One-Time Licensing Fees Empower Design
The monthly fee model employed by Typekit, most CMSs, and just about any other design-centric web app, inhibits design decisions and leads to awkward conversations between a designer and client. Technologies that tie a design decision to a monthly fee are inherently prohibitive, and can ultimately solve nothing. In such situations, a one-time licensing fee is the only model that does not inhibit the designer’s choices… given that the product or service hopes to turn a profit.
The Ball and Chain Model
Designers need to be free to make the right decisions for their clients’ needs, and arrive at those conclusions solely within the constraints of those needs. Many products and services geared towards designers – especially web-designers – purport to simplify decisions while their pricing model just leads to more confusion. Jeffrey Zeldman noted this recently, saying (about Typekit) “a one-time font purchase as a line item in a design budget is easier to explain and sell to a client than an ongoing rental charge.”
In all of this, I am specifically talking about products or services that a designer would want to use in a project for their client: typefaces, content management, traffic reports, etc. Even if a designer/developer/account exec is able to help their client understand the importance of these monthly expenses, the question becomes: Who picks up the tab? One has to fear that such additions to a client’s overhead could easily be cut in the next budget, rendering a design useless. And if the agency or freelancer puts it on their tab, when does one stop paying?
Solution: The One-Time Licensing Fee
For just over eight months now, Unit Interactive has been proud to sell our little content editor: Unify. Without re-treading too much ground here, Unify is a plug-and-play app that allows a user to edit content on their page, we are mainly targeting web designers/developers who want a simple, reliable solution for their client’s content needs. Given these constraints, and after much discussion early-on, we decided that a one-time licensing fee, per domain [or sub-domain] made the most sense. A designer delivers a site, installs Unify, bills the client for the total cost, and everyone moves on with their lives.
Type foundries and print designers have long benefited from the one-time licensing fee; this is not a new idea.
Purchasing any product or service for a project is a complicated subject to broach with a client, and a major factor in these delicate deliberations is the pricing model for said items. The success of important design decisions – and therefore the project itself — can precariously hang on the business decisions of a third-party. This is just a hard fact of doing business. That being said, another crucial aspect of running a business is smoothing out difficulties; allowing maximum efficiency for minimal headache. It is for this reason alone that I believe that the one-time licensing fee is the ideal pricing model for all products and services aimed at designers, or any project-based work, and I’m perplexed that it is not more prevalent.
Other posts in "business"
- We’re Looking for a JS Developer
- We Welcome Ryan Downie to Unit Interactive
- Published: Interference
- Wanna Work at Unit?
- White Labeling Unify
- Working with Multiple Agencies
- User-Centric Pricing
- Your Clients Are Not Stupid
- Irony
- Competition?
- Nathan’s Anniversary
- RFP Theatre
- Our 2009 Annual Report
- We’re Saying It Again
- Projects to Kick Off 2010
- The Sum of All Choices
- Fire Your Account Team
- Protect your hard drive from Dokken. Wait …huh?
- Eyes on the ball, not the other team
- One Bad Ad Ruins It for All Advertisers
- Nearly 100 More Leads per Day
- ABSOLUT World Makes Kindness the New Currency
- New Unitard: Welcome R.A. Ray!
- How Not to Inquire
- We Refuse
- Under the Table
- Same Content, More Eyeballs
- Publish2 in the NY Times
- Is the Pricing Right?
- …So we’ll know them by their limping
- International Affairs
- Paid Search Follies
Comments (4)
Nice article Nathan! Been thinking about this very same issue recently. The one-off fees of products such as http://haveamint.com and http://unify.unitinteractive.com do make them so much easier to add to a project.
I completely agree. I always avoid recurring monthly charges. There are many CMSs I have avoided because of this (also, I like to have it on my own host).
Heck, I don’t even have a cell phone and avoid that monthly fee as well.
I’ve been looking around at the heavy cms and light cms. I found Perch CMS and Cushy CMS but as soon as I found Unify there was no contest, I fell in love. The no monthly fee really got my attention, and has really helped me make a choice. Plan on using you for some major projects.
Great work guys, keep it up.
I would agree on a one-time licensing fee for select elements, such as fonts. However in the case where the client gets a great interactive feature like a simple cms, I like the thought of a monthly fee. In fact my strategy includes 2 revenue sources, (1) the design/development and (2) the monthly recurring charge for cms access. I personally use a simple cms for all my clients at a small rate of $20-50 per month for the entire site depending on individual factors. My clients like it because its easy and cheap. And I like it becuase it provides me a monthly income if regardless of work load. In fact currently I bring in approx $2500 per month on just this alone.
Your Comment