/mo become $8.33?

    It is $100 more per year. That is $8.33 more per month.

    If you are paying month to month then we can presume you are not paying at the pro level for more than half the year. In which case it is even less for you if you average it over the year.

    If you are paying month to month for more than half the year... well...
    I don't smoke and I don't manage to down a six pack even every other month, so those options are out for me. I'm a full time student supporting a family who's trying to improve my photography as I go. I had high hopes of at least being able to sell a print here or there to offset the cost of my hobby and maybe, just maybe, one day make a few bucks off of it.

    It is a pro account, not a hobby account.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • kenskikenski Big grins Posts: 34Registered Users Big grins
    edited September 1, 2012

    It is a pro account, not a hobby account.

    It may be a pro account but it has features that a "HOBBIST" would want and that is why he uses it. I shoot an event/wedding and I give them the CD but post the pictures on line for ALL to see. sometimes I get a few buys from a wedding/event from family members or friends. I want to be able to control the price and know what pictures are actually getting printed. I do not get this A LOT but it is nice to have. Not double your money nice.
  • Rogue 1Rogue 1 Nothing to see here Here and therePosts: 150Registered Users, Retired Mod Major grins
    edited September 1, 2012
    Montec wrote: »
    Playswithrocks; I think there are probably many like you and I who are not costing SM a dime. We should not be held responsible for the mega users. I buy more of my own prints in large 20x30 etc. than anyone else. SM makes profit on those.

    I also cannot get my head around allowing SM to just sell my images without me even being aware of it and making a profit. Just because I choose them as a host they get to sell my copyrighted content at a profit and I have to pay for that privilege.
    This is a license to steal. They are not giving us merely webspace for the cost of being a member, they are profiting off every single print ever sold weather it be a wedding or simply a picture of the kids Gramma buys.

    I shot a Provincial girls softball tourney a few years back. SM made more money on that weekend than I did for this tourney, this happens all over the World every weekend. Many many of us who want the ability to set prices are not costing SM more money. There needs to be a better solution. The higher rates should be paid by Superusers.


    Hi Montec - Oh my - it sounds like you didn't know that every account level has option to prevent purchases (always has been) - Think of it from this angle, if you posted photos for your family, you'd probably want them to be able to order a print if they wish. And of course, you can order prints of your own photos...

    If you don't want anyone buying prints of your images, simply toggle PRINTABLE? to NO in the settings of any (or all) galleries you don't want anyone to be able to BUY - This removes the BUY option completely.
  • PlayswithrocksPlayswithrocks Big grins Posts: 15Registered Users Big grins
    edited September 1, 2012
    It is a pro account, not a hobby account.

    And that's the point. SmugMug no longer offers an account for someone who would like to sell prints at a modest profit, but doesn't do high volume or make their entire living off of photography. Sure, I'd love that one day. And when/if that day comes I'll fork over the dough, but that day is a long, long ways off.
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft GWC for hire Portland.ME.USAPosts: 2,977Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 1, 2012
    Montec wrote: »
    I also cannot get my head around allowing SM to just sell my images without me even being aware of it and making a profit. Just because I choose them as a host they get to sell my copyrighted content at a profit and I have to pay for that privilege.

    I would assume that at the new portfolio level, you could disable print sales if you really want. This is currently possible in the pro level.
    This is a license to steal. They are not giving us merely webspace for the cost of being a member, they are profiting off every single print ever sold weather it be a wedding or simply a picture of the kids Gramma buys.

    No it isn't. They are "profiting" as much as anyone else who prints photos on paper and mails them somewhere. It is peanuts per order.
    I shot a Provincial girls softball tourney a few years back. SM made more money on that weekend than I did for this tourney, this happens all over the World every weekend.

    That is on you. You should have paid for a pro account for a month or two and priced your prints accordingly.
    Many many of us who want the ability to set prices are not costing SM more money. There needs to be a better solution. The higher rates should be paid by Superusers.

