<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>idea Feedback on ArcGIS Pro licensing changes and suggestion for micro-businesses in ArcGIS Pro Ideas</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-ideas/feedback-on-arcgis-pro-licensing-changes-and/idi-p/1644667</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Dear Esri Team, I am writing to express my disappointment with the recent changes in the ArcGIS Pro licensing model. Whenever I have the opportunity, I recommend the software, highlight its strengths among colleagues, and have even tried to implement it in companies where I have worked. However, the current licensing structure does not reflect the reality of micro-businesses, especially in Brazil, where the official reseller charges more than twice the international price. This makes adoption unfeasible for very small companies, which often turn instead to free alternatives. It is important to note that these free and open-source GIS solutions are constantly improving and expanding their user base. In this context, Esri risks losing market share, particularly among independent professionals and small firms who could become future long-term clients. Therefore, I would like to suggest the creation of an ArcGIS Pro Standard license for micro-businesses with up to two employees, at an affordable price point that matches their operational scale. Such an option would allow small companies and consultancies to officially adopt Esri technology, creating sustainable growth that could naturally evolve into higher-level licenses in the future. I continue to admire ArcGIS Pro and remain a spontaneous advocate of its quality. Still, I believe that revisiting pricing policies and providing more inclusive options is essential for Esri to remain competitive in an increasingly dynamic GIS market.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2025 14:07:05 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>PedroFilho</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-08-22T14:07:05Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Feedback on ArcGIS Pro licensing changes and suggestion for micro-businesses</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-ideas/feedback-on-arcgis-pro-licensing-changes-and/idi-p/1644667</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Dear Esri Team, I am writing to express my disappointment with the recent changes in the ArcGIS Pro licensing model. Whenever I have the opportunity, I recommend the software, highlight its strengths among colleagues, and have even tried to implement it in companies where I have worked. However, the current licensing structure does not reflect the reality of micro-businesses, especially in Brazil, where the official reseller charges more than twice the international price. This makes adoption unfeasible for very small companies, which often turn instead to free alternatives. It is important to note that these free and open-source GIS solutions are constantly improving and expanding their user base. In this context, Esri risks losing market share, particularly among independent professionals and small firms who could become future long-term clients. Therefore, I would like to suggest the creation of an ArcGIS Pro Standard license for micro-businesses with up to two employees, at an affordable price point that matches their operational scale. Such an option would allow small companies and consultancies to officially adopt Esri technology, creating sustainable growth that could naturally evolve into higher-level licenses in the future. I continue to admire ArcGIS Pro and remain a spontaneous advocate of its quality. Still, I believe that revisiting pricing policies and providing more inclusive options is essential for Esri to remain competitive in an increasingly dynamic GIS market.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2025 14:07:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-ideas/feedback-on-arcgis-pro-licensing-changes-and/idi-p/1644667</guid>
      <dc:creator>PedroFilho</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-08-22T14:07:05Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Feedback on ArcGIS Pro licensing changes and suggestion for micro-businesses</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-ideas/feedback-on-arcgis-pro-licensing-changes-and/idc-p/1644797#M35951</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.esri.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/709808"&gt;@PedroFilho&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN data-contrast="auto"&gt;Thank you for sharing your experience here and for being an advocate for ArcGIS Pro. I appreciate the details so I can better understand your position.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN data-ccp-props="{}"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN data-contrast="auto"&gt;Have you shared this feedback with your official reseller? I recommend that you&amp;nbsp;inform the sales or accounts team of the opportunity and your unique situation—it is the best channel for this feedback. Our product teams do not handle Ideas related to &lt;A href="https://community.esri.com/t5/community-help-documents/arcgis-ideas-submission-guidelines-and-statuses/ta-p/904874#toc-hId--707044681" target="_self"&gt;pricing and licensing&lt;/A&gt; at this time. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN data-ccp-props="{&amp;quot;134233117&amp;quot;:false,&amp;quot;134233118&amp;quot;:false,&amp;quot;201341983&amp;quot;:0,&amp;quot;335551550&amp;quot;:1,&amp;quot;335551620&amp;quot;:1,&amp;quot;335559685&amp;quot;:0,&amp;quot;335559737&amp;quot;:0,&amp;quot;335559738&amp;quot;:0,&amp;quot;335559739&amp;quot;:160,&amp;quot;335559740&amp;quot;:279}"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN data-ccp-props="{&amp;quot;134233117&amp;quot;:false,&amp;quot;134233118&amp;quot;:false,&amp;quot;201341983&amp;quot;:0,&amp;quot;335551550&amp;quot;:1,&amp;quot;335551620&amp;quot;:1,&amp;quot;335559685&amp;quot;:0,&amp;quot;335559737&amp;quot;:0,&amp;quot;335559738&amp;quot;:0,&amp;quot;335559739&amp;quot;:160,&amp;quot;335559740&amp;quot;:279}"&gt;Best,&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN data-ccp-props="{&amp;quot;134233117&amp;quot;:false,&amp;quot;134233118&amp;quot;:false,&amp;quot;201341983&amp;quot;:0,&amp;quot;335551550&amp;quot;:1,&amp;quot;335551620&amp;quot;:1,&amp;quot;335559685&amp;quot;:0,&amp;quot;335559737&amp;quot;:0,&amp;quot;335559738&amp;quot;:0,&amp;quot;335559739&amp;quot;:160,&amp;quot;335559740&amp;quot;:279}"&gt;Nairi&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2025 18:08:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-ideas/feedback-on-arcgis-pro-licensing-changes-and/idc-p/1644797#M35951</guid>
      <dc:creator>NairiSevajian</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-08-22T18:08:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

