If Everyone Hates Adobe, Why Is It Pulling in Record Profits?

If Everyone Hates Adobe, Why Is It Pulling in Record Profits?

Last week, Adobe reported that the fourth quarter of 2019 was the most lucrative in the company’s history, delivering annual revenues of $11 billion. Given that it’s rare to hear a good word said about Adobe in the world of photography and videography, why is the company still so incredibly successful?

You don’t have to look far to find photographers complaining about Lightroom: it’s slow, its masking functionality is put to shame by the likes of Capture One, its ability to edit skin tones is surprisingly limited, and the workspace cannot be customized. The near-unavoidable Creative Cloud Desktop app is bloated, constantly up-selling, and frequently misleading. Perhaps by far the biggest bugbear bemoaned by customers is the subscription model: no other photo editing software ties you in for 12 monthly payments with the ever-present threat that the price could be hiked at any moment. 

From this, you can probably appreciate why I thought Adobe Rush was a free alternative to iMovie. One of the many slightly misleading aspects that makes Adobe's software obnoxious.

For many photographers, Adobe has them tied into a contract and thus has no incentive to innovate, fix bugs, or offer significant upgrades, but it’s not just photographers who are complaining. I’ve heard from more than a few videographers and filmmakers recently who have announced their move from Adobe Premiere Pro to DaVinci Resolve, citing stability issues and corrupt project files. Premiere can be buggy, especially if you’re on a PC running hardware that’s more than a few years old. Many users complain of customer support being incredibly slow responding to inquiries, bug reports that are seemingly ignored, and that the beta forums for some packages have become farcical.

Is Adobe Too Big to Care?

The recently launched version of Photoshop for iPad seemed indicative of how Adobe now treats its customers. No doubt, huge companies draw greater criticism simply by virtue of being so huge, but for many, the car crash that was Photoshop for iPad demonstrated a complete lack of respect for users. Instead of getting enthusiastic fans on board by exhaustively testing and evolving a new product, Adobe seemed to rush it to market, creating an application that received countless caustic reviews.

I recently did a job that required a lot of compositing, something I'd never done before. Not something I'd like to try on the iPad.

Given all of these problems and the emergence of so many competitors — Capture One, Skylum, and Affinity to name but a few — why is Adobe still proving so unbelievably successful? Creative Cloud subscriptions account for the largest part of Adobe’s revenues, and from the noise, surely, dissatisfaction and customers migrating elsewhere would have an impact? Apparently not, and shareholders must have been delighted when Adobe’s share price spiked by more than 4% on December 12 at the news that revenues for the year were in excess of $11 billion.

That is a phenomenal amount of money for a company that makes niche software. This is not an operating system that is integral to every machine out there or a word processor that even your nan needs to have installed. This is hardcore, professional-level, commercial software with a comparatively limited customer base. Through sheer innovation, Adobe established itself as the industry standard across numerous professions, but how long can this last? Apparently, for the foreseeable future.

The Subscription Tsunami

Adobe realized early that software as a standalone product was not going to deliver profits forever. Eventually, demand was going to drop-off — potentially coinciding with a slackening of innovation from its developers — and Adobe was smart in predicting that its sales would reach saturation point. The number of new customers would eventually decline, and those who already owned the software were not about to blow a chunk of cash on an updated version that was barely an upgrade.

Software as a service was the future, and it brought other hooks and advantages as well. Tapping into customers’ Gear Acquisition Syndrome was now much easier: users might feel reluctant to hand over several hundred dollars for something that offered only an incremental improvement, but paying $10 a month to know that you were always using the latest and greatest version was reassuring.

Lightroom. Dependable. Occasionally sluggish. Hard to leave.

Secondly, cloud service companies such as Dropbox were already using this model, and if this type of functionality could be bundled into the deal, it would both justify the ongoing fee as well as trapping customers into an ecosystem. If your raw files are all in Adobe’s cloud, while it’s not impossible to move systems, it definitely gives you an extra incentive to stay put. Encouraging lethargy is a great way of retaining customers.