    I would think there could be a "semi-pro" level that is $150/yr and limited in some way (storage, volume of orders, etc), but allows custom pricing.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft GWC for hire Portland.ME.USAPosts: 2,977Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 1, 2012
    kenski wrote: »
    It may be a pro account but it has features that a "HOBBIST" would want and that is why he uses it. I shoot an event/wedding and I give them the CD but post the pictures on line for ALL to see. sometimes I get a few buys from a wedding/event from family members or friends. I want to be able to control the price and know what pictures are actually getting printed. I do not get this A LOT but it is nice to have. Not double your money nice.
    And that's the point. SmugMug no longer offers an account for someone who would like to sell prints at a modest profit, but doesn't do high volume or make their entire living off of photography. Sure, I'd love that one day. And when/if that day comes I'll fork over the dough, but that day is a long, long ways off.
    I would think there could be a "semi-pro" level that is $150/yr and limited in some way (storage, volume of orders, etc), but allows custom pricing.

    So Baldy, how about it? It seems we have identified a gap here. I don't need to keep my customers' photos online forever.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • Rogue 1Rogue 1 Nothing to see here Here and therePosts: 150Registered Users, Retired Mod Major grins
    edited September 1, 2012
    I would assume that at the new portfolio level, you could disable print sales if you really want. This is currently possible in the pro level.

    Hi JM - just to reiterate, that ability is, and always has been, available at every account level - Toggle PRINTABLE? to NO in gallery settings - done - :D
  • GRBlizzGRBlizz Major grins Posts: 109Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 1, 2012
    So Baldy, how about it? It seems we have identified a gap here. I don't need to keep my customers' photos online forever.

    Clearly a gap, and based on my exchanges with Don on Facebook today, one that I think they are hearing loud and clear. They are using the new price tiers to separate server-hogging users from the rest, but I think they lumped the hobbyists in with the wrong group.

    I'll bet if they looked at the storage and bandwidth usage of accounts whose sales barely cover their annual fee, they would see that we perform more like their "Portfolio" level than like their "Business" level.

    I understand their DNA is opposed to setting limits on uploads, hence the unlimited uploads on their $40 plan. So, instead, set limits on how much you can earn and still pay only the $150 level. Go over, and you are upgraded to Business. If you sell too much, you win and SmugMug wins.

    But please put back the ability for a "soccer mom" to collect a few bucks from the other parents without having to pay what the "wedding photographer to the stars" pays.
  • Rogue 1Rogue 1 Nothing to see here Here and therePosts: 150Registered Users, Retired Mod Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    GRBlizz wrote: »
    Clearly a gap, and based on my exchanges with Don on Facebook today, one that I think they are hearing loud and clear. They are using the new price tiers to separate server-hogging users from the rest, but I think they lumped the hobbyists in with the wrong group.

    I'll bet if they looked at the storage and bandwidth usage of accounts whose sales barely cover their annual fee, they would see that we perform more like their "Portfolio" level than like their "Business" level.

    I understand their DNA is opposed to setting limits on uploads, hence the unlimited uploads on their $40 plan. So, instead, set limits on how much you can earn and still pay only the $150 level. Go over, and you are upgraded to Business. If you sell too much, you win and SmugMug wins.

    But please put back the ability for a "soccer mom" to collect a few bucks from the other parents without having to pay what the "wedding photographer to the stars" pays.

    For those of you who've been with us for a while, you already know that we listen to our customer's feedback intensely - we're reading every post. tweet and email -

    Quoting a few of Don's Facebook responses:

    "thanks for the feedback. This closely matches what we're hearing from some other customers, so you can bet we're going to talk about this a lot. What you say makes a lot of sense, and wasn't evident from the customer feedback sessions we did prior to shipping this pricing change. Really appreciate you and everyone else in this thread for the feedback."

    and:

    "As [. . . ] points out, it's pretty easy for us to separate "Pros who price" and "Pros who don't". And the "Pros who price" chew up more than 4X the number of GBs. What's not clear is whether there are a large # of Hobbyists hiding in that category, which is something you've greatly helped us think about over on your other thread."
  • TalkieTTalkieT Major grins Posts: 491Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    Rogue 1 wrote: »
    For those of you who've been with us for a while, you already know that we listen to our customer's feedback intensely - we're reading every post. tweet and email -

    I believe you, but there seems to be a lot of selectivity about what questions are answered...

    How about this one?

