Adobe; that does it!

[Spoks]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

That is a lot of gear! To save $2000 you would have to buy $6000 in gear, and then subtract the $1000 to arrive at a savings of $1000.

How do you get the equipment in, since "If you import goods into Norway valued at more than 200 kroner, you [may] need to pay 25 % VAT and customs and excise duty."

Is this a "throw the boxes away" sort of adventure?

Sure! But that is still what they did! I know of more than 10 guys (they were more than 30 altogether) that went to New York back then. Only from Oslo! They were even fighting among themselves about who should have B & H last 300 mm 2,8.

Norwegians travel a lot. As tourists, on business or as students. Not the least to USA. So do most Europeans. Adobe seems to know little about how Europeans live and how our tax system motivates us to buy things tax free.

[Olsen]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

That is a lot of gear! To save $2000 you would have to buy $6000 in gear, and then subtract the $1000 to arrive at a savings of $1000.

How do you get the equipment in, since "If you import goods into Norway valued at more than 200 kroner, you [may] need to pay 25 % VAT and customs and excise duty."

Is this a "throw the boxes away" sort of adventure?

I have bought practically all my gear in Singapore. From ny 1Ds/1Ds II/1DsIII plus a heep of lenses - not the mention the M8 - and so on. I guess I have saved more than 6,000 $ in VAT only. I simply put it in my bag. Boxes included. The tax free purchasing limit is far higher than 200 NOK. It is more like 10.000 per person. More of an issue is the weight restrictions and cost of overweight on the flight home. (One of the guys going to NY from Oslo in 2008 had to pay a hefty overweight fee. Still it was good business!)

I have a old Adobe CS version on an old PC with Windows NT. We now have a new and better PC with Vista and yet another planned with Windows 7 in my household. I could very much like to have a CS4 combined with the latest Lightroom for the new Windows 7 system. I checked around at Cathay Photo, Singapore about prices when I was there last time. I could not make sense of the price I got (that I understand now!), and thought that it can't include all what is offered here in Norway. I'll will buy my CS4 in Singapore. That's for sure.

[nonot]

The prices of many software products are different all over the world but so are things like import and distribution taxes for doing business in any given country. Adobe no doubt employs people somewhere in Europe and that costs them a certain amount of money, probably more than what it does per person in the USA. There's many issues at work that determine the final price you purchase something at, it's not all Adobe being predatory and thinking they can swing one over on the Euros. But I'd take it to them and ask directly "why?" if you're a potential customer, they owe this much to you to explain it, and if it sounds like a fabrication then it probably is... move on and support someone else.

Having made my living with adobe products for some time I'll fully admit to having used pirated software of theirs for years. I was a student putting myself through school and I simply couldn't afford it even at the educational discounts... that being said I now own pretty much all of their products, with multiple user licenses and think their software is well worth the money. Once I started charging people for my output I figured it fair to pay them for theirs.

[Olsen]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

Apparently this is Adobe's position.


I know, if you buy the Engish version it should be cheaper... and who knows if this policy will last. But Adobe's main customer base in Europe continues to be professional. And they have to have one price per country.

Bottom line re Norway, you don't buy very much. Trips to B&H aside.

We can drop the special language part. It is not relevant since we are talking of 'English version' only. A 'Norwegian' CS4 is so expensive that it is only relevant for Hasselblad users. We can drop the tax part. Which leaves us with 'nothing' substantial as arguments as to why a CS4 should cost $ 500 more in Norway than in USA.

No. We are not buying that many CS4s. Particularly not here in Norway. That could change if Adobe applied a price policy more adjusted to the international realities. - Like what Canon and Nikon have done. Adobe has a range of excellent products. Give us an oportunity to not feel like the stupid farmers we most likely are - and we just might buy the stuff.

[clachnacuddin]

Originally Posted by martin s

A few weird comparisons going on here, but this one takes the cake. You don't see the difference between wine and software?

martin

I think the comparison goes together quite well...I know the work I do on Photoshop improves greatly after a few glasses of wine!

