1500 Customer Success employees? **
The FAQ, that wasn't linked to, may be here: https://www.ptc.com/en/try-and-buy/subscription
I'm ambivalent about the idea of "Smart connected and proactive support to pinpoint problems sooner, see trends, and operate more efficiently" which sounds like Clippy 2.0
"It looks like you are making a sketch, can I help with that?"
**Another springboard chance.
Every piece of software has what I think of as UI endpoints, places where the user has done their part and they click the OK button and the software makes some change. It seems to me that each one of these is an endpoint to a particular path of actions the user has done and that these endpoints can be uniquely identified and their useage tracked and be used to see just how many endpoints a user actually knows about.
Therefore users having trouble could identify which endpoints they were unable to utilize and be sure the Customer Success employee is already well experienced in handling the problem based on a tabulation of the number of times they have successfully done so.
Hey Eric Snow,
Why doesn't Paul Lenfest get down and dirty with us here rather than the inertial process of PTCUser?
That makes you one less perpetual license PTC have to support in the long term. Which means a more tenuous, certainly less powerful (titter titter) position for those who must remain.
Somewhere in PTC a bean counter saw what Adobe did with Photoshop 3-4 years ago and presented a pie chart with all that lovely revenue you did not pay and that's why subscription models are better. Therefore Gartner are right probably right and I wonder if they have attempted to analyse the true motivation? I haven't looked. 'shareholder interest' is at the top of my list.
We are old enough to know that the rest is spin and you are aceptable collateral damage.
Looking at the latest financial results, PTC seems to be accomplishing what they intended. Here are a few quotes:
License and Subscription Bookings
For the full year, CAD bookings grew 14%, far outpacing market growth. This was the second consecutive year of double-digit, constant currency CAD bookings growth.
Subscription % of Bookings
Q4’17 subscription mix of 72% was above our guidance of 68% and was the highest quarterly mix posted to date.
Software revenue grew 10% YoY in Q4’17 and 5% YoY for FY’17 as we exited the subscription trough, due to the success of our subscription transition program,
Solutions Software Revenue
Quarterly software revenue growth of 10% in Q4’17 was the first double-digit growth quarter since Q3’14, prior to our move to a subscription model.
In Q4’17, subscription bookings represented 72% of total bookings, 4 percentage points higher than our guidance of 68% and 2 percentage points higher than our Q4’16 bookings mix of 70%. For FY’17, subscription bookings represented 69% of total bookings... Programs promoting the benefits of subscription as well as our support conversion program are driving our ongoing success in our transition to a subscription business model.
A higher mix of subscription bookings is expected to benefit us over the long term, but results in lower revenue and lower earnings in the near term.
For FY’18, we expect 80% of our bookings to be subscription vs. 69% in FY’17, with subscription mix exiting the year at 85% in Q4’18.
Note our FY’18 subscription revenue guidance exceeds our subscription bookings guidance by more than 20% for the first time in our transition, illustrating the compounding benefit of a subscription business model as it matures over time.
I've been reading Gartner publications discussing flat sales 2016 and increasing proportion of leasing. Documents awash with 'Boston Matrices'.
This is generic trend and not limited to software.
For PTC it's business and its working for them at the moment. Fair enough. Surely we can only conclude that this transient will see a user base 'adjustment' and that's that. Leasing will work for some, others will change. Some may be driven by the investment they have in their databases and training; changing course is not cheap and to be put in the position where they lease or retrain is not fair.
I see the company that offers a mixture of both perpetual and leasing surviving better than one who only leases. There again, PTC's website looks less and less like that of an engineering software company so who knows what their grand plan is. It will be very interesting to analyse the resulting stratification; to understand the type of company and circumstances for whom leasing is best and those that prefer perpetual licenses.
It seems Solidworks (I read as the directly competing product) do not have the same view on leasing; although it is possible to lease I think they are firmly entrenched in the perpetual camp (at the moment !)
PTC have always had the extra separately licensed modules which I gather are now being 'bundled' in various permutations to incentivise prospective lease victims. So it must be reviewed that the following:
Are all in the standard version of Solidworks including contact. Contact being funtionality PTC has scoped out of their 'standard' offering which I have said before is misguided at best. The Solidworks simulation matrix seems more sensibly structured.
The pricing structure is cack-handed. Why on earth would you lease Creo and have it switch off at midnight one year later when for 2 years lease you can have a perpetual license of Solidworks and zero anxiety. The ratios are crackers.
And the incentive structure PTC offer is **bleep**-eyed too.
Bringing up to date the maintenance of our second simulation seat (Currently at Creo3.0) makes a move to Solidworks very very cheap indeed. Then when we factor in attendant uncertainties regarding future treatment of perpetual license owners by PTC the decision becomes really easy.
I have had many discussions this week. Twice I was told (no prompting) that it was wrong that a company should have to pay to access/use/update its IP after midnight LEASE = RANSOME. The second red flag was the potential to run out of license on a project with limited margin is a massive no-no.
Thus we will keep one seat of Parametric and Simulation maintained and leave the other sad sorry wasted investment to slowly wither. We won't renew the surfacing extension either as when compared to the cost of a solidworks seat it would be a stupid idea. We will continue to use Ansys and FE-Safe in the background.
At the end of the day our customers use both Creo and Solidworks. For us, CAD is a fancy geometry preprocessor and provided we get the right answer the analysis package is broadly irrelevant unless someone is particularly precious about which we use (remember, there is no bad software. Only bad users). Of course, if you want to study finite friction or large deformation with contact then the former does not work and the latter is extremely painful in Creo Simulate if you have yielding materials.
Oh yes, Solidworks have submodelling too ... and before anyone tells me to submit product ideas, I have. I cannot be bothered anymore. The level of feedback I received is exactly zero which exactly matches the feedback I got to my questions regarding leasing.
It would appear the censoring software for this forum is set to 'sensitive flower'
I blame my poorly applied hyphenating, the word should not have been.
The word in the previous post
should have been
meaning crooked or askew, misaligned. And is not some kind of inuendo. Of course, 'inuendo' could be an inuendo.
The etymology is interesting and varies depending on which website you believe, so ignoring those that have blatently plagiarised each other I quite like the possible Gaelic origin "caog" meaning "wink"
Thus we will keep one seat of Parametric and Simulation maintained and leave the other sad sorry wasted investment to slowly wither.
Be very careful. I've heard of PTC refusing to allow partial maintenance renewals unless you either renew >50% of your licenses or sign a contract saying you won't continue using any of the other off-maintenance licenses. Not sure if they are still doing this or not.
Let me re-phrase that as it entered my ears.
Is this similar to my Chevy Cruze I bought in 2012 and now own, has been "maintained" at the Chevrolet dealer to the tune of $1250 per year with oil changes, filters, computer updates to the fuel system, recalls, all offered by GM. But come January 2, 2018 when I walk in the same dealership, I have been loyal to for over 15 years, wanting to buy a new Cruze at FULL price without negotiation I am told sure, we have your fancy new Cruze right here, please sign the contract and pay us the full price without a loan. Oh and we have this additional agreement that states you will no longer drive your 2012 Cruze you own. Is this the same concept PTC has with licenses already paid for in full?
Not sure about the analogy, but fundamentally what they are trying to prevent is some place having say 20 seats of software, only paying maintenance for one of them, but keeping them all up to date. Of course this only works while everyone is still on the same major version, but I think that's what they are trying to prevent. Again, I don't know if they are still doing this, but I've told that if you attempt to renew maintenance on less than half of your "in use" seats they may refuse to allow it unless you sign a contract agree to discontinue using the other seats.
I just found the original conversation. Read these: