activeCollab 1.0: Plans and Prices

Looks like there will be no open-source version for small businesses then? I would need at least 70 projects for all my websites, but I don’t think I can afford to suddenly add more than a thousand dollars (and then several hundred a year) to my expenses. Unless the new version can save me that much…

Presumably the active-project limits are a license-controlled thing, given that the source code could be modified to remove this restriction? I’m not sure how that would work?

0.7.1 works quite nicely for me at the moment so I’ll see whether I can help out with the open forks of that code.

Disappointing, as I was expecting more “shareware”-like prices for the new version.

Wow, this is great info! Thanks for the update, looking forward to launch.

We’re looking at this as an improvement over Basecamp (as are many others I suspect) – which seems also to have informed your levels too (they are named similarly, and project limits are similar).

Right now we pay $49 pcm for 35 projects worth, and some level of tech support etc for the Basecamp ‘plus’ plan. Your license pricing for the same product is equivalent to 15 months rental from 37 signals, plus $15 pcm maintenance. Thus, assuming we cancel Basecamp the instant we start ActiveCollab, a move from Basecamp to ActiveCollab puts us out of pocket compared to staying with Basecamp for nearly 16 months.

Given ActiveCollab is an unproven product (we’d have loved to have participated in some sort of Beta Test but missed the deadline), chances are we’d have to continue to run Basecamp for several months while we work out for our selves that it works OK etc. (particularly in light of their less-than-helpful attitude to FTP storage on new accounts (not allowed)).

I haven’t run similar analysis on other levels of license – but it seems a rather costly migration at the current price levels. Certainly enough for us to think twice about moving.

Guys, are you kidding?! The project must be free and open-source as it was stated from its birth. What prices? What 2 versions? It’s not serious.

Why limit the number of projects for a Non – Profit? We are a therapeutic riding center that gives riding lessons to children and adults with disabilities and have at least 10 projects running at any given time. Please consider a greater number of projects for non profits. Thanks – Rob

Thanks for the information.

But to be honest, I was quite shocked when I saw the large numbers for everything above the lite version. I mean until just recently, it was an open source software. Half the price of your Start package would have been reasonable. I am quite disappointed.

Good luck!

From open-source to $2K is a long way…

Sorry guys, you blew it with this prices

From “open source” to “Lite for non-commercial use” is quite a change.

Time to look for something else.

Illija— I’d disagree with them comment that the prices are unreasonable. This announcement brings up a few questions for us:

Will you be able to switch between packages? e.g. if I buy the 35 project version, but need 36 projects, I’ll be able to pay the difference to upgrade to the next level?

If so, will my year’s support restart from the date I upgrade, or if I upgrade on day 364, will I only get one day’s support? (in which case as a loyal customer I’m getting a worse deal than a new customer?)

Will an installable demo of the non-free version be available? 30 day trial? Online demo?

Will the non-free versions have their license entitlement embedded in their serial number, or will it have to “phone home” to check their license entitlement? If so, what happens if I want to operate on an intranet only system? What if activeCollab goes bust? What if the authorisation server goes down (as happened to Windows Authorisation recently)?

It’s a shame the non-free versions will not be open source, as you’re giving your paying customers less flexible software than people who don’t pay a penny. Enterprise-level customers, who are likely to be buying the higher priced versions, would, I’m sure, be keen to audit the code from a security and data integrity point of view (they’re trusting highly confidential client data to the system—one of the big attractions of an open source system is being able to make sure the software is processing this accurately and isn’t secretly sending this outside the organisation in any way)

If

Gutted ! I was really looking forward to the V1 release, and presumed that the prices would be something a bit more affordable than the market leader Basecamp, but alas not. I understand that you are now producing this as a commercial venture, but I really think that selling a one off package for $99 with no support would have brought far more customers to active collab.
Can you Imagine if Joomla suddenly annouced that the next upgrade (no matter how much of an improvement) would be $2000 a copy. No me neither.
A real shame. Oh well 0.7.1’s good enough for the time being.