[Olsen]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

I just posted what the Norwegian government says it is, and now realize I cannot find the page I translated. They were very specific that food was allowed but clothes not. I could not find a specific reference to cameras. I do personally know people who have be snagged in the Netherlands and had to leave equipment at customs, and pick it up on the way out. I wonder what the actual rule in Norway is?

Here in New York we are supposed to pay sales tax on goods bought in New Jersey, and there were times when the state tried scaring people by taking down license numbers at malls in NJ, but they now go directly for the companies.

Found it: it is about $1000 USD
Free import:
1. residents of Norway who have been abroad for less than 24 hours: goods representing a total value of NOK 3,000.-. This does not include alcohol or tobacco products, unless it can be proven that they have been purchased with a price including tax (not duty free) in an E.E.A. country;
2. residents of Norway who have been abroad for 24 hours or more and visitors to Norway: goods representing a total value of NOK 6,000.-. Articles included in this limit (not for passengers under 18 years) are:
a. 200 cigarettes or 250 grammes of other tobacco products and 200 leaves of cigarette paper; and
b. alcoholic beverages:
- 1 litre of spirits of 22% vol. or higher to a max. of 60% vol. and 1.5 litres of alcohol of 2.5% up to and incl. 22% vol.; or
- 3 litres of alcohol of up to and incl. 22% vol.; and
- 2 litres of beer with more than 2.5% up to/incl. 4.7 vol.
This means a max. of 5 litres of beer if no other alcoholic beverages are imported.

http://www.iatatravelcentre.com/NO-N...ns-details.htm

Olsen -- others please correct this if incorrect, I am not taking sides just reporting what Adobe, and what seems to be the Norwegian rules on import. I have never entered Norway, so could not begin to know about enforcement. I know it is very sporadic in the US, but my girlfriend keeps losing British food.

Which makes me a smuggler. I am crying all the way to the bank....

[Spoks]

The VAT, but also the event of internet, has changed the photo business drastically. But also the jewels, expensive watches - anything compact & expensive that can be transported easily. These products you don't buy back home here in Europe anymore. A hefty VAT is common in most European countries. In Germany 19% of the sales price is VAT. 21% in Ireland, 20% in Norway, Sweden and Finland - and so on. Most likely, USA will have to introduce some kind of VAT in the future. I see this is being discussed on Bloomberg TV and so on. Then you will see the advantages of going to tax free havens.

[Spoks]

Originally Posted by Olsen

We can drop the special language part. It is not relevant since we are talking of 'English version' only. A 'Norwegian' CS4 is so expensive that it is only relevant for Hasselblad users. We can drop the tax part. Which leaves us with 'nothing' substantial as arguments as to why a CS4 should cost $ 500 more in Norway than in USA.

No. We are not buying that many CS4s. Particularly not here in Norway. That could change if Adobe applied a price policy more adjusted to the international realities. - Like what Canon and Nikon have done. Adobe has a range of excellent products. Give us an oportunity to not feel like the stupid farmers we most likely are - and we just might buy the stuff.

I agree.

It is in countries like the Scandinavian countries, Ireland, Germany, Italy etc - with consumers with a high purchasing power and a relatively large community of semi pro/advanced amateurs that well could fall for a time limited campaign with favourable prices of CS4. Pro users, many of whom are willing to pay the $ 1,100 regardless, will not hop on such campaign offers. This because purchases are tied to budgets and investment decisions, an so on. While an amateur/semi pro on a consumer-like budget would certainly take the advantage of a favourable offer.

[Olsen]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

There is a strong Norwegian graphic design industry, and they probably what the support, and do not care about cost. Also companies cannot run pirated software, they must have licenses, since they run the risk a disgruntled employee will "drop a dime" on them.

I understand your points of course, but Adobe still considers themselves a professional supplier, and they must cater to the companies and schools who buy many copies and want the software in their native tongue.

But if you are going to run pirate, why pay for the software at all?

