Perch v4 license model

  • Valid points, but I would add that they are now are having to change the pricing model as Perch as it is, is not sustainable which indicates something somewhere isn't working. And it's not always down to how you price your product or service.


    This is of course all conjecture though, and like yourself and others have noted, Drew and Rachel are the only ones that know the details. Hopefully, if nothing else, this thread will help them decide on the way forward.

  • Yeah thats easy to argue these days i think.


    Success is subjective. The product is stable enough even without frequent updates. That's a success. I'm still purchasing licenses. That's a success. I still get Perch development contract work on new projects from agencies (hopefully they are buying licenses and not reusing old ones). That's a success. You and me among others willingly paid for the registered developer program. That's a success.


    Perhaps It's been a slow 1-2 years for Perch in terms of development. Some may consider this the worst year for Perch, yet many are still eager to keep using it (and they are). That's a success.


    So yeah I'm still calling their 10 years run successful (not perfect).

  • Success is subjective. The product is stable enough even without frequent updates. That's a success. I'm still purchasing licenses. That's a success. I still get Perch development contract work on new projects from agencies (hopefully they are buying licenses and not reusing old ones). That's a success. You and me among others willingly paid for the registered developer program. That's a success.


    Perhaps It's been a slow 1-2 years for Perch in terms of development. Some may consider this the worst year for Perch, yet many are still eager to keep using it (and they are). That's a success.


    So yeah I'm still calling their 10 years run successful (not perfect).

    I agree. Every product or service needs a course correction from time to time. I'm positive that a change to the pricing model and more communication will save the day!

  • I think this message can be clear by focusing on simplicity, ease of use (for developers and editors) and how it does not get in the way (e.g. no themes) without having to label it "little", which can be misinterpreted. Having said that, Drew and Rachel have been successfully running Perch for 10 years, which indicates the marketing suits their (perhaps primary) target audience even though I think they are underselling the product!

  • Hey all


    Thanks for the thoughts above. The situation is that Perch and Runway under the current license model do not generate enough income to keep me working on them full time. Progress on v4 is slow because the time I can afford to dedicate to it is less than it has been in the past.


    This is not that usual - it's been the situation before with Perch, where I started it as a side project alongside client work. It was a full time job for two of us for a while, then just me, and now it's back to being just one project of a few. Dynamic server-rendered CMS solutions aren't a massively growth market, and that's fine.


    So progress is still being made, updates are still coming, and support is still here. Perch isn't about to stop or disappear or anything like that. It's just that at the current volume of license sales I need to do other work to make sure I can pay my mortgage and feed the cat.


    Drew

  • Late to the party I know usually just a lurker..


    I have been using Perch since V1, lone developer/designer servicing small businesses in a niche market, in some ways probably the persona Perch was initially conceived for.


    Over the years I have accumulated a fair few Perch licenses, and I am certainly guilty of reusing them, I never assign licenses to the client, they remain mine, their sites hosted on my server, the client has the rights to them as long as they remain a client or can choose to pay for it if they go elsewhere (which rarely happens).


    Recently however I have moved away from using Perch, for a few reasons, some of which may be down to my personal idiosyncrasies, some maybe not, but anyway for any new licensing model possibly relevent.


    1. Perceived lack of development. Already dealt with by plenty of others, it is a major concern, given that Perch now seems to be no more than a side project.


    2. Updating. I regularly update Statamic, Craft and ExpressionEngine sites by a simple one click process in the control panel, with Perch I need to maintain a git repo and use a deployment service, otherwise maintaining many sites I will be in for hours of work, and even if paid for is costly for me in terms of time required. This in 2020 seems archaic.


    3. Control panel look/feel again this may be personal but it feels dated, and honestly has done for a few years.


    4. Perch shop: This seems beyond crazy and a major mistake that this is not a paid add on. My guess is the support it requires has been a large factor in creating the current situation, anybody requiring e-commerce really should be prepared to pay for it, and pay well.


    OK this all sounds negative, I do like Perch and would love to continue using it for certain clients, but any new licensing model which inevitably will be more expensive (and I appreciate DEV's have to live) has to come with some benefits for the end user in terms of a vibrant development regime, full time or otherwise.

  • How do you actually reuse a license anyway?


    I was under the impression that when you specify a domain in your account, that unless the license matched your domain wouldn't work.


    Personally, I never came to Perch thinking about other CMS solutions, I was simply attracted to the fact that I could balance a database with PHP and HTML client code.


    I am confident in what Drew says but would appreciate compatibility with the lastest version(s) of PHP ASAP.


    As for the Shop, I don't use it but understand others' concerns but am still prepared to pay yearly price if it's not in the 100's of dollars.

  • How do you actually reuse a license anyway?


    I was under the impression that when you specify a domain in your account, that unless the license matched your domain wouldn't work.

    You can reassign the license to a different domain. This normally happens when one an old project dies or stops using Perch, so the owner of the license reassigns the license to a new domain for a new project instead of purchasing a new license. It is perhaps worth noting that v2 licenses get a free upgrade to v3, which means people have been reusing old v2 licenses for new projects on v3.


    This reminds me of Chris Ferdinandi's post: Running a trust-based business. Now that Perch has communicated how the reuse of old licenses hurts them I wonder whether people will continue reusing old licenses for new projects.

  • This normally happens when one an old project dies or stops using Perch, so the owner of the license reassigns the license to a new domain for a new project instead of purchasing a new license.

    I'm not aware of any CMS solution that charges a fee so if a project ends, why wouldn't a license owner want to re-purpose or re-sell their license?


    Saying that, again I have nothing against charging ongoing fees, so long as they aren't exhorbitant.

  • I wonder how many people have got that message about reusing licences? And I imagine if that loophole isn't closed that many users will reason "it can't be that much of a problem, if they really wanted us not to reuse licences they'd stop it".


    This gets to the nub of the problem (well for me at least), that the lack of communication from Perch leaves us guessing about so much stuff. I know they have clients that we don't hear about that might have been kept in the loop, but for most of us we have very little to go on. So when we try to sell Perch to new clients who ask about what the future is for it, we have to guess. Are they changing the licence model... When is this bug getting fixed... When's v4 coming out... Etc... We have to guess.


    I will always use Perch when I can. I have no plans to jump ship and I'm very happy to hear that Perch is still being developed and it's not going away, but it's like trying to read tea leaves.

  • I'm not aware of any CMS solution that charges a fee so if a project ends, why wouldn't a license owner want to re-purpose or re-sell their license?


    There is nothing stopping you from reassigning older licenses to new projects. I'm not sure whether the license agreement even prohibits you from doing so.


    As for reselling a license, the license terms do not allow that. You purchase a license to use the product. You are granted permission to use the product. The third-party to which you would resell the license would not have permission to use the product, which is fair.



    The proposed license model sounds like it would continue to allow customers to reassign licenses to different projects. That's what many customers do anyway. Perch didn't suggest they'd stop this. However, this time they're not going to give free updates forever. You get 1 year's worth of updates. If you need more (perhaps it's an ongoing project or you're reusing a license after an old project dies and now need the latest version), you pay for another year's worth of updates. It's a fair model to both parties.