They can't even add any new transactions manually.
And there is no way to "buy" Quicken using the old business model.
If this is left unchallenged they will most likely use this model for the US version next year.
People should vote on this "idea" if they are against Quicken Inc using this business model.
Microsoft? Their support, answers to bugs and software patches and updates are second to none. Even they have stand alone versions. But to say Quicken is on the same level as Microsoft's software? Please. Office is the predominant force in business. Quicken is not. Quicken for what it is appeals to a niche marketplace.
Other software companies mentioned? All powerhouses. Why doesn't Mr. Dunn mention the niche product companies?
Mr. Dunn has signed Quickens death certificate. Especially if he believes that in its current form it cannot easily be outdone by other software that's out there. That simply isn't true.
So as my final thought, Mr. Dunn needs to understand what quicken is and reverse this decision. Should he not, I bid the Quicken I once knew, a fond farewell.
I'll not rehash what has been said dozens of times, only replying here to add to the chorus of discontent. What I find particularly odious is the concept of, I guess, legal ransomware [only legal because it'll be in the license terms], holding our purchased product functionality hostage to an unknowable annual fee.
I understand the idea of charging in some way for the online update functionality, I'm sure it takes plenty of Quicken's resources to keep up with the changing requirements of hundreds of financial institutions, and in fact have considered this feature to be a relative bargain, even if I do have to upgrade every 3 years.
And it is also true, even if my Quicken product would remain fully functional but for online updating, I'd probably be willing to pay a fee for this service. How much? Well, as has been pointed out, it is common to find discounts for the product, without getting specific, I did pay under $36 for Deluxe, so on a 3-year cycle that's just a buck a month. Very acceptable considering I'm getting an updated product (even if the actual new feature content is minimal). And I'd gladly pay that kind of money per year -- but the prices floated here are certainly way higher, and don't see much chance that discounts could be had. And of course there's no lock-in for the future so who knows how high it can go?
It is for this sort of reason I resist subscribing for pay TV, with the exorbitant box-rental fees, that increase at rates far beyond inflation and not protected as part of any contract. That's another rant but something I see happening with a subscription model.
So, just as Quicken charges for online backup (which is hardly necessary considering all the free backup/storage options available), why not have a separate subscription fee for the online updating part? And lower the price for the actual product, which would be offline only unless you subscribe to the online bit.
I'm not sure I understand why Quicken needs to support 7 versions in Canada, in the US there are just 3 years-worth to support. And concerning support, if you produce a bug-free quality product, it shouldn't matter how many customers you have, so you wouldn't need substantial extra revenue to maintain a quality product for 1 or 10 million customers, within reason.
Finally, to put a cap on it, Mr. Dunn does say the subscription model is becoming more common, and guess what, I hate it. I'm a buy it, not rent it, kinda guy and I cringe at each new attempt to make me pay uncontrolled increasing monthly rates until the day I die.
That said, I'm pretty tired of the constant bombardment of ads in general on the Internet, but seeing just one discreet ad per download wouldn't bother me, and if they are relevant, maybe even useful. Look at that revenue stream from millions of daily updates... think of that, Mr. Dunn, it's made a lot of companies wealthy beyond imagination. Then you can use that income to support and improve the product. BTW, if you adopt this model, I'll send you my PayPal address so I can get a royalty payment ;-).
Quicken 2017 Canada ripoff. Warning. If you purchase in Canada you will be given a 1 YEAR subscription, and then after that begin made to pay for it again, again, and again. in the US its 3 years. Intuit has now become an address for royalties, nothing more. I REFUSE to rent software that has nothing new to offer.
If you look at Microsoft's model for Office for only a little more money you can install the software on multiple devices and continue to use it at a reduced level if you cancel your subscription. Imagine if Microsoft said all you could do is look at your files and print them and not be able to edit anything.
Considering what you get from Microsoft 365 Business for $126/year the Quicken program should be priced around $30/year. I will continue to use my H&B 2015 and look for alternatives unless Intuit reconsiders their proposed subscription model.
