Why I will stick with Matterport Classic Pricing9301
 WGAN ForumFounder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
 Screen Grab from My Matterport Cloud Dashboard Hi All, We Get Around Atlanta will continue to pay "classic pricing of $1,499 annually to host 297 of our up to 300 allowed models instead of switching to new Matterport pricing and pay $7,188 annually to host up to 250 Matterport 3D Tours (which we would have to archive 47 of our existing Matterport models). Yup! $1,499 --> $7,188 for 250 spaces instead of 300. Since We Get Around offers up to 15 of 39 Matterport 3D Tours for use by WGAN Standard and Premium Members – plus, have many active models – I could not switch and archive enough models to make the switch worthwhile to get unlimited uploading and unlimited processing. We are always under the 11 free models processing per month "classic" pricing plan. So, in our case, the unlimited uploading and unlimited processing offered in the new pricing are not valuable to us. By the way, I tried calling up my April 2019 invoice to confirm our annual payment, but I received an error message. Perhaps many of us are trying to do the same thing. Which plan is right for you and why? Please share your numbers and thought process! Best, Dan  Screen Grab of error message when trying to retrieve our April 2019 annual invoice. |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
|
Integratedman private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I also was trying to pull up my invoices..yep NO LUCK..do this ding dong`s at Matterport have just 1 CLUE lord when they cannot get even this right, then SPRING a ridiculous new pricing model on MSP`s it just makes you go hmmmm... I Guide Management must just laugh their collective asses` and wonder how Matterport management gets thru a day... oooh and when I put my ticket in the problem was not fixed, my invoices were e-mailed to me..  |
||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
Regina, Saskatchewan Canada |
Queen_City_3D private msg quote post Address this user | |
| The only good news with this new pricing is the grandfathering of classic plans. Good thing too, because I would switch to a new platform if I had to pay $7,188 US per year (nearly $10,000 Canadian). I pay the $1499 USD annually for the business plan and pay overages each month for all the processing beyond the 11 *free* model processings plus overage for hosting beyond 300 models (currently have 459 public spaces... but I've been lazy and there's several that I'm sure I can pull down). It makes no sense to me that they would have 250 public spaces as a cap for such an outrageous price. In fact, isn't it Matterport's goal to have millions of real world spaces converted to 3D Showcases? If so, why do they make it so costly to keep models live? I was an early Matterport adopter and have stated from the beginning that there should be no limit to models hosted as long as you pay for a plan. By forcing us to take down models by setting limits it is preventing the growth of Matterport. The more spaces that are live... the more the public will see them... and the more the public will want them. That means more business for MSPs which equals more camera sales for matterport and more model processing fees. I think this new pricing is disastrous for the company and whoever conceived of it should be re-assigned! |
||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
|
Shakoure private msg quote post Address this user | |
 RJ just finished the Facebook live Q&A... if you missed it, you can get a sense of how well it went from the FB reactions, to say nothing of the comments... clickable text |
||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Shakoure It's a Private Group and I am not a Member. I could imagine others are not members either. Anything to share? Best, Dan |
||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
Shakoure private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DanSmigrod ... Not that much to report other than what we already know. Dee Johnson seemed to have more insight on what MSPs were concerned about. Try this link... https://www.facebook.com/dee.johnson.5680/videos/10212889005172469/ |
||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Shakoure Thanks. It's a Private Link for members of the group. Dan |
||
| Post 7 • IP flag post | ||
 WGAN StandardMember Las Vegas |
VTLV private msg quote post Address this user | |
 |
||
| Post 8 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
Shakoure private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DanSmigrod ... Sorry Dan. I thought they'd make the video public, but then again, I can see why they opted not to. However, one of the things that disturbs me in RJ's talk (if you listen carefully) is that they're basically forcing MSPs to move to their new, pricier model by not allowing grandfathered MSPs the opportunity to move from one tier to another in the original subscription options. That's probably why they sprang this new pricing model without notice, giving no one a chance to upgrade within the original subscription/pricing options. Moreover, when asked if he would commit MP to keeping the Grandfather clause in perpetuity, he did not, but rather said that MSPs need to move forward with how MP is evolving. |
||
| Post 9 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
Integratedman private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I wonder if staff and Management at I guide sent the Matterport Management team flowers and a BIG TY!!.... |
||
| Post 10 • IP flag post | ||
Sarnia, Canada |
June private msg quote post Address this user | |
Well that was interesting!!! Thanks for the share......: |
||
| Post 11 • IP flag post | ||
|
