Article Focus: When most people think of Avid, low cost is not one of the terms most likely to be used in connection with the venerable leader in broadcast and film editing systems. But with today's announcements Avid has increased their lead in the education sector and has even radically dropped the price of its flagship Media Composer software. In this article, Creative COW's Ron Lindeboom explores the news and examines why we find this great news for both existing Avid customers and those who thought that they could never afford an Avid.
Well, after last November's big news that Avid would not be packing up the family station wagon and heading to visit friends and relatives at the industry's family gathering, NAB 2008 in Las Vegas, they have now released their latest news blast. And big news it is, especially for those who have used Avid for years and those who have wished that they too could afford an Avid.
Avid's big news centers around a single word: price. And it's a word that most longtime industry veterans do not associate with Avid -- well, unless they are applying it from a high-side perspective. But in today's news the word is used in the context of radical price cuts. The kind that Avid has never done before. I know, I have owned a couple of them and they have never been cheap.
Until now...
NEW EDUCATIONAL PRICING When it comes to educational pricing, Avid has always been very aggressive. They have always operated from the viewpoint that getting students to use their system is a great way to insure that they will remain Avid users after they graduate. It has worked well for the company and has been one of the reasons that so many broadcasters and studios use Avid.
With today's new pricing for educational customers, Avid has dropped the cost of an educational license for Avid's Media Composer Academic software to just $295. Compare this to Apple's educational license for Final Cut Studio that is $695 as of today. (I expect to see some reactionary move to this disparity once the news of today's Avid announcement makes its way through the halls of Cupertino.)
Some will argue that for $695 Apple is giving their complete Studio (and a nice set of tools it is) and Avid is only giving Media Composer. But there is something to be said for learning the software used to edit roughly 90% of the films in Hollywood and around the world, while handliing 85% of today's broadcast television seen and 80% of the commercials. And while some would argue that this has changed radically with the ascent of Final Cut, FC still accounts for very few films -- I can count all the major films that I know of on one hand -- and the only major broadcast series I can recall is the FC edited "Scrubs" on NBC. The rest? Think Avid.
AFTER GRADUATION ADVANTAGE: AVID -- So, in an academic market wherein teaching is done to open up job opportunities for their graduates, a $295 box of Media Composer is a compelling argument to make to educators and those that plan the curriculum at their respective institution. And in another unique Avid move, once you've graduated, graduates can pay the difference between the educational price and the pro price and get a full pro license -- a gap now much smaller than it once was. FCS's educational licence is end of the road and can't be upgraded -- at least not in any way that we have heard or are aware of.
XPRESSWAY TO THE TOP: MEDIA COMPOSER
Once upon a time in an editing universe far far away, Avid launched the original Xpress to largely compete with Media 100, who at the time held the high ground in new sales and online finishing quality. Later Avid launched Xpress software edition to compete with Final Cut and its wealth of features. Neither version of Xpress was ever enough to displace its rival as they didn't have the features -- most notably, all the frame rates and resolutions that were needed. Xpress also didn't have the features needed to support Avid's own Media Composer editors -- too few formats, including support for critical Avid resolutions (AVR), and most annoying for people who actually work for a living, incompatible keyboard shortcuts.
As a result, people complained that Xpress was annoying onpurpose. I owned one, it was. I sold it after a year. Also, Xpress was purposely hampered by limitations designed to protect Avid's sales of its flagship Media Composer. Understandable, but still frustrating to Xpress owners.
Now, Avid has fundamentally changed all that, merging its Avid Xpress Pro software into its flagship Media Composer software product line. They have also radically dropped the price a couple of grand, establishing a new price point of $2,495 USMSRP for Media Composer software.
In a move to avoid ill-will with those who purchased Media Composer software at the prior $4,995 USMSRP price after January 1, 2008, they are now eligible to receive a credit towards future purchases. Not perfect but it does acknowledge the feelings of their customers and I think that deserves a tip of the ole cow ears on my cow hat.
Yes, with Media Composer there's a premium price, but it's due to the fact that the product genuinely does carry a premium, along with the ability to earn more money. But still affordable -- barely more than a second copy of FCS for your bag of tricks, less than a tricked out MBP or desktop -- and Media Composer is a trick that opens up new earning potential.
