Why aren't IPS add-on apps transferable between licenses?

[The Old Man]

Dear @Lindy

FYI as feedback...

I have been paying renewals for unused Pages and Forums add-ons on 1 of my 4 IPS community suites/4 websites for some time, wondering what to do with them. All my licences are in good standing.

I put in a low priority ticket to Sales to ask if the Pages app could be transferred to 1 of my other licenses, to effectively complete that suite and leave the remaining suite with only Forums and Gallery.

I was told it is not possible to transfer add-on apps between community suite licences.

This is no criticism of the ticket respondent who was very helpful, but I think this is disappointing company policy.

As a customer, multiple licences & suites and long-standing aside, from my perspective expecting a customer to pay another $100 plus renewals for a 3rd Pages licence when they already have 2 and 1 is unused, is fairly disappointing.

I feel customers should be able to transfer add-on apps between active, good standing suite licences if they are no longer needed or required, I'd hazard a guess that it's probably just a quick admin task to update the customers records (take off the first licence number and paste to the second), even if there was a cheeky small fee.

Of course I'll rethink my plans accordingly.

[Woodsman]

All additional licenced applications are only available to that primary license.

Example:

If you purchase Pages and Blogs for Community License A you are entitled to those apps for that particular license.

If you purchased Commerce, Downloads and Gallery for Community License B you are entitled to those apps for that particular license.

Unfortunately Applications are not transferable between Community licenses.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SJ77]

5 minutes ago, Woodsman said:

Unfortunately Applications are not transferable between Community licenses.

 

I am going to go out on a limb here and guess that the OP already understands this. I believe this thread is created to ask WHY this is the case.

Expectation is probably an explanation.

[The Old Man]

Yes, spot on SJ, I can't see any reason for this policy beyond the obvious, but to be honest I originally intended to ask why and when this came about as I couldn't see it mentioned anywhere on the main site, but also to end the post by asking if IPS could review the policy, but that's unrealistic.

I did notice some contradiction about continued use of the software if you don't renew, but nothing other than you buy the add-ons.

[Ramsesx]

Since the price tag of IPS isn't the lowest on the market and you own 4 licences + addons, it would be a nice move by IPS to grant you the possibility to transfer your page licence.

[The Old Man]

Thanks Ramsesx, IPS said they'd bill you.  (Just kidding).

[Ramsesx]

6 minutes ago, The Old Man said:

IPS said they'd bill you.

[The Old Man]

God bless Mr Kramer!

[Joel R]

I don't think it's feasible or realistic to allow IPS to allow general app transfers. There's the potential for abuse and renewals can get messy if you transfer an app from an active license to an inactive license.  

With that said, if you're transferring apps between your own licenses under one account, you're active on all licenses for a history of many years, you're a trusted IPS member, and this is one time request, it's not unreasonable to ask for a private transfer.  Ask for your ticket to be escalated to management.  

[bfarber]

As @Joel R suggested, you may want to just quickly ask for your ticket to be passed over to Lindy so he can review and make a final decision. Management have been known to make exceptions to policies in specific one off goodwill circumstances for long-time clients such as yourself. 🙂 I can't promise that will happen here, but you'll get a more direct and definitive answer either way.

[The Old Man]

Thank you @bfarber really appreciate the suggestion.

In all honesty, I'm not so keen on overriding policies because it sends mixed messages and spreads confusion not only within corporate teams, but also amongst customers. So as much as I do want IPS to review and hopefully revert this particular policy in my case, I'm going to put my trust in a solution that hopefully benefits all clients, and not just me. If it's unsustainable for IPS, fair enough, but at least we tried.

[Joel R]

31 minutes ago, The Old Man said:

Thank you @bfarber really appreciate the suggestion.

In all honesty, I'm not so keen on overriding policies because it sends mixed messages and spreads confusion not only within corporate teams, but also amongst customers. So as much as I do want IPS to review and hopefully revert this particular policy in my case, I'm going to put my trust in a solution that hopefully benefits all clients, and not just me. If it's unsustainable for IPS, fair enough, but at least we tried.

Ask for it to be escalated. Really.  IPS is surprisingly accommodative for clients of good standing. 

[Meddysong]

1 hour ago, Joel R said:

IPS is surprisingly accommodative for clients of good standing. 

That's true. I always appreciate the little courtesies. I think it's probably worth remembering that policies are often what they are to preclude wrongdoers. For example, you have to pay $15 to change your URL if you've already done so within six months. Why? So that people can't costlessly switch domains every time an update comes out and they want to upgrade their several expired sites using their one good license. I suspect something similar is the case here and that IPS, recognising the cases when they're speaking with reputable customers, might be welcoming.