App Store Developers Debate Pricing and Marketing [Archive]

rdowns

Dec 10, 2008, 09:06 AM

Link (http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/12/10/trouble-in-the-99-cent-app-store/)

Or as I call it, why we see so many garbage apps.

With 10,000 applications and 300 million downloads in less than four months, Apple’s iPhone may be the most successful software platform since the IBM personal computer.

But that doesn’t mean all is well in the App Store.

In fact, the business model that nurtured its success now threatens to choke off the programming talent that sustained it...

The sticking point, as Hockenberry sees it, is that spike by Edible Apple’s graph: the proliferation of 99-cent applications — what he dubs “ringtone apps” — as developers reduce their prices to the lowest possible level in order to get favorable placement in iTunes.

“We have a lot of great ideas for iPhone applications,” Hockenberry writes. “Unfortunately, we’re not working on the cooler (and more complex) ideas. Instead, we’re working on 99¢ titles that have a limited lifespan and broad appeal. Market conditions make ringtone apps most appealing.”...

What should Apple (AAPL) do about the ringtone problem? Hockenberry doesn’t offer Jobs a solution. (”You and your team are perfectly capable of dealing with it on your own terms,” he says.) But he warns that pricing issues are choking off innovation and could prevent development of an app that could do for the iPhone what the spreadsheet did for the Apple II or desktop publishing did for the Mac.

jessica.

Dec 10, 2008, 09:16 AM

That's just it, many people do not want to spend money on apps and $.99 cents appears to be their sweet spot. Look at these boards. Many people are younger and they're struggling just to buy the phone let alone pay for the service. Then on top of that they want the apps but they don't want to pay. Those who jailbreak are ok, those who do not will pay $.99 here and there.

Those "business users" or those people who genuinely need an application will pay. I did not pay $6.99 for AirShare, but I would in a heartbeat as it fills a slight gap that Apple left me with when I bought the iPhone.

Why do we see so much junk in the app store? Quite frankly it has everything to do with the model they're using to approve apps, just as the article states/implies.

There is also another issue that either wasn't brought up or I missed. That is developers releasing an app for free then turning it to a fee-based app. Or, they release it for say $9.99, drop it down to $2.99 as a "sale", then back up again. People wonder how the hell the $9.99 app made it to the top, but that is how. People are more prone to waste $.99 cents or a couple more bucks at that, somehow wasting $10 hits people a bit harder.

rdowns

Dec 10, 2008, 10:03 AM

detz

Dec 10, 2008, 10:12 AM

And this is the reason I'm going towards contract work instead of developing my own apps. If your app is not $0.99 you get bad reviews on how it should be free or cheap, and there is always someone out there willing to copy your app idea, make it cheap and undercut you. Unlike blackberry and Windows Mobile users iPhone users are not willing to pay for quality software.

With that said, there are not that many quality apps on the store either...people are just trying to make a quick buck so they "bust" out a crappy app in a week or too and post it on the store.

I doubt I will release anything on the store under $4.99 now, it's not worth my time to create useless apps.

Stebus

Dec 10, 2008, 10:38 AM

I've noticed this problem too, and honestly, the only way I see it improving is Apple changing their approval process. Maybe start looking at the actual usefulness of the app rather than just the code? I realise this is stepping on dangerous territory but it could stop the people that make "how long until..." apps. Maybe if an app wasn't deemed worthy they could still have it in the app store for free? That would mean that if people just enjoy making apps then they could still have them included and distributed. I know it's not perfect, but it seems better than the present situation.

BergerFan

Dec 10, 2008, 10:43 AM

One man's trash is another man's treasure. :)

sushi

Dec 10, 2008, 10:47 AM

I don't see a problem. The 99 cent apps are fine.

More expensive good apps are being added as well. Good apps can get a referral from web sites and other means.

Both have their place.

Maxington

Dec 10, 2008, 11:41 AM

As more utility and the adoption rate by corporate customers increase you will see the bell curve expand more to the 1.00 - 49.99 apps, but the bulk will always be free or $0.99

ninjadex

Dec 10, 2008, 11:51 AM

There are already some very innovative apps on the app store that seem to at least be somewhat successful, even with more expensive prices.

Make software people want to use, price it and market it accordingly, and you will be successful.