    How do you justify the $90 difference between Power and Portfolio packages when the only salient difference for most people is the fact that Power lacks watermarking? (Yes, and printmarks, and backprinting and professional labs - but you make money on the pro labs so the only big difference is watermarking)

    I've asked this in a few places and SM people have answered questions from before and after I posted it... It seems to be a question that's being actively ducked - can you provide any insight?

    Cheers - N
    --
    http://www.nzsnaps.com (talkiet.smugmug.com)
  • GRBlizzGRBlizz Major grins Posts: 109Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    Rogue 1 wrote: »
    For those of you who've been with us for a while, you already know that we listen to our customer's feedback intensely - we're reading every post. tweet and email -

    Quoting a few of Don's Facebook responses:

    "thanks for the feedback. This closely matches what we're hearing from some other customers, so you can bet we're going to talk about this a lot. What you say makes a lot of sense, and wasn't evident from the customer feedback sessions we did prior to shipping this pricing change. Really appreciate you and everyone else in this thread for the feedback."

    and:

    "As [. . . ] points out, it's pretty easy for us to separate "Pros who price" and "Pros who don't". And the "Pros who price" chew up more than 4X the number of GBs. What's not clear is whether there are a large # of Hobbyists hiding in that category, which is something you've greatly helped us think about over on your other thread."

    I hope so. I am the [...] in your earlier quote, that is my real name and this is my screen name. I hope they do come up with a slice of the data that shows we are valuable to keep in the Pro ranks.
  • divamumdivamum Major grins Posts: 9,021Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    What's not clear is whether there are a large # of Hobbyists hiding in that category,

    Add me to the pros who don't do this full time, who do need some printing ability (thus have set price lists) and who are dismayed at the HUGE jump in price. If this was my main, meat-and-potatoes livelihood I'd just shrug, consider it a deductible overhead and not sweat it that much. As it is, it's a big chunk o' change out of nowhere. I really like the Smugmug family, have done enough tweaks to match my gallery to my blog, and have had good feedback from the small percentage of my clients who purchase prints, and thus have no real interest in migrating elsewhere, but that's a steep increase for somebody who only sells a couple hundred bucks of prints a year (but uses the gallery service for proofing and digital delivery a lot). My renewal date comes up in December and I'll need to think about whether or not the benefits outweight the added cost. ne_nau.gif
  • jfriendjfriend Scripting dude-volunteer Posts: 8,097Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    GRBlizz wrote: »
    Clearly a gap, and based on my exchanges with Don on Facebook today, one that I think they are hearing loud and clear. They are using the new price tiers to separate server-hogging users from the rest, but I think they lumped the hobbyists in with the wrong group.

    I'll bet if they looked at the storage and bandwidth usage of accounts whose sales barely cover their annual fee, they would see that we perform more like their "Portfolio" level than like their "Business" level.

    I understand their DNA is opposed to setting limits on uploads, hence the unlimited uploads on their $40 plan. So, instead, set limits on how much you can earn and still pay only the $150 level. Go over, and you are upgraded to Business. If you sell too much, you win and SmugMug wins.

    But please put back the ability for a "soccer mom" to collect a few bucks from the other parents without having to pay what the "wedding photographer to the stars" pays.
    I think they need to align their DNA with the costs that drive their business. Allowing customers to store more and more every year means your cost of supporting a given customer just increases every year. That's a crummy characteristic for any business and basically has to get fixed. And, it will only ever get fixed if you find a way to incent customers to manage their own storage amount. And, the main way you do that is by giving them limits and fees if you store more than X.

    FYI, the high volume sellers already pay a lot more than the hobbiest sellers through their commissions.

    Yes, I'd also like Smugmug to support hobbiest sellers,but I think it has to be done by managing storage. If you want to pay the hobbiest level of fees, you manage your storage accordingly.
    --John
    HomepagePopular
    JFriend's javascript customizationsSecrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
    Always include a link to your site when posting a question
  • onethumbonethumb SmugMug CEO & Chief Geek Posts: 1,269Administrators Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    jfriend wrote: »
    I think they need to align their DNA with the costs that drive their business. Allowing customers to store more and more every year means your cost of supporting a given customer just increases every year. That's a crummy characteristic for any business and basically has to get fixed. And, it will only ever get fixed if you find a way to incent customers to manage their own storage amount. And, the main way you do that is by giving them limits and fees if you store more than X.

