SOLIDWORKS Business Model Changes Coming in July 2023 - here we go again!!

[nevillew]

Anyone getting these kind of crap from their VAR (in my case they still have me noted), trying extract money from users who have not upgraded in 3 years.
(Attached SOLIDWORKS Business Model Changes Coming in July 2023.doc from VAR)

Link as well https://blogs.solidworks.com/solidworks ... -2023.html

I was just about choking on my coffee as I read it thru.
It perfectly shows up everything that is wrong with SnotWorks (Heath Robinson Business) LLC and there whole corporate attitude to customers.
Personally I think this is basically bordering on extortion and am so glad I do not have to stay on the treadmill.
I just going now to wash the taste of sick out of my mouth.

[zwei]

....


I am surprised that i am no longer surprised by this.

[zxys001]

They don't care.

[SPerman]

Someone needs to explain to DSS the definition of perpetual.

It reminds me of the Filmora mess.

[Glenn Schroeder]

I saw that too. Part of it says "New subscription and term licenses of SOLIDWORKS Desktop CAD products, but not the rest of the desktop portfolio (PDM, Simulation, Composer, etc.), will experience an uplift in price. This uplift in price is still a fraction of the cost of the additional value that was mentioned above and will secure the necessary investments in the quality products you have come to expect and the state-of-the-art Cloud infrastructure."

Any "uplift" in price is not justified if I will get zero value from access to the Experience thing. So users will be forced to pay extra for something they don't want.

[Frank_Oostendorp]

And not to forget, to boost up the number of paying participants in the 3DExperience cloud infrastructure. So far, only less then 3 percent of SolidWorks users actually use the 3DExperience cloud version, including all DS employees and students and hobbyists. And I think 2 percent have left the 3DExperience already. On the other hand over 1 million desktop versions are under subscription. This is not the result GPB has predicted, so the number has to go up.

[Peter De Vlieger]

In short
- we have to pay for things we haven't gotten or used (if you go of subscription but after a few years want to update)
- we have to pay for things that we might not benefit from but will be introduced the next few years (having to pay for a minimum amount of subscription years)
- we have to pay for things that we have no intention of using (cloud)

hmm....
do we see a trend ?

Can anyone explain to me what exactly we are getting for all that money that we send them year after year because the things I do in Solidworks still need work-arounds, still aren't stable, still make me work how Solidworks dictates instead of it doing what is common in the industry

Heck I problem of a very core thing in a certain module that I notified them of over a decade ago may perhaps be solved in 2023, but your guess is as good as mine for how long because it had be solved a few years ago, and a couple of months before that and and a couple of years before that

[Frederick_Law]

So users will be forced to pay extra for something they don't want.

They are paying for the future improvement.
To infinity and beyond, goes your money!

[RichGergely]

The Wild West of the CAD Industry is just a crazy place.

In the normal world of consumer used services/stream/software nothing like this would ever happen. Go to industrial/commercial and anything goes.

[JSculley]

I saw that too. Part of it says "New subscription and term licenses of SOLIDWORKS Desktop CAD products, but not the rest of the desktop portfolio (PDM, Simulation, Composer, etc.), will experience an uplift in price. This uplift in price is still a fraction of the cost of the additional value that was mentioned above and will secure the necessary investments in the quality products you have come to expect and the state-of-the-art Cloud infrastructure."

Any "uplift" in price is not justified if I will get zero value from access to the Experience thing. So users will be forced to pay extra for something they don't want.

Doesn't the word 'new' here mean that existing users with subscriptions would not see a price bump? Essentially, new users or users who went off subscription and come back on will pay more but for anyone current it is the same old same old?

[SPerman]

This all sounds bad, and I am ready to be upset over it. But to be honest, I'm not exactly sure what it all means. I am going to leave my pitchfork in the closet until I get communication from my VAR that specifically outlines pricing / policy changes that affect me.

[TTevolve]

"This uplift in price is still a fraction of the cost of the additional value"

If we don't use the cloud, what is the additional value?

