July 2025 Odoo Enterprise Terms  Update — Full Version Support & 25% Extra Fee for Over 3 Generations

Opportunities come suddenly, and misfortunes strike when you least expect them. As of July 9, 2025, the Odoo Enterprise Subscription Agreement has been revised.

Odoo Enterprise Subscription Agreement (Latest Version)

GitHub Permalink

Key Points of This Agreement Revision

The key points of this revision are as follows:

• Previously, the Enterprise Edition support covered “the latest three versions (approximately three years)” only → From July 9, 2025, all versions will be supported. Bug fixes, upgrades, and security updates will continue to be provided.
• Odoo.sh will expand official support coverage to the latest five major versions.
• However, for versions more than three generations older than the latest release, an additional fee of 25% will be charged on top of the user subscription.
• This revision applies to all new and renewed contracts from July 9, 2025.

In short, the scope of supported versions is expanding, but users who benefit from it will incur additional charges.

Timing and Examples of Additional Charges

According to Odoo, the additional fee will be charged six months after the release of a new major version.

In September this year, Odoo version 19.0 will be released, making it the latest version. In April 2026, Enterprise Edition users still on version 16.0 or older at that time will receive an additional invoice for 25% of their subscription.

Announcement of the Revision and Existing Users’ Reactions  

I actually first became aware of this revision not from direct contact by Odoo staff, but from information circulating on social media. Around the same time the change was announced internally at Odoo, Fabien Pinckaers, Odoo’s founder and CEO, posted the following on LinkedIn.

It seems that even within Odoo, the Customer Success team was notified only after the fact, and I could see that Satoshi Tanaka, who is in charge of the Japanese market, was struggling to explain this sudden change to existing customers.

For our own Enterprise Edition customers, we arranged meetings together with Satoshi to provide explanations step-by-step. Customer reactions varied: some viewed it positively, “The cost was already reasonable, and this change encourages upgrades, which is a good thing,” while others reacted negatively, “Such a sudden and punitive change is unacceptable.”

Every change benefits some while disadvantaging others. Personally, while I understand that this revision points in the right direction for future core system lifecycle management, I also feel there should be some kind of relief measure for existing users.

Why This Revision?

According to Fabien’s earlier post, the reason for this change was user requests to “support older versions.”

Of course, expanding the scope of supported versions increases costs. The question becomes: where should those costs come from? The answer: from users who continue using older versions. And to avoid additional costs, users should upgrade regularly.

Odoo’s explanation is logically consistent. The company likely believes that discouraging customization and keeping users on a 2–3 year upgrade cycle will improve user satisfaction, reduce churn, and ultimately increase Odoo’s profitability. Given the product’s evolution and growing market share in recent years, it’s natural that Odoo would feel confident in steering users toward this scenario.

For many users, this approach also makes sense. There are not a few companies that, by postponing upgrades and repeatedly adding short-term customizations, have become trapped in unmaintainable systems, clearly undesirable from a lifecycle management perspective. While it may not be realistic for all users to upgrade every 2–3 years, it’s still valuable to recognize in advance the costs of postponement.

I don’t know how many requests Odoo actually received for older version support. Cynically, I suspect many of those voices may have been more along the lines of “It’s unfair that we pay for the Enterprise Edition when our version is unsupported.” Even if Odoo used that sentiment as a pretext, implementing such a striking change with a plausible explanation at high speed is very much in Odoo’s style.

Is This a Good Revision from the Perspective of Odoo’s Adoption in Japan?

In markets where Odoo can be used with little or no customization, this revision may help spread the Enterprise Edition more easily. In markets where that’s not the case, it may have the opposite effect and increase attrition.

Japan clearly falls into the latter. Odoo’s core localization for Japan is still limited, and in most Japanese implementations, customization is unavoidable. In addition, Japanese companies, especially large enterprises, tend to heavily customize ERP systems due to high perceived costs of changing existing processes.