I am absolutely sure that the total of Norway's graphical industry are using Adobe software already and that they all have paid their $ 1,100 for their CS4s. But that industry is now in decline. The demand for licences is falling. If Adobe wants to sell more in Norway, they come to a tight market. They also come to a market which is changing. Where companies are breaking up in smaller independent units where individuals are independant companies. Adobe should not expect these to act the same way as the larger companies did. The individual 'consultant' just might jump on the possibility to buy his CS4 licence for $ 600 somewhere. If Adobe wants to sell more licences then they should direct campaigns towards this segment as well as the semi pro/advanced amateur. No to say students.

Personally, I will not go for any pirate solution. But I am not interested in paying more than the lowest international price + Norwegian VAT. Left with no other option, I will buy my CS4/Lightroom combo where it is cheaper. That's called arbitrage. A term the market orientated Adobe people will understand, I am sure.

[sevo]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

I understand your points of course, but Adobe still considers themselves a professional supplier, and they must cater to the companies and schools who buy many copies and want the software in their native tongue.

About eight or ten years ago, when they had nationalized distributions (maybe while they hit the space limit on distribution CDs), the English versions were always about 10% more expensive than the German one hereabouts - and all companies I worked for purchased English versions (for the sake of their international staff and to have the best possible compatibility with add-ons and plug-ins, which sometimes did not work or were unsupported on nationalized versions). Right now, they ship at least bilingual.

Sevo

[wgerrard]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

Now there are a large number of users (encouraged by Adobe, and pirated software before their current clamp-down) who simply want to own a professional application for home use, and price is important.

I have a twenty-something nephew. As far as I know, he doesn't own a camera, but he has a pirated copy of PS on his laptop. Go figure.

The characterization of PS as a professional tool is important. Amateurs and professionals have different needs. They also have different skills and knowledge levels. If an amateur just wants to resize his images, make them look better and palatable for web posting, then PS is a whole lot of unnecessary hassle. Adobe recognized the difference between the amateur and the pro markets when they launched PSE. That's something they would not have done if "amateur" PSE posed any threat to "pro" PS.

[Olsen]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

Taxes are tricky, here in NYC we pay a modest 8.25 sales tax, which supports all sorts of city expenditures. But no one wants to pay sales tax, so "we" drive to New Jersey or buy on the internet. But then the money has to come from somewhere... and when the Subway for instance has a severe shortfall we all cry the blues.

I have no answer, just that the money for "free" this and that, has to come from somewhere.

Ha, ha! Indeed, you are right. We had an excellent social democrat prime minister, Gro Harlem Bruntland (this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gro_Harlem_Brundtland ) who said: 'everybody wants to buy a new car, but nowbody wants to pay for the road'. I am in a little special situation. I live both in Singapore and Norway and pay taxes to both places. But I do take the advantage of buying stuff where it is the cheapest.

[JPSuisse]

One poster asked why somebody who buys expensive cameras won't pay for software... Actually there are good reasons:

1.) A good film camera does not require me to purchase an update every 3 years when I change operating systems! I bought CS and shortly upgraded to Tiger 10.4. Acrobat never did work properly again.... Now, who's ripping whom off here!?

2.) My film camera does not collect information about me and require data to be sent to the manufacturer to "reactivate" what I purchased. Why should I pay for an invasion of privacy?

3.) I'm using a Lightroom 2 now, but since Adobe won't support PPC processors anymore, I'm changing to Bibble 5 now that it supports the M8. Here, software companies are working together to force this continual cycle of upgrades down my throat! Alas, the Captialist business model at it's best.

Actually, in my view, software is much less valuable than hardware from a customer point of view, because REAL hardware should last without having to pay for updates...

Grrr.

JP

[NickTrop]

Originally Posted by Jamie123

It's not that simple. Adobe is the leader by a long run in its market segment. It is THE standard for imaging software in the creative field and as such it has a quasi monopoly. For most people working in this field not using Adobe products simply isn't an option as there's no real competition around. I'd venture to say that the could even double the price tomorrow and a lot of people would still buy it because they have to.