Gerhard private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Yup! $1,499 --> $7,188 for 250 spaces instead of 300. I need to go back to school I think and learn maths all over again, then put CEO behind my name. I don't like this new CEOs attitude towards the MSPs at all. Looks like its going to be the Matterport Spring again soon on Facebook with people giving them one stars and they will react by taking it down again. We the MSPs have the power to put a end to this, just like we did when they hanged the T&Cs and just forced us to accept them. I know all the other competitors is watching this space and forum very closely. And this is the perfect opportunity to put greed aside and capture a massive chunk of the market if they are innovative and look at the longterm and not short term goals and gains. I am looking at companies like APPLE that will soon take over this space and make them obsolete, but again time will tell. But again what do we know we are just the employees of a camera company that pushes a button that makes a camera spin as it is so easy anyone can do it. And never own our own content that has been hijacked from us even if we delete them. All part if a bigger plan that some of the more woke MSPs have addressed in the past. But again lets not be Matterabies , and just take it and swallow the cool aid why not, are we ever going to be taken serious by Matterport. Without us they will not have a company. |
||
| Post 12 • IP flag post | ||
|
AtlanticAerialworX private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Interesting points of view of the new pricing system. I am just getting started with matterport by taking over another companies matterport buisiness. They currently have 75 active scans. I was going to just take over their plan and they still have by changing all their contact info and credit card info and going forward under their plan of $49/month. But on the flip side it now costs $3,200k to create AND host 100 scans with unlimited amount of scan uploads. Under the old plan it would be roughly $1,400 in hosting yearly + ( 100 * 19.99 = 2k) = $3,400 after the first year, but only $1400 to keep hosting those same number active scans of 100 going forward. So at the end of year 2 you would save almost 2k if you didn't upload any more scans that is. So if you scan another 100 the following year and still only have 100 'live' it works out the same. Tough call either way staying with old or going with new pricing. Real estate scanners makes sense since the average house is 3 months on market, so we would be flipping out live spots constantly with no costs to processing scans. Tough call! |
||
| Post 13 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @AtlanticAerialworX Would this option make "cents" for you? ✓ This MSP is Buying a Pro2 Camera Today: How I Answered His Questions Dan |
||
| Post 14 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
AtlanticAerialworX private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DanSmigrod funny, i was thinking of it right after i clicked submit. This will ONLY work if they allow scans to be transferred to an older pricing account. | ||
| Post 15 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @AtlanticAerialworX I may be making this up, but I believe I read in one of these WGAN Forum Matterport pricing discussions that a WGAN Forum Member asked Matterport Support and they said that was fine. If you do more forward with my recommendation, please do confirm with Matterport Support that there is no charge for transferring Matterport spaces from a new Matterport pricing plan to a Matterport Classic pricing plan. Dan |
||
| Post 16 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
AtlanticAerialworX private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DanSmigrod i just had a chat and yes we can transfer from new pro pricing account to classic pro pricing account. He did give me a warning that i made me scratch my head. He said to remember that the new account has hard limits to the number of active scans. and that i had to archive the ones i don't need. He indicated there is no 'not active' scans, just active and archive. When archived you CANNOT edit or do much with them unless you have a free slot available to make 'active' first. I guess this means we cannot have dozens or test scans to play with unless we make them 'active' and are using up our slots. I don't like that but it is what it is |
||
| Post 17 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @AtlanticAerialworX Please get “okay to transfer from new to old at no charge” in writing before getting the new account. Active and Archive. Got it. Thanks, Dan |
||
| Post 18 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
AtlanticAerialworX private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DanSmigrod it is free and here is the link to the updated transfer process and fees fyi from their space that was updated early this morning. https://support.matterport.com/hc/en-us/articles/360000201087-Transfer-a-Space-Between-Organizations |
||
| Post 19 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @AtlanticAerialworX Excellent! Thanks for sharing that link. Please keep us posted regarding what you decide to do and why. (A spreadsheet is a plus  )Enjoy your weekend, Dan |
||
| Post 20 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Hi All, Anyone switching to Matterport New Pricing Plan form Matterport Classic Pricing Plan? Dan |
||
| Post 21 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
 Share how you feel about the Matterport New Pricing and ask questions of two Matterport executives. Please join the Town Hall discussion today (Thursday, May 16, 2019 at 5 pm EDT (GMT -4) Join the Town Hall Live |
||
| Post 22 • IP flag post | ||