[bnemec]

Doesn't the word 'new' here mean that existing users with subscriptions would not see a price bump? Essentially, new users or users who went off subscription and come back on will pay more but for anyone current it is the same old same old?

It appears that new licenses are seeing the increase. Not just new customers. So if we want to add a few seats those will be at higher cost.

I speculate that it's just a matter of time before maint prices take a hike for similar reason. Namely the "free" access to hollow functions in the PLATFORM. It's all ala-carte so it's like they're giving us "free" access to the lunch room but cannot go get anything from the buffet. We can collaborate/visit with others that may be eating or just wandering around because they have access. Any of the apps require roles that need to be paid for.

[Frederick_Law]

Here is your 2 years subscription.
Do you want fries with that?
That's another 2 years sub.

Actually I'll take popcorn chicken .....

[zxys001]

their business model is saying,.. our clients want this (because what they are paying us is not enuf?) so all new clients will pay/subsidize those wants.
= their Marketing wants this (because they failed horribly in the past) to compete with other new potential sales.
So, our annual fees are not enuf.... = they really suck at innovation and managment = they will buy/merge other companies/tech because they have extra $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[mattpeneguy]

It appears that new licenses are seeing the increase. Not just new customers. So if we want to add a few seats those will be at higher cost.

I speculate that it's just a matter of time before maint prices take a hike for similar reason. Namely the "free" access to hollow functions in the PLATFORM. It's all ala-carte so it's like they're giving us "free" access to the lunch room but cannot go get anything from the buffet. We can collaborate/visit with others that may be eating or just wandering around because they have access. Any of the apps require roles that need to be paid for.

I think your analogy is a little generous....It would be more accurate if the lunch room was arranged like this:

image.png (11.4 KiB) Viewed 25211 times

[mattpeneguy]

"This uplift in price is still a fraction of the cost of the additional value"

If we don't use the cloud, what is the additional value?

You're making an assumption...The additional value goes to the SW marketing department...Why would you assume that you would get the additional value?

[Frederick_Law]

I think your analogy is a little generous....It would be more accurate if the lunch room was arranged like this:
image.png

You can see clearly they all out to lunch.

[Frederick_Law]

their business model is saying,.. our clients want this (because what they are paying us is not enuf?) so all new clients will pay/subsidize those wants.
= their Marketing wants this (because they failed horribly in the past) to compete with other new potential sales.
So, our annual fees are not enuf.... = they really suck at innovation and managment = they will buy/merge other companies/tech because they have extra $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Last money grab from top brass before they disappear.

[TTevolve]

You're making an assumption...The additional value goes to the SW marketing department...Why would you assume that you would get the additional value?

I guess it was dumb of me to assume that the people paying the additional costs would see the additional value. My bad!

[zxys001]

I guess it was dumb of me to assume that the people paying the additional costs would see the additional value. My bad!

shame on you for assuming the users are also investors with longterm interest in tech and their own customers.

[AlexLachance]

I guess it was dumb of me to assume that the people paying the additional costs would see the additional value. My bad!

How dare you

[Frederick_Law]

shame on you for assuming the users are also investors with longterm interest in tech and their own customers.

Knowing you're investing into someone else's future should give you a warm and fuzzy felling.

[Frederick_Law]

Oh $hit

Expired-01.jpg (13.03 KiB) Viewed 25091 times

[matt]

Wow, don't say no one warned you. It's been a slow motion train wreck, so I think there have been some people who didn't believe this kind of stuff would actually happen. They're inviting you to find something else.

Remember a couple of things - Technology is no place for nostalgia, and business people really don't care about your feelings, regardless of how many times they tell you they do.

[tsmith]

Translation... "Our cloud services are losing so much money, and we have such a low conversion rate (even after making some really cute comic book characters) that we have to make the profitable part of the business pay for things that they don't want, don't want us to care about, and won't use."

Matt is right, and this makes it so clear... the plan all along was to convert the SW userbase to a premium-ly priced ala carte cloud model. The upside was untold riches, the downside was that they would loose their users. We're all just so damn stubborn it didn't work.

