SrPx

I'm curious... One of our Australian forum members, MikeV, discards this possibility, due to Canva's HQ happening to be in Sydney, Australia, and how Australian regulators are tending to deal with this sort of thing there :

" Adobe takeover
One of the concerns raised in this thread is the potential for Adobe to buy Canva – given the mood and direction of Australian competition regulators I think this is so unlikely that it does not figure in my calculations. "   

After  what has happened with Figma (Adobe tried to acquire it recently), apparently this is not such an automatic thing to expect, these days. There are some articles about it : 
https://www.afr.com/technology/no-one-can-buy-canva-now-other-start-ups-beware-20231220-p5esr8
Edit: Ouch, sorry. It seems that article is partially behind a paywall...  I could read it completely, but it seems for some reason it only shows up full when searching some stuff in Google, not accessing it directly... (I am not familiar with that site, BTW). But one of  the key points of it is that Australian companies have it pretty hard to do such operation now, due to regulation (what MikeV described).

What I am finding more in Google goes more in the lines of several sources expecting more of a competition from Canva against Adobe, grabbing more market from Adobe in the low, to low-mid end. Obviously Adobe will keep non challenged in the very high end, not just as its apps are immensely more advanced and professional, but -almost more important- because many industries (not only the game and film industries) have their pipelines, workflows, custom solutions, trained teams, tightly tied to Adobe. But a huge pie of the market is the low end (175 millions of users in Canva is no small thing) and part of a bit higher tier.

Even more the case when our skills are less and less needed (and I can't understand why people don't realize that this is the biggest danger for artists, designers, photographers, etc, but not just from Canva, but any apps with full AI art and design generation, like MidJourney , Dall-E, etc), so, the low end users can finally do a lot of work without our services (in Canva, and similar solutions), and then, the "pie" that canva can grab is significantly bigger than what it was the potential Canva's user base before. WAY more the case if they start implementing Affinity's tech inside Canva solutions (to an extent... I don't see a lot of their user base getting super technical! It's not that profile), and also keeping the branch of Affinity's standalone suite. As in, I think it aspires to way more  than the social media graphics and fast stuff for marketing people and small business owners saving bucks on designers and artists that it was its market till now. This challenges a large chunk of Adobe's user base. And from what I am digging out there, it seems I was not the only one suspecting that Canva's thing is not to be bought, but to compete with the giant, as at this point, well, it's a giant itself and it has a lot to win.
I am not saying this to challenge your opinion. I am genuinely curious about all this matter, and I might be wrong, as I'm just barely reading about these things now, pretty ignorant in finances stuff, and English is not my first language, but seems to be there quite a bunch of articles supporting this theory and right now I am not finding anything suggesting the possibility of an Adobe--> Canva buyout. But who knows.
 

Just to add to the confusion, the first Baron Sydney was Robert Sidney before he was elevated to the peerage.
Barons rank lower than viscounts. Robert Sidney became Baron Sydney in 1603, Viscount Lisle in 1605, and finally Earl of Leicester in 1618.

Thought I would check out the 'fate' of other Canva acquisitions. A couple follow this trajectory. I thought was one might be of interest – Canva's announcement in February of 2022:
https://www.canva.com/newsroom/news/flourish/
and this is the Flourish web site today:
https://flourish.studio/
Let's hope this is also the Affinity story.
Also no apologies need. It's  a common mistake that mixes Sidney – a first name – with Sydney a surname. The city was named after Viscount later Baron Sydney a prominent UK politician of the late 1700s. Much more egregious is pronouncing Bondi as in Bondi Blue iMac and Bondi Beach as Bondee rather than Bon-die.
M

Thank you   (Alfred)

You can read the article here. 

OK, but how realistic is to compare what Adobe did to Freehand to what people fear Canva will do to Affinity? Canva has no reason to kill Affinity because unlike Adobe they do not have any products that compete with Affinity.