Quicken has always treated the Canadian version as an after thought. All you have to look at is the patch releases. 26 in the US for 2016... and only 3 in Canada.
They really don't care about the Canadian business. For all we know they are doing this to justify closing the Canadian arm down and only concentrate on the US version.
They brought the mobile app to Canada this year. Yet it doesn't work with 2016 even though the installation of 2016 says it will, complete with graphics and everything.
They just want to piss Canadians off. And they've done so.
The decision will never be reversed in Canada. Yet it will never see the light of day in the US.
Let's take a look at what's new in 2017. Nothing really stands out to warrant an upgrade from a previous version. Yet you'll have to pay 90 bucks every year for no benefit.
Dunn points to Symantec and their subscription model. How can you even compare the two? It's a security company. It constantly updates itself in a daily, even hourly basis. That's the same for mostly all antivirus and malware companies. They can justify the subscription model. They can be seen working to keep you safe on a daily basis.
Quickens updates are few and far between. Almost non existent. Yet they want you to be on the same subscription model. For what exactly? A 90 dollar mobile app? Non existent updates? New features that don't appeal to anyone?
No justification for this whatsoever.
Being comfortable with Quicken is the only reason people have stuck with it instead of moving on. But this subscription model will force people to get used to something else. Like breaking up with your girlfriend or starting a new life in a new country. Uncomfortable at first, but you get used to it.
Mr. Dunn... Give your head a shake.
I followed the link to the CEO's mail and sent him this same message. I urge everyone to do the same.
It is simple...I have used quicken, quickbooks and quicktax for as long as I can remember. I kept every quick tax disc for better than 20 years. I will NEVER pay a subscription fee for this product. I won't do it for MS Office or Adobe or even subs for news media. There are too many open source options for it all.
Don't try pull the wool over our eyes. This is not for us, but for your profit margin. Once hooked you will continue price increases while reducing your overhead. Thanx for the heads up with the banner to 2017 when I open my quicken as it made me aware of what you were doing.
Now I will actively pursue another option for all my financial needs. I recently cut my cable sub way back because it was too expensive. I am learning to live without it and we will learn to live without Quicken. Don't be a lemming following other firms down this path or our greed will be your undoing.
As I have posted elsewhere, there is a HUGE difference between Quicken and software products such as those from Adobe and Microsoft. MAINLY, I can access and edit the files from these programs in many other programs. I am NEVER locked out of editing my data. This also means that I can switch to a different program at any time if I decide the functionality or cost are not to my liking. Adobe, Microsoft, virus software, etc. that have moved to a subscription model have to provide a user experience that users feel is worth the cost. This contrasts with Quicken which I, like many users who have weighed in here, have stayed with because the time-cost of switching is large and I have maintained a hope and trust that the new owners will follow through on promises that have not yet been kept. I am a Quicken for Mac user which makes this discussion even more Kafkaesque.
The whole product idea "personal desktop finances" is a dying industry, and the best Quicken Inc can do in my opinion is find a way to keep it on life support until the people using it die. The average age of someone using Quicken is probably 50 years old. It is going the way of writing checks.But isn't that because 50-year olds have money?
I'm 42. When I was 22, it's true that if you put Quicken in front of me I would have asked you what the hell it was. But not because of the program's inherent complexity or because it was on a desktop (granted, back then phones were just phones), but because I was broke. You could have managed my personal finances on a post-it note.
By the time I was 32, when I first started using Quicken and Microsoft Money, there was actually a point to using a PFM. I had a mortgage and more than one kind of account. This is more or less the typical Quicken user life cycle Mr. Dunn described in an interview last year to explain why he thought Quicken was still relevant.
I agreed with him then and I agree with him now. In fairness, apparently even Mint's abandonment rate is ridiculously high. But Quicken -- or something like it -- is still relevant to anyone for whom terms like tax lots, marginal rates, and amortization means anything. Right? I mean, people like that have to manage their finances somewhere, don't they? There has to be a market for at least one PFM with Quicken's capabilities as long as there are enough people on the planet with sufficient wealth to require such a tool. Doesn't there?
