Originally Posted by McQ I hear you, John, but even if I agreed with that interpretation 100%, the solution is really simple. Don't raise prices now. Just don't do it. There's simply no justification in the video or interview given for such a massive increase now. Again, it's carrot waiving (with a little bit of stick to the low level [money-wise] Pro users). Split the service. Or announce that the service levels will be split in October, with price changes going into effect as well. Give the low level Pros something other than, "We die inside..." (man that was really a dumb thing to say by DM, since the price increase is the action that negates the words).

Apparently, you didn't watch the same video I did. If they don't do something, they're going to get eaten by their storage costs. The explosion of high res cameras, success of online selling, improvement in upload bandwidth and improvement in uploaders has led to people uploading a LOT more GBs than they used to. This storage use has grown way, way faster than the cost of reliable disk storage has declined. As such, their current revenue won't successfully cover the rising storage costs (either now or soon in the future) and provide enough retained earnings to fund all the new features we're clamoring for. They have to do something and it appears they feel they have to do something very soon.

I heard that they are considering options for a lower storage using pro that might be available around the $150 level, but that they don't have the infrastructure to implement that now (e.g. they will have to build some stuff first before they could offer that). As such they can't implement that now or by Oct. 15.

So, it seems like you say they should not raise prices now, but that doesn't help solve their storage cost issue. Then, you say they should give the low levels pros a different option next month, but they don't have that implemented yet. So, the only thing I see that you're saying they can actually do is just cancel the price increase until they have something implemented for lower-storage-using pros. That is a legitimate option, but it's up to Smugmug to assess the financial consequences of that vs. the path they're on now (with the price increase) and decide which way they want to go.

Originally Posted by jfriend Apparently, you didn't watch the same video I did. If they don't do something, they're going to get eaten by their storage costs. The explosion of high res cameras, success of online selling, improvement in upload bandwidth and improvement in uploaders has led to people uploading a LOT more GBs than they used to. This storage use has grown way, way faster than the cost of reliable disk storage has declined. As such, their current revenue won't successfully cover the rising storage costs (either now or soon in the future) and provide enough retained earnings to fund all the new features we're clamoring for. They have to do something and it appears they feel they have to do something very soon.

Yep, that's the same video, John. I heard all that, and I understand it. My interpretation of it is that this situation is a failure of the company to manage their business costs properly and it's not the customer's fault. I know I'm not alone in that interpretation, as the many threads, blog posts, FB and Twitter posts indicate. The failure of SM to accurately manage their costs has caused them to tag their customers unexpectedly with a sharp increase in price for the service. That's what most of us are miffed about.

Originally Posted by jfriend I heard that they are considering options for a lower storage using pro that might be available around the $150 level, but that they don't have the infrastructure to implement that now (e.g. they will have to build some stuff first before they could offer that). As such they can't implement that now or by Oct. 15.

I did not hear this apparently. I either missed it, or misinterpreted something that was along these lines. But I did not hear a direct and positive commitment to doing this. Mea culpa if I missed it.

Originally Posted by jfriend So, it seems like you say they should not raise prices now, but that doesn't help solve their storage cost issue.

This is another issue that I think is a failure on their part to accurately manage their business. Again, not the customer's fault, but they are willing to tag us with the penalty for their mistake.

Originally Posted by jfriend Then, you say they should give the low levels pros a different option next month, but they don't have that implemented yet. So, the only thing I see that you're saying they can actually do is just cancel the price increase until they have something implemented for lower-storage-using pros. That is a legitimate option, but it's up to Smugmug to assess the financial consequences of that vs. the path they're on now (with the price increase) and decide which way they want to go.

I agree with all you've said here, with the clarification that I'm saying there is nothing necessary for them to need to implement for the lower-storage-using pros. That's already in place. I do agree that it's up to SM to assess the financial consequences, of course. It's their company and they've ultimately got to do what is necessary to be viable. That's where it gets tricky for any service type business.

The balance is remembering that they exist solely for the customer. They created a company voluntarily. They asked for customers voluntarily. They're only purpose is to meet the needs of their customers as best they can. It isn't that we the customers are "always right" or anything like that, it's simply about the company treating their customers like they want to keep the customers. This whole debacle is the anti-version of wanting to keep customers. If they can manage this situation appropriately, and without being disingenuous (as I feel they have been, despite everything they say), then all is well.

I'm still waiting to see what comes.