Hi SrPx,
Canva was started in Perth (the capital of Western Australia) and is now headquartered in Sydney, Australia – depending on the day either the largest or second-largest city in the country. An aside – Sydney not Sidney.
The Australian Financial Review is Australia's business paper of record. The article reflects our tightening regulatory landscape around acquisitions – currently there are major debates about market concentration in several industries and sectors – particularly supermarkets.
While never say never, it would have to be a dramatic black swan moment for Adobe to take control of Canva. The Review takes the attitude that this is bad for start-ups that just want to be bought by big tech as an exit strategy – which for us as users of Affinity software is a source of comfort.
I agree with you and other comments that Canva's acquisition provides near total protection from an Adobe buy-and-kill Affinity move. It is one concern that was off my list immediately.
Mike

Hi Andy,
I think some of those commenting in this thread don't appreciate that this is a challenging time for all involved – including the Serif people. Kudos for keeping this forum open.
Having made two quite disastrous production software choices in the last decade I really wanted to get a deeper understand of the situation. I'm gun shy, and don't want to make a third bad decision – stay and eventually lose access to production files or abandon software that is going to improve and expand – particularly into fixed format ePub.
My post was a summary of thoughts to date. I wasn't sure it would contribute to the debate – it goes on a bit. In the end I felt some of the local knowledge might be helpful to others.
Having though more overnight, and read recent responses including from NewInBoston, RC–R and SrPx – I'm feeling one degree more confident that this might all work out okay.
Mike

Hi lovely people. 
and to the serif team, thank you so much for developing this software. 
My name is Adib, a graphic designer and currently reside Penang, Malaysia. Growing up, working and life, I have always been using Adobe software, and I am so accustomed to the illustrator and photoshop, and having Inkscape as my alternative as I really like using something else that is not mainstream. I have been following the development of Affinity software ever since it started, but never thought of jumping right on it straight away. However, I am here now, have been learning and using affinity designer and photo for work for this past few weeks, and hoping that I could get better on it. Nice meeting you all. 

This is the most balanced take I've seen in this thread - thanks 👍

This announcement was a shock. While Version 2 was oversold, and the recent slow pace of bug fixes and limited feature updates is concerning, I understand there was a lot of V2 under-the-hood work. Regardless, we were more than happy to pay for the Version 2 ‘all options’ package, even though we don’t (at the moment) run Windows machines and the iPad apps remain something to be explored. The value from V1 was so great that buying version two was both a V1 'thank you’ and a V2 encouragement.
The new ownership compels us to examine of our continued use of Affinity software.
Background
We are a small publishing operation creating image-rich print and multi-media ebooks, based in regional Victoria.
We used PageMaker and then the Adobe Creative Suite from its inception until it went subscription. It was not cheap software – $AU600 to $AU800 a seat with half-price updates that, particularly toward the end, were of diminishing worth. We always had the option to skip an update, over the nine years we probably skipped half – skipping more often towards the end. The Australian pricing was at times up to twice that Adobe charged in the US after allowing for the $AUD/$USD exchange rate. It was very expensive software, but as we purchased outright we could partially control the cost. When the subscription ‘model’ was introduced it effectively doubled our already high costs (again charged at much higher prices than to US users), and the moment we stopped paying we would have lost access to our files.
We limped on with CS6 for publishing and drawing while we pivoted photo processing to Apple’s Aperture – based on this being flagship software from a major corporation. This prove to be a major mistake. We also started producing multi-media ePub projects in Apple’s iBooks Author. Another mistake.
Affinity journey
As CS6 faltered, we waited impatiently for Affinity Publisher for our print-based work, taking part in the beta testing. The moment it launched we moved some projects across, even though key features were missing (compared to In-Design) and there were strange bugs. The killer aspect for us was/is the seamless integration of the three apps. This more than compensated for missing functions and ‘managing’ bugs.
When Apple abandoned Aperture we moved to Photo. The first in our string of abandoned software experiences.
For ePub we are still, just, managing to use iBooks Author but expect that ability to ‘break’ any day. We were hoping Publisher would have a robust ePub capability before that final break.
Continue or abandon
The sale is forcing us to review the place for Affinity in our workflows.
We need software longevity. It is not uncommon for us to revisit projects across a decade. We have just spent weeks updating a project from 2014 where the hundreds of photos processed in Apple’s Aperture have to be redone. So my overriding concern is: what are the odds that the Affinity apps will still be viable in 2034?
Our other requirement is perpetual licence software we can to continue to use.
Unfortunately, ‘wait and see’ isn’t a option as we are due to begin several major projects. Do we continue to pour time, effort and capital into projects based on Affinity software or do we look for alternatives now?
This is a summary of our thinking.
Adobe takeover
One of the concerns raised in this thread is the potential for Adobe to buy Canva – given the mood and direction of Australian competition regulators I think this is so unlikely that it does not figure in my calculations.
VC cash grab leading to enshitification
Two of the three Canva founders are on record as holding 18 per cent of the company each, I guess the third also holds 18 per cent – that would give the three a controlling holding. For short-term VCs an IPO allows them to cash out, so there is a path for control to remain with the founders – parties to the assurances we are receiving today – while VCs can grab their cash.
Institutional shareholders
Two of Canva’s institutional shareholders are Australian ‘industry’ superannuation funds that together manage $250 billion of investments. We have two types of super funds – the commercial ‘for profits’ run by financial institutions etc. who make profits for their owners (and generally lower returns for their member) and ‘non-profit’ – the much larger group – of ‘Industry’ funds run only to benefit their members, often union-controlled, and generally long-term ‘ethical’ investors. That Canva’s institutional shareholders are in the second group provides some comfort.
Entrepreneurs with social conscious
Australia has a small group of billionaire entrepreneurial software developers with strong public conscious. Reports suggesting the Canva founders fall into this group – the pack leader is Atlassian co-founder Mike  Cannon-Brooks, a major driver of large renewable energy projects.
Serif’s fate
A few posts have pointed out that Canva acquired Pixabay and Pexels five years ago to support their offering. Both continue to operate as they had pre-acquisition – as stand-alone organisations with previous management – while providing that support to the main Canva product. It is not a leap to see Serif treated this way as the professional offerings would not make sense being folded into the current Canva 'anyone can design' offering.
The driver for Canva is adding ‘professional’ capabilities. In buying Serif, Canva has paid a lot for that capability. Canva senior management are very astute – they have built a $26 billion business from scratch. Dismantling or compromising Affinity software is not an ‘astute’ path, while strengthening it is. And knowing that a very large part of the attraction to Affinity users is perpetual licences, why would you change this major selling point over Adobe?
However, offering AI or cloud-based services requires a subscription to cover the ongoing costs – the template for that is Luminar Neo – you can by perpetual licences with optional AI-based ‘add ons’ with a subscription.
Much of the angst in this thread is around assurances being given by people who are/will not be in a position to deliver/honour those assurances. On reflection, I think there is a reasonable chance those people will remain in positions where they can honour those assurances for several years beyond an IPO.
Our decision
Making the wrong choice – stay or go – will have a substantial financial and resource impact on our business/operation. It is not a decision to make lightly.
For the moment that decision is to delay the major projects until 2.5 is released, see if there is an improvement in bug fixes and ePub features. If so, we will tentatively begin one of our major projects on Affinity software and remain watchful until Version 3.
If not, the search for alternatives will begin.
There are paths for this to be a net positive for Affinity, and we who use the software. I really hope this is the outcome.