As someone else stated: Until the prices are competitive with Basecamp, I see no reason to switch. Good luck with that pricing scheme, you’re going to need it.

Good products will ever be for sale. That’s a business fact, and also in the web-business (believed it or not)

So, but. I hope there will be such as a demo-installation on one of your servers, so that a customer can test the business-version. Because, someone like me or our agency, looking forward to your product, but never will purchase one euro as long as we don’t know, if it will proof all our needs.

It really doesn’t like my comment! I was trying to say, if the Lite version has “full” source code available, surely it would be trivial to change the project limit. The licensing part of the source must therefore be obscured in some way?

Looking forward to trying it out,

booooooooo :(
it’s not open-source software ! really ?

The pricing is far too high, you really need to look at these again.

I’ve been monitoring aciveCollab as a ‘cheap’ alternative to BaseCamp but see no reason to move from a market leader (even if I do use their servers!) to a newcomer when the prices are as high as they have been posted above.

Personally, I am interested in a full-blown version of activeCollab, but I will keep my mouth shut about pricing before test driving 1.0. If tool with be good enough to rely my bussines on it – I can pay the price and be a happy customer.

I definitely agree the number of active projects in lite version should be set to higher level, or even unlimited. While I can understand licensing/pricing scheme in “pro” version, I can’t imagine lite users paying $399 just to have 6 active projects without need for advanced features.

Guys, the announcement that there would be different prices and two different versions went out MONTHS ago.

I haven’t had a chance to use the new version yet, but I must say from appearances, the quality level went up scores from version 0.71.

Good job Illija and team, I’m really impressed with how professionally you guys are handling this!

I’m not sure if this has been covered or not, but is the RC1 release going to be when the beta testing invites go out, or did you scrap that? Just curious.

Ditto here on the pricing concerns. We’re a school and 5 projects would be pretty limiting. I was ok with this going commercial, but figured the pricing would be really reasonable…

very disappointing, was expecting great things. I don’t mind paying for a quality product but I would imagine that most small businesses like ourselves are very cash flow sensitive and whilst we would all like to be more efficient we also have to make a living. Starting something as opensource and then changing the goalposts strikes me as slightly against the whole concept of open source. We donate to every OS project we use and participate in communities when we can add something of relevance. Offering support as a paid service would have been something many businesses would have welcomed and paid for but this excessively high pricing inhibits us from taking this application further, shame it was looking good and we were really excited about V1 but guess we’ll stick with 0.7.1 and keep our eye out for any updates that people can help to flatten out a few niggles. We just can’t afford this price structure (why we aren’t using basecamp!) and I imagine you will lose a great number of people because of this. Maybe time for a rethink?

The 5-project limit for non-profit organisations is absolutely ridiculous. Greedy…

Did I understand right that there is now time managment and calendar in the lite version? If so, what is the differance between 0.71 and 1.0 lite excepting limites of project quantity at the last version?

Ilija, it seems that many of the people commenting have been previous version users, looking for an alternative to Basecamp that is affordable and more flexible.

Perhaps you’d like to comment on the reason for the change of license, as this seems to be the biggest issue other than the cost.

To all the other commenters: Joomla, Drupal etc have all had active communities contributing code from as far as I can tell. Ilija never wanted that kind of arrangement. Was a paid plan always in the wings?

Ilija, perhaps posting a copy, or providing for download, the licenses would help this discussion.

To be honest, I think your pricing is going to make many people think that Basecamp is a bargin, the cynic in me asks – do you work for them?

Hoping you’ll change the pricing,
Mike

Sorry, but this is not the split license “like MySQL” that was talked about! My business is going back to 37 Signal’s Basecamp, and I second the call to fork .71 into a truly OSS version. Very disappointing, no matter how many features were added.

I was planning on going the commercial route with 1.0… But the prices are much too high for my small company, I just can’t afford it. I’ll have to go on using good ol’ 0.7, even if it lacks alot of features you announced in 1.0 that I could use. Shame… There are two ways to sell software : pricey and elitist, or affordable and popular. I was hoping for the latter, but it seems the pricing plans puts AC on the elitist road ! Too bad.

