# Has the Photography Plan changed?  Did Classic just double in price?



## Linwood Ferguson

I was looking up something for someone, and found I can no longer find the (US) $10/mo photography plan to includes Classic.

When I look at the "all plans" I see a "Lightroom CC Plan (1TB)" that is $10/mo with only CC, or a photography plan that includes CC + Classic and 1TB; there used to be a small-storage version of that for $10.

Is it no longer available?

Did my price for Classic just double?

Creative Cloud pricing and membership plans | Adobe Creative Cloud


----------



## Hal P Anderson

That site redirected me to the equivalent Canadian page, where you can still get the 20GB plan for 9.99 USD/month. Of course they may not have updated that page yet.


----------



## raucous

I'm still seeing the 9.99 USD/month (20GB) plan if I'm logged in to Adobe's US site with an ID that has an existing CC subscription. However if I'm not logged in, I, like you, only see the 19.99 USD/month (1TB) option for Classic and it's buried behind the "Compare Photography Plans" link.


----------



## Jim Wilde

Not seeing any problem here, UK site, US site, logged in, not logged in....all show the three variations of the Photography Plan using the drop down list, and the price and plan contents update dynamically as I change selection.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Sounds like split testing... I think you can safely ignore it.


----------



## raucous

Jim Wilde said:


> Not seeing any problem here, UK site, US site, logged in, not logged in....all show the three variations of the Photography Plan using the drop down list, and the price and plan contents update dynamically as I change selection.


Wow. That's weird. Those options weren't there an hour and a half ago. Now I'm seeing what you describe. Maybe we saw the site in some intermediate state? Thanks for pointing out the updated update.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

raucous said:


> Maybe we saw the site in some intermediate state?


That's what companies do when they're split testing. They show some prices/purchase options to some people and the normal ones to everyone and see what percentage of people buy. Sometimes they do it with different sales copy to see which version converts the most visitors to buyers.


----------



## Hal P Anderson

Victoria Bampton said:


> That's what companies do when they're split testing.


That seems like a dangerous (for the company) method of doing market research.


----------



## johnbeardy

I have seen other reports of people in the US not being shown the $9.99 Photography Plan, but I always believe in cockup being far more likely than conspiracy.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

johnbeardy said:


> I have seen other reports of people in the US not being shown the $9.99 Photography Plan, but I always believe in cockup being far more likely than conspiracy.



I wonder if someone posted what will become the new price early, then yanked it.   Adobe Max starts today, it's a time perfect for announcements.

But let's hope not.  When I look now it's also back to "normal".


----------



## Zenon

That was reported on all the major forums over the last several days. They are testing the waters. I believe $9.99 was a time limited offer. If you signed up you got that price permanently - not including general increases that will happen.  Looked like Adobe decided to keep the $9.99 but might be investigating $19.99 for new customers.


----------



## Zenon

Ferguson said:


> I wonder if someone posted what will become the new price early, then yanked it.   Adobe Max starts today, it's a time perfect for announcements.
> 
> But let's hope not.  When I look now it's also back to "normal".



On other forums several people opening the same link would see different pricing. The easiest way to find $9.99 is to go to B&H, Amazon, etc.


----------



## johnbeardy

I wouldn't describe $9.99 for the Photography Plan + 20gb as a time limited offer. No price is offered for ever, and this was left as open ended as any pricing. I tell you, cockup is always more likely!


----------



## Zenon

I'm not talking about doubling the price. After 5 years the all app plan went up 6%. For $9.99 that comes out to about 60 cents. Of course I'm not saying that I know it will be 6%. It could be 10% but there will be an increase some day. I can't think of anything that has not gone up in price. I'm not defending it, I'm just be a realist and I expect an increase one day. 

I have a bad memory but I remember this.

Adobe expands Photoshop and Lightroom offer


----------



## Zenon

Everyday this link was different. It came up as the plan for $9.99 for me but the pricing would spin for a few seconds. Others got the spin and $19.99 came up. Now it says the latest release of LR CC is here. So they were making a bunch of changes.       

Adobe Creative Cloud Photography plan | Professional photo editing software


----------



## tspear

Well, I just checked, the 9.99 plan is still available. And talking to the sales desk, they are not aware of any plans to change it.

Tim


----------



## PhilBurton

Hal P Anderson said:


> That seems like a dangerous (for the company) method of doing market research.


Agree.  How would anyone feel if they had just signed up for the $20 plan, when their needs would have been satisfied by the $10 plan.

Usually "split testing" is done with short-term or one-time purchases.  And to be truly valid, Adobe should have created a $5/month plan.  That way, they could truly determine price sensitivity (or as the economists call it, "price elasticity").  Maybe at $5/month, they could attract some of the "just say no to subscriptions" people.

Phil Burton


----------



## Zenon

That would be a good idea but I wouldn't hold my breath. It is like a cable packages that makes you pay for a bunch of stations you don't want. In Canada they passed legislation to stop that but they found ways around it.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

So I mentioned to someone else the $10 price and cautioned to look carefully and sure enough, this morning they could not find the old style 20gb plan again (in the US).  When I searched (just now) it was back.  So Adobe is still messing around with this. 

Makes me worry there's bad news coming.  If not, then makes me think they are just plain incompetent, and confusing their audience.


----------



## Zenon

The 1TB  plan is on sale for $14.99. Maybe they were updating at the time.


----------



## johnbeardy

Ferguson said:


> Makes me worry there's bad news coming.  If not, then makes me think they are just plain incompetent, and confusing their audience.



I think it's best to believe in cockup rather than conspiracy!


----------



## tspear

Ferguson said:


> So I mentioned to someone else the $10 price and cautioned to look carefully and sure enough, this morning they could not find the old style 20gb plan again (in the US).  When I searched (just now) it was back.  So Adobe is still messing around with this.
> 
> Makes me worry there's bad news coming.  If not, then makes me think they are just plain incompetent, and confusing their audience.



Halon's Razon: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity 
Hanlon's razor - Wikipedia

Tim


----------



## Zenon

I thought if Occam's as soon as I read that. Never that variation before. Thanks


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

tspear said:


> Halon's Razon: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity


Please don't let that be widely known, or all news media will need to shut down with nothing to talk about.