    FYI, the high volume sellers already pay a lot more than the hobbiest sellers through their commissions.

    Yes, I'd also like Smugmug to support hobbiest sellers,but I think it has to be done by managing storage. If you want to pay the hobbiest level of fees, you manage your storage accordingly.

    You nailed this right on the head. We're in active discussions right now, based on all this feedback, about adjustments to the Portfolio account and/or a Hobbyist account, and the only way to make that option viable would be a reasonable, but modest, storage cap in addition to limiting engineering- and support-heavy features like Packages & Event Marketing.

    If such a hypothetical situation were to arise (we've only begun thinking about it today, I'm afraid to admit), what would a reasonable storage cap look like to those who are interested in an account like this?
  • onethumbonethumb SmugMug CEO & Chief Geek Posts: 1,269Administrators Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    TalkieT wrote: »
    I believe you, but there seems to be a lot of selectivity about what questions are answered...

    How about this one?

    How do you justify the $90 difference between Power and Portfolio packages when the only salient difference for most people is the fact that Power lacks watermarking? (Yes, and printmarks, and backprinting and professional labs - but you make money on the pro labs so the only big difference is watermarking)

    I've asked this in a few places and SM people have answered questions from before and after I posted it... It seems to be a question that's being actively ducked - can you provide any insight?

    Cheers - N

    The honest answer is that it hasn't really been a big question until now. Most of our customers tell us those features all go hand-in-hand, so they need all of them. I hadn't thought about breaking Watermarks out of that bundle, or moving it down to Power. But we'll certainly think about it.

    Off the cuff, without having thought about it more than 60 seconds, I'd guess there'd be some reservations around Power users' storage costs going way, way up if there was a sudden flood of $150 users with much higher storage requirements (which is the case today) moving to $60. So we'd need to look at the data and see if there's a correlation between those who watermark and those who use a ton of storage. My gut says yes, but I always check my gut with the data first. :)
  • TalkieTTalkieT Major grins Posts: 491Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    onethumb wrote: »
    Y[snip]
    If such a hypothetical situation were to arise (we've only begun thinking about it today, I'm afraid to admit), what would a reasonable storage cap look like to those who are interested in an account like this?

    Well, I checked mine and I have 90GB, but only because it's unlimited. If I had to work within a limit to qualify for a lower price account, I'd start doing things like uploading at a slightly lower quality JPG, or uploading 8mp images instead of 16. I'd even think about removing old events, or greatly culling them.

    However with the unlimited tag, I don't care about that stuff and just upload fullsize images and never think about removing old events no-one looks at.

    See the point I'm making?

    Anyway, I don't know what your average is, and I suspect that if it's anything like broadband usage across a large population, you literally have the top 5% of users accounting for 50% of your storage.

    I'd be happy with a 75GB limit, and would hope for management options like "Reduce all images in this gallery to 4mp/400KB"

    I'd also happily forgo events, coupons, packages, premium labs, printmarks...

    Also, could I please point you at my earlier question about justifying the $90 difference between Pro and Power users? (Edit, I note you did answer that - thanks!)

    Cheers - Neil G
    --
    http://www.nzsnaps.com (talkiet.smugmug.com)
  • TalkieTTalkieT Major grins Posts: 491Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    I may as well ask the question I've been too scared to ask until now...

    If I dropped down to Portfolio or Power, are you going to outlaw my customisations to sell via Paypal? Until Now Smugmug has been brilliant in letting this happen but I'm truly afraid that part of the rationale behind the huge price increase is to force users making money from your service to pay a lot more for the privilege. I implemented Paypal originally because SM took so long to offer a foreign currency feature that I NEEDED a way to accept sales in $NZD (Even now you only offer select currencies) and found my sales at least quadrupled when I offered Paypal in $NZD.

    So, Are you going to clamp down on users circumventing your print and download sales systems? Please please please say you won't stop me doing this - your cart still doesn't work for me and I've lost hope it will ever have the straightforward $NZD support I desperately need.