The upside is that the SW leadership team is now in such a precarious position that they only logical move it to remove them and let next set of lambs have the bright idea to 'return our focus to the next generation of premiere desktop focused parametric cad systems'.

[Damo]

Anyone getting these kind of crap from their VAR (in my case they still have me noted), trying extract money from users who have not upgraded in 3 years.
(Attached SOLIDWORKS Business Model Changes Coming in July 2023.doc from VAR)

Yup. My Reseller here in Australia tells me the same thing. Your perpetual licince is older than three years, you can NEVER resub and update.
You will only ever now be able to buy new.
Mind you, a new license here for "Standard", runs to around $9850- AU, with 3yr Subs at >$7000


I am curious how pricing compares globally.

[Peter De Vlieger]

HOLD ON !
So 'normal price would be 16.897 but during the limited time promotion offer you can get it for 12.954 ?
In other words you can get a ±23% discount, and you know your VAR is still making a profit of it after giving Solidworks their cut.
Which means after the discount period, they are making 23% more profit.
But they care about their marks.... euh I mean customers.

Am I the only one that finds that this reeks of the worst used car sales practices? First jack up the price, than offering you a discount that is limited in time.

Of course, they know they have you over a barrel because unless you want to switch over to another software solution and redo years of work in that package, you can't do anything else but pay them or another VAR. Besides, even if you do switch over software, that other company knows that they have you over a barrel as well and soon will do the same thing.

[dave.laban]

My issue is in the wording of the email I got from my VAR (Trimech via SolidSolutions);

Please note that this is a global change that will apply to all new SOLIDWORKS license purchases on or after July 1st. However, we want to assure you that current licenses on subscription will not be impacted at this time.

Which while meant to be reassuring, is in fact saying I will 100% be impacted at some yet-to-be-determined point in the future.

[jcapriotti]

Until the current management gets ousted and/or they lose enough customers to affect their bottom line, this sort of mentality will continue. They feel like they need to make "CAD" new again to try and make sales and convert companies. And like PTC salesmen of the past, they likely intend to sell to executives and tell them their users don't know what they're talking about.

[SteveH]

"uplift in price" is one of the most insulting euphemisms I've seen.

I retired in July of last year and maintenance on my personal license expired in May of this year. I didn't renew. I still use SolidWorks for personal projects. It appears that the march to eliminate the perpetual license just took a few steps forward.

[Ryan-3DS]

Matt is right, and this makes it so clear... the plan all along was to convert the SW user base to a premium-ly priced ala carte cloud model. The upside was untold riches, the downside was that they would lose their users. We're all just so damn stubborn it didn't work.

I will let Matt speak for himself, but this statement is true of the entire software industry.

SaaS is SaaS. Service is not free.
Look at Hulu. Look at Netflix. Look at Microsoft. Look as SAP! Look at Adobe! Look at Salesforce. Heck, look anywhere..what will you see? SaaS.

So, when looking at the CAD software market, desktop SW is actually behind in the subscription roll-out. Autodesk (all 3 major areas), subscription. PTC (Onshape, Creo, Windchill, Vuforia, etc.), subscription. DS( CATIA, ENOVIA, etc.) subscription. Siemens (NX and Solid Edge), moving to subscription. Now Solidworks is moving to subscription. C'mon, guys..

I know I'll catch a lot of flak on this but, really guys?

[SteveH]

It is true that subscription based software is being forced on users from many directions. I suppose there are some cases where software subscriptions make sense for some uses. However, I can't think of a use case at the moment.

If software subscriptions were beneficial to users then the software companies would offer both perpetual licenses and subscriptions for the same package and let the market settle it. Of the big CAD players, the only one I'm aware of that does this is SolidWorks, for now.

