[Ardour-Users] Ardour 2.8.5 released

[John Emmas]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Patrick Shirkey"
>
> The options that you have outlined were discussed in detail last year
> for over 30 days straight and the decision was made at that time to go
> with the current system as the other options were not viable or
> acceptable to Paul or the wider community.
>
As the person who instigated last year's lengthy (but comprehensive)
discussion I should maybe outline my thoughts during the interim, starting
by responding to these comments made by Ralf:-

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ralf Mardorf"
>
> Okay, I'm wrong, Ardour is comparable to Pro Tools and others, than it
> shouldn't be a problem to sell it to studios
>
> [...]
>
> If Ardour is comparable and if there nevertheless aren't studios that
> want to pay for Ardour, than just phone calls to studios, establishing
> contacts on music trade fairs is needed.
>
Last year's debate was full of similar comments, though aimed in a different
direction.  I remember suggestions about making the Linux version free but
charging the Mac users.  Or bringing out a Windows version and making them
pay.  Ardour seems to be saddled with users who think it could easily become
profitable - if only "somebody else" could be made to pay.  The plain truth
is that there's only one class of person who should feel obligated to
subscribe to Ardour - namely, those persons who find it useful.

But with all due respect to the previous posters, that isn't really the
issue here.  Ardour has a target income of $4,500 per month and according to
Ardour's web site, that target has been reached consistently (in fact, every
month AFAIK) since last year's discussion.  I don't know what living costs
are like in the US or elsewhere.  Nor do I know how that $4,500 gets shared
out.  But if it's all going to one developer, it doesn't seem to me to be a
bad income.  The real issue is much broader.

The issue here is simply that one swallow doesn't make a summer.  Nor
can one lone developer have any expectation of competing with commercial
giants like Steinberg and Digidesign.  The problem isn't that there's not
enough income to keep Paul going.  It's that there isn't enough income to
pay the number of devs that would be needed to get Ardour into the big
league (where, in all honesty, it deserves to be).  And I'm sorry Paul but I
think you need to stand up and shoulder the blame for that.  Here's why....

Last year's vigorous debate saw people like Patrick and myself (and others)
putting forward a whole host of suggestions for diversifying Ardour's income
streams.  But Paul consistently rejects any proposal, except for that of
voluntary donations (in which, I'm including sponsorship and sponsored
features).  Paul may have good reasons for all I know and I'm always loathe
to criticise something I don't understand but I'd like to offer this
observation:-

I work for ITV where I was recently involved in a staff "pep talk" by their
new management team, mostly head-hunted from mega corporations like Walmart
and Fox.  I remember one of the team commenting that he's always considered
it folly to develop a business model dependent on too few income streams.
The fewer income streams at your disposal, the more difficult it is to
compete and to survive long term.  If you reach the stage of relying on just
one income stream, sooner or later you're stuffed.  It's only a matter of
time.

Personally I think he's right.  For Ardour to ramp itself up a gear, Paul
would seriously need to consider other forms of income in addition to
voluntary subscriptions.  Suggestions from last year included:-

1)  A one-off charge for providing subversion access to non-developers.
2)  Releasing some kind of (chargeable) "Ardour Pro" version.
3)  Charging for enhanced support.
4)  Charging for "added value" items, such as manuals, printed logo
stickers, special keyboard overlays etc.
5)  Using some of the existing income to pay a professional fundraiser.

and many others which I can't remember now.  Anyway, this email is already
longer than I intended - but the bottom line is that whilst last year's
discussion undoubtedly pricked a few consciences, Ardour is now (probably)
generating as much income as it can realistically expect from voluntary
subscriptions.  IMHO alternative revenue streams are the only practical way
forward from here.

John