Originally Posted by McQ Yep, that's the same video, John. I heard all that, and I understand it. My interpretation of it is that this situation is a failure of the company to manage their business costs properly and it's not the customer's fault. I know I'm not alone in that interpretation, as the many threads, blog posts, FB and Twitter posts indicate. The failure of SM to accurately manage their costs has caused them to tag their customers unexpectedly with a sharp increase in price for the service. That's what most of us are miffed about.

That's fine to be miffed. They messed up by not predicting the explosion in storage costs. They messed up by not realizing that they needed to encourage customers to manage their own storage. Unlimited storage for their photography site turns out not to work long term at the prices they were charging. They need to address that issue to maintain a healthy service and business. It is not an option to do nothing even though customers may want them to not change anything.

Originally Posted by McQ I did not hear this apparently. I either missed it, or misinterpreted something that was along these lines. But I did not hear a direct and positive commitment to doing this. Mea culpa if I missed it.

You have to read between the lines where the answers indicate that they've discussed a lower storage option and evaluated what it would take to implement. They did not come out and say they would do such a thing, but I'm confident they will because a low storage user at $150/yr is a good business opportunity and I think they will want that business as much as they want a $300/yr customer that uses more storage.

Originally Posted by McQ This is another issue that I think is a failure on their part to accurately manage their business. Again, not the customer's fault, but they are willing to tag us with the penalty for their mistake.

This is mostly an emotional statement (which I understand), but the fact remains that they need to fix the economics of their business. Changes are going to happen whether you like what those changes are or not.

Originally Posted by McQ I agree with all you've said here, with the clarification that I'm saying there is nothing necessary for them to need to implement for the lower-storage-using pros. That's already in place. I do agree that it's up to SM to assess the financial consequences, of course. It's their company and they've ultimately got to do what is necessary to be viable. That's where it gets tricky for any service type business.

This is where I think you and I see things differently. Suppose (as you suggest) they start offering a low storage pro option for $150 tomorrow that allows 20GB. I sign up and immediately upload 100GB. Smugmug needs infrastructure to either prevent me from uploading more than my limit or start charging me a higher amount because of my higher storage (or something in between). Today, they don't have that infrastructure and it takes time to code, test and implement things like that. Without it, they'd have to be charging based on an honor system or by paying people to manually review every account every day. Neither of those is practical at their volume of activity.

Originally Posted by McQ The balance is remembering that they exist solely for the customer. They created a company voluntarily. They asked for customers voluntarily. They're only purpose is to meet the needs of their customers as best they can. It isn't that we the customers are "always right" or anything like that, it's simply about the company treating their customers like they want to keep the customers. This whole debacle is the anti-version of wanting to keep customers. If they can manage this situation appropriately, and without being disingenuous (as I feel they have been, despite everything they say), then all is well. I'm still waiting to see what comes.

Actually, they exist to be a successful business. It so happens that they need to meet the needs of some set of customers in order to make a successful business, but if there are customers that aren't compatible with a successful business such as a standard user who has 2TB of images and won't ever pay any more than what the standard account costs, then they may weed out those customers at some point because they aren't compatible with a successful business. Smugmug gets to decide which set of customers they will serve or to set the conditions under which people can be customers.

Originally Posted by jfriend This is where I think you and I see things differently. Suppose (as you suggest) they start offering a low storage pro option for $150 tomorrow that allows 20GB. I sign up and immediately upload 100GB. Smugmug needs infrastructure to either prevent me from uploading more than my limit or start charging me a higher amount because of my higher storage (or something in between). Today, they don't have that infrastructure and it takes time to code, test and implement things like that. Without it, they'd have to be charging based on an honor system or by paying people to manually review every account every day. Neither of those is practical at their volume of activity.

This is a very valid point and explanation, John. I've thought of it as needing to do nothing, but what you've said here makes sense.

Originally Posted by jfriend Actually, they exist to be a successful business. It so happens that they need to meet the needs of some set of customers in order to make a successful business, but if there are customers that aren't compatible with a successful business such as a standard user who has 2TB of images and won't ever pay any more than what the standard account costs, then they may weed out those customers at some point because they aren't compatible with a successful business. Smugmug gets to decide which set of customers they will serve or to set the conditions under which people can be customers.

I agree, of course, they need to be successful as a business. I take that as a given. My point was that they chose to do a line of work that is service-based, which requires a different "touch" with customers. And I understand that the business needs to be modified so that they don't get crushed by a customer base that sucks up most of their resources without returning an appropriate level of subscription fees. It just seems that the baby is being thrown out with the bath water here.

I think most of us agree on SM needing to stay vibrant and viable. It's how they choose to do so that becomes less agreed upon.

