Did people storm Adobe headquarters when they came out with Lightroom, saying "That should have been a part of Photoshop Camera Raw"? Did Adobe give you 50% off Lightroom just because you owned Photoshop?
For the record: Lightroom was free to all owners of the excellent RawShooter (which Adobe had acquired) -- I certainly did not have to pay a cent for it.
My hunch is that there would be much less unhappiness over the introduction of Ultimate (and the initial payment for it and for subsequent upgrades) if it was abundantly clear that it is in a very real sense a new product and not just a partial revamping of Studio with FlashPipe incorporated.
A detailed side-by-side (columnar) listing of the features that the four versions of Qimage have would help, not just to convince one that Qimage Ultimate is indeed a new/different product but also to guide future purchasers of the different versions of the software.
Perhaps such a listing already exists, in which case my apologies for suggesting that there should be one. But my point still stands, namely, that there is likely to be much less fuss, petulance, talk of loyalty, wanting something for nothing, etc., etc., if Ultimate were clearly seen to be a new product, a sufficiently advanced to warrant acquiring and to justify a fresh payment by existing owners of Qimage and Flashpipe.
Incidentally, I will not hesitate to buy Ultimate once I am sure that it provides more/better printing features than Qimage Studio and a better interface for managing that task. I would still prefer a version just for printing, without the clutter of (no doubt excellent) features (e.g., raw processing, which for Lightroom is much more to my liking).