Am I missing something? Is the platform the problem? I use Mint, Personal Capital, the Vanguard app, all on my iPhone and iPad. Sure, it's great fun. But even on the big iPad Pro, the screen is too small to do anything serious. Am I the only person who prefers to use two huge desktop monitors while running Quicken? Why would anyone want to try to use Quicken on a mobile device, even if it was possible?
You say that certain Quicken users "have the fear of being online." You've just described my 69-year old mother. But she would never use Quicken to begin with (or maybe she would, I've never asked). So is Quicken Inc.'s problem that they can't get fuddie-duddies like my mother with her canvas-covered ledger and scraps of paper to use a browser?
I'm not trying to be argumentative, by the way. I'm honestly curious as to why this market has been moribund. It's hard for me to imagine the PFM, desktop or otherwise, as being on life-support, but you're obviously on to something.
When MS Money was put out to pasture, one of MSFT's spokespeople explained to the financial press that PFMs were going to be increasingly less relevant. I remember reading that and thinking, "Of course. Couldn't be Microsoft's fault."
I was one of the many people who assumed that Microsoft had just decided they had better things to do, that someone would assume Microsoft's position in the PFM wars and that the Coke vs. Pepsi status quo ante would resume. It never happened. It's one of the great mysteries in life to me.
Like the majority of people who commented on this topic, I have been a Quicken user for 15+ years. I have been purchasing a new version every 3 years at approximately C$100 and never contacted Quicken support. I would be happy to continue using Quicken in the subscription model on 2 conditions:
1) The annual subscription price (without "Premium Support") priced at no more than $50 (which represents more than 50% premium over what I have ben paying historically); AND
2) Expired subscription results in no updates and no online services (e.g., download of quotes); HOWEVER, the manual entry of the transactions is still available.
I was looking forward to upgrading my Quicken 2014 to Quicken 2017, however, with the new T&C being unacceptable to me, I will stay with my current version of Quicken until/unless the terms change.
Alternatively, Quicken could continue offering a one-time purchase model, in which case, I would be open to paying C$150 for 3-year online services support.
In either case, the "read-only mode" is a deal breaker for me.
Very disappointed with the new subscription model. What is the last feature that deserves $100? The app is fine, but what about next year. I look every year to see what has improved, but nothing is there. All of the benefit statements are the same.
I understand that they pay fees for some of the services and upgrade about once every 3 years. There is not enough improvements to justify a yearly fee. Why do you have to be greedy? Can you be happy with loyal customers.Now searching this site for suggestions for alternatives.
You make some very valid points as well. A few in particular caught my attention:
for the most part the Windows version of Quicken is the same old same old. Every few years they dress it up, but the interface is basically the same.Personally, I care less what Quicken looks like than what it can do. This came up when people were complaining about Q17's color scheme. My two cents were okay, sure, the colors are awful, but what about ... and then I proceeded to beat everyone over the head again with my long-standing gripes, like the LTP-Debt Reduction bug, not being able to customize asset classes, and so on.
Point is, my gripes had to do with Quicken's existing functionality either not working properly or not working optimally, not what it looks like or where buttons are.
But that's me. I have and use a handful of financial apps that perform their modest tasks well and look gorgeous. However, as I said upthread, though some alternatives come closer in certain areas than others, Quicken's same old same old remains unmatched by any PFM available except MS Money -- still, 8 years or so after Money was chucked by Microsoft. This is what is so astonishing to me.
It's also, I think, what should be a point of strength in Quicken's favor. If ever a software application existed that could justify a subscription model, Quicken -- with its same old feature-set that's already more powerful than any of the currently-supported alternatives -- would seem to be it. If they could just get the goddamned thing to run well ...