Thirdly, this model can feel to many like a monthly subscription but is in fact an annual subscription that is paid by the month. Opting to pay for the entire year in advance will not save you any money, and even if you choose to pay for 12 months, Adobe will hang onto your card details so that it can process the renewal when it comes around. (Given that Adobe inadvertently exposed the data of 7.5 million customers a few months ago, this might not be ideal if you’re protective about your information.) This monthly fee feels less expensive, and psychologically, it gives you the misguided sense that if your circumstances suddenly change, this is a financial burden that can be immediately canceled. Of course, it’s not that simple: there is a fee if you want to cancel your contract early.

The final piece of this puzzle that secured Adobe’s transition from goods to services, from selling to renting, was the disappearance of the option to purchase outright. While subscription and standalone options stood side by side for a while, sales of Lightroom 6 stopped earlier this year, with the last copies being snapped up from online retailers in March and April. You might recall that back in 2013, Adobe promised users that it would always offer a standalone version of Lightroom available to purchase with a perpetual license: “Future versions of Lightroom will be made available via traditional perpetual licenses indefinitely,” its blog calmly explained.

So, was Adobe telling the truth as it saw and things then changed, or was it telling customers what they wanted to hear to prevent unnecessary upheaval?

The Photography Bundle Is Massively Discounted

In Adobe’s defense, it could be argued that the plan for photographers is comparatively cheap. Lightroom and Photoshop together come to $9.99 a month, which seems like a bargain when you consider that Photoshop as a single app is $20.99 per month. Why anyone would choose to pay for Photoshop on its own considering that it’s less than half the price if you rent it with Lightroom is a mystery, but that’s the standard fee for individual apps.

Photoshop. Cheap at half the price.

As the model goes, it makes sense. There are millions of amateur photographers willing to pay a small fee per month that probably wouldn’t pay a large fee. Adobe gets a ton more customers, which more than outweighs the reduced price — a million customers paying $10 a month pulls in more revenue than 100,000 customers paying $20 a month. By contrast, there are far fewer video editors or designers than photographers, and they will pay more for an individual app, especially when it’s more likely to be a profession.

The problem starts when, as a photographer, you have Lightroom and Photoshop, but want to do some video editing. Adding Premiere — one single application — to your bundle triples the cost of your subscription. Because of this, I opted to buy Affinity Publisher outright for around $50 rather than rent InDesign for the year for more than $250.

If you feel the urge to self-publish a book, Affinity Publisher is your most cost-effective professional option.

Not only that, but one has to wonder how long this Lightroom/Photoshop photography bundle will last. Earlier this year, Adobe claimed that it was “testing” new pricing options when visitors to its website noticed that Lightroom as an individual app was $9.99, but bundled with Photoshop, the price was suddenly $19.99. Perhaps this was some A/B testing happening in certain parts of the world, but if those are the options when renewal time comes around, many will be ditching Photoshop and paying a one-time fee for Affinity Photo or Pixelmator Pro in its place.

If Adobe decides to implement this change, there is a chance that customers renting one app rather than two will then be more inclined to ditch Lightroom completely in favor of something else. Hopefully, for us customers, that’s enough for Adobe to hold off.

Will the Competition Follow Suit?

What seems more likely is that competitors will follow suit with the subscription model. No doubt, lots of small software firms initially saw Adobe’s move and thought they’d been given a up: while Adobe would push customers away with subscriptions, they could Hoover them up by continuing to offer one-time fees. However well that may have worked for Adobe’s competitors, Adobe has proven that the subscription model is lucrative, and it may only be a matter of time before one-off purchases become a thing of the past across the industry. Affinity and Pixelmator are both a single purchase, but they’re still under heavy development, and while many professional users will have migrated, Adobe still has a very stiff hold of the industry, and one-off fees make these alternatives stand out — for now.

Capture One currently offers both a one-time fee and a subscription, but will it eventually follow Adobe’s lead and become subscription only? It has no plans to switch, but unlike Adobe, it doesn’t want to rule it out before possibly changing its mind.

Adobe Can Do Whatever It Wants, But for How Long?

This being a free market, Adobe can charge whatever it wants, and customers will decide what’s best, but Adobe’s dominance is going to take time to shift, and the company is clearly not afraid of exploiting its position. There’s a huge volume of tutorial content for Adobe products, and any budding young digital creative thinking of ditching freelance life and working for an agency will be expected to know Adobe products inside out.