No reasonable person anywhere, including Avid, believes that any current FCP customer will stop using FCP. With this move Avid is not trying to convert anyone, Avid's real goal is likely to make this such a compelling price -- one with such a potentially huge upside -- that no serious pro anywhere would miss this opportunity to create new, more lucrative earning possibilities.
This is Avid's biggest advantage, the ability to say that you really DO edit on an Avid -- Media Composer no less. The flagship. At a price that I still scratch my head at, remembering that I once paid about $35,000 just for my first copy of Media 100 software.
Man, have things changed. And so now has Avid.
Ron Lindeboom
Creative COW
Agree? Disagree? Discuss your reasons in the COW's AVID forum
FCP has always felt extremely the same as Avid to me. I also was a Media100 and VideoCube/Stratasphere editor, as well as a linear editor. So this quote is bizarre...
"(I taught M100 to many MC editors -- and they were horrified to learn how "bizzare" the MC GUI was.) The non-modal GUI is why FCP users, as you correctly note, will not switch. "a
FCP is not non-modal by anymeans. When you slip/slide it brings up a different view (a sucky one that even premiere outshines in). And trim mode is exactly the same as avid, although a little more quicky and less responsive if anything. And yes, you can trim in either app more intuitively and more quickly without going into trim mode. And the only other mode Avid really has is the keyframing/graphics mode, which is about a thousand times better than screwing around in FCPs motion tab and trying to adjust keyframes with any sense of consistency. You can't even copy/paste individual keyframes in FCP!
And to answer RON... "Just when is Final Cut Server going to be released, anyway? "
You don't think 90% is an accurate number, huh? You are probably right -- my number is probably inaccurate. In episodic TV, Avid's numbers are probably even higher. As I said, I can think of "Scrubs" as the only occasion when FCP was used in a major series. You say "Monk" is edited on FCP? That's two. All the others? Avid.
Trailer houses? I won't argue that as I don't know. You say that they are FCP, you could be right. I will give them all to you. But the movies from which they edit these trailers? Nearly all Avid -- with a few exceptions. The rest? Avid. Hands down.
So for major film and television? Avid. With a few exceptions. Very few.
There are far more things in a major motion picture or broadcast series than an editing timeline. Most TV shows that do use FCP are reality shows where a single workstation does the entire edit. But when entire teams and departments contribute to a major series, it is nearly always Avid. It comes down to workflow. And when media management and workflow are major considerations, people with money buy Avid. They don't gamble on things that make workflow and media management of secondary or tertiary concern. (Just when is Final Cut Server going to be released, anyway? It's been a year now since the big press roll-out at NAB and it's still not even on the horizon.)
For every facility you can point to running FCP as their main platform of choice, I can point to company after company after company in Hollywood that use Avid. In areas of these companies where they use FCP, it is usually in a department for specialized jobs. (Just as you mention in your point about trailer production, or a reality program; the types of jobs where the lifting isn't as strenuous and the demands are not as great.)
So, in the end I will stand by my words. Will it stay this way in the days ahead? Who knows? But as of this morning, that's the score as I see it.
While Avid is still dominant in film and episodic television, I don't think 90% is an accurate number. There is a lot of TV work done on FCP, especially in reality, where a real switch is occurring. Most trailer houses are using FCP now, the Cohen Bro's edit on FCP, Monk is cut on FCP, and my friend who is a trainer for FCP keeps getting called over to places like Universal and Paramount for various departments that are switching over to to FCS 2... I think it's all changing though it's not over night. I think Avid is going to have to create a suite of programs if they want to compete in the realm of stand alone systems. Of course the ability for multiple editors to work in a single project file is still a big advantage in Avid. But even as far as media management goes, I don't know if that argument holds water, not if you really know FCP super well, especially as well integrated as it is with Macs. I look at a place like Plaster City (www.plastercitypost.com) and having see their workflow, and how they use Pablo for 2k and 4k on-lines, and I have come to see how powerful FCP can be and how it should not be underestimated as being part of a high end work flow.
I forgot to mention: At first i really hated FCP… even with AVID-keyboard-short cuts. You just have to get used to it. I think you can edit as good on FCP as you can do it on AVID.
I also used to hate Motion, but when it comes to get ideas to your customer quick (like: How do you like that???) I really learned to love it. It's just that i finish or rebuild things in After Effects… there's a reason that we have After Effects 8 and Motion 3… in 3 or 4 versions i bet motion will be great. or discontinued.
