Shift to a subscription model - your questions are welcome

[Akos Pfemeter]

Dear Community,

You may have already read the press release or the Insights post about our strategic shift to a subscription model. 

Here is a quick summary of the news:

BUDAPEST, April 2, 2024—Graphisoft, the leading Building Information Modeling (BIM) software solution developer for architecture and multidisciplinary design, today announced that, as part of its strategic shift to a sustainable subscription software delivery model, perpetual licenses will be gradually phased out by the end of 2025. This change does not affect the delivery of Software Service Agreement (SSA)/Forward subscription services to existing customers. 

Archicad perpetual and SSA/Forward licenses will be available for new customers through December 31, 2024, and to existing customers through December 31, 2025. Starting in 2026, Archicad will be available only through subscription. Active SSA/Forward contracts will continue to be serviced beyond 2025. Alternatively, SSA/Forward customers can convert to Archicad Collaborate subscriptions at the same price as SSA/Forward. This offer is designed to help existing SSA/Forward subscribers take full advantage of the Archicad Collaborate subscription, which combines award-winning Archicad for architectural design with BIMx and BIMcloud SaaS for fast, efficient, secure, real-time access to shared projects.

Please ask your questions and share your thoughts here -- Graphisoft's expert team will try and provide answer to all sorts of questions you may have!
Thank you.
----------------------

Edit by Moderator:  here is the link to the evolving information/FAQ page about this announcement:

https://graphisoft.com/convert-ssa-forward-to-archicad-collaborate/

[Jp1138]

The way it´s written you won´t be able to buy more perpetual licenses, but the existing ones will, of course, continue to work. They will, at the moment, maintain some kind of SSA service, at least until the end of the six years, it may seem. The problem with this is that, in the future, once SSA stops because it´s not profitable for GS, even if you still mantain your license, your software may stop working due to OS updates (this is specially true for apple users) without GS issuing patches of any kind for perpetual licenses. Usually the part of the software that controls the licensing is very sensitive in this regard. And if you loose your software key or your hardware one malfunctions, you may not be able to recover it. It´s like using a software of a company that no longer exists. In the long run you are being forced to subscribe or look for alternatives.

[DGSketcher]

I see three problems...

Despite the "by mutual agreement" departure of Huw Roberts there is absolutely no acceptance by Graphisoft that our last five years investment has failed to materially benefit the architectural users of the software and there doesn't appear to be any intent to change that position or compensate users. All I see in that press release is a company desperate to boost its profits by forcing users onto subscription contrary to the assurances of Marton Kiss.

If you want to charge a premium for software it should at least be fit for purpose and be seen to be delivering upgrades users want. Nobody asked for the disruption of the UI with the Structural Analytic Model. The MEP27 release was & still is a gross breach of trust and has left users stuck on AC26 despite paying for the upgrade to AC27. A negative ROI due to collapsing productivity is not an appropriate position to encourage users to maintain a subscription.

The subscription model removes the obligation of the developer to do anything more than maintain the software as-is, and let's be honest it isn't in a good place. With the perpetual model the developer needs to engage with users to keep them upgrading. Subscription isn't for the user benefit, it is the legitimised face of RANSOMWARE.

No doubt this release is there to pre-empt the coming perpetual user SSA/Forward price hike.

[thesleepofreason]

As always with GS the marketing is ridiculous to the degree of being unclear - even when the subject is of great importance to users and without the benefit of the doubt it's hard not to see it as intentional.

I'm sure that there are a lot of small scale users that would like to keep the perpetual licensing (less the rampant and seemingly unjustified price increases) and thus I'm equally sure that GS will give a lot of reassurances of "continued support". But looking at the subscription conversion program it's obvious that that the future path has a divergence with the perpetual path coming to a stop sooner or later (although that might still be preferable to running of a cliff!?) 

Or how is the marketing below compatible with assurances that perpetual licences will be a viable path forward? Or has marketing just created a false dilemma?