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I will be keeping 'Classic' until Matterport announces that they are sunsetting the Classic plans. I currently host 710 spaces and pay $150/mo + ceil((710 - 300)/50) * 19 = $321/mo Most of my spaces are in active use -- I work with home builders and multi-family management companies. $321/mo is not bad at all. Our processing fees are generally low as we have 11 free per month and any additional processing fees are all a drop in the bucket as the cost is factored into the job. The total cost for hosting for me is $3,852 annually. If we add in an average of 3 additional processing fees per month for fun, it would be $4,536. Our new cost would be $21,564 annually. ($7,188 * 3 for 750 Active Spaces). We will run out of space pretty quickly. The new cost is 4.7x more and requires an annual payment that I cannot afford. Therefore, I have stopped being a product evangelist for Matterport. I have requested to be removed from being a moderator on their forum. I am no longer promoting their products beyond the services that are provided by my company. Due to the double talk by RJ Pittman, Chris Bell and Damien Leostick (who was, btw, the architect behind most of last year's Eco-System fiasco) -- I am quite frankly SCARED of Matterport's ability to completely pull the rug out from underneath us and create an inhospitable environment for us to continu to run our businesses and succeed. I am an EXTREMELY moderate person who generally loves to see both sides of all arguments and wants to diffuse people who are reactionary based on distrust. That is why it is with a heavy heart that is a bit broken that I'm admitting -- I've lost all faith in this company. Chris Bell, Damien and RJ Pittman are all marching towards a brave new world where Matterport is a services company. The first step is to remove the ability for any other agencies to provide service at scale. That's why hosting of 25 and 50 models are all that are affordable now. The second step will be to increase direct sales to additional verticals. This will be coupled by a relaunch of the MSP program as Matterport's boots on the ground. There will be a lot of great opportunities here for individual MSPs and agencies to make money -- not incredible money, but for some it will be really helpful, for others it may represent competition within their market and be very disruptive to their revenue. The third step will be to sunset all Classic Plans and to offer MSPs ways to transition their clients to paying Matterport directly for hosting. It is not Matterport's goal to provide us with ways to make money from hosting -- that is revenue that Matterport would rather make. Frankly, I have always found reselling their hosting to be goofy and awkward as I have enough respect for my clients to not engage in double speak about the value of 'hosting' when Matterport blatantly advertise $50/mo for 100 Spaces. And that is why, again, Matterport are killing off Classic Plans. How on Earth can Matterport justify charging higher hosting fees to clients that they are directly selling to when cheap monthly plans exist? It just doesn't make sense. -- As it stands, I have my 710 models. This number is likely to continue increasing. In order to offset my $312/mo, I need to be paid at least THAT much in hosting, or continue to scan so that the 'free' processing credits balance out my monthly payment. That is easy to do -- however, it just increases my liability. Even Realtors who want to do their own scans for their listings who will be happy with the 25 Active Spaces limit will likely pay $20/mo more than what the $49/mo plan costs. They are not receiving any additional value either. The only people who will receive value from 'unlimited uploads' with restrictive visibility will be people who are uploading to generate Google Street View and/or Floorplans before deleting models. Oh, and sidenote -- when you delete models, Matterport keep them and add them to their tally of how many 3D models they have collected. Pretty silly. Maybe one day they will find someone who wants to buy all of that data under the false assumption that the quantity has value. [shrugs] -- At the end of the day, I have absolutely no trust in Matterport after watching RJ, Chris Bell and Damien speak about the new pricing plans. There is no value in them and under almost all circumstances, consumers will pay 5x more. The plans impose anti-competitive restrictions and are step 1 to a complete paradigm shift that is intentionally designed to put an end to professional photographers and agencies participating in their ecosystem. |
||
| Post 23 • IP flag post | ||
|
Regina, Saskatchewan Canada |
Queen_City_3D private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Metroplex360 Thank you for taking the time to write this. I hope that Matterport takes note as you have always been one of THE most recognizable names in MSP circles. As I've mentioned before, the new plans don't directly affect me *right now* as I am more than happy to keep to the grandfathered in classic plan. I just went through and deleted 200+ models that I no longer needed to carry (I deleted a couple hundred more about half a year ago) but I still have 478 hosted models right now. If Matterport does sunset classic plans, I too would wrap up my Matterport offerings as my costs would also be exponentially more than they are now. |
||
| Post 24 • IP flag post | ||
|
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Queen_City_3D And there you have it -- if the grandfathered classic plans went away, you could not afford to do business as an MSP. This is the story of -everyone- here. How do you feel knowing that when you 'delete' your spaces that they are still Matterport's? They are never gone Matterport still has the assets as part of their library.This is one reason why I find it quite insulting that Matterport is imposing limitations on the # of active spaces that we have -- because they keep the data no matter what. The cost of the bandwidth is very little. The activity of 'deleting' models in order to save money and fit into their limits is so silly. --- I would love nothing more than there to be a company that provides 3D Tour services with SIMPLE, UNDERSTANDABLE and TRUSTWORTHY pricing that we can rely on that is not based on arbitrary concepts