----------



## Replytoken

I hate to revive this thread, but I was looking at a few offers from B&H and then looked at the Adobe web site and it appears that the $10 Classic plan is not showing up.  More split pricing or is this now permanent?

--Ken


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

I was looking up something for someone, and found I can no longer find the (US) $10/mo photography plan to includes Classic.

When I look at the "all plans" I see a "Lightroom CC Plan (1TB)" that is $10/mo with only CC, or a photography plan that includes CC + Classic and 1TB; there used to be a small-storage version of that for $10.

Is it no longer available?

Did my price for Classic just double?

Creative Cloud pricing and membership plans | Adobe Creative Cloud


----------



## Victoria Bampton

It's still showing up ok from here, so more split testing I guess.


----------



## Zenon

Still there. 

https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/plans.html


----------



## stevevp

Still $9.99 if you click to Choose a Plan here: Adobe Creative Cloud Photography plan | Professional photo editing software


----------



## Califdan

Seems to be the same.   Photographer plan still $9.99 for Photoshop, LR Classic, LR CC, Spark,  20gb cloud storage.


----------



## Replytoken

Zenon said:


> Still there.
> 
> https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/plans.html


Not from my machine.  I have tried all of the links and I am still not seeing the 20G/$10USD plan on their web site.

--Ken


----------



## PhilBurton

Replytoken said:


> Not from my machine.  I have tried all of the links and I am still not seeing the 20G/$10USD plan on their web site.
> 
> --Ken


Ken,

I thought for a minute that Adobe is showing different prices in different countries, so I just tried the link above, and this is the page that results.  I am currently in New York State and presumably you are in Washington State, but it's inconceivable that Adobe would have different prices for different states or provinces.

May I suggest that you try a different browser.  If it matters my default browser is FireFox.


----------



## Replytoken

PhilBurton said:


> Ken,
> 
> I thought for a minute that Adobe is showing different prices in different countries, so I just tried the link above, and this is the page that results.  I am currently in New York State and presumably you are in Washington State, but it's inconceivable that Adobe would have different prices for different states or provinces.
> 
> May I suggest that you try a different browser.  If it matters my default browser is FireFox.
> 
> View attachment 12395


Bingo!  I tried a different browser and received the 20GB plan.  Shame on Adobe!  I can understand split testing, but pricing based on your cookies just seems like bad behavior in my book.

--Ken


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Replytoken said:


> I can understand split testing, but pricing based on your cookies just seems like bad behavior in my book.



The cookies are so that the buyer sees the same price each time. You can imagine the consternation if they'd seen the $10 price the first time, then came back and found it was $20 this time. Whereas someone seeing $20 each time would just think that's how much it costs. Or that's the general theory of split testing anyway. It's not just an Adobe thing.


----------



## PhilBurton

Victoria Bampton said:


> The cookies are so that the buyer sees the same price each time. You can imagine the consternation if they'd seen the $10 price the first time, then came back and found it was $20 this time. Whereas someone seeing $20 each time would just think that's how much it costs. Or that's the general theory of split testing anyway. It's not just an Adobe thing.


Perhaps, but it is a profoundly anti-consumer approach.  There are accounts on the web that depending on the system (Mac or PC) or your location, Amazon stores or other websites may show you different prices.  The rationale is that Mac users, for example, are more affluent than PC users, or less price-sensitive, so that a business can show higher prices and not lose business.  It's a form of micro-targeting, but I'll repeat.  It is profoundly anti-consumer and it might even be illegal in the USA.  (Clayton Act).


----------



## Victoria Bampton

From what I understand, it's not THAT kind of micro targeting, which I agree would be very unfair. Standard split testing - the kind that Adobe does, along with practically every other marketing department - just takes a random percentage of visitors and shows them something different, to get a feel for what the market likes best. It's not just pricing, but marketing blurb, that kind of thing.


----------



## tspear

@PhilBurton 

How does the Clayton Act come into play?
Also, with demand based pricing that airlines started thirty plus years ago; why should the IT industry not follow their lead?

Tim


----------



## MikeFoto

this is not new. 

if you do any shopping on the internet, you know everyone does this all the time. cars, appliances, airline and movie tickets, internet cable plans, cosmetics, insurance plans, etc. there are hundreds of other examples.


----------



## Replytoken

Victoria Bampton said:


> The cookies are so that the buyer sees the same price each time. You can imagine the consternation if they'd seen the $10 price the first time, then came back and found it was $20 this time. Whereas someone seeing $20 each time would just think that's how much it costs. Or that's the general theory of split testing anyway. It's not just an Adobe thing.


While I do understand the need for consistency and that other companies do similar things, I am not seeing any consistency on my end of things if I have done my due diligence.  I get this is how many do business today, but it is a practice that just does not sit well with me.  And for as much as folks say that the airlines do this frequently, I have not really found that to be the case with Delta.  I use many machines, including a Chromebook that is used in Guest Mode, and I get consistent pricing from Delta on all platforms and browsers.  Having said my piece, I am going to drop this.  The plan I am considering is still available, and that was my original reason to post.  Thank you to those who helped me find the plan again and explained why it was not as easy to find as I thought it should have been.

--Ken


----------



## PhilBurton

tspear said:


> @PhilBurton
> 
> How does the Clayton Act come into play?
> Also, with demand based pricing that airlines started thirty plus years ago; why should the IT industry not follow their lead?
> 
> Tim


Tim,

*First, I'm not a lawyer.  *Second, showing different pricing  to different people for the same goods or services would be discriminatory.  Airline demand pricing, like baseball park pricing, sets different prices for different goods or services.  The 9 am direct flight from SF to NY is different from a 6 pm overnight flight that requires a change of planes.  But in this case, that pricing is available to everyone.

The idea that people who own Macs can be charged more than people who own PCs, that idea has drawn a lot of scorn.

Phil


----------



## Victoria Bampton

I think this conversation's done to death now guys.