[DGSketcher]

In context of MEP 27, I am concerned by the "Built-in updater". There have been a number of occasions recently where updates have caused disruption for the user, MEP 27 being the worst example. So what happens if AC runs the built in updater and the impacts of the update are problematic to your office? Can you rewind? I assume you don't get to download an installer file anymore, which previously would allow you to recover your position to an earlier version. What happens if AC changes / breaks Objects without notification, can I reload the old version? At the end of the day it's about autonomy and trust and that has been broken too many times recently.

[Karl Ottenstein]

@thesleepofreason Could you give a link to where you found the Perpetual vs Cloud Subscription graphic?  I'd comment on the apparant major issues to we users in that graphic if I knew where it came from and the context in which Graphisoft published it.  Thanks!

[Mathias Jonathan]

@Karl Ottenstein  Here: https://graphisoft.com/convert-ssa-forward-to-archicad-collaborate

[Karl Ottenstein]

Thank you!  Wow.  More questions than answers there...  The big technical question is one that @vlahtinen raised an hour ago.  With this table, Graphisoft is saying that the subscription people will get continuous updates vs the perpetual licenses... and if that is so, then how can Teamwork projects be joined by people with both license types?

But, maybe I'm dreaming about 'continuous updates' more like all other subscription software I have which gets actual feature updates - not just bug fixes - on a monthly / bimonthly basis ... and if that were the case for Archicad subscription, then the build numbers would not match perpetual.  (However, it begs the question, what is the perpetual licence holder receiving for their SSA/Forward subscription if not those same updates?)

So, in trying to distinguish subscription over perpetual with SSA/Forward - Graphisoft seems to only be muddying the waters ever more  (for me at least).

(The discount offered on that page for the first and second 3 years (6 years total) of conversion will probably be appearling to large firms who want BIMcloud SaaS anyway.)

Thanks again, Mathias!

[DCorcoran]

I just purchased a perpetual license from the local NW reseller, ARCHVISTA consulting, who assured me that the SSA would be available going forward no matter what for those of us with the PL.  I was on the fence and then there was a 20% off on perpetual licenses.   Was this a way for Graphisoft to make some quick cash?   Accounting for SSA annual increases my math showed that in year 3 I would come out a bit ahead with the PL vs the subscription, assuming both go up about the same each year (which I based on previous year increases). 

[Anita_Slocombe]

Unfortunately, this is all marketing lies. When I signed up two years ago, the SSA forward agreement was sold to me as a locked-in price, but it went up by 23% last year. It was one of the only reasons I paid the upfront fees for a perpetual license. when I asked my rep, they said they couldn't remember this "sucked-in" GS and the reseller is seriously losing my trust. Why take payments knowing these small businesses are going into debt, planning ahead to wear the cost over a few years only to now need to pay even more?

[proto]

Mine was similar. Last year, I was $880/seat for SSA/FW. This year it's $1,050/seat. +19% in one year. [previous yr was $800 --> $880, a 10% bump]

And now the prospect of a subscription license is another bump. 1yr of subscription (at what I'm told is a "discount") = $1,152. That is a 31% jump from my cost last year.

Graphisoft says in their press release "Alternatively, SSA/Forward customers can convert to Archicad Collaborate subscriptions at the same price as SSA/Forward." [emphasis is mine]

I'm not seeing either a "discount" or a "same price."

And the 3-year pre-purchase is like doing a full new seat at the perpetual purchase cost. We are being railroaded into paying for all new software seats every few years, instead of "subscription" or "upgrade costs". I don't have the cash to pre-purchase 3-yr subscriptions.

I'm a small office -- I can't imagine the software costs for large offices.  I will suck it up this year and see how it goes, but this pricing model may actually cause me to abandon Archicad.

[Barry Kelly]

@proto 

You do not need to take up subscription or the 3 year deal (which will convert you to subscription).

Stay with your SSA.

As far a I can make out, the subscription includes BIMCloud and BIMx and so is a little more expensive than Archicad alone.

If your SSA fees do not include BIMCloud, then that would explain why it is around 10% cheaper than the offer (which does include BIMCloud).

Although I personally think you should get the 3 year deal (if you want to take it up) at your current SSA price as stated in the FAQs.

That is unless there has been another increase since your last 20% increase, but if that was recent, there should be a new increase.

So, stay with the SSA and nothing should change (except annual increases we can always expect it seems).