As a devoted user and enthusiast, I've always shown immense loyalty to the apps I use, sticking with them through thick and thin. It took a significant amount of frustration for me to even consider switching platforms. My journey with Adobe began in 1994, but the introduction of Creative Cloud (CC) marked the beginning of my dissatisfaction. After a year of using CC, I was troubled by the realization that discontinuing my payment would mean losing access to all my cloud-saved documents and apps. This felt like Adobe was coercing me into a perpetual subscription, prompting me to explore alternatives.
I experimented with several apps like Graphic for vector work, Pixelmator for raster graphics, Rapidweaver for web development, and iStudio Publisher, but initially, they didn't quite measure up. However, when Adobe bluntly announced a price increase, essentially forcing users to accept the hike or lose their data, it was the last straw for me. I canceled my subscription and began a frantic search for replacements. Options ranged from CorelDraw to running Adobe CS6 on older Macs—I was desperate. Serif, at the time, had a tarnished reputation, known for dated design apps that seemed more suited for crafting clipart or printing business cards on home printers. Everything changed with the debut of Affinity Designer.
Though I approached it with skepticism, it became clear that this was the lifeline my business needed. Affinity Designer, alongside Pixelmator, allowed me to continue servicing my clients, gradually integrating other Affinity tools until my business regained its footing. While many flock to Canva, viewing it as user-friendly, I find it lacks the professional robustness necessary for serious design work, often yielding amateurish, uniform results. The acquisition of Affinity by Canva was an astonishing development, raising concerns that the excellence I had come to rely on might be diluted by Canva's more populist, less professional approach. Yet, part of me hopes that perhaps Affinity's influence could steer Canva towards becoming a formidable contender to Adobe, reshaping the landscape of design tools.
Despite these uncertainties, my commitment to Affinity remains unwavering. These tools have been indispensable to my livelihood, and I'm prepared to stand by them until given a reason to do otherwise, much like my eventual departure from Adobe.