----------



## Zenon

Amen


----------



## Jonathan Buckley

Sorry if this thread has been done to death but... I've just recommended Lightroom to a friend. I think he  needs Classic. He's on a tight budget. I want to send him a link so he can buy Classic plus 20gb. He has no need for Photoshop. The Lightroom Queen shop currently lists the Photography Plan for £9.89 and clearly states it includes Classic. Yet when I click on the links that price band only includes CC. This is crazy! Can anyone advise how I can point him in the direction of buying Classic for about £9.89? If it's possible then surely it can't make sense to make it so difficult. He will undoubtedly buy something else if I can't make this quick and easy for him!


----------



## Jim Wilde

Try this link: Compare plans | Adobe Creative Cloud Photography plan

Select the middle plan, it includes Classic, LRCC, Photoshop, 20gb cloud space. There is no plan which includes Classic but excludes Photoshop.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

I can repro. I shall pass on your comments.

In the meantime, he can grab it from Amazon (99.99!!) or grab an incognito window to go to that page. I had to do that a couple of times before I hit on the £9.89 version.


----------



## Jonathan Buckley

Thanks but for me on that link the middle plan only shows  the £19.97 1TB storage plan - no option to select 20GB. I've tried two different browsers.
It's fine to have Photoshop as well but it needs to be the Classic plus 20GB option at £9.89. That's the one I have myself and the one advertised on the Lightroom Queen shop.


----------



## Jonathan Buckley

Victoria Bampton said:


> I can repro. I shall pass on your comments.
> 
> In the meantime, he can grab it from Amazon (99.99!!) or grab an incognito window to go to that page. I had to do that a couple of times before I hit on the £9.89 version.



Sorry Victoria, I posted before seeing your reply. Yes I can see it on Amazon or by using Incognito. Maybe he would have seen the option too if it's based on cookies. But honestly, I wasted the best part of an hour this morning. I'm trying to spread the word here and whatever the reasoning behind Adobe's policy they certainly don't make it easy and nearly lost a new customer. It might also be handy if the LR Queen shop page offered some sort of advice on this too as it is confusing to select the Photography Plan on LRQ then not find the described options available.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Jonathan Buckley said:


> It might also be handy if the LR Queen shop page offered some sort of advice on this too as it is confusing to select the Photography Plan on LRQ then not find the described options available.


TBH it was the first I'd heard of the split testing expanding outside of the US.


----------



## Rob_Cullen

In Aus- I just checked the "Buy all Products" page I had bookmarked:
https://www.adobe.com/au/products/c...=de_252Fdocuments&filters=de_252Fe-signaturesI still see the US$10 plan.


----------



## tspear

@Victoria Bampton

You may want to pass on to Adobe that they lost three sales this past week as I directed friends to Lr Classic. None had an interest in the cloud versions, and were not willing to chase down Adobe to get it. All felt it meant that Adobe was killing the Classic version so they felt it served no purpose to invest in a dead product.


----------



## Zenon

Again I typed in Adobe in the browser search field and the main page came up. I clicked on learn about the plan and on the next page clicked on choose the right plan for you (all plans and pricing) and all 3 showed up.

This is odd. Adobe definitely wants you to use LR CC and  while people speculate that Classic will die ( I wonder myself) the $20 month plan doesn't even offer LR CC.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

I was looking up something for someone, and found I can no longer find the (US) $10/mo photography plan to includes Classic.

When I look at the "all plans" I see a "Lightroom CC Plan (1TB)" that is $10/mo with only CC, or a photography plan that includes CC + Classic and 1TB; there used to be a small-storage version of that for $10.

Is it no longer available?

Did my price for Classic just double?

Creative Cloud pricing and membership plans | Adobe Creative Cloud


----------



## PhilBurton

Zenon said:


> Again I typed in Adobe in the browser search field and the main page came up. I clicked on learn about the plan and on the next page clicked on choose the right plan for you (all plans and pricing) and all 3 showed up.
> 
> This is odd. Adobe definitely wants you to use LR CC and  while people speculate that Classic will die ( I wonder myself) the $20 month plan doesn't even offer LR CC.


We have no way of knowing of course, but i'm going to guess that there are warring camps inside Adobe regarding the future of LR Classic.


----------



## MikeFoto

i think you’re right. 

no company wants to split resources and double effort across multiple products. 

and since the future is internet/online and mobile devices... it’s just a matter of time


----------



## PhilBurton

MikeFoto said:


> i think you’re right.
> 
> no company wants to split resources and double effort across multiple products.
> 
> and since the future is internet/online and mobile devices... it’s just a matter of time


Mike,

The real issues are much more complicated than just "multiple products" and we have all discussed these issues, particularly when Lightroom 7 and subscription-only pricing were announced in Oct, 2017.  Just look at the old threads.

Phil Burton


----------



## Zenon

As long as LR CC is robust as Classic and I have a "choice" of whether I want to send my files to the cloud or store locally I'll be OK with it. I realize I can still store files locally with the current LR CC but they have to go to the cloud.  Hopefully this option for desktop users will be there.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

PhilBurton said:


> We have no way of knowing of course, but i'm going to guess that there are warring camps inside Adobe regarding the future of LR Classic.



FWIW, I don't see this as being anything whatsoever to do with whether Classic will survive or not. I'm sure there are warring factions, but I'm pretty sure their debates are about pricing, because that's what marketing guys do. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tspear

Victoria Bampton said:


> FWIW, I don't see this as being anything whatsoever to do with whether Classic will survive or not. I'm sure there are warring factions, but I'm pretty sure their debates are about pricing, because that's what marketing guys do.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I thought marketing staff tried to confuse the public and to buy the wrong product? What other reason could be given by the naming disaster?


----------



## Zenon

Not sure why it was a naming disaster. I found it pretty straight forward. I just typed a in few searches and it was pretty clear. Classic was like LR6 and CC was a new app geared towards mobile devices. They probably spent some time on it and decided no naming convention would have been great. I worked in manufacturing for over 30 years. A few things Iearned. People always hated change and it is hard to make 5 people happy let alone hundreds.  Choose some names and I'll pick them apart


----------



## Jimmsp

Victoria Bampton said:


> FWIW, I don't see this as being anything whatsoever to do with whether Classic will survive or not. I'm sure there are warring factions, but I'm pretty sure their debates are about pricing, because that's what marketing guys do.