Disagree on two points. It is what the market will bare. In fact, you have it backwards. The more competition exists, the less it's about "what the market will bare" and the more it's about price equilibrium. For example, commodity items - wheat for instance. The market may "bare" twice or three times the cost per bushel. However, because it's a commodity item with lots of farmers producing wheat, supply drives every person to the same price per bushel - the farmer has "zero" influence on the price of his produce - even if the market will "bare" a higher prince.

In a monopoly - and I disagree completely that Adobe has a "monopoly" on image editing SW at all but I'll play along, they could charge $100,000 per license but they would find themselves soon out of business. What price do they charge? The highest price the market will bare.

[Al Patterson]

Originally Posted by JPSuisse

One poster asked why somebody who buys expensive cameras won't pay for software... Actually there are good reasons:

1.) A good film camera does not require me to purchase an update every 3 years when I change operating systems! I bought CS and shortly upgraded to Tiger 10.4. Acrobat never did work properly again.... Now, who's ripping whom off here!?

2.) My film camera does not collect information about me and require data to be sent to the manufacturer to "reactivate" what I purchased. Why should I pay for an invasion of privacy?

3.) I'm using a Lightroom 2 now, but since Adobe won't support PPC processors anymore, I'm changing to Bibble 5 now that it supports the M8. Here, software companies are working together to force this continual cycle of upgrades down my throat! Alas, the Captialist business model at it's best.

Actually, in my view, software is much less valuable than hardware from a customer point of view, because REAL hardware should last without having to pay for updates...

Grrr.

JP

You do know that the only reason you need to upgrade the hardware is that software designers will eventually write some bloated code that will require you to upgrade, after it sucks up every CPU cycle you have and then some, right?

Yes, I'm sort of kiddng, but my older desktop, which ran fine when I bought it, now has trouble keeping up when both McAfee and MicroSoft go on the web to get their updates at the same time. I blame Bill Gates...

[wgerrard]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

Apparently this is Adobe's position...

...

I'm glad you posted that. It clarifies matters. I'm especially intrigued by this:

We maintain 2.5 times as many field marketing employees in Europe as in North America to support our creative business at a certain level of quality across local markets. However, the revenue per employee is smaller, so the overall costs per unit of revenue is 4:1 in Europe compared to North America.

[Spoks]

Originally Posted by wgerrard

I have a twenty-something nephew. As far as I know, he doesn't own a camera, but he has a pirated copy of PS on his laptop. Go figure.

The characterization of PS as a professional tool is important. Amateurs and professionals have different needs. They also have different skills and knowledge levels. If an amateur just wants to resize his images, make them look better and palatable for web posting, then PS is a whole lot of unnecessary hassle. Adobe recognized the difference between the amateur and the pro markets when they launched PSE. That's something they would not have done if "amateur" PSE posed any threat to "pro" PS.

Sure, if we try to define "what is really necessary" in our little semi pro/advanced amateur photo world we end up with a pin hole camera and Wall Mart processing. The software part of photography is just as important as the camera itself today.

[wgerrard]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

Taxes are tricky, here in NYC we pay a modest 8.25 sales tax, which supports all sorts of city expenditures. But no one wants to pay sales tax, so "we" drive to New Jersey or buy on the internet. But then the money has to come from somewhere... and when the Subway for instance has a severe shortfall we all cry the blues.

I have no answer, just that the money for "free" this and that, has to come from somewhere.

The sales tax where I am is something like 7.5 percent. The legislature sometimes levies "temporary" increases of a fraction or so, and everyone whines and bitches. Yet, ask someone if they'd be willing to cut anything that actually impacted their lives and the answer is "no". They are quite happy to advocate cutting spending on services that benefit someone else.

[Spoks]

Originally Posted by wgerrard

I'm glad you posted that. It clarifies matters. I'm especially intrigued by this:

We maintain 2.5 times as many field marketing employees in Europe as in North America to support our creative business at a certain level of quality across local markets. However, the revenue per employee is smaller, so the overall costs per unit of revenue is 4:1 in Europe compared to North America.