Thanks @Patrick Connor and @Ash for your professional responses. Really appreciate your contributions and clear explanations here on the forum. Although I, like obviously several others here and on other channels, have a difficult time in believing corporate ways after take overs (by multiple experiences) and only believe it when it's a few years later, it's of no use to stay negative (for nobody. That's just a waste of energy) and it's best to give it the benefit of the doubt and just go with the flow.
 
Thanks a lot for taking the time to respond thoroughly. It shows that you are involved and that's really something. It's also well appreciated that you didn't sensure this thread and kept it open. At least as far as possible for what I can see. As that sometimes must be hard for you I can imagine.
Let's hope everything works out well for everybody here and this turned out to be just a bump in the grand scheme of things   (Which it probably is anyway, as are most things in life! haha 😀) and turned out to be groth in the end everybody is happy with!

I think it could depend on the level and nature of the AI services being offered. For 'from-scratch' AI content generation, yes, there will be an ongoing cost which could require continuing revenue / licensing.
But what about much smaller scale AI logic attached to 'everyday' editing capabilities: masking, fill, error-fixing, etc.? It seems those capabilities could be supported under a perpetual license, as (from what I understand as a non-AI-expert) they're ultimately more logically oriented. Once algorithmically-seeded, they would seem to be less reliant on continual 'feeding'.
I, for one (and I've seen the same expressed by others here), would greatly welcome AI-assisted editing but have no interest in wholesale AI-based content generation.

It doesn't work for layer masks and it creates a selection. What we need is a way to see the pixel layer while editing the mask (i.e., after Alt+click on Windows). It's been a while, but IIRC PS (used to?) shows a mask as a translucent red overlay through which you see the pixel layer. E.g., red == black and as you apply white it goes transparent and the pixel data becomes visible through it. Quick Mask mode initially looks like that but nothing shows through and a selection is created (which is unneeded).

@Andy Somerfield Oh, cool, you're back! Glad to see!

I got it in that sense (even with the difficulties of a Spaniard always "thinking in Spanish"), and even so, in my experience, things often work better hoping for the best, in practically every matter. In my opinion, it's so much better for "building" stuff (and in personal relations, and etc).  This does not mean being naive, or not taking certain measures (like, also counting on other tools, a flexible plan in that sort of thing also helps in learning much better the general concepts (2D, 3D, design... ), IMO). But even so, making your mind too much towards a negative outcome, affects one's perception, and finally, one's actions. But ok, this is more philosophical than anything... a bit off topic.  

I got it in that sense (even with the difficulties of a Spaniard always "thinking in Spanish"), and even so, in my experience, things often work better hoping for the best, in practically every matter. In my opinion, it's so much better for "building" stuff (and in personal relations, and etc).  This does not mean being naive, or not taking certain measures (like, also counting on other tools, a flexible plan in that sort of thing also helps in learning much better the general concepts (2D, 3D, design... ), IMO). But even so, making your mind too much towards a negative outcome, affects one's perception, and finally, one's actions. But ok, this is more philosophical than anything... a bit off topic.  

I don't disagree with you @bbrother but I'm pretty sure that getting angry is never going to change anything.
I'd much rather be as supportive of Serif and Canva as I can as I'd like to continue to use the Affinity apps going forward—but that doesn't mean I won't be constructively critical (as I've always tried to be) of the massive list of issues and shortcomings in the apps that users have had to workaround for years. The ball is really in Serif and Canva's court right now. I already know my exit strategy (back to Adobe, I've been slowly migrating back already), and I'm willing to give them some time to make good on their promises/pledges before completely abandoning the products, company, and team that I genuinely prefer, despite all of their shortcomings.
I definitely wouldn't suggest not having a backup plan, but personally I don't have much to lose by giving them the benefit of the doubt for a little bit longer—I want them to make good on their pledges. The Affinity apps today are exactly the same as they were before the announcement (with a few onboarding tutorials added in 2.4.1), with all of their bugs and quirks, along with more than a few truly delightful features that make me not want to give up on them quite just yet.
Oh, and this acquisition has made me take a serious look at Canva, and I quite like what I see. They're not perfect (nothing is), but in all honesty I feel like they're probably the best owner/partner that Serif could have ended up with—and I'm really excited to see where this goes.

I agree; making it free for educations is a great idea!

Nice one @Ash. Exciting times. I love the idea that Affinity is probably going to be used in schools now.
Onwards and upwards.