In a lot of high tech companies, product managers are also part of marketing. And product managers fight about capabilities and specs along with price.
I have no idea as to how the product management structure in Adobe is set up wrt to PhotoShop, Lightroom, et al.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Jimmsp said:


> In a lot of high tech companies, product managers are also part of marketing. I have no idea as to how the product management structure in Adobe.


Marketing's a separate department at Adobe, and are a law unto themselves.


----------



## Mickey

I find that if you search for pricing on a "Lightroom Plan" you only get LR CC and not Classic, but if you search for pricing on the "Lightroom Photography Plan" you get Classic + CC + 20 GB or 1 TB cloud storage.  So maybe the key is to include "photography" in your search.


----------



## PhilBurton

tspear said:


> I thought marketing staff tried to confuse the public and to buy the wrong product? What other reason could be given by the naming disaster?


Incompetence?  

Phil Burton


----------



## tspear

Zenon said:


> Not sure why it was a naming disaster. I found it pretty straight forward. I just typed a in few searches and it was pretty clear. Classic was like LR6 and CC was a new app geared towards mobile devices. They probably spent some time on it and decided no naming convention would have been great. I worked in manufacturing for over 30 years. A few things Iearned. People always hated change and it is hard to make 5 people happy let alone hundreds.  Choose some names and I'll pick them apart



LightRoom Cloud or LightRoom NG for (Next Generation) or LightRoom Next

LightRoom Desktop for "classic"


----------



## PhilBurton

tspear said:


> LightRoom Cloud or LightRoom NG for (Next Generation) or LightRoom Next
> 
> LightRoom Desktop for "classic"


Lightroom Cloud and Lightroom Desktop.  What could be more clear?


----------



## PhilBurton

Mickey said:


> I find that if you search for pricing on a "Lightroom Plan" you only get LR CC and not Classic, but if you search for pricing on the "Lightroom Photography Plan" you get Classic + CC + 20 GB or 1 TB cloud storage.  So maybe the key is to include "photography" in your search.


That's a crazy situation.  My guess:  The webpage's metadata tags are incomplete.

Phil


----------



## Zenon

I can see still distinguishing the 3 for CC between desktop would still be confusing unless you did a little reading first.  LightRoom Cloud is still unclear because the entire package including the desktop app is a part of the Creative Cloud package.         

As for Lightroom Desktop. This is not me but a response in general I can see happening. "So is that still  perpetual licensing? Why not? LR6 is and is desktop. Why didn't they come up with a better name so I would know it is subscription".     

I have thought about this and I couldn't come up with better names that would be crystal clear at first glance. You would have to do some research.


----------



## tspear

@Zenon 

Photoshop is only sold as a subscription. There are many examples. No need to have that in the name; and not exactly a problem.
Desktop states the focus.
Cloud states the focus.

Neither would prohibit either product from playing some in the other space.


----------



## johnbeardy

I guess if they'd consulted the British public on the names, there's a fair chance Lightroom CC would have been released as Lighty McLightroomface.


----------



## Zenon

tspear said:


> @Zenon
> 
> Photoshop is only sold as a subscription. There are many examples. No need to have that in the name; and not exactly a problem.
> Desktop states the focus.
> Cloud states the focus.
> 
> Neither would prohibit either product from playing some in the other space.



PS is another thing.  Not to say anything negative about the way you named the LR's but it could be misinterpreted as both are exactly like the previous LR6, one operates in the cloud or has cloud storage and the other on the desktop like before.  The desktop could have meant perpetual licensing to some unless you did some reading.   

It it as been over a year and a half and we know how this works. You don't know how people would have reacted with different names. I'm no expert but I don't think it would have been that easy without some research. LR7 going to subscription and introducing LR CC at the same time was the bottle neck.  Also people thought you had to use cloud storage with Classic which didn't help.


----------



## tspear

Zenon said:


> PS is another thing.  Not to say anything negative about the way you named the LR's but it could be misinterpreted as both are exactly like the previous LR6, one operates in the cloud or has cloud storage and the other on the desktop like before.  The desktop could have meant perpetual licensing to some unless you did some reading.
> 
> It it as been over a year and a half and we know how this works. You don't know how people would have reacted with different names. I'm no expert but I don't think it would have been that easy without some research. LR7 going to subscription and introducing LR CC at the same time was the bottle neck.  Also people thought you had to use cloud storage with Classic which didn't help.



Zenon,

I believe you are over thinking it. 
And 18 months after the name change was completed, I still see confusion in the marketplace. Regardless of Adobe intent, I have multiple friends and family that decided against Adobe for image management precisely because of the new names. And like I posted earlier, I have three friends that together decided they would organize photos and learn the same tool so they can help each other. The website shenanigans; plus the name change convinced all three they should look elsewhere.


----------



## PhilBurton

tspear said:


> Zenon,
> 
> I believe you are over thinking it.
> And 18 months after the name change was completed, I still see confusion in the marketplace. Regardless of Adobe intent, I have multiple friends and family that decided against Adobe for image management precisely because of the new names. And like I posted earlier, I have three friends that together decided they would organize photos and learn the same tool so they can help each other. The website shenanigans; plus the name change convinced all three they should look elsewhere.


Not shenanigans.  Just confusion, based on a lack of strategy and clear thinking, plus lack of feedback from the marketplace.


----------



## Zenon

tspear said:


> Zenon,
> 
> I believe you are over thinking it.
> And 18 months after the name change was completed, I still see confusion in the marketplace. Regardless of Adobe intent, I have multiple friends and family that decided against Adobe for image management precisely because of the new names. And like I posted earlier, I have three friends that together decided they would organize photos and learn the same tool so they can help each other. The website shenanigans; plus the name change convinced all three they should look elsewhere.



Well one of those good conversations that will not settle either side. We have our views and I respect yours. I think the roll out was bad but I will continue to think that naming them differently would not have helped much. I know I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer but it didn't me take very long to figure out what each did. It took longer to figure out whether or not I had to use cloud storage with Classic because it became part of the Creative Cloud app family.  If your read forums the world Cloud itself can make people uncomfortable.  Even if CC had not been part of the name or named differently I still would have investigated that carefully just to be sure because it went subscription, which was new to me. I wasn't going to walk away from a program I liked without taking some time to understand the changes.