    Regards
    Neil G
    --
    http://www.nzsnaps.com (talkiet.smugmug.com)
  • mbellotmbellot Major grins Posts: 465Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    II would think there could be a "semi-pro" level that is $150/yr and limited in some way (storage, volume of orders, etc), but allows custom pricing.

    Simple then.

    Allow the "hobbyist" to sell with mark-up but only give them access to the standard (non "Pro") print lab(s) such as EZPrints. Also (on the remote chance it ever happens) they don't get the ability to self-fulfill.

    I have until May 2013 before I have to renew. It is a guaranteed fact I will be looking at alternatives and keeping an eye on Zenfolio's pricing once the SM pricing takes full effect in October.

    If they stick with a $120 (or there about) package that includes for-profit sales and unlimited storage/bandwidth then this may be my last year with SmugMug.

    EDIT:

    Seconding (or thirding) the suggestions to further limit the "hobbyist" level by excluding packages, coupons and events.

    I'm less enthusiastic about capping storage, but if it comes to that then so be it. I keep things online because I have had parents come back two and three years after an event to buy more photos.
  • Rogue 1Rogue 1 Nothing to see here Here and therePosts: 150Registered Users, Retired Mod Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    TalkieT wrote: »
    I may as well ask the question I've been too scared to ask until now...

    If I dropped down to Portfolio or Power, are you going to outlaw my customisations to sell via Paypal? Until Now Smugmug has been brilliant in letting this happen but I'm truly afraid that part of the rationale behind the huge price increase is to force users making money from your service to pay a lot more for the privilege. I implemented Paypal originally because SM took so long to offer a foreign currency feature that I NEEDED a way to accept sales in $NZD (Even now you only offer select currencies) and found my sales at least quadrupled when I offered Paypal in $NZD.

    So, Are you going to clamp down on users circumventing your print and download sales systems? Please please please say you won't stop me doing this - your cart still doesn't work for me and I've lost hope it will ever have the straightforward $NZD support I desperately need.

    Regards
    Neil G

    Hi T - Customizing alternative payment options like Google CHeckout and PayPal are exactly that, customizations - :D - moving to Power would have no effect at all. Full customization at POWER.
  • TalkieTTalkieT Major grins Posts: 491Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    Rogue 1 wrote: »
    Hi T - Customizing alternative payment options like Google CHeckout and PayPal are exactly that, customizations - :D - moving to Power would have no effect at all. Full customization at POWER.

    Hi there - thankyou for the clarification... I understand the customisations would work if I downgraded to Power user - my real concern is that the rules would change and we'd be told unless we had a business account we weren't allowed to sell at a profit by any method.

    ANyway, thanks for putting my mind at rest, screenshot taken :-)

    Cheers - Neil G
    --
    http://www.nzsnaps.com (talkiet.smugmug.com)
  • DogdotsDogdots Major grins Posts: 8,781Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    I didn't know one could see how many GB they had on their site. I looked and found out I have 29.54. I thought mine would be a whole lot bigger since I know I have way more on my site that needs to be on there.

    It's kinda like cable tv. We have to buy the basic package, but we only watch a handful of the channels. Maybe set up a basic pro package with selling/price list settings and let us pick what we want to add on from there. Keep the option tho for printing choices. I love bayphoto thumb.gif I don't need mats, coupons, etc.

    I like that smug is talking about how to help the hobby photographer out .. since I'm one of them at this point in my life :D

    Look forward to see what will happen in the future. I'll still be a smugger thumb.gif
  • jfriendjfriend Scripting dude-volunteer Posts: 8,097Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    onethumb wrote: »
    You nailed this right on the head. We're in active discussions right now, based on all this feedback, about adjustments to the Portfolio account and/or a Hobbyist account, and the only way to make that option viable would be a reasonable, but modest, storage cap in addition to limiting engineering- and support-heavy features like Packages & Event Marketing.

    If such a hypothetical situation were to arise (we've only begun thinking about it today, I'm afraid to admit), what would a reasonable storage cap look like to those who are interested in an account like this?
    I don't know as I've never been forced to think about photo storage amount. I'd turn this around and ask you to propose a storage amount for the power and portfolio price points that would work for your business in the long run and we'd have to figure out if we could fit into that.