Imho, the price is too high and not reasanable for most of current users of this product, so I belive you’ll change the price policy in future, but now it sucks (

From an “open source alternative to Basecamp” to making Basecamp look like a pleasant alternative.

This pricing is definitely not an option for me. I’ve been subscribed to your feed ever since 0.71 was active, but won’t be anymore if this is what it’s going to be.

Why can’t you leave it open source and charge for commercial support?

Hey Ilija,

Thanks for posting this information. I must say the prices listed are a lot higher then I expected. Its unfortunate news and I won’t be pulling my credit card out just yet.. I’m a one man business with lots of little projects and your pricing plan makes aC an expensive product. But I’m still sticking around cos I think your software rocks.

The main thing I liked with aC was the fact that I could have unlimited projects (and that it was hosted on my server)... I would have preferred to pay for a base version and then pay for plugins to it (like buying from from dell) as per my requirements…

I just feel that that 5 projects for a start level is a bit low.. if it was 10 or 15 then it’d be better and your increments go up quick!

Also, you mentioned that there may be some kind of deal/discount/special for users and members who have been with aC pre 1.0 who have waited patiently … is this still something you might offer?

and yeah, you guys complaining about ‘its not open source’ should really read the forums a bit more.. it has been known for months and months…

Leon

Everything that was fantastic about this project, the spirit, the people, the product…it’s all disintegrating now. I remember when this thing started as a finger to Basecamp and we were all excited, and all behind you. This pricing scheme, is just too much. I don’t mind paying for a license, but the money you’re asking for is beyond the means of 70% of small businesses.

With that being said, I think you have a fantastic product. You’re doing what you think is best and I can respect that. I just can’t afford it.

Obviously the feedback has been overwhelmingly negative regarding the proposed price structure. And the inevitable result is that another open source project will come and fill the gap you’re leaving open. There are dozens sprouting up even now, based on ajax/ruby on rails.

Should everyone complain? No. But such is the way with the “entitlement mentality” that seems ever more prevalent in society. That’s the danger of feeding lost cat; it ungratefully expects more and more.

I am thankful for your hard work on this project, and can happily continue to use v.0.71 or BaseCamp if 1.0 doesn’t prove to be vitally indispensable. I believe hard work is always rewarded (it says so in the Bible!) in one way or another, and so if you feel that taking this route will bring you a profit, I wish you every success!

Trying to sell the ability to install activeCollab on your own server as a “feature!” is kind of risky, as hosting your own server is an added expense and hassle, and therefore would logically dictate a significant discount in the software price. However, I do think it’s advantageous for me to install it on my own server, especially because DreamHost makes its so simple with 1-click!

Bottom line: activeCollab is beautifully done, and is going to make an impact (albeit, of an as-of-yet-unknown magnitude) in the ultra-competitive market it’s moving into. All the complainers will use the free plan and be just fine, and you’ll no doubt lower your prices in order to gain market share…

And, quite miraculously, the world will keep on turning.

I was really looking forward to the new version. I wanted to buy AC for my small business (up to 10 projects). I’m sure the new version is much better than the opensource one, but I just can’t afford this. I expected lower prices :-/

I can see the points being made in comments, but I understand this is a business.

I’m glad to see ActiveCollab moving along. Some need to realize that Basecamp is a subscription product. Once you stop paying, you can no longer use it. Thats not the case w/ ActiveCollab (to my understanding). Once you buy ActiveCollab, its bought.

I’d much rather own my product, get the cost out the way once, and move on. Lets see here:

ActiveCollab Unlimited would cost $4494 for 5 years of service. Thats the unlimited version with 5 years of support and upgrades. Simple Math – $1999 + (5×499). I’ll add hosting just to make it more realistic. I currently pay $150 for two years @ site5.com. Thats an added cost of $375 for 5 years of hosting. Total is $4869.