Off topic but I couldn't help but giggle at the translation of my boss's first name to "Freixo"

Well... I already said I was optimist about this (a bit after being shocked at a first moment, just by giving it a second read and a second video watch), many, many pages ago. There are like 15 pages or more that I have not been able to read (yet.. And I thought I was THE compulsive writer, here, all these years   ). But after the latest post from Ash (7 hours ago) in this thread, I have no doubts.  Zero. 

This is really a very good thing for Affinity and its users. I had my doubts due to the initial wording, before the pledge (but a lot of that can be due to my language barrier! ) of the initial announcement, but now it has been very clearly explained. And it being other way... it wouldn't really make sense in relation to a bunch of aspects. He's being sincere and now I don't have a single doubt that 3.x and beyond will be offered as perpetual licenses (while at the same time being there a subscription option, just like I mentioned it happens, and successfully, with years to prove it, with Celsys' Clip Studio and Corel's suite) for whoever prefer the subscription flavor, which I guess there won't be many around here, for the nature and origin of this community, me included.  But a portion will, from what I have read from people in threads during the years (even if that's a minority). 
Not only that, I also believe it is also true that they will be able to develop with quite less pressure, this resulting in good quality code, and therefor, user experience.
Bright future to come. These three apps have allowed me to get very functional workflows and high quality work, in several fields. And for those still thinking about fleeing... the grass not only ain't greener out there, as, being the "compulsive software collector" that I am, I always keep an eye... "out there" it looks pretty bad, lol (with the exception of FOSS, open source software, which I have always loved, deeply).

I'm eager to check the new improvements to come in 2.x. Eager but not in a hurry! I absolutely love 2.4, which allows me not only to do anything DTP, game and illustration related, but also at this point it is a remarkable pleasure to digital paint with Affinity Photo, the brush engine and system performing great, with the overall functionality and flexibility in image editing that I had years ago in Photoshop, but with an UI and UX that I prefer, despite having used PS for decades and knowing it upside down.  And Designer is a joy for anything vectors related, for any flavor of graphic design. I use Publisher less just because I get fewer gigs (and I'm way less experienced in publishing tasks), that's just due to my circumstances; but I love that app, too.
I hope many of you will stay. I think it's very much worth it.
 

Well... I already said I was optimist about this (a bit after being shocked at a first moment, just by giving it a second read and a second video watch), many, many pages ago. There are like 15 pages or more that I have not been able to read (yet.. And I thought I was THE compulsive writer, here, all these years   ). But after the latest post from Ash (7 hours ago) in this thread, I have no doubts.  Zero. 

This is really a very good thing for Affinity and its users. I had my doubts due to the initial wording, before the pledge (but a lot of that can be due to my language barrier! ) of the initial announcement, but now it has been very clearly explained. And it being other way... it wouldn't really make sense in relation to a bunch of aspects. He's being sincere and now I don't have a single doubt that 3.x and beyond will be offered as perpetual licenses (while at the same time being there a subscription option, just like I mentioned it happens, and successfully, with years to prove it, with Celsys' Clip Studio and Corel's suite) for whoever prefer the subscription flavor, which I guess there won't be many around here, for the nature and origin of this community, me included.  But a portion will, from what I have read from people in threads during the years (even if that's a minority). 
Not only that, I also believe it is also true that they will be able to develop with quite less pressure, this resulting in good quality code, and therefor, user experience.
Bright future to come. These three apps have allowed me to get very functional workflows and high quality work, in several fields. And for those still thinking about fleeing... the grass not only ain't greener out there, as, being the "compulsive software collector" that I am, I always keep an eye... "out there" it looks pretty bad, lol (with the exception of FOSS, open source software, which I have always loved, deeply).

I'm eager to check the new improvements to come in 2.x. Eager but not in a hurry! I absolutely love 2.4, which allows me not only to do anything DTP, game and illustration related, but also at this point it is a remarkable pleasure to digital paint with Affinity Photo, the brush engine and system performing great, with the overall functionality and flexibility in image editing that I had years ago in Photoshop, but with an UI and UX that I prefer, despite having used PS for decades and knowing it upside down.  And Designer is a joy for anything vectors related, for any flavor of graphic design. I use Publisher less just because I get fewer gigs (and I'm way less experienced in publishing tasks), that's just due to my circumstances; but I love that app, too.
I hope many of you will stay. I think it's very much worth it.
 

They are not cash strapped (before the buyout), where did you get that from? However people saying they are sell-outs makes me laugh. If you had a company are were offered a butt load of money don't pretend you wouldn't bite their hands off and take it.