Sorry, but no, I don't believe that is true. As Olsen said: We can drop the language part; we talk of English versions only, we can drop the tax part [we talk of tax free prices]. Which leaves us with 'nothing' substantial as arguments to why a CS4 should cost 30% [actually 83% - $ 500] more than in USA. We Norwegian amateurs have to direct our technical questions, in English, to USA. So, what European field support...?

[wgerrard]

Originally Posted by Spoks

Sure, if we try to define "what is really necessary" in our little semi pro/advanced amateur photo world we end up with a pin hole camera and Wall Mart processing. The software part of photography is just as important as the camera itself today.

I qualified my statement about what amateurs need. And the usefulness of pirating PS when you don't use a camera escapes me.

[Spoks]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

Reality I am just the bearer of bad news. Olsen as an international smuggler, now that is funny.

Ha, ha! Olsen could well make a living off smuggling CS4s from Singapore to Oslo. For service call 800 --- Ha ha!

[Al Patterson]

Originally Posted by wgerrard

The sales tax where I am is something like 7.5 percent. The legislature sometimes levies "temporary" increases of a fraction or so, and everyone whines and bitches. Yet, ask someone if they'd be willing to cut anything that actually impacted their lives and the answer is "no". They are quite happy to advocate cutting spending on services that benefit someone else.

No sales taxes where I live,, but they do take more in income taxes than the three surrounding states...

Many people seem to like the "free" government goodies paid for by others.

And I'm with those who say that one should use open software rather than pirate commercial products.

[wgerrard]

Originally Posted by JPSuisse

One poster asked why somebody who buys expensive cameras won't pay for software... Actually there are good reasons:

1.) A good film camera does not require me to purchase an update every 3 years when I change operating systems! I bought CS and shortly upgraded to Tiger 10.4. Acrobat never did work properly again.... Now, who's ripping whom off here!?

3.) I'm using a Lightroom 2 now, but since Adobe won't support PPC processors anymore, I'm changing to Bibble 5 now that it supports the M8. Here, software companies are working together to force this continual cycle of upgrades down my throat! Alas, the Captialist business model at it's best.

JP

Apple and Adobe did not force you to upgrade. That was your choice. Buying a software upgrade is directly analogous to buying an upgraded or new model of a piece of hardware. Buying an M9 doesn't render an M8 inoperable.

It's pretty difficult these days to find parts and mechanics for a Model T Ford.

[wgerrard]

Originally Posted by Spoks

Sorry, but no, I don't believe that is true. As Olsen said: We can drop the language part; we talk of English versions only, we can drop the tax part [we talk of tax free prices]. Which leaves us with 'nothing' substantial as arguments to why a CS4 should cost 30% [actually 83% - $ 500] more than in USA. We Norwegian amateurs have to direct our technical questions, in English, to USA. So, what European field support...?

The Adobe statement does not mention taxes, and mentions languages only in relation to increased costs. The European field personnel it mentions are marketing, not support, staff.

Fundamentally, if you are arguing that Adobe products should cost no more in Europe that in America, you need to explain why other American products also cost more in Europe. Or, for that matter, why I can buy a book from Amazon in the U.S. for $20 while Amazon.UK will sell it to me for $30.

[Olsen]

Originally Posted by Al Patterson

No sales taxes where I live,, but they do take more in income taxes than the three surrounding states...

Many people seem to like the "free" government goodies paid for by others.

And I'm with those who say that one should use open software rather than pirate commercial products.

Hi Al,

While Spoks and nikonhswebmaster tries to make a laughing stock of me as an international smuggler, I will simply point out to you that paying $ 1,375 is simply too much for a CS4. If we could be offered the going tax free price of $ 600 - as in USA, we would 'only' have to pay $ 750 taxes included here in Norway, - we would find this to be a fair deal. I hope you'll understand. Adobe is trying to make their own sort of 'prohibition' here. Oportunity makes crooks. I am sure you agree.

Regards Scarface, the Smuggler.