----------



## Ed Anderson

For some reason Adobe seems to be trying to hide it from new users or may just be the split pricing.  Its still available though. 

Try this link, it should be the option in the middle: Compare plans |Adobe Creative Cloud Photography plan    For me it shows $9.99


----------



## msmack

Replytoken said:


> I hate to revive this thread, but I was looking at a few offers from B&H and then looked at the Adobe web site and it appears that the $10 Classic plan is not showing up.  More split pricing or is this now permanent?
> 
> --Ken


 
Using this link you can still get the plan for $9.99 per month.   Using the drop down menu next to the price you can pay for the year.  At least it locks in your price for the next 12 months.
Rumor is that in the near future you might be able to pay for three years. RUMOR.   We shouldn't be surprised about a price increase but we can be very disappointed that the increase might be 100%. 

https://commerce.adobe.com/checkout...9283&items[0][cs]=0&promoid=162BDVLH&mv=other


----------



## Victoria Bampton

There are a lot of rumors going around right now, and very few have a factual basis. It is ALREADY possible to pay for multiple years right now by purchasing the yearly pre-paid cards from third parties and redeeming them all. The expiry date just gets extended with each card. Not that I'm saying you should.

To clarify what happened, Adobe removed the 20GB plan from their website in some locations as a market research test. The test failed in fairly spectacular fashion. This was a test for NEW customers, not a threat to double the price for existing customers. An inflationary price rise is likely at some stage, as it hasn't changed in 5 years, but that's very different to the rumors of prices doubling.


----------



## Zenon

As I recall it was supposed to be $19.99 but Adobe had an introductory offer of $9.99 for about a year.  If you got in that price was grandfathered  excluding inflationary increases. Looks like they extended that offer for much longer.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

I was looking up something for someone, and found I can no longer find the (US) $10/mo photography plan to includes Classic.

When I look at the "all plans" I see a "Lightroom CC Plan (1TB)" that is $10/mo with only CC, or a photography plan that includes CC + Classic and 1TB; there used to be a small-storage version of that for $10.

Is it no longer available?

Did my price for Classic just double?

Creative Cloud pricing and membership plans | Adobe Creative Cloud


----------



## msmack

Victoria:
I get you are telling me not to spread rumors and I am ok with that.  i will not talk about it anymore.  I think Adobe made a huge mistake in doing this kind of testing in this manner..   I belong to a very large photography club in the San Francisco  Bay Area and we are always telling new members to  join the plan for
$9.99 per month.  These new people are going to the site and are NOT seeing the $9.99 option.   

I do understand that we have had a really good deal for $9.99 per month for quite a long time and that at some point there will have to be an increase.
Hoping that the increase will be more like a $2.00 increase rather than 100%.   Many of us do not want more storage space at Adobe for the simple fact that we do not want to be held hostage by Adobe to be able to get to our images.  The fact that we would get more storage for more money is NOT intriguing to many photographers.

By the number of people talking about this price change even if it is a test, most people don't know that, it has shown that Adobe is not going in the right direction in choosing this testing method.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

msmack said:


> I think Adobe made a huge mistake in doing this kind of testing in this manner..


Me too!!!


----------



## Jim Wilde

msmack said:


> Many of us do not want more storage space at Adobe for the simple fact that we do not want to be held hostage by Adobe to be able to get to our images.


I see that sort of comment quite often, and it always strikes me as strange given the tools that Adobe provides for those wanting to exit their subscription. The only thing that could be improved would be to provide a Tif export option, but hopefully that'll turn up eventually.
But other than that, I see little difference between LRCC and any other non-destructive editor, be that Classic or On1 or Capture1.


----------



## Roelof Moorlag

Jim Wilde said:


> The only thing that could be improved would be to provide a Tif export option,


But, doesn't it?


----------



## PhilBurton

Victoria Bampton said:


> Me too!!!


In any case, there are other market research approaches to get at this issue, such as large-scale surveys, focus groups, and just down-and-dirty competitive analysis.  That all said, the _hardest_, and I mean the hardest part of product management, is pricing.  (I'm assuming here that the product managers or product marketing managers at Adobe have input to this decision.  In many companies, pricing is very political.)

*The mass confusion and anger generated by this approach should have led Adobe to stop this experiment by now.*  Of course, that assumes that Adobe is actually watching market reaction outside of just the number of times someone purchases a $20/month plan.  I may be giving them too much credit here.

Phil Burton


----------



## Jim Wilde

Roelof Moorlag said:


> But, doesn't it?


Yes, Roelof, of course LR Classic can export to Tiff, but we're talking about LRCC which currently only exports as Jpeg or Original.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

PhilBurton said:


> *The mass confusion and anger generated by this approach should have led Adobe to stop this experiment by now.*


They already did. But yeah, it should never have happened in the first place.


----------



## Eric Bowles

One of the interesting things about this test is it did highlight a $9.99 per month Lightroom + 1 TB Cloud plan.  I see  a lot of photographers that never use Photoshop, and many of these photographers lack appropriate storage and backups.  The LR+ 1TB plan is a good solution for those that are not using Photoshop anyway.  And they can always download and test Photoshop in the future if they need to explore that option.

Like most of you, I've seen a lot of people concerned by this test and it gives many people a bad taste in their mouth about Adobe.  This little experiment is a pretty expensive way to test when you look at the impact of ill will and lost customers.


----------



## tspear

Eric Bowles said:


> One of the interesting things about this test is it did highlight a $9.99 per month Lightroom + 1 TB Cloud plan.  I see  a lot of photographers that never use Photoshop, and many of these photographers lack appropriate storage and backups.  The LR+ 1TB plan is a good solution for those that are not using Photoshop anyway.  And they can always download and test Photoshop in the future if they need to explore that option.
> 
> Like most of you, I've seen a lot of people concerned by this test and it gives many people a bad taste in their mouth about Adobe.  This little experiment is a pretty expensive way to test when you look at the impact of ill will and lost customers.



I am likely part of the target demographic, a hobby photographer.

The problem is the 1TB 9.99 plan does not include Classic. As such,, myself and many others are unable to use. There are multiple missing features I use on a regular basis. I also never use Photoshop, in fact it is not installed anymore (I installed it at one point to look at it, never opened it again).


----------



## x Aperture

As in the subject  I read somewhere on the internet (as one does) that Adobe was trialling a doubling of the subscription cost for LR and PS.
Has any one any wareness of this trial?


----------



## MikeFoto

Eric Bowles said:


> This little experiment is a pretty expensive way to test when you look at the impact of ill will and lost customers.


do we know how many subscribers they acquired at the new price point? 
it may not have been the business “disaster” we hoped it was.


----------



## Zenon

I did remember $9.99 was an introductory offer. From 2014.    

https://fstoppers.com/gear/adobe-makes-999-photography-plan-permanent-12332


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Eric Bowles said:


> One of the interesting things about this test is it did highlight a $9.99 per month Lightroom + 1 TB Cloud plan.  I see  a lot of photographers that never use Photoshop, and many of these photographers lack appropriate storage and backups.  The LR+ 1TB plan is a good solution for those that are not using Photoshop anyway.


Just to clarify, that's the cloud service Lightroom app, not Lightroom Classic. There's still plenty of confusion surrounding the names.


----------



## Zenon

Yes here is where I see confusion and I think Adobe dropped the ball - or did they?    They left CC out of it so unless you are well versed with the terms then you could think Lightroom is the older version. New customers might not even know the difference and that would be beneficial.


----------



## Roger Walton

Why do Adobe charge so much for online storage? Backblaze is far cheaper so I would hate to be "forced" to pay for 1Tb that I don't need. Double the price of the Photographers Plan and loose 50% of your customers? madness.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Zenon said:


> They left CC out of it so unless you are well versed with the terms then you could think Lightroom is the older version.


That's not a LR specific change. Go look at the list of apps on the website and you'll see that CC's are going AWOL everywhere.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

I like Matt's blog post Did Adobe Just Double the Price of Lightroom and Photoshop? - Matt Kloskowski


----------



## Jim Wilde

Yep, great article.


----------



## PhilBurton

Victoria Bampton said:


> I like Matt's blog post Did Adobe Just Double the Price of Lightroom and Photoshop? - Matt Kloskowski


I liked this article also.  A lot of the anger was caused by the confusion this pricing experiment has caused.  it's consistent with the confusion Adobe created when the announced LR 7  and the new cloud-based product.


----------



## tspear

Victoria Bampton said:


> Just to clarify, that's the cloud service Lightroom app, not Lightroom Classic. There's still plenty of confusion surrounding the names.



Between the pricing debacle, and the naming issues, is Adobe senior management aware of the headaches they are causing themselves by keeping the same brilliant marketing team in place?


----------



## clee01l

PhilBurton said:


> I liked this article also.  A lot of the anger was caused by the confusion this pricing experiment has caused.  it's consistent with the confusion Adobe created when the announced LR 7  and the new cloud-based product.


Adobe seems to have a knack for mismanaging user expectations


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

Roger Walton said:


> Why do Adobe charge so much for online storage? Backblaze is far cheaper so I would hate to be "forced" to pay for 1Tb that I don't need. Double the price of the Photographers Plan and loose 50% of your customers? madness.



Adobe is not positioning their storage is just cloud storage, but as part of a photographic system including synchronization across devices, and (though I think more in hazy vague promises than commitments) functionality built into the cloud specific to photos using AI such as automated categorization.  And for that they (a) require it be THEIR storage, and (b) charge more.

Whether they can make this work out, whether they can actually communicate a value proposition to people for it or not, remains to be seen.



clee01l said:


> Adobe seems to have a knack for mismanaging user expectations



I am completely aware that price testing is done in many markets.  I used to be involved in magazines for example, and frequently parts of the country would get a different price for the same magazine at retail, to see how (if) it impacted sales.  Price sensitivity testing.  it's perfectly legal, unfortunately.

But somehow doing it on a web site that the entire country sees, where you just seem to randomly get different prices, seems (but probably is legally not) different.  It feels more slimy, less ethical.  That they have been doing it off and on since this thread started shows they clearly have not learned how badly people react.  Or they do not care.


----------



## tspear

Ferguson said:


> I am completely aware that price testing is done in many markets.  I used to be involved in magazines for example, and frequently parts of the country would get a different price for the same magazine at retail, to see how (if) it impacted sales.  Price sensitivity testing.  it's perfectly legal, unfortunately.
> 
> But somehow doing it on a web site that the entire country sees, where you just seem to randomly get different prices, seems (but probably is legally not) different.  It feels more slimy, less ethical.  That they have been doing it off and on since this thread started shows they clearly have not learned how badly people react.  Or they do not care.



Actually if Adobe has a technically competent team the testing is constrained by Geo-referencing the IP address.  This is actually pretty easy to implement. I have actually done it for for performance reasons.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

tspear said:


> Actually if Adobe has a technically competent team the testing is constrained by Geo-referencing the IP address.  This is actually pretty easy to implement. I have actually done it for for performance reasons.


I haven't tried this time, but when I first noticed this I would get it sometimes and not others.  Unless Adobe was putting it up and removing it, then they failed to constrain this adequately.  It's also worth noting with the large and growing use of vpn's for users' privacy (and theft and other reasons) a lot of people may still see it even if they got their filtering right.

Regardless, Adobe knows how much background discussion occurs among LR users, and about forums like this.  It's one thing to have a different price on a bottle of Clorox in LA vs Phoenix, but do they really think within a few hours it will not make the news world wide that they have new (and various) pricing up?


----------



## tspear

Actually the connected nature of forums, for stuff outside of technical realms is rather recent. Think about it, Adobe is more than 30 years old. Forums, pricing knowledge, connected users is really less than 5 years for a majority of users.



Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

I was looking up something for someone, and found I can no longer find the (US) $10/mo photography plan to includes Classic.

When I look at the "all plans" I see a "Lightroom CC Plan (1TB)" that is $10/mo with only CC, or a photography plan that includes CC + Classic and 1TB; there used to be a small-storage version of that for $10.

Is it no longer available?

Did my price for Classic just double?

Creative Cloud pricing and membership plans | Adobe Creative Cloud


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

tspear said:


> Actually the connected nature of forums, for stuff outside of technical realms is rather recent. Think about it, Adobe is more than 30 years old. Forums, pricing knowledge, connected users is really less than 5 years for a majority of users.