Basecamp Unlimited would cost $8940 for 5 years of service, and counting. Email support is included.

Thats a savings of $4071.

To me it comes down to, do I want to setup my own server and host ActiveCollab, or do I want a managed solution where I don’t have to worry about any type of server maintenance.

Maybe ActiveCollab should offer a managed/hosted monthly cost solution? These are just my opinions and thoughts, my apologies if any of the information above is incorrect.

My concern with the pricing scheme is not necessarily that it’s too high. But that it will require people to put too much money up front. If I were to stick to Basecamp it’d cost me more after several months of using it, but the cost would be offset each month to a more reasonable chunk of change. I was sort of hoping for a lower entry price for the new version.

Perhaps somehow you could set up the licensing for monthly or quarterly payments, to help ease the initial cost level.

Sadly, my destiny seems to be going back to Basecamp!

As a small company, we’ve been using AC for a while now (the free version) and thought that when the commercial version is out we will upgrade to it to get more features. But at the prices you set we cannot afford to do it. We will search for another solution …

Joel Spolsky has some good articles on prices http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CamelsandRubberDuckies.html

Do you really need six pricing levels ?

What I don’t understand is why did you put a limitation in the Lite version for “Max. active projects” if you are going to release full source code of it?

sigh. Not what I was hoping for. Will the full source code be distributed with the commercial version?

I was hoping for 1 simple price for unlimited projects with full source code available. I really hate the “plan” system that is so popular right now amongst web 2.0 companies.

Is $2k worth it? Hard to imagine. I’ll wait for the beta to see I guess. And if its closed source, forget it. I’m not paying $2k for a product I can’t alter to my needs (API or no).

it may be great for the long haul in saving prices but what about updates to the software… will we have to pay for those too? if so then it is no longer the set price.

This licensing plan is a bit over the top as are the limits on the lite version. I am sorry, but I think that you are missing a great opportunity. With those fees many could develop a custom solution, after all this is just a modified blog (as originally stated).

I also have issues with the licensing enforcement, will the app connect to a licensing server on run time to confirm the license? If so what happens if the server goes down, will our copy stop working?

Anyway, I guess you guys know what you are doing. Good luck. I am sure a new Open Source alternative will fill the gap soon.

This knocks me out as well. I’m using aC for personal organization plus two or three nonprofits. Five projects is basically a toy (or forces you to lump everything into one “project”).

Don’t forget you’re also paying hosting fees and doing your own sysadmin stuff, plus backups of databases and files.

I think the appeal will be limited to those who (for whatever reason) must keep all their data on servers they control.

I think you have alienated a lot of your current audience with that pricing and structure (project limits). Perhaps you are going for a completely different target market/audience, in which case you wont be considering these responses anyway!!!

If you are, most posters here seem to be looking for basecamp alternatives (ive even tried Goplan), with flexible amount of projects (as it is self-hosted) and its quite clear from the posts above that the pricing does not deliver this. We havent seen the product yet so the comments are a bit premptive.

If not you are going for medium sized companies.

I should mention that you have accidentally or otherwise inferred that you may review, and thus possibly alter, the pricing structure based on the response. In which case of course it will be negative!!! :)

Good luck

It really is unfortunate that this is the outcome of months of waiting for some reliable information about pricing, licensing, etc. Rather than getting the community excited about the release, the team has sent the community running in every direction from what was, at one time, the best OS project available for small businesses.

I guess all good things must come to an end. Truly competitive pricing would have been nice…here’s how it currently shakes out over a 3 year period…

Basecamp: $5364
ActiveCollab: $2997

That’s a difference of $65.75/month

So, we can see that there is some savings over the hosted, subscription service offered by 37Signals, but what are you getting for the difference?

1. Customization
I can modify the code…that’s nice, but I could already do that with the v0.7.1 release.

2. Features
There are some new features…but most of those already existed in the competing product, and there are several that Basecamp has that aren’t available in aC. That might change as plug-ins and extensions are developed, but currently those don’t exist. Without seeing the functionality of Tickets, chat, or the “powerful calendar” it’s impossible for us to make any determination about how they stack up to similar features in other products.