Therefore, at least in the short term, I expect this revision will disadvantage Enterprise Edition sales in Japan, and Odoo’s intended outcome may not materialize. Personally, I feel this change is premature for the Japanese market and would have been better applied after greater product-market fit had been achieved. (That said, in the bigger picture, Odoo’s adoption in Japan will likely continue to grow despite some unfavorable factors.)

Factors that tend to increase costs of changing existing processes in Japanese companies include:

• A culture that values relationships with business partners
• Highly personalized business management and bottom-up culture
• Older users reluctant to change

I’ve long wished Odoo would understand these characteristics and roll out market-specific initiatives accordingly, but that has yet to happen. With more Japanese staff at Odoo these days, might we soon see things change?

What Should User Companies Do?

As you know, Odoo comes in two editions: the fully open-source Community Edition and the Enterprise Edition with additional proprietary features. In Japan, choosing between them is often a major consideration when adopting Odoo.

With this revision, an additional factor will need to be evaluated: if adopting the Enterprise Edition, is it feasible to upgrade every 2–3 years? If the answer is no, then the operational cost calculation must include the additional fees for running older versions.

Regardless of edition choice, companies should adopt approaches that make regular upgrades easier. As I always say:

1. Avoid customizations as much as possible, and adapt business processes to Odoo’s design.
2. If customization is needed, minimize bespoke development and make use of  Odoo Community Association (OCA) features.

While point #1 is often mentioned, point #2 is easily overlooked. OCA modules are maintained by community contributors and many are updated for new versions. Leveraging them reduces both implementation and maintenance costs, as well as upgrade costs.

By following this approach, Enterprise Edition users can likely avoid additional fees, and Community Edition users can still achieve robust lifecycle management.

What Should Japanese Odoo Partners Do?  

This Enterprise Edition policy change challenges us as partners to ask: “What can we do to lower the total cost of ownership (TCO) for users?”

The answer is the same as always: Japanese Odoo partners should participate in essential activities to make Odoo more acceptable in the Japanese market, namely, improving the product to match local circumstances.​

• Proposing improvements to the Odoo core
• Proposing and reviewing code in OCA
• Translating Odoo core and OCA modules

Participating in these activities can narrow the gap between Japanese user requirements and Odoo’s capabilities, and reduce the likelihood of additional fees caused by postponed upgrades.

As of this writing, our company is the only Japanese Odoo partner continuously participating in these activities. Most Japanese partners are enthusiastic about sales but contribute little to product improvement. Changing this could increase trust in both Odoo and its partners in Japan, and could spark rapid adoption in the market.

Related article: Essential Criteria for Selecting Your Odoo Partner as an End-User Company

What Should Odoo S.A. Do?

While Odoo adoption in Japan is progressing, it feels slow compared to its potential. I believe the reason lies in Odoo’s communications being heavily skewed toward the sales side, while showing little interest in nurturing the open-source community. Because community activity is weak, grassroots information sharing is limited, and even aggressive sales-driven marketing has only a limited effect in such an environment.

Needless to say, energizing the community is essential for the adoption of any OSS product in a given market. Without it, profit-boosting initiatives by the publisher can distort the ecosystem.

As mentioned earlier, Odoo’s scenario of increasing profits by putting users on a 2–3 year upgrade cycle depends greatly on the product’s fit in each market. In Japan, the effect is likely to be negative.

Looking at the comments on Fabien’s LinkedIn post about this revision, the overall response is surprisingly positive. There seems to be a noticeable gap between the global consensus and the perspective of those working in the Japanese market.

This comes down to timing. Every initiative should be implemented at a time when its impact will be greatest, and that timing depends on each market’s readiness.

When I see new initiatives from Odoo, I often think: “It’s too early for Japan” and “Strengthening the community should come first.” If the goal is long-term development, it’s better to take the long way around. The key is to first assess the market situation, steer toward nurturing the community and promoting localization, and reduce the mismatch between market realities and initiatives.

Conclusion 

This revision officially covers long-term legacy use while introducing a 25% surcharge for versions more than three generations behind the latest release. While short-term headwinds can be expected in the Japanese market, I believe that by strengthening lifecycle management and community activities, users, partners, and Odoo itself can lay the groundwork for medium- to long-term adoption.