rlittle@ics.uci.edu (Robert A. Little) (05/26/90)
In article <1403@faatcrl.UUCP> jprad@faatcrl.UUCP (Jack Radigan) writes: >EDU> >Organization: FAA Technical Center, Atlantic City NJ >Lines: 45 > >barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) writes.. >> >>the hateful evil commercial software companies are out to drain my >>wallet. And everybody knows that ALL commercial software companies are >>criminals. Software companies aren't criminals, but passing along the costs of bad advertising campaigns and methods isn't exactly fair. I recently purchased _Dungeon Quest_ (a VERY good game) for $49...Now, I didn't hear about DQ from a Magazine or any other source which FTL (the distributor) would have advertised in; in fact, I heard about the game from a friend of a friend, etc. My point is this: FTL did NOT spend that much money on advertising, if they did, then the money was unwisely spent, and I'm sure the development wasn't THAT expensive (a complete custom programmed business package of mine costs at MOST $5000) So where do they justify the cost? > >Granted, unlike a mechanical device which wears out over a period of time, >software remains as functional as the first day you licensed it. Quite correct--the software program will never wear out...or will it? Software programs (commercial, that is) are static--they can NOT be upgraded as time goes on...you can't add a hard drive, a little extra RAM, maybe a new processor. In fact, if you DID add something to the program, then you have just broken the law! (Fed. Copyright Law: the copyright holder, and only the (C) holder, can make "derivitave" works. -not a direct quote, but the idea is there) In order to "upgrade" an existing software program, then you have to buy the NEW version (maybe at a reduced rate, granted) I currently have M2Amiga (a Modula 2 compiler) that will be of little or no use with the 2.0 operating system...great, does this mean I have to shell out ANOTHER $200 for a new compiler? That's BULL! It's NOT worth it! Granted, the development of a compiler is MUCH more detailed and expensive than a game (or is it?) it doesn't merit _that_ much! > >It's not that I'm anti-capitalist, I do feel everyone is allowed to make >a profit, but it has its limits just the same. > > -jack- Quite right--it has its limits. Unfortunately, piracy would seem to be setting those limits. What's the solution? Shareware? I personally release stuff as shareware, but I have yet to receive a cent (that might also be because I make NO effort to distribute my stuff, I don't make very friendly programs, and probably no one would like my crap anyway) I do, however, send off money whenever I feel the work merits it. Unfortunately, I have become QUITE upset with some of the authors...I sent $10 off to a programmer for a Star Trek game that I was very impressed with, (he was asking for 5), and I sent him my address and phone number, asking for a hand in graphics work with Modula-2 (the game was written in M2) He cashed the check, but never called or wrote. I find this offensive...the least he could have done was spend 25 cents and send a form _thank-you_ letter. There must be some middle ground...Suggestions? --rob ============================================================================= { "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice." -- RUSH } { - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "Freewill" } { rlittle@bonnie.ics.uci.edu, eaiu099@orion.oac.uci.edu \ - - - - - -} {===========================================================================} -- Clueless Rob Little
mcmahan@netcom.UUCP (Dave Mc Mahan) (05/26/90)
In a previous article, rlittle@ics.uci.edu (Robert A. Little) writes: >Software companies aren't criminals, but passing along the costs of bad >advertising campaigns and methods isn't exactly fair. I recently purchased >_Dungeon Quest_ (a VERY good game) for $49...Now, I didn't hear about >DQ from a Magazine or any other source which FTL (the distributor) would >have advertised in; in fact, I heard about the game from a friend of a friend, >etc. My point is this: FTL did NOT spend that much money on advertising, if >they did, then the money was unwisely spent, and I'm sure the development >wasn't THAT expensive (a complete custom programmed business package of mine >costs at MOST $5000) So where do they justify the cost? Your kidding, right? Where do you think your friend-of-friend-of-a... heard about it, the saying on the bathroom wall? If he didn't read a magazine add or review, or someone along the way didn't, or there weren't enough adds to justify the software store who purchased the game for demo originally, how did DQ become so well known? Somewhere, someone had to tell someone else. That's just the way it works. I know very few successful software vendors that just buy mailing lists of amiga owners and mail out a few free 'seed' copies to spread the word. Even that method is telling someone by letting them demo the product. Advertising is a thing that produces a VERY poor return for the number of people reached. The secret is to hit a large number of folks. That's why they call it 'mass' media advertising. The targetted marketting (preaching to amiga user clubs) is much more time consuming and just not as effective for the big vendors. It's all right for the small guys that are willing to invest in sweat equity by doing shows themselves or giving user club talks, but companies like FTL can't afford to pay the manpower to do that kind of thing, since such meetings are not spaced closely enough together in time and space to make it economical. Sure, there are exceptions, but when was the last time you heard of Manx or Lattice doing a road show in the greater Montanna-Wyoming-Idaho area? Mass marketting via mail (and TV, but that's even more expensive) is about the only cost effective way to do it. To answer your question, they justify the cost by taking expenses for a month and dividing it by costs for a month. A couple of months are used, but you have to be good at projecting such costs for a real figure. You then add some fudge factor, a little profit, and you end up with $49.95. I have found that in software, (as well as most other tasks) things always take more time than originally projected and cost more in resources than orignally projected. Companies like FTL have learned this fact and realize what price they can sell for and make a profit (or at least, stay in business until tomorrow). It worked on you, didn't it? (-: The laws of economics state that every free market will seek a level. If a product is overpriced in the eyes of the buyer, he won't buy. If the buyer thinks it is a good value and has the money, he will buy. Raising the price will increase dollars per copy sold, but probably decrease total sales. (I know, I know, there are exceptions to this and every rule due to a higher price projecting more 'perceived value' a la BMW, but this is just simple economics. I'll argue the advanced stuff via E-mail, but not here). There is a magic price/profit ratio every company would love to find, but most companies guess at what it will be and then add a little more to cover their risk (the 'fudge') and some to cover their food (the 'profit'). Companies that guess wrong about the size of their market or their pricing point either don't make as much money as they could (but sell lots more copies and become more famous, possibly even a 'standard') or are left twisting in the wind when the debts come due and there is no money to pay. Personally, I'm for the free market. Let every comer take his best shot. Those that have something of value (in the eyes of others) will be around tomorrow. Those that don't have enough value for their cost will have to find something else to do. This includes shareware, PD, tryware, commercial, retail, mail-order, BBS-distributed, whatever anyone can think of and is willing to back with money and time. The market will decide. >Clueless Rob Little -dave