3. Hosting
I can host it myself. Wait, is this really a selling point? I mean, of course it is, but shouldn’t this ‘feature’ significantly REDUCE the cost of the application? Hosting costs money. And if you maintain your own server, it can cost of lot of time and headaches too. Time and headaches that will not be addressed by the aC support team. Are they going to trouble shoot my Apache config? What about when the DB gets corrupted and I need help restoring a backup? What about creating a backup in the first place? All of these are things that are included in the Basecamp subscription fee, and part of what make Basecamp such an attractive solution. As a small business owner, I can trust the really difficult maintenance tasks to the experts.

I think the biggest problem for most of us is that this licensing arrangement requires a capital outlay of $2000 on Day One! That’s just not an option for a small business that’s trying to make ends meet. I don’t know about the rest of you, but that’s basically my software budget for the whole year! I might be interested in a license if i could pay for it month-to-month, but there’s not way I can drop two grand in one shot. At least with Basecamp, I can pay for the application as I use it.

To Ilija and the rest of the aC team: I’m sorry to see the direction you’ve taken with this exceptional product. I see it as a complete reversal of the inspiration for the application, an affordable alternative to Basecamp. I sincerely hope you will reconsider this pricing, as I think it could lead to the demise of the product. I also hope you will consider as an alternative, offering a hosted, subscription service similar to Basecamp. If you were to offer it at a competitive price point I’m sure you would have success. You could offer new features to your subscription service first, and use the customers as your beta testers for major feature upgrades in the OS version that would be released after a preliminary “exclusivity” period.

The responses you are receiving are a direct result of the lack of information you have provided throughout the development process. Active communication with your user community would have prevented this negative backlash, as we would have been better prepared for the information, and would have felt like we participated in crafting the offering.

Well we are just a small company, did a research and started to discuss which project management system we’ll be using in the future – basecamp, goplan or activeCollab. I was very excited about the new version coming out soon and even delayed the decision, most of all because this would be the only system which offers real customizability. But you should know that we – and probably many other companies or individuals aswell – just like to offer it as an enhancement regarding the support of clients during and after the project development phase. And though it’s just an additional service and doesn’t create any income itself, the prices may be really too high for small businesses unfortunately.

Anyway, we’ll be awaiting the demo version and will see wether we’ll use activeCollab or one of the hosted alternatives.

PS: Maybe it’s not just the prices itself, but 5 active projects in the starting plan are definitely not enough, at least not for us.

I’m sorry to pile on, but I feel like this prices are quite high, given the new version hasn’t rolled out yet. I also work for a non-profit, though working in the Balkans. I had hoped to use ActiveCollab as our hub for project management. Can’t do it at these prices.

Could you not add a different price point for non-profits? Non-profit and Lite do not overlap in terms of need, etc.

Well… if nothing else, this shows that there is a solid group of end users looking a self hosted basecamp alternative.

The big question for us is not the price but when can we get to try it – you never know – it may be actually worth the price you are asking.

Any dates on when we can try (before we buy)???

http://www.thinkvitamin.com/features/webapps/how-to-price-your-web-application

Another informative article on Web Application pricing.

I would agree with some users that you may of alienated some of your original audience.

RE: Max Hyatt
You do make a good point, and that does put it into perspective with the Basecamp options. I, as well as several other individuals, just can’t pay that amount up front.

I also just don’t like the limitations. How is it any of the aC owners’ business how much we use their product? Call me an open source fanatic, but software isn’t supposed to limit your productivity…it’s supposed to increase it.

Ilija, you said over here that “there will be a free and open source version that match current feature set so current users will not be let down when 1.0 gets launched.” Well, a 5 project limit does not “match current feature set” of 0.71’s [non-existent] project limit. I am a current user…and I am let down.