    I like to upload full res originals for optimal print ordering or sharing of originals. But, in most galleries, I don't really need those originals up there forever. After some period of time, the galleries are really just there for web viewing and X3 is probably all that needs to be there (in most galleries). Today, they sit there forever because I have no reason to do otherwise and no tools to manage it.

    I'd be happy to configure some galleries as auto-downsize to X3 in N months (and have print ordering disabled) as a means of maintaining a web history, but managing storage to a reasonable level.

    And, if I got near my limit or wanted to reduce my costs manually, I'd want the ability to efficiently see my storage consumption by gallery and select a number of galleries to auto-reduce them to X3 (throwing away originals) or remove galleries.

    Some galleries could also just be auto-expiring as there's no reason to maintain a web presence at all once the event and the interest in the event has passed (right now I just leave them up forever).
    --John
    HomepagePopular
    JFriend's javascript customizationsSecrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
    Always include a link to your site when posting a question
  • rich56krich56k Major grins SoCalPosts: 547Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    It is $8.33 extra per month. Smoke one less pack of cigarettes, drink one less six-pack of beer, if you can't sell one more 5x7.

    It's not a matter of "it's only .28 cents per day (8.33 month)" or whatever math you apply to this.

    That completely misses the point...
    it's a matter of principal, doubling the cost of anything at any price all at once is absolutely absurd and a brazen slap in the face to us loyal customers that feed your families - it's not the $$ amount it's the percentage of increase!

    What if your phone bill, internet service, gasoline, prescriptions or any regular service (insert your own example - mine aren't the greatest) you rely on suddenly doubled it's price??

    Think you'd look to another source for a similar service?

    Better yet name any other company that has the nerve to go anywhere in the 67-100% increase at one time ??? Don't worry I'm not holding my breath.

    At least give us something for the HUGE increase in cost - like the gallery changes that have been years in the making...

    OK enough ranting - just my .02

    PS: Jack - I not trying to single you out in this, it's that your post was the best example of the flip side of my coin that's all.

    -Rich
    http://HooliganUnderground.com
    Member: ASMP; EP; NPPA; CPS
  • davidmedinadavidmedina Big grins Posts: 55Registered Users Big grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    It is so sickening to see so many cry babies. I have never seen or heard so many ridiculous statement coming from grown ups.
    \Before starting tantrums do yourself a favor and look at what you get, what it cost and compare to nthe competition.

    I think is so hilarious to read that someone stayed with Smugmug because Photoshelter did not offer unlimited downloads, but now, because SMP price approaches the cost of Photoshelter he is considering to move. But wait, wasn't the reason that Photoshelter did not offer unlimited uploads?

    The reality is that you were getting a ridiculous low price for unlimited uploads, bandwith and 24/7 and now you are pissed because you have to pay what it is really worth.

    Smugmug Pro is for working professionals. People that make money at what they do. Not for wannabes or hobbyist. At $150 it was a steal and at $250 or even $300 is still a great price.

    At $250 a year, for a real pro studio means just $21 per month for unlimited, full resolution hosting, online galleries and shopping cart. If your business cannot handle $21 a month or $250 a year, the problem is NOT SMP but your business.

    So if $100 more a YEAR is such a hardship for your business, then you have a lousy business. It is not SMP fault but YOURS!

    Zenfolio at the same level is $250 and do not even offer the great lab options Smugmug Pro offers.

    Pictage at the cheapest level is $359 a year and they take a 20% commission from the gross and not the net (after cost like Smugmug does). I know, because I am moving from Pictage and I used to pay $99 per month. So $21 a month is peanuts.

    So people, think before you write. Do the number and you will see how silly you are behaving.
  • jfriendjfriend Scripting dude-volunteer Posts: 8,097Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    It is so sickening to see so many cry babies. I have never seen or heard so many ridiculous statement coming from grown ups.
    \Before starting tantrums do yourself a favor and look at what you get, what it cost and compare to nthe competition.

    I think is so hilarious to read that someone stayed with Smugmug because Photoshelter did not offer unlimited downloads, but now, because SMP price approaches the cost of Photoshelter he is considering to move. But wait, wasn't the reason that Photoshelter did not offer unlimited uploads?