Personally, I know many people in the LA area that are quite happy about this move. While there are indeed places opening up to Final Cut, many others -- and by far the largest majority -- are still Avid-only sandboxes.
Do I believe that just because someone has a box of Media Composer that they are suddenly going to get a bunch of jobs? No. I never said that. What I said and what I believe is that it opens up the potential that they couldn't tap before. There are too many marketing parameters that must be met and mastered to reduce it down to such a simplistic formula as "get a box, get a customer." I have seen far too many people over the years think that they get this equipment and now they are an editor and are in business. Yeah, right.
But here in California, and I suppose that New York is much the same, Avid is the big dog in the film and broadcast world. For every box of Final Cut making the handful of movies and TV series that originate from Final Cut, there are scores more that use Avid.
Lastly, yes there are indeed features in an Avid that are not in Final Cut. Most have to do with the FAR SUPERIOR media management and networking that Avid has far and above Final Cut. (BTW: Just when *is* Final Cut Server going to get here, anyway? Or has it become Finally Cut Server?)
By the way, for more on the business implications of marketing your business, you may wish to visit the Business & Marketing forum here at the COW or feel free to visit the Library, we have many articles there to help you should you need to learn to sell yourself and take advantage of the new *opportunities* that a tool like a cheaper Media Composer makes available.
Lastly, I used Media 100 for years and found the Avid interface much less confusing to me than Final Cut.
Different strokes for different folks.
Lastly, discussions about companies going out of business have been bandied about for years about all kinds of companies and are just too boring to want to bother with. (Especially as any real pro knows that they can make their money back in a single job. Hobbyists worry about prices even when they are greatly reduced, pros usually don't -- they buy what makes them money.)
I might be short sighted, but on a personal level I'm quite happy for Avid's move. I started editing on Avid a decade ago and as far as it concernes me I wouldn't trade Avid's 24fps-workflow for any other systems workflow. It's so easy… no cinematools and that crap.
I do edit on FCP too (as FCPs getting better and better), but i think Avid is still a great tool. Unfortunately I always thought Avid is a little bit arrogant towards the customers (hence that usually far from helpful support) and way way overpriced.
Here in Germany you still experience customers giving you a weird look, when you mention FCP for their project (but you still can't beat the price of the suite), but once you talk it over, they are usually persuaded. It's also a good tool.
"No reasonable person anywhere, including Avid, believes that any current FCP customer will stop using FCP. With this move Avid is not trying to convert anyone, Avid's real goal is likely to make this such a compelling price -- one with such a potentially huge upside -- that no serious pro anywhere would miss this opportunity to create new, more lucrative earning possibilities."
Three problems with your conclusion:
1) The steep learning curve that comes with MC means that it simply isn't practical to "buy" a MC and advertise you now "edit with an Avid." It's taken me a year to create a MC tutorial, simply because the MC GUI is so radically different than M100, Premiere, and FCP.
2) It's not at all clear that in 2008 there really are higher paying jobs available to an Avid newbie. Are you really going to get a job in LA or NYC because you spent $2,500?
3) In 2008 -- does a MC really offer so many features that are so far advanced over FCS2 that many folks will spend 2X more than they paid for FCS2?
Avid management continues to delude itself that in 2008 folks really WANT a MC and it's only the historically higher price that enabled M100 and FCP to attract so many dedicated owners. (I taught M100 to many MC editors -- and they were horrified to learn how "bizzare" the MC GUI was.) The non-modal GUI is why FCP users, as you correctly note, will not switch.
Bottom-line, Avid -- already losing money -- will now lose most revenue from Xpress sales plus an instant loss of 50% of revenues from MC. Unless thousands upon thousands of incremental sales are made -- financially this will bring about a huge revenue loss.
Add if Avid supports AJA or BM boards, they loss even more revenue from a loss in hardware sales. And, if they OEM these boards, the boards will cost more so the cost for an Avid suite will remain 2X higher than an FCS2 suite.
So as Avid continues to lose money -- anyone putting $2,500 on their credit card should think about how soon Avid will need to drop the price to $1,000. Or, how long Avid will be able to stay in business.
When it comes to educational pricing, Avid has always been very aggressive. They have always operated from the viewpoint that getting students to use their system is a great way to insure that they will remain Avid users after they graduate. It has worked well for the company and has been one of the reasons that so many broadcasters and studios use Avid.
Digg it