Note to self: Start an open-source project to draw in the traffic, and then BOOM – migrate it to proprietary and get them to pay. If this project started out with this pricing, I don’t think it would have a chance (assuming it does now).

Looking at the other comments, I know others share my view when I ask as to why you chose to allow only 5 projects for OS/Non profit users.
15-20, now that’s a decent number, but 5 projects?
Now say your a small business, and wanted more projects, well the next plan up costs $249, but that still only allows 5 projects.

Ok, they will get some extra features such as group chat etc., but they can still only run 4 active projects, which is very small for the upfront price they are paying.

If you priced the ‘pro’ version at say $99-$200, I’m sure you’d make a lot more money in a year than having such astronomical prices, because then most people would be able to afford a copy of the pro version.

Lets just say you did price the unlimited version at $200.
You’d need 10 people to buy it in order to get the same amount for one license at the current price.

Now imagine if 10 companies buy the unlimited version at the current price, that’s $29985 in the bag right away.
But imagine if you priced it at $200, you’d need 2000 people to buy a copy in order to regain the money.

Now think about all the people using basecamp for ~ $ 49 a month (Over 1 million according to 37 signals).
Don’t you think they’d switch to your perpetual license for three month’s of basecamp single month license?

Your could also buy a couple of servers and host installations of AC, (like many have suggested), and package that as a monthly license, therefore bringing in monthly income.

Then you’ve got extra support & upgrades per year, that’s a heck of a lot of money if say 500000 people bought a $200 copy of your unlimited version.

Please think about the little guy, and remember, your going from free to $2000. That’s a heck of a jump for an opensource project. :)

PS, I don’t think he actually said ‘The business packages will not get the source’.
He just says lite versions get the source.

Well, I was really looking forward to buying this, but not with these outrageous prices.
This is no longer looking to be the great tool I thought it would be.

What I find most thoroughly unfortunate here is the way in which the versions have been differentiated.

I wanted to get away from Basecamp because of the artificial limitations that were inherent in hosted solutions. I figured, hey, if I’m hosting it, there’s no reason to limit the number of projects, right?

And that was indeed the case with 0.7.1.

I had imagined that with 1.0, the different price points would instead be bundled features. Like $199 for the basic system, $299 with full calendar, and maybe $399 with time tracking. All with unlimited projects, of course, because after all, that’s a limitation of the server and not the software.

But instead, AC has become exactly that which it once hoped to replace, and worse, for no reason: instead of even a plausible technical reason to charge more to be able to manage more data, AC charges more just because that’s how Basecamp works. Except that AC isn’t a hosted service and has no reason to use such a pricing model.

I had really hoped AC would be the breakthrough product that would shake up the market. Too bad that dream is over.

You’re mad. And you have thoroughly wasted my time.

That’s one less newsfeed in my reader. Good bye!

I would suggest you don’t delete the feed from your feedreader, as they may decide to change the price plans, like they said they might.
Although it looks like the damage has already been done….

(Running the risk of providing redundant information, I couldn’t resist commenting on this post.)

This has seemed a wonderfully promising product from day 1. Our team have quietly followed the development and discussions with great anticipation and enthusiasm, feeling more than willing to donate (lately ‘pay’) to support the continuation of you magnificent work.

Thus, I’m very sad to say our excitement was considerably cooled after reading this blog post. I fully understand the need for project revenues, but the proposal in this post nearly eradicates any incentive to migrate from other systems such as BaseCamp (which we currently use). Migrating would mean investing in a far less tested product that, in addition, would take at least two years to pay off, not to mention the work of installing/maintaining and everyone getting used to a new system.

Regardless of your final pricing decisions, I hope you will at least decide to offer your full versions as Shareware. It’s a big decision to change one’s working environment and we would need to try out any new solution before we could make a decision.

In design, structure, and features, your work suggests a strong competitive edge. Expecting that you will revise your currently proposed pricing, and as we are deeply interested in the product per se, we will continue following the developments of aC.

Best wishes!