without any grounds in reality. --- What costs money? CPU Cycles and Bandwidth. Matterport can save tons of money by: - Shutting down auto snapshots - Shutting down auto teaser videos - Shutting down generation of unused assets (Multiple point clouds and unnecessary image assets that aren't used) - Finding ways to fix the need to upload multiple times (improved tools for marking models / improving the mesh) - Reducing unnecessary staff Because at the end of the day, it's a company that produces a 3D OBJ file that is displayed within a player that has fixed points in space that a viewer moves between wherein a panorama is projected. Movement between these fixed points and view modes is aided with cross fades and other effects that are core Three.js features. What they created is -amazing-, but it's a product that has been with us for years. There has been little innovation on it and the size of the company that surrounds this product is ridiculous. The amount of investment capital raised to support it is ridiculous too. The ROI on their product doesn't justify anything. Phase 1 - selling to photographers and Realtors didn't work. So, phase 2 is to become the provider of the end product to see if that will work. |
||
| Post 25 • IP flag post | ||
|
Convrts private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Thank you for your insight @Metroplex360 it's a really informative and well-judged explanation of your concerns with a great overview of situation and how you see it playing out. When someone such as yourself, who has been so involved in the delivery and the promotion of the Matterport service, raises such concerns then it really is worrying for the rest of us MSPs. I know that personally I was kind of holding out some hope that there was some consultation going on behind closed doors in which Matterport were listening to concerns of respected Partners such as yourself and were intending on amending these decisions and their plans to choke the life out of our businesses. It comes as a real blow that this is not the case. I'm not in a position such as yourself with over 700 spaces to host but, as I've discussed elsewhere, even with just over 100 spaces which all need to be available for many years to come (Museums, Art Galleries, Heritage Sites)... we find ourselves in a position where, even if we do not scan another space ever (which is increasingly likely... at least through Matteport), once the grandfathering ends, we're going to be stuck with this $3228 annual fee forever to host spaces we invoiced for on the understanding that our Matterport service was set at a price we could rely on. |
||
| Post 26 • IP flag post | ||
|
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Convrts $3228 is a huge financial burden for you to have to pay to host these tours! It's a very awkward place to be in -- where you might have to consider telling your clients that they too will need to start paying unexpected increased hosting fees -- or else lose the tours that you created for them. When it comes to Museums, Art Galleries and other public spaces, the nice silver lining is that you can always publish to Google Street View. The experience is inferior, but as we all know, Google Street View allows free publishing without any hosting fees. Quote: Originally Posted by Convrts The new pricing plans were presented to a small focus group first, which I was a part of. We saw the presentation, we all voiced our concerns and expressed that this would be a disaster for all users. I have worked hard to come up with a silver lining and I just cannot find one. Matterport has put an end to new MSPs competing with you in your market as the new price plans prohibit hosting at scale. While this will benefit existing MSPs as long as grandfathered classic plans still exist -- it is difficult to continue to on faith that classic plans will not be taken away from us in the future. No one wants to pay Matterport's new hosting fees. Unfortunately, we all have to if and when Matterport decides to. I have absolutely no idea what to do. I cannot afford to pay 4-5x what I do right now all at the same time in an annual contract. I know few of us that can. |
||
| Post 27 • IP flag post | ||
|
Regina, Saskatchewan Canada |
Queen_City_3D private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Matterport is selling the end of processing fees as a great deal for MSPs. The reality is that if you are paying a processing fee, it means that you have a paying job and its been built in to your pricing. In that sense, you're only paying it if you're getting paid and so it's a manageable expense. Personally I'd rather a pay-to-play processing fee model then the new plan options, especially when they set the limits to how many models can be hosted at such ridiculous low amounts. 25 active models might work for a sole real estate agent, but anyone else who has a vibrant business cannot deal with that low threshold. |
||
| Post 28 • IP flag post | ||
|
Sarnia, Canada |
June private msg quote post Address this user | |
| As Chris said: "I have absolutely no idea what to do. I cannot afford to pay 4-5x what I do right now all at the same time in an annual contract. I know few of us that can." I definitely can"t! Not only do I live in a very small town where it is hard to get Agents on board never-mind pay much....I also live in Canada so tack $8.00 onto every $20.00 that I pay so that's an extra $400 per thousand! Ridiculous for Canadians and I'm positive there are a lot more out there that have exchange rate problems. Grrr! |
||
| Post 29 • IP flag post | ||
|
Regina, Saskatchewan Canada |
Queen_City_3D private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @June I hear you! The exchange rate sucks which makes the proposition all the more expensive. I'll stick with Matterport as long as I am grandfathered in. If that goes away, so do I! |
||
| Post 30 • IP flag post | ||
This topic is archived. Start new topic?