Online Bills, credit report, Zillow...even their Cloud sync...all messed up at one time or another.I have a weakness for conspiracy theories. Until I read a post by Jim Del Favero (who I cited upthread), my long-standing belief (based on nothing but my over-active imagination and a vast ignorance of both the IT sector and software engineering) was that the majority of Quicken "features" were added over the years not to offer increased functionality but as part of some lucrative licensing/branding scheme. Their cumulative effect, I've believed, has added little more than to bog Quicken down with extra freight.
Anyway, this is the main reason, I've convinced myself, that the current owners are so keen to get everyone on the same release: after all, Quicken 2018 by FICO featuring the Wells Fargo Mortgage Analyzer is less remunerative if a large number of laggards are, as QPW says, still using Quicken 2004.
I haven't completely abandoned that theory. However, in a post on Quora.com Del Favero lays out the real cost savings achievable by Quicken by having support staff trained to only service a limited number of releases. So, maybe Mr. Dunn isn't completely blowing smoke up our you-know-whats on that issue. Doesn't mean I'm going fall onto my back with my checkbook in the air, but since trust is currently strained and evidence of goodwill is in shorter supply than usual ...
Next, is millennial and tech savvy users. Why purchase Quicken (at around $100...or $35 from Amazon) when I can get all the same info from my bank, credit card and investment companies website? It's all there...you just have to find it.Two main reasons I can think of, both having to do with aggregation. The first is access to "niche" features like tax lot management, portfolio rebalancing, debt reduction modeling, cash flow projection, and so on. The other main reason I can think of is that, even if you don't require niche features, bouncing around the internet to collect your financial data is a pain in the ass. It's the main reason millennials (to say nothing of middle-aged farts like me) use Mint and Personal Capital for certain tasks.
It's hard for me to imagine why anyone would use Quicken for anything other than niche reasons, to be totally honest. I'm amazed at folks who pony up for Quicken Premier and use it as a virtual checkbook and to see how their 401K is doing. To me that's like swatting a fly with a telephone pole, but I guess each to their own.
Anyway, don't get me wrong. I hear you. I threatened to walk if the upcoming terms offered by Quicken Inc. aren't to my liking -- a threat made possible because of the availability of data you cite. So have most others in this thread. But the data lockout issue aside, Management is obviously betting that we're full of it and that convenience will trump thrift just enough that they can squeeze us pretty hard.
In my case, they're probably wrong, but then they have no way of knowing how colossally cheap I am (maybe if they checked my correspondence with their customer service department they would, but I digress). Regardless, that aspect of their calculation (the convenience factor) isn't a bad bet on their part.
And it will be yet another case of capital investment companies exhibiting corporate greed by over-estimating it's value of its product to it's customers.Completely agree. In revealing an appalling misunderstanding of Quicken's user base and of the product itself, the data lockout in particular reflects the ultimate in widget mentality. After all, the reasoning goes, you can't pay for a Bloomin' Burger once and eat as many as you want.
It's hard for me to believe such a misunderstanding could come from Quicken Inc. itself. For one thing, most of these folks have been working with Quicken and its users for years. For another, not even Intuit -- an organization far from indifferent to profit -- ever tried this sort of move. It's draconian, medieval. It reeks of private equity.
If you had to distill one essential point from this entire War and Peace-sized thread (my own long-winded role in adding to it notwithstanding) I would award the prize to QPW. This is, as QPW states, a bad business move for the following reason alone: they could have gotten 99% of what they wanted without threatening to lock loyal users out of their data.
I hope that any new upgrade strategy will preserve users' ability to time major upgrades over at least a 6 month window and will give them the ability to revert to the previous version if the new software breaks something they depend on.
I am against this new subscription policy > I am now retired, am not a business and use Q H & R 2014 for my banking needs and mutual funds portfolio. I have no need for support by Quicken unless program does not work. So that persepctive of the subsciption fee is wrong . Why should I support a software that does not allow after one year sof rme to continue , Most software allow you to use but without updates which one agrees but to cut you off, fully wrong , Why can I buy a USA version for $119 as standalone CD but not Canada. Even MS allows me to buy standalone if I do not use the subscription model. Even apps on mobiles are standalone purchases. Sorry you have lost a customer