Barry.

[Eric Milberger]

This description is eye-opening and a little scary.  What make it so complicated?  Why not operate both as the cloud?

[Mjules]

I consider the perpetual license as one of the ArchiCAD's features, and it's the only one that still keeps me as a customer at Graphisoft since our recommendations for the software have not been heard. To me, it would be more beneficial for the company to follow the advice of its existing customers instead of following what Autodesk is doing. 

[jl_lt]

It's all right Akos! 

with this move, You only:

A) lose one of your biggest remaining perceived advantages over revit. Now you become undistinguishable from it, minus a trully functional structural and mep modules, vast resources and third party support and an industry-wide acceptance (a little bit forced, yes, but acceptance nontheless).

B) lose your perceived status as "underdog that could", which now becomes "the Wannabe that couldnt". Not cool.

C) get endless dissapointment from your instaled user base which is also your main marketing machine, many of which are small practices or solo practices.  It Will be interesting to know how many users accept this new model with a smile. My guess is not many.   Since You have been toying with this idea for some time now (You know You did!), You can be assured that many of us have already explored and researched other options in case You choose to follow this route.

D) in relation to point a),  You greatly reduce your ability to attract new users in emerging markets, because now that conditions will be the same, there is little incentive for new users to take a risk with you; most new users will choose Revit, unless You either significantly (i mean significantly) drop the price or make Archicad a competing product to all the features Revit offers, but i don't see any of it happening.  Anyway, i don't know if You actually want to catter to this market.

E)Will see a Boost in revenue... For 2 or 3 years max. Then it will drop abruptly, once more competition emerges, which is inevitable. Maybe You already know this.

F)are trying to offset what have now become years of lagging behind in features and make a quick buck. If You had fixed and addressed the problems that have been presented in these forum for years now, maybe You could have been more prepared for a move in this directon.  That way You could have said "look guys, we put in the work!  we fixed the issues and we have an up to date product with which you can actually compete with the neighbors. This new revenue model will help us grow into the future. No one here loves it, but its necesary- Come along with us!".  You had half a decade now to do this. Many of us would have understood and hopped aboard without much complain.    

But instead of that, with what You are doing right now it sounds more like this: "hey! We charged You for years but we actually didnt fix any of the Main issues You constantly requested and now we are going to charge You even more! by the way, no checks please, just hard cold cash. Thanks, bye". 

other than that, it's all right!

[Mjules]

From my opinion, it's too late to compete with Revit. 

[jl_lt]

Yes, but they think they can

[Jp1138]

Competing by becoming worse... Maybe they know something we don´t, but I don´t get it 🤔

[jl_lt]

My real guess is that they know that Bim as a concept and selling point is on it's last legs. AI came to finish the job and put it to rest.

So, from a financial point of view it makes much more sense to grab this last cash influx (even with the cost of alienating half your current users) with very little investment upfront than trying to compete and write the software from the ground up and put it up to date with current times and current technology (AI, generative design, etc)  which i estimate would cost them in the hundreds of millions between research, development and implementation.

[Jp1138]

Seeing what guys like these https://architechtures.com/es are doing, i don´t think so many millions are needed, just the will to steer course if that is what is wanted. But right now I don´t know if GS has a clear vision of what they want, apart from our money 😅

[Eric Milberger]

It is too late in the big picture - However if pricing was better - on Archicad - which is a better product - Then we could be competitive.

But that would require a pricing and subscription that would bring in new Engineers and Architects.  We need to get Architcad to Commerical Engineers and not just focus on residential.

But if the cost is not less than the investment for Revit - it becomes a hard sell as EVERY A/E office you walk into in the US is Revit.

Archicad is the best product - but it is not the most REQUIRED product from government to Commerical projects.

[vlahtinen]

What plans do you have in store for BIMcloud in the future? Will it still be provided for on-premise installations going forward?

Also, is it possible and advisable to use Archicad with both licensing types (Perpetual and Cloud Subscription) in the same teamwork project? If licensing type affects how Archicad is updated (yearly upgrades vs. continuous updates), how is it ensured that differing versions maintain compatibility in teamwork projects?