Thanks for all the work you personally have done to help me and the other SM customers, by the way, John. I know you've put a great deal into making the whole SM experience much better. Wanted you to know its appreciated.

Originally Posted by McQ It just seems that the baby is being thrown out with the bath water here.

If they want to keep the low-storage consuming pro or the customer who will manage their storage to a lower amount in exchange for a $150 annual pro subscription (which I think would be an intelligent business decision), then they messed up and we will have to see if they take actions to fix that. I suspect they will, but we will see.

Originally Posted by McQ Thanks for all the work you personally have done to help me and the other SM customers, by the way, John. I know you've put a great deal into making the whole SM experience much better. Wanted you to know its appreciated.

Thanks.

Quick question, if I downgrade to "Power" user at the time of my renewal will my site automatically be branded with the smugmug pro logo everywhere or any smugmug logos at that? Right now there are none which is perfect.

Originally Posted by Dota Quick question, if I downgrade to "Power" user at the time of my renewal will my site automatically be branded with the smugmug pro logo everywhere or any smugmug logos at that? Right now there are none which is perfect.

Hi Dota

The Power account will have the regular SmugMug logo, rather than the SmugMug Pro logo, added. The SmugMug branding cannot be removed from places like the browser tab or from videos that you have on your site with the Power account.

Hope that helps.

I did watch the video, and while I had decided to stay before watching the video, it only reinforces that I'm making the right decision. The four things that Chris says are coming down the pike first are the four things I most want. I realize that it's not SM policy to put a timeline on these things, but to actually get an acknowledgement that these four things are at the top of the heap makes me feel pretty good about the future.

It seems counter-intuitive to deny the ability to sell to ANYONE who pays to use Smugmug. Even sites like CafePress let their free accounts mark up products (though free accounts are limited to one image on one product). Reading through this thread it is obvious that the ability to sell even just a few prints means a great deal to many who want Smug's quality either for personal keepsakes or as they try to grow a viable photography business.

One solution is to standardize the ability to purchase for all subscriptions except the top one. Simply include a standard watermark and set a standard markup across-the-board on the products; let those paying top dollar have full bells & whistles.

PJ.

I'll be patient for a while to learn of the new offerings, but at the end of the day, make a demonstrative statement of major enhancements, SM....anything less will be the gurgling sound of Pro accounts going down the drain....

Longtime SM Pro user. Price increase wasn't fatal to me, but did prompt me to see what else was out there. ZF provides most of what I get with SM and is less expensive and simpler to customize. And their iPad app works. So I will not be renewing with SM. My first "pro" sale was made through SM, and there is lots I'll miss, especially the Heroes (and they are aptly named). But business is business. Nonetheless, I move on with a heavy heart. Thanks for everything SM.

Take a look at this comparison of Smugmug, Zenfolio and Photoshelter - doesn't take account of the price increase but very useful especially for pros
http://www.photosharingreviews.com/r...vs-smugmug.php

The question is, does SmugMug want to cater to everyone? I would prefer they not detrimentally split their focus on long-term hobbyists that don't have an inkling to ever make more than $500 per year but instead cater to those that want to make more than $500 per year.

I suspect there might be a correlation between the commission fees dropping on digital downloads, the yearly fee increasing and those that are now eager to drop their digital downloads below $1 each and get as close to $0.01 as they can.

Time to stop driving the market down you penny lovers and step up to support your penny loving ways.

As for those on the fence about whether to stay here or leave based on your renewal date... I'd say, contact the help desk so that you can lock in the lower rate for another year before jumping ship if you don't want to downgrade. Perhaps in a year or less, you'll come to quietly and reluctantly appreciate the higher yearly fee. Or maybe it will just delay the inevitable and really screw up SM counting on your renewals at the highest tier.

Good luck to y'all and all our theories we have regarding this price increase. May it work out for us all. Either way, don't forget to check out http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com and http://www.networksolutions.com if you're unhappy with SM and all of the other choices presented here so far.

Originally Posted by Pure Energy The question is, does SmugMug want to cater to everyone? I would prefer they not detrimentally split their focus on long-term hobbyists that don't have an inkling to ever make more than $500 per year but instead cater to those that want to make more than $500 per year.

I agree with this. There is clearly a difference between the needs of hobbyists and serious working pros. So SmugMug made their choice.

My question is: Are they sure they chose the right market segment? SmugMug has always struck me as being just perfect for prosumers, weekend warriors, etc. Their casual style and love of photography seems to fit best with the enthusiast crowd.