    The reality is that you were getting a ridiculous low price for unlimited uploads, bandwith and 24/7 and now you are pissed because you have to pay what it is really worth.

    Smugmug Pro is for working professionals. People that make money at what they do. Not for wannabes or hobbyist. At $150 it was a steal and at $250 or even $300 is still a great price.

    At $250 a year, for a real pro studio means just $21 per month for unlimited, full resolution hosting, online galleries and shopping cart. If your business cannot handle $21 a month or $250 a year, the problem is NOT SMP but your business.

    So if $100 more a YEAR is such a hardship for your business, then you have a lousy business. It is not SMP fault but YOURS!

    Zenfolio at the same level is $250 and do not even offer the great lab options Smugmug Pro offers.

    Pictage at the cheapest level is $359 a year and they take a 20% commission from the gross and not the net (after cost like Smugmug does). I know, because I am moving from Pictage and I used to pay $99 per month. So $21 a month is peanuts.

    So people, think before you write. Do the number and you will see how silly you are behaving.
    What I'm seeing is a large class of Smugmug pro customers who are small sellers, not large sellers. It's not a full-time business - but rather a side business or a hobby. For those customers, $300 is likely impractical (not worth the commitment given what they make).

    If Smugmug wants to get rid of all those customers that were willing to pay $100-$150/yr, that's their prerogative, but what you say in your message doesn't really apply to them. Even worse for Smugmug, some of these customers will just stop selling and downgrade to power (that's probably what I'll do). So now we make less money for them in commissions, we pay them less money for subscriptions and we still use just as much storage as we always did. Probably not a good outcome for anyone.

    That's why I think the way they've formulated the price increase doesn't make sense. IMO, it would have made more sense to introduce a flock of new features that are valuable to the real working pro and entice them to a new $300 account level and then maybe go for some storage limitations and/or fees at the lower account levels so hobbiests willing to manage their storage use could still have access to the selling features at a more reasonable account fee.
    --John
    HomepagePopular
    JFriend's javascript customizationsSecrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
    Always include a link to your site when posting a question
  • SventekozSventekoz Major grins Posts: 500Registered Users Major grins
    edited September 2, 2012
    It is so sickening to see so many cry babies. I have never seen or heard so many ridiculous statement coming from grown ups.
    \Before starting tantrums do yourself a favor and look at what you get, what it cost and compare to nthe competition.

    I think is so hilarious to read that someone stayed with Smugmug because Photoshelter did not offer unlimited downloads, but now, because SMP price approaches the cost of Photoshelter he is considering to move. But wait, wasn't the reason that Photoshelter did not offer unlimited uploads?

    The reality is that you were getting a ridiculous low price for unlimited uploads, bandwith and 24/7 and now you are pissed because you have to pay what it is really worth.

    Smugmug Pro is for working professionals. People that make money at what they do. Not for wannabes or hobbyist. At $150 it was a steal and at $250 or even $300 is still a great price.

    At $250 a year, for a real pro studio means just $21 per month for unlimited, full resolution hosting, online galleries and shopping cart. If your business cannot handle $21 a month or $250 a year, the problem is NOT SMP but your business.

    So if $100 more a YEAR is such a hardship for your business, then you have a lousy business. It is not SMP fault but YOURS!

    Zenfolio at the same level is $250 and do not even offer the great lab options Smugmug Pro offers.

    Pictage at the cheapest level is $359 a year and they take a 20% commission from the gross and not the net (after cost like Smugmug does). I know, because I am moving from Pictage and I used to pay $99 per month. So $21 a month is peanuts.

    So people, think before you write. Do the number and you will see how silly you are behaving.

    What a sanctimonious dick you're being. How dare you presume to lecture people on who should or shouldn't be using particular accounts. If only 'you' thought before you wrote, but I guess that's too much to ask for.

    This is just as much about how the needed price increase has been implemented as the increase itself. It smells of desperation on SmugMug's part, and that has people worried. From some of the responses here and elsewhere, it would also seem that SmugMug didn't think of too many other options, and that probably has people worried, too.

    FWIW, SmugMug, I'll be staying because I'm very happy with the overall service. However, you've lost your competitive advantage - and I'll be interested to see how you're going to get that back.
    John
Sign In or Register to comment.