I agree that it’s worth it to pay for good software, and in my experience, their CS has been reasonably responsive for bugs. Also, I understand the need to take on additional revenue when you start to saturate a market.
That said, the $99 a year price point seems arbitrary, and a little steep. I think they’d be better served and realize a larger volume gain with a $49 price point (think quantity variance outweighing price variance).
My experience has taught me that lowering the barrier to entry is really key for adoption. Also, making a cost yearly is a big turnoff to potential buyers, so it’s important it doesn’t seem high — especially for people who haven’t already experienced the value.
Just a thought.