[jcapriotti]

@Ryan-3DS I have no problem with SaaS as there are hosting costs, so your examples aren't an apples to apples comparison. It's when desktop software moves to a subscription only model that I get perturbed. Adobe did this with its tools, Autodesk did the same. They basically took desktop software and changed the licensing terms to say you no longer have a perpetual license anymore, then they put a timebomb in the software to stop working after a certain date. There is no reason to do this except to try and justify their existence and force users to pay up year after year.

Imagine if the car industry did this, you can no longer buy a car, only lease it. What if buying a hammer or nail gun worked this way. These are tools of the trade to build something, CAD software is the same.

[SPerman]

Imagine if the car industry did this, you can no longer buy a car, only lease it.

BMW wants to sell you subscriptions to your car’s features
https://techcrunch.com/2020/07/01/bmw-w ... -features/

(I need to figure out how to use the hyperlink feature on this bb)

[SPerman]

I don't have a real problem with subscription pricing. I'm not happy about it, but as Ryan points out, that is the direction the world is heading. But forcing us to cloud based apps has many drawbacks which have been mentioned multiple times, and Ryan chooses to ignore. Why can't I enter an equation in a distance mate? Because all of the effort is being put into web based software that was rolled out years too early, and no one really wanted. I am sure SW is losing subscriptions to F360 and Onshape. Some of those changes were driven by people who like the advantages of a cloud based environment, but I bet an equal number were driven away by SW pricing and worrying more about half baked new features than finishing the last decade of half baked new features. (Yes, I know the equation workaround, but it takes many more steps than being able to enter the equation while creating the mate.)

[zwei]

Frankly speaking, I am fine with SaaS if there is benefits on it...
HOWEVER, i really dont see much of it with SOLIDWORKS..

Did the software get better every version? Far from it
To be frank, i am having more issue with newer version than old version.... For eg:

• SW2020 will crash whenever a pack and go is performed, and only got fix around SP4/5
• SW2021 will crash when unhiding a lightweight component with enhanced graphic turned on, and only got in SW2022

I am not talking about the buggy new features yet... THESE ARE SOME CORE FUNCTIONALITY and DS manage to break them with very upgrade (talk about proper regression testing eh)

Before someone start spouting some certified graphic card bs, i am using a CERTIFIED QUADRO card AS WELL AS THE CORRECT DRIVER.

So what do we really gain from going to SaaS beside funding DS greed?

New subscription and term licenses of SOLIDWORKS Desktop CAD products, but not the rest of the desktop portfolio (PDM, Simulation, Composer, etc.), will experience an uplift in price. This uplift in price is still a fraction of the cost of the additional value that was mentioned above and will secure the necessary investments in the quality products you have come to expect and the state-of-the-art Cloud infrastructure.

I am also pretty pissed at the "uplift in price"... As other mentioned... WHY SHOULD I PAY FOR SOMETHING THAT I HAVE NO INTENTION AND NEVER GOING TO USE? Why should i "invest" in something I am not interested, not to mention it had a pretty terrible reputation (3DExperience)?

[Glenn Schroeder]

I will let Matt speak for himself, but this statement is true of the entire software industry.

SaaS is SaaS. Service is not free.
Look at Hulu. Look at Netflix. Look at Microsoft. Look as SAP! Look at Adobe! Look at Salesforce. Heck, look anywhere..what will you see? SaaS.

So, when looking at the CAD software market, desktop SW is actually behind in the subscription roll-out. Autodesk (all 3 major areas), subscription. PTC (Onshape, Creo, Windchill, Vuforia, etc.), subscription. DS( CATIA, ENOVIA, etc.) subscription. Siemens (NX and Solid Edge), moving to subscription. Now Solidworks is moving to subscription. C'mon, guys..

I know I'll catch a lot of flak on this but, really guys?

If everyone else is doing it then it has to be the right thing to do, right?

[AlexLachance]

I will let Matt speak for himself, but this statement is true of the entire software industry.

SaaS is SaaS. Service is not free.
Look at Hulu. Look at Netflix. Look at Microsoft. Look as SAP! Look at Adobe! Look at Salesforce. Heck, look anywhere..what will you see? SaaS.