Fortunately, companies such as Affinity are leading the charge and seem to have the funds to be able to offer their software at very affordable prices. Right now, Affinity Photo is just $49.99, and a perpetual license costs less than two and a half months of Photoshop. If and when the Lightroom/Photoshop bundle gets its price hike, I highly recommend reading this article from Fstoppers' Wasim Ahmad and doing the 30-day trial.

A screenshot of Affinity Photo. Source: Serif.com

In time, Adobe’s slowing innovation, dishonorable marketing tactics, and lack of respect for its customers may have an impact, especially as competitors match features, produce more tutorial content, and continue to undercut Adobe on price. Revenues might be at record highs for 2019, but as 12-month contracts begin to expire and the alternatives keep getting better, 2020 might be a different story.

What are your thoughts? Leave a comment below.

Andy Day's picture

Andy Day is a British photographer and writer living in France. He began photographing parkour in 2003 and has been doing weird things in the city and elsewhere ever since. He's addicted to climbing and owns a fairly useless dog. He has an MA in Sociology & Photography which often makes him ponder what all of this really means.

Log in or register to post comments
110 Comments
Previous comments

My only gripe with Adobe is that Premiere is very quirky for a 2020 product. Lots of operations in the timeline and effects management are very clunky. Because of this, if u dont follow a very specific workflow pattern u end up with potential problems when u want to make universal changes once you are deep in an edit.

Adobe has the biggest advantage because of the amassed knowledge base available for the software. There is no PiXimperfect for Affinity. That is really their monopoly. Switching from LR to C1 was a bit of a bumpy road and I'm still adjusting if I'm being honest, but I'm really dreading switching from PS to Affinity.

That knowledge base was the reason I switched from Paint Shop Pro over ten years ago to Photoshop. I got tired of having to work out my own solutions when there were "Photoshop Cookbooks" on the shelves with all the answers I needed. And that situation is certainly not changed, with such people as Unmesh Dinda continually discovering things about Photoshop that I didn't even know I needed to know.

I have been using the version of CS6 for a long time now and I recently purchased a new camera which necessitated a new version of PS and LR and having to buy into the subscription model. The first thing I noticed was that not much had changed in terms of features from CS6 but it was much slower on the same machine.

For those of us who don’t live in the US, the subscription price came out to be much higher than I had hoped to pay. I am not a professional photographer. When the new C1 came out, I decided to purchase it and my eventual goal is to drop PS and LR as I don’t want to pay an annual fee for something that hasn’t evolved much.

One thing I am going to miss most is the Nik Collection which I use. I haven’t used C1 much and but I am hoping that they have plugins and that something like Nik will eventually be available on it. LR isn’t important to me. I am looking for a replacement to PS.

The thing is that Adobe isn't just Photoshop and Lightroom. Adobe plays in ALL the creative fields - and that is their strength.
Photoshop, After Effects, Animate (Flash), Illustrator, InDesign and Premiere has each pretty much become the industry standard version of those apps. Yes, they all have competitors, with many of those better than the Adobe version, BUT with Adobe you can integrate them all so easily. The big animation studio I work at alone, probably has 300-400 licences of Photoshop, Animate and After Effects each, with probably about 50+ for Premiere. The fact that companies can, through 1 subscription (and bulk discounts) get access to all those apps, makes so much harder for the other apps to infiltrate the "Adobe domain".

Darktable is very impressive and free. I really don't understand why the community ignores it. Maybe it's because they don't pay influencers to write articles about it.

I just want my LR to work as well, as fast and as bug free as it did in 2014. How did LR become slower over time and an unreliable mess of a program. Why are we regressing? I don't understand this.

Well since this time in 2014 and yesterday my raws have increased in size from 15 to 40mb which would cause some issues with cpu,ram and if using spinning rust to store date I know cpu and ram throughput has not tripled in that time.
Why is X program running slow is not something that can be answered unless sitting at your machine and tearing into everything running. In short could just be you.

People don't hate Adobe, some people don't like anything. If I was to create a image creation program I would tell the world they hate Adobe and any other company I can move out of the way so I can get to the money !!!.

I don't hate Adobe :-) I reckon that there are GREAT alternatives on the market - yet the whole Adobe Creative Cloud back-end, the Adobe Reader ... Spark ( a fun freebee ) should be put into account as well - I feel it is always about more than just a great program ! The Desktop and iOS integration of CS and Lightroom for instance ! Worth every penny !