So, in short, you just purchased Topaz Labs plug-ins only for the free upgrades rather then they are good products?!
If so, then you’re not the customer they have in mind, they need the money to make the plug-ins better.
That means more testing and probably more programmers…and that costs money…
Really happy with this policy. It’s fair. It keeps you in business. And thank heavens you’re no trying to take us down the route of another well-known imaging software who lost my business years ago.
Whilst I accept the need to charge for upgrades, £100 per year is far too much for just the two tools I have (I have no use for the others), after all I can get Lightroom and Photoshop for that - two complete packages, not just two small elements, so despite the good tools I won’t be paying this subscription to Topaz. Plus bug fixes or returning removed features, should be free, and one wonders at the nebulous ‘adding new features’ as this usually never happens, sad day indeed.
I just wish is was more like $29/$49
Don’t kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.
If you can watch my history, you will see that I was always one of the first to buy new software and make updates. I am an avid consumer of Topaz products. But this news really scared me. I am retired and my expenses are carefully assessed. On the other hand, I understand the justifications exposed and I liked the fact that it allows us, customers, to evaluate whether the upgrades will be worth it or not. Maybe, who knows, do upgrades every three years, I don’t know. Anyway, always think about us, customers. Don’t kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.
That’s my understanding. $99 maximum, but you don’t have to upgrade at all until you need the newer features, so you could wait 3 years and then pay $99.
Keep in mind that during that period of time at any time the conditions may change again. And again. In this case you can not trust any offer anymore I am afraid. not even if there have been tied certain conditions to the product when you bought it. 
I have never complained about the obvious flaws in the AI apps because I assumed that future free updates would put things right. Sharpen AI still leaves artfacts in odd places and Denoise AI still misses areas out, to name but two problems. There is no way I am going to pay for ‘updates’ that are just bug fixes.
I am not surprised at the change. If Topaz do not make money they will close, but bug fixes are not updates. Get them fixed before you apply the changes Topaz. Otherwise I for one will wave you goodbye.
Dear Mr Yang,
While I fully understand the motives and the rationale behind the change in strategic direction of your Company, since you are changing the terms of the contract we had when I did purchase some of your products, it would more professionally (and contractually) fair if you offered to buy-back the licenses of the users who would not want to continue using your products on the newly imposed basis. This way, the users who do agree to (tacitly) renew the contract with Topaz Labs under the new conditions, would happily pay the upgrade fees, and those who do not, can, selectively, leave the Topazsphere and tempt their luck elsewhere.
Sincerely
Andre
Thank you, Eric, for a suitably detailed explanation of your decision and your view for the future of Topaz products. Reneging on an agreement for commercial reasons can’t have been easy and I’m only left wondering why you didn’t see fit to apologise to the user base?
‘Sorry’…5 key strokes is all it would have taken.
Some examples;
If you bump into someone on the sidewalk…Sorry, I didn’t see you…Apology-Explanation
If you’re late for a meeting…Sorry, the traffic was terrible…Apology-Explanation
If you renege on an agrrement…Sorry, we need to increase our revenue stream…Apology-Explanation
There you go, I’ve just written it 4 times, didn’t take a lot of effort on my part and I’ll even allow you to cut and paste one of them if you think that actually apologising would be a decent and correct thing to do.
That offer has already been made in one of Eric’s messages above…
So has Eric the CEO of Topaz labs actually provided an official response or follow up now that the community have left 540 comments, most of them either unhappy about the proposal or suggesting compromises? Are Topaz labs going to stay silent and ignore the whole situation or are they going to try and work out something so that existing users don’t feel like they are getting the rough end of a stick?
I am totally fine with this. Cheap ain’t good and good ain’t cheap. Having spent my 40-year career in the software business, this new approach makes total good sense to me: If the upgrades aren’t worth their cost to me, then I won’t upgrade and pay, but the new plan incentives Topaz to keep making significant upgrades to their product line, and provides the revenues to do so. Keep up the good work!
Since Topaz is making a change to the support model; it should be clear regarding all products for the future. The announcement: “Only DeNoise, Sharpen, Gigapixel, and Mask will require an upgrade license in 2020. Other products remain under the old policy.” is limited to what will happen in 2020. It is logical to expect that once Topaz gets the User Community use to paying for support; then there will be charges for other products as well.
Just to be clear - I expected a shift in the support model over a year ago and am not opposed a change. But, the cost for value received is too high at the stated pricing model and like much of software being released; this announcement is flawed by being incomplete. (only addressing what is happening in 2020)
Thanks…Have not seen this in previous threads & can’t find it. But if that offer has been made then it’s fine - everybody should be able to decide on their own fate 
the offer was made about post #444 - 445
He made it sometime yesterday…
I think he speaks for Topaz Labs so they haven’t remained silent. They’ve just left it to the man at the top. Not many other company’s Owners would reply to their users, so that’s a good thing.
Nobody’s going to get what they want here - most would prefer the old free updates to return or some heavy compromises for existing users.
Topaz seem to be thinking of securing their long term future and if it’s a case of pay for upgrades or see some of the most innovative photo software disappear then I’ll pay for updates.
I’m not jumping for joy. Who would? But I’d rather accept reality than insist on my rights and watch it all implode…
Adobe never offered “free for life”. Except for saying that LR would always have a perpetual offering they never made any promises at all. Actually they cannot change their policies as they see fit. That is why companies get the crap sued out of them. I realize that a few are saying policies are not the same as TOS, while that’s true, once a company offers and enticement in PRINT, they are bound by them. CS6 is a terrible example as Adobe made no promises.
That has been EXACTLY my point, and no one seems to get it!! What keeps TL from changing the terms again and again and again? While they “may” not lose any money, because we weren’t paying for upgrades, I for one won’t buy anything else. I’m not paying for bug fixes. I never complained about buggy software as I knew they would eventually fix it, and I’d get it without paying for it. Not now. Can they guarantee that their software will be bug free? No. So why should I pay to be a beta tester???
That’s not an offer to buy back. He said provide receipts, then they would. You’ve got to be kidding me!! Who keeps receipts that long???