Let's hope the "Creative Cloud" creator has discovered forums and social media.  

How much they care... well, who knows.  But I think we are drifting off topic a bit.

For what it is worth, I just went to Adobe, B&H and Amazon and all had the PS + Classic + CC + 20G at (about) $10/mo.  Oddly Amazon had a teacher/student version which was the same price, not discounted.   That was from S. Florida.  I then used a system (entirely different ID, everything) from Chicago and got the same thing.  

I did notice (and maybe this was already said) -- it advertises as "Lightroom" and "Lightroom Classic"... the "CC" or "Creative Cloud" does not appear on the "Choose the plan that is right for you" section, though at the top it says "Get the Creative Cloud Photography plan".    Apparently the plan is "CC" but the products are all not. Though for reasons a bit unclear there it appeared with awful icons for PS and LR.  I was on a W2016 server so that might be related.


----------



## Jimmsp

Ferguson said:


> Let's hope the "Creative Cloud" creator has discovered forums and social media.
> ....
> 
> I did notice (and maybe this was already said) -- it advertises as "Lightroom" and "Lightroom Classic"... the "CC" or "Creative Cloud" does not appear on the "Choose the plan that is right for you" section, though at the top it says "Get the Creative Cloud Photography plan".    Apparently the plan is "CC" but the products are all not. Though for reasons a bit unclear there it appeared with awful icons for PS and LR.



I have noticed this for some time.  They are behaving like the auto companies have done - advertise the product that is not selling well, and maybe there will be a boost in sales.
I really feel that they are currently working with pretty junior marketing folks who are not really knowledgeable of the market.
They are taking a Marketing 101 approach to a difficult problem.


----------



## PhilBurton

Ferguson said:


> Adobe is not positioning their storage is just cloud storage, but as part of a photographic system including synchronization across devices, and (though I think more in hazy vague promises than commitments) functionality built into the cloud specific to photos using AI such as automated categorization.  And for that they (a) require it be THEIR storage, and (b) charge more.
> 
> Whether they can make this work out, whether they can actually communicate a value proposition to people for it or not, remains to be seen.


There is clearly value in a photographic system that includes sync across devices.  However, and this is important, cloud storage these days is a *commodity*.  Aside from differences in upload and download speed, there are no other ways to compete except price.  Price becomes all important,  That is true over many industries.  Why Adobe doesn't appreciate this distinction, or else think that the "system" completely overrides the commodity aspect, that is hard to understand.  Very hard.

That all said, I seem to recall that the Lightroom subscription model has been very successful for them overall.  And that's an argument for not changing management.  Nonetheless, nothing is forever, certainly not in fast-changing markets.  Adobe really needs to do some finely sliced customer analysis, to see what % of customers actually pay for additional cloud storage, for how many months until they switch to a less expensive plan, etc.  It also would not kill them to do some focus groups or large scale customer surveys, and test various issues.


> I am completely aware that price testing is done in many markets.  I used to be involved in magazines for example, and frequently parts of the country would get a different price for the same magazine at retail, to see how (if) it impacted sales.  Price sensitivity testing.  it's perfectly legal, unfortunately.
> 
> But somehow doing it on a web site that the entire country sees, where you just seem to randomly get different prices, seems (but probably is legally not) different.  It feels more slimy, less ethical.  That they have been doing it off and on since this thread started shows they clearly have not learned how badly people react.  Or they do not care.


It feels slimy to me also.  Or else the sign of amateurism and just bumbling incompetence.  Those focus group or survey questions should include a few about attitudes to Adobe management.

Phil


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

PhilBurton said:


> There is clearly value in a photographic system that includes sync across devices.  However, and this is important, cloud storage these days is a *commodity*.  Aside from differences in upload and download speed, there are no other ways to compete except price.  Price becomes all important,  That is true over many industries.  Why Adobe doesn't appreciate this distinction, or else think that the "system" completely overrides the commodity aspect, that is hard to understand.  Very hard.



I do not mean to imply I understand fully, but I do think they have a vision of it being more than a commodity, specifically not JUST storage, but that when you upload images there, things happen beyond sync.  An example that may happen is automatic tagging, facial recognition, etc.  Or maybe not.  There's a lot they COULD do, for example they could analyze your edits, and teach LR's "auto" so it is not generic but the way you edit (if there was "a" way you edit, which of course there is not a singular one). 

If (emphasis on "IF") they have a vision like this, it behooves them to require you use their cloud.  And it becomes a distinction among all the various cloud storage provides as it is not storage, it is processing.

I hope they have a vision.  I wish they were better at sharing it.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Ferguson said:


> do they really think within a few hours it will not make the news world wide that they have new (and various) pricing up?


That's just it though. It didn't. We've been discussing it for months without the press noticing. They just got cocky.


----------



## x Aperture

However other photo editting product companies have noticed and are using "fear" advertizing to persuade LR users to migrate to their own products.

Not all LR users or potential users will research the "true " state of the pricing of LR but will only remember the suspicion that Adobe cannot be trusted on product pricing or avail ability.  Mac users that used to use Aperture are already sensitised to the fickleness of SW developers.


----------



## Rob26

What ever the outcome it certainly has frightened me away. I recently posted for help in the non subscription forum and received helpful advice.
But my iMac is getting older now and I just do not trust Adobe.In fact its getting scary out there so many companies going subscription.Looks like the future for me is to buy another Mac and live with the built in stuff.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

That is sad Rob, especially considering nothing's actually changed. If we were afraid of everything that could possibly happen to us, we'd never get out of bed in the morning, and then we'd miss out on all the good stuff too.


----------



## Rob26

True enough Victoria. But I do get out of bed and also I am careful with my pension pot. I want to enjoy my own money.  No it hasn't increased.
Maybe they never will double the rate but the damage is done. They have highlighted a  possibility and played right into the scaremongers hands.
I will stay with 6.14 as long as possible then find something else.Yes it is sad so many programmes going subscription and it hits the OAP's hard.
Rob


----------



## tspear

Rob26 said:


> OAP's


That is a new one on me. What does OAP mean?


