Just thinking out loud here. The following is currently just a mind-game, but I thought it might be interesting for other developers in a similar position. I didn’t know about OEM before and really like your system of discounts, but the requirements are quite high. That is entirely acceptable, since you actually get a full Rhino license for a really good price. My original idea was just a bit different…
To give my line of thought a little more context: I am using acoustic simulation software and comparing what’s on the market, I find them all lacking in the UI and import functionality. I draw my models up in Rhino, export via DWG and still need to redefine all the surfaces I a crappy 3d editor. That’s just frustrating since those packages still cost a lot of money.
Then again, I have some basic coding skills and already tried (and failed) to streamline the import/export via grasshopper. Right now I do my own basic simulation in grasshopper. I like the scalability of Rhino and use it for a lot of other things. It’s a wonderful tool to create 3D geometry. But if I coded a plugin for Rhino, the subset of functions, that I’d actually use would be pretty limited. Obviously, a plugin for a software that has no additional benefit for the typical user of the plugin is hard to sell if the host software makes up half or a third of the stand-alone-plugin.
I don’t know any exact figures, but I expect the market to be a pretty limited one. Especially if you are just getting started. I would not expect to sell anywhere near 200 copies in the first year and I don’t think I could for the 150% of the price of a Rhino license as required for the OEM program. If I could be sure of that, I think it would be entirely plausible to use that money and find some guys to code up that very limited subset of 3D functionality, that I’d actually make use of.
So please don’t take that as anything against Rhino or your licensing options. I was just hoping, I could somehow license a subset of your framework.