BIMx early adopters penalty.

[Anonymous]

I sincerely wish GS would think ahead in their financial development cycle.

As it stands now, we, early adopters, always get fined for buying into and supporting GS's early releases.

When BIMxPro first came out on iPad (circa 2013) with a rather unthought-trough and somewhat unrealistic payment model I was one of the first to pay around $80 for an application.

A bit later realizing slow sales and cumbersome payment structure related to sharing projects with clients, GS came out with a lower-priced $50/$50 model (all projects for $50 if you buy BIMxPro version, or a single $50 fee for any one project to be shared with any number of clients running free BIMx application).

I was curious then and I am curious now whether any courtesy rebate would be offered to any early BIMxPro users (usual practice in software development) to offset GS's marketing department inability to set realistic sales goals. Nope.

As a demand for BIMxPro grew due to our (general users) restless promotion we had to buy more licenses at $50 a pop to share 2D docs with our clients.

Now, when an aging BIMx technology (after all, it is more than a decade old) is experiencing another sales drop due to other competeing applications taking their market share we get fined again by GS marketing team.

I am curious, can old supporters of BIMxPro get a refund, so we all start using software for free just like the rest of the world? 🙂

[Laszlo Nagy]

I sincerely do not think it is possible to predict how well a product will perform or how to set these financial conditions. I feel you may be a bit too harsh on GRAPHISOFT for this.

But, hey, look at it this way: from now on you will save a lot of money because all those 2D+3D Hypermodels you will use from now on will be free. Isn't that a good thing?

[Anonymous]

laszlonagy wrote:
I sincerely do not think it is possible to predict how well a product will perform

Actually, I think it is.
It is called "Marketing" and one can get a PH.D in it. 🙂

[Laszlo Nagy]

If what you say was so simple there would be a lot more wildly successful companies.
How many products come to market and the market just doesn't respond the way all those great marketing gurus who "know everything there is to know" thought it would. I just do not think it is a exact science.

[Richard Morrison]

Anton wrote:
I sincerely wish GS would think ahead in their financial development cycle.

As it stands now, we, early adopters, always get fined for buying into and supporting GS's early releases.

So I take it that you'd prefer to have the earlier versions be free and the later, more mature versions, be paid for? At what point in the development cycle should the software be financed? And it's outrageous that GS was standing there, with a gun to your head, forcing you to buy the early software. lol.

[Anonymous]

Richard wrote:
So I take it that you'd prefer to have the earlier versions be free and the later, more mature versions, be paid for?

Did't think about this way, but it is a possibility. I am not sure it is fully applicable, but this is accepted practice nowadays with a lot of software development companies going the way of free "Public Beta" to test new software and then charging money for the full commercial release.