Are there really enough serious pros in their mix to make up for the loss of the mass-custom market represented by the light-pros?

Originally Posted by Ann McRae Hi Dota The Power account will have the regular SmugMug logo, rather than the SmugMug Pro logo, added. The SmugMug branding cannot be removed from places like the browser tab or from videos that you have on your site with the Power account. Hope that helps.

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/photo-sharing-features/

Really? Where is that explained on the feature comparisons? Any other limits in customization that we will find if we downgrade to Power?

Sorry - rereading my reply now and I see I was not clear. If you display the SmugMug header on your site and have a power account, then the logo displayed is the regular SmugMug logo.

You will not be able to remove the SmugMug footer (this is true for all account levels) nor will you be able to remove the SmugMug brand from the browser tab or from video if you choose a Power account.

I hope that is clearer.

ann

Originally Posted by beast625 Longtime SM Pro user. Price increase wasn't fatal to me, but did prompt me to see what else was out there. ZF provides most of what I get with SM and is less expensive and simpler to customize. And their iPad app works. So I will not be renewing with SM. My first "pro" sale was made through SM, and there is lots I'll miss, especially the Heroes (and they are aptly named). But business is business. Nonetheless, I move on with a heavy heart. Thanks for everything SM.

Did you really feel like the customization was easier? I took a couple of cracks at it, and could get nothing even close to a decent looking site.

I feel like their customization tool is overly complex to get something looking decent.

Originally Posted by GRBlizz I agree with this. There is clearly a difference between the needs of hobbyists and serious working pros. So SmugMug made their choice. My question is: Are they sure they chose the right market segment? SmugMug has always struck me as being just perfect for prosumers, weekend warriors, etc. Their casual style and love of photography seems to fit best with the enthusiast crowd. Are there really enough serious pros in their mix to make up for the loss of the mass-custom market represented by the light-pros?

Ah yes, the type of photographer I try to distance myself from everyday is the prosumer weekend warrior. That $300 entry point to have photos online would have been a hard sell to me when I was choosing a site. It still might be for me when my renewal date comes up.

I think one stat SmugMug needs to look at is how many people are paying the current PRO yearly fee... yearly or monthly?

I know that when I could afford it, I paid for a storage unit I have the whole amount for the year in order to take advantage of their "pay 11 months in advance, get one month free." However, I then started to notice my yearly fee rising every year. Ever since I started paying monthly a few years ago, they haven't raised my monthly rates. Finally an expense I could count on.

And don't be fooled by those numbers. It's far easier for SmugMug to charge that yearly fee to my credit card that continues to bill me for my SmugMug purchase what I owe for the rest of the year (and sometimes beyond). The storage unit, on the other hand requires cash/check and thus my decision to pay monthly was easier to arrive at.

Overall, at $300 per year, I don't want to learn any CSS crap EVER. Customer service will now be... "what do you want? We'll paste the code." Don't forget the other things I've wanted from day one many days/weeks/months/years ago. Don't forget that I narrowed down my choices to three to five companies before deciding upon SM. And don't forget that you will force me to do what every business person does: consider those three to five options again with all of the new choices out there and to ponder the following:

will the new site be better, just as good or worse?

Originally Posted by jwashburn Did you really feel like the customization was easier? I took a couple of cracks at it, and could get nothing even close to a decent looking site. I feel like their customization tool is overly complex to get something looking decent.

Yes I did. For me, significantly easier. I suspect there is more depth to the SM customization options, but what ZF has is adequate for me. I was able to develop a better site for my needs in one evening than I had on SM after several years of tinkering. That is not necessarily SM's fault, but I do feel the ZF experience is more user-friendly with a less severe learning curve.

I'd like to reiterate - I was a happy smugger and not considering a switch until the price increase. As stated by others, I too believe SM made a choice in favor of Pros over enthusiasts. While not happy with the choice, I fully support their right to choose. It may actually work out better for both of us. And I wish them incredible success.

Originally Posted by Ann McRae Sorry - rereading my reply now and I see I was not clear. If you display the SmugMug header on your site and have a power account, then the logo displayed is the regular SmugMug logo. You will not be able to remove the SmugMug footer (this is true for all account levels) nor will you be able to remove the SmugMug brand from the browser tab or from video if you choose a Power account. I hope that is clearer. ann

Ah, thank you. So you are saying the option to set a Favicon will not be active in the customization screen for Power users? Or that it can be set, but SM code will override it? It's a minor thing, but since we have SmugMug integrated as the photo section of our nonprofit website, it would be nice to have it consistent. Thanks for clarifying.