So, when looking at the CAD software market, desktop SW is actually behind in the subscription roll-out. Autodesk (all 3 major areas), subscription. PTC (Onshape, Creo, Windchill, Vuforia, etc.), subscription. DS( CATIA, ENOVIA, etc.) subscription. Siemens (NX and Solid Edge), moving to subscription. Now Solidworks is moving to subscription. C'mon, guys..

I know I'll catch a lot of flak on this but, really guys?

*THEY DID IT FIRST SO IT MUST BE OKAY!*

Really Ryan?

[Frederick_Law]

Subscription is bad for customer.
One software I use was $40 for current version. I can pay $15 to upgrade when next one come out which is 2-3 years.
Now it's $99 per year. Discounted.
If I don't upgrade, my cost increase is infinite %.
First year 99/40, second (99*2)/40, so (99*n)/40.

I've cutoff lot's of "subscription", yearly rental product/service at home and I've money at the end of the month.

Subscription might work for business. I think they can be 100% write off.
Hence they lease everything if possible.
Problem is, if you got no sales, those bills still come in.
Hence all those shut down in pass few years.

So subscription is designed to cut off all the small business.

[Frederick_Law]

*THEY DID IT FIRST SO IT MUST BE OKAY!*

Really Ryan?

Yea, I said SolidWorks suck, so it is
This is the Flaw.

[AlexLachance]

Subscription is bad for customer.
One software I use was $40 for current version. I can pay $15 to upgrade when next one come out which is 2-3 years.
Now it's $99 per year. Discounted.
If I don't upgrade, my cost increase is infinite %.
First year 99/40, second (99*2)/40, so (99*n)/40.

I've cutoff lot's of "subscription", yearly rental product/service at home and I've money at the end of the month.

Subscription might work for business. I think they can be 100% write off.
Hence they lease everything if possible.
Problem is, if you got no sales, those bills still come in.
Hence all those shut down in pass few years.

So subscription is designed to cut off all the small business.

"Subscription services" are the first thing a lot of people look at when they need to cut on some expenses because they are easily quantifiable.

[matt]

I will let Matt speak for himself, but this statement is true of the entire software industry.

SaaS is SaaS. Service is not free.
Look at Hulu. Look at Netflix. Look at Microsoft. Look as SAP! Look at Adobe! Look at Salesforce. Heck, look anywhere..what will you see? SaaS.

So, when looking at the CAD software market, desktop SW is actually behind in the subscription roll-out. Autodesk (all 3 major areas), subscription. PTC (Onshape, Creo, Windchill, Vuforia, etc.), subscription. DS( CATIA, ENOVIA, etc.) subscription. Siemens (NX and Solid Edge), moving to subscription. Now Solidworks is moving to subscription. C'mon, guys..

I know I'll catch a lot of flak on this but, really guys?

It's not just the subscription. If it was just that it might slide. It's the forced march to the platform, and larger than that, the disconnect with customers.

The unbelievable success of cell phones and Verizon's success was for a time a great thing. But they got greedy and took advantage of their market position to the point people felt they weren't getting much value. There has been a big backlash against Verizon's very anti-consumer practices, and one-time fringe services like Consumer Cellular have been the beneficiary. Verizon has to some extent backed off the predatory practices. Which way will DS go? Speaking of predatory practices, remember Pro/E? They developed such a bad reputation they changed the name of the product ("creo" means "I Believe" in Spanish). Both Autodesk and Adobe faced big backlash against what they have done regarding SaaS, and non-corporate types do what they can to avoid getting caught in those "perpetual" traps. And of course we don't need to explain what I mean when I say Bud Light got out of touch with customers and is paying the price.

There are consequences for taking advantage and loosing your connection with customers. DS is overstepping the bounds of loyalty SW earned.

[zxys001]

It's not just the subscription. If it was just that it might slide. It's the forced march to the platform, and larger than that, the disconnect with customers.