----------



## Zenon

Old Age Pension I think .


----------



## Rob26

Oh wow where do you live? Guess your not used to our English short hand.

Yes it is Old Age Pensioner.    OAP sounds kinder don't you think. 

Rob


----------



## Zenon

I think you earned the right to say it long version


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

Rob26 said:


> I just do not trust Adobe.In fact its getting scary out there so many companies going subscription.Looks like the future for me is to buy another Mac and live with the built in stuff.



So, and please take this as hoping to encourage thought not argument, but it sounds like you have a subscription to Mac's.  You buy one, wait a few years, buy another.  Sure, the payment due date is not cast in stone, but you do not seem concerned that it will be a recurring expense.

Other than being more frequent (but much smaller in size), how is a monthly fee different really?

Please... I realize there are differences, one ends a service immediately, one keeps running until random chance breaks it, one is a month, one is years. I get all that, it is just that despite all technology seeming to have very short lifetimes and a need to keep paying and pay, we seem to view subscription very differently than buying finite-life items.  Why?

As to the OAP part, one might even argue that spreading the cost evenly and predictably makes it easier to plan for.  Certainly businesses will generally prefer a predictable fee service than one that is randomly zero then huge and at an unpredictable time.

Postscript: I said at the time, and I say now -- I think Adobe forced it on us in a heavy handed way, and was very misleading on their "indefinite" promise, but taking the "I feel betrayed" out of it, I just have trouble really feeling buying a short term thing is good but subscription is bad for some philosophical reason.


----------



## tspear

Rob26 said:


> Oh wow where do you live? Guess your not used to our English short hand.
> 
> Yes it is Old Age Pensioner.    OAP sounds kinder don't you think.
> 
> Rob



I am outside Boston 
After your post and @Zenon  I looked up this slang. Seems like British phrase.


----------



## johnbeardy

Two countries separated by a common language....


----------



## Zenon

tspear said:


> I am outside Boston
> After your post and @Zenon  I looked up this slang. Seems like British phrase.


 
Go Bruins.


----------



## tspear

Zenon said:


> Go Bruins.


Lol. Actually I was a Caps fan. The NHL made it to hard to follow an out of market team so I follow none now.

Tim

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk


----------



## Zenon

tspear said:


> Lol. Actually I was a Caps fan. The NHL made it to hard to follow an out of market team so I follow none now.
> 
> Tim
> 
> Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk



LOL


----------



## tspear

johnbeardy said:


> Two countries separated by a common language....


In high school I did a biking trip to Spain. We had a young lady from California who spoke Valley Girl in the group. At one stop she met a guy from London with a really thick accent. They could not understand each other in English so ended up talking Spanish all evening. It was very funny.

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk


----------



## PhilBurton

Ferguson said:


> I do not mean to imply I understand fully, but I do think they have a vision of it being more than a commodity, specifically not JUST storage, but that when you upload images there, things happen beyond sync.  An example that may happen is automatic tagging, facial recognition, etc.  Or maybe not.  There's a lot they COULD do, for example they could analyze your edits, and teach LR's "auto" so it is not generic but the way you edit (if there was "a" way you edit, which of course there is not a singular one).
> 
> If (emphasis on "IF") they have a vision like this, it behooves them to require you use their cloud.  And it becomes a distinction among all the various cloud storage provides as it is not storage, it is processing.
> 
> I hope they have a vision.  I wish they were better at sharing it.


Ferguson,

Amen to what you just said.  In some ways, Adobe is being very cautious, never pre-announcing products and features because WHEN (not IF) the schedule slips or some features aren't feasible (sound familiar?) they are embarrassed.   I can understand that.  What I can't understand, speaking as a product management consultant (my "day job", I get paid by companies to give advice in this sort of issue), is all the confusion and worse they have created with their poor rollout of the Cloud product, and then this professional malfeasance surrounding the pricing trials, or whatever it is.

If they are somehow doing market research and competitive analysis to understand what customers want and need, they are surely keeping that project a big secret.

Phil Burton


----------



## PhilBurton

x Aperture said:


> However other photo editting product companies have noticed and are using "fear" advertizing to persuade LR users to migrate to their own products.
> 
> Not all LR users or potential users will research the "true " state of the pricing of LR but will only remember the suspicion that Adobe cannot be trusted on product pricing or avail ability.  Mac users that used to use Aperture are already sensitised to the fickleness of SW developers.


What you are describing is an unforced error by Adobe, a self-inflicted wound.

Phil Burton


----------



## prbimages

tspear said:


> I looked up this slang.


Strictly speaking, of course, it's not slang, it's an _initialism _or _acronym_.


----------



## tspear

Well, after 18 months the Adobe marketing department seems to have dropped the CC.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

tspear said:


> Well, after 18 months the Adobe marketing department seems to have dropped the CC.


They've dropped the CC across everything except the Creative Cloud app. The apps are basically all CC now so the extra letters were redundant.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

I was looking up something for someone, and found I can no longer find the (US) $10/mo photography plan to includes Classic.

When I look at the "all plans" I see a "Lightroom CC Plan (1TB)" that is $10/mo with only CC, or a photography plan that includes CC + Classic and 1TB; there used to be a small-storage version of that for $10.

Is it no longer available?

Did my price for Classic just double?

Creative Cloud pricing and membership plans | Adobe Creative Cloud


----------



## tspear

Victoria Bampton said:


> They've dropped the CC across everything except the Creative Cloud app. The apps are basically all CC now so the extra letters were redundant.



That is a better spin on it than I would give Adobe credit for.


----------



## Johan Elzenga

Maybe Lightroom Classic should have been renamed to ‘Lightroom No Cloud’...


----------



## johnbeardy

Probably will be in 6 months' time!


----------



## tspear

Johan Elzenga said:


> Maybe Lightroom Classic should have been renamed to ‘Lightroom No Cloud’...



Nah, the Adobe marketing department believes that all press is good press.  Therefore, such a descriptive title will not generate enough press to be worth while.


----------



## Johan Elzenga

I've also suggested 'Lightroom Cola' to them...


----------



## Zenon

Everyone can relate to Coke Classic.


----------



## johnbeardy

It's the real thing....


----------