The unbelievable success of cell phones and Verizon's success was for a time a great thing. But they got greedy and took advantage of their market position to the point people felt they weren't getting much value. There has been a big backlash against Verizon's very anti-consumer practices, and one-time fringe services like Consumer Cellular have been the beneficiary. Verizon has to some extent backed off the predatory practices. Which way will DS go? Speaking of predatory practices, remember Pro/E? They developed such a bad reputation they changed the name of the product ("creo" means "I Believe" in Spanish). Both Autodesk and Adobe faced big backlash against what they have done regarding SaaS, and non-corporate types do what they can to avoid getting caught in those "perpetual" traps. And of course we don't need to explain what I mean when I say Bud Light got out of touch with customers and is paying the price.

There are consequences for taking advantage and loosing your connection with customers. DS is overstepping the bounds of loyalty SW earned.

Totally agree.... although, beer politics... really?

[Frederick_Law]

Aaah cellphone providers.
They don't value loyalty.
Only new customer get discount.
Mine just passed the "discount" term and it doubled.
Good thing my last provider wanted me back with a discount.
Switching this week.

Simple fact, money talks.
Both way.

[Damo]

HOLD ON !
So 'normal price would be 16.897 but during the limited time promotion offer you can get it for 12.954 ?
In other words you can get a ±23% discount, and you know your VAR is still making a profit of it after giving Solidworks their cut.
Which means after the discount period, they are making 23% more profit.
But they care about their marks.... euh I mean customers.

Yes.. !! It feels like it's a lot..

Am I the only one that finds that this reeks of the worst used car sales practices? First jack up the price, than offering you a discount that is limited in time.

Yup. It is shameless. They also pile on a virtually scammer level of urgency too.
"You must accept this never to be repeated offer before such-n-such date, (within the next couple of weeks) or you will pay full price."
Needless to say, we now have a slightly older standard seat that can/will never be updated.!

Of course, they know they have you over a barrel because unless you want to switch over to another software solution and redo years of work in that package, you can't do anything else but pay them or another VAR. Besides, even if you do switch over software, that other company knows that they have you over a barrel as well and soon will do the same thing.

At least with other pay as you go services, (think: insurance, utilities, tel-com services, etc.) we have the option of switching providers reasonably easy.
This helps to keep them all fairly competitive and reasonably honest. Nor do we need to swap out our entire internal infrastructure to do so..

[mattpeneguy]

Yes.. !! It feels like it's a lot..



Yup. It is shameless. They also pile on a virtually scammer level of urgency too.
"You must accept this never to be repeated offer before such-n-such date, (within the next couple of weeks) or you will pay full price."
Needless to say, we now have a slightly older standard seat that can/will never be updated.!



At least with other pay as you go services, (think: insurance, utilities, tel-com services, etc.) we have the option of switching providers reasonably easy.
This helps to keep them all fairly competitive and reasonably honest. Nor do we need to swap out our entire internal infrastructure to do so..

It was interesting that Seimens seemed to want to make the transition easier. In their command search you could type a SW command and the SE equivalent would pop up in the results. I didn't have time to do a full demo but I was impressed with some things that SE did right that SW didn't. I'm sure it has shortcomings that SW doesn't, but again I didn't spend enough time with it.

I did not try IV (which turns out may be a better fit when we switch).

[RichGergely]

My Var last week said they would be sending out a mail this week to all the customers to let them know what is exactly happening.

As is come place with my VAR nothing has happened.

[DanPihlaja]

My Var last week said they would be sending out a mail this week to all the customers to let them know what is exactly happening.

As is come place with my VAR nothing has happened.

We just got our email the other day.

[mgibeault]

Another problem with this is in education.
I spoke yesterday to a couple of college teachers and of course they know nothing about all of this. They don't know what is 3DEXPERIENCE and why a new panel keeps asking the user to connect to this obscure thing.
They chose to teach SolidWorks to their industrial design students because most companies that employs them are on SolidWorks.
When they finish their scholarship this may have changed and they are not aware at all. Teachers have no contact to a VAR and probably never receive communications from SolidWorks?
I think I'll begin a campaign in the area to push for more than one CAD in the curriculum...