MacRumors

Dec 10, 2008, 02:00 PM

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/10/app-store-developers-debate-pricing-and-marketing/)

While the iTunes App Store has been a huge success in terms of iPhone app distribution, there have been lingering complaints that the current structure encourages a "race to the bottom" with massive competition dropping the price of apps towards $0.99. The most vocal complaint about the current system comes from Craig Hockenberry (http://furbo.org/2008/12/09/ring-tone-apps/) who published an open letter to Steve Jobs on the issue:As an iPhone developer who’s been in the App Store since its launch, I’m starting to see a trend that concerns me: developers are lowering prices to the lowest possible level in order to get favorable placement in iTunes. This proliferation of 99¢ “ringtone apps” is affecting our product development.Hockenberry claims that these $0.99 "ringtone apps" prevent developers from working on more substantial and creative applications, instead trying to cash in on the latest fad.

Jesse Farmer of 20bits (http://20bits.com/articles/the-099-app-store/), however, disagrees with Hokenberry's letter and distinguishes that while the App Store is a very good distribution channel, developers should not rely on it as their only marketing channel. Distribution and marketing aren't one and the same, and this tension is why developers are feeling pinched.

Distribution is the "how," as in, how do you get your product to your customer? .... Marketing is the "why," as in, why do your customers want to buy your product?Farmer suggests that developers should look for creative ways outside the app store itself to stimulate demand. He points out that lower prices aren't what convinces people to buy Beyonce's album, but instead the multi-million dollar marketing campaigns surrounding the brand.

Article Link: App Store Developers Debate Pricing and Marketing (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/10/app-store-developers-debate-pricing-and-marketing/)

amac4me

Dec 10, 2008, 02:07 PM

I think the number of apps to date speaks for itself. This distribution channel and way of doing business for developers and Apple will continue to grow at a rapid pace in the near to medium term.

crees!

Dec 10, 2008, 02:08 PM

Both Hockenberry and Farmer are correct in their statements.

nottooshabby

Dec 10, 2008, 02:10 PM

I think it would help if the Top Paid list was ordered by revenue and not downloads. If App A and App B do the same thing but App B has more features so they charge $1 more, and app A and app B end up having the same number of downloads, App B should appear higher on the list. Clearly it's more successful it people are willing to pay more for it.

unfaded

Dec 10, 2008, 02:15 PM

I would say that the lack of easily playable demos are what keeps people at a 99 price-point: they don't want to buy something, play it for a few minutes, realize it blows and then feel ripped-off.

There are a number of apps that are worth more than 99 cents, but how many apps on your phone can you say are worth the price they're at?

Fieldrunners, the tower defense game, for example. I bought that for a few dollars and it brought me about a day's worth of decent game. Sure, the future value may expand, but in its current form, I feel the price grossly over-valued the application.

What's missing from iPhone apps is depth, and that's why 99 cents is the price point to meet.

Also, doesn't this ******* know we're in a recession?

Turmoil

Dec 10, 2008, 02:15 PM

minik

Dec 10, 2008, 02:16 PM

I kind of disagree with Hockenberry's argument. For some reason, if the app is good and valuable to me, I'm happy to pay $4.99 for it.

G4R2

Dec 10, 2008, 02:17 PM

If there's a problem here, it's not the app store pricing system but rather the inability of the established software development model to adapt to a democratized way of creating and distributing software. Frankly, much of the letter appears to be belly aching about how new software developers now have the ability to translate their ideas into applications and to distribute them without significant overhead. Given the increasing ease by which applications can be created the question arises as to whether the higher cost of programming can be justified on a platform such as the iPhone.

But if it's true that the quality of software is being constrained by the abundance of apps created by a larger pool of developers who can translate their ideas into code through easier programming tools and distribution channels, as counterintuitive as that might seem, then a solution might be including an emulator within iTunes that permits users to preview the apps before purchasing them.

I would say that incorporating a shareware style system of disabled, high cost apps is not going to improve the iPhone experience but rather detract from it. And I don't like the idea of Apple putting up walls to new developers in order to protect other developers who don't like having to share what they think their niche is and what they are entitled to with new comers.

dukebound85

Dec 10, 2008, 02:18 PM

im beginning to feel that 99% of all apps are useless junk and have found myself really using a key few along with the ones shipped at first

bigmc6000

Dec 10, 2008, 02:18 PM

How many times have we seen the old bait and switch when it comes to App Pricing? They'll release it at 4.99 or whatever, get a few buys and then for a (insert time frame here) they'll sell it for 99 cents and it'll rocket to the top of the paid apps list and then after that 99 cent promo period it'll remain up there for quite some time because people look at the top 10 lists and it will get exposure it wouldn't have anyway.

As with previous post I was disappointed with Field Runners - I find TapDefense to be much better (and it's freakin' free!)

Luke1robb

Dec 10, 2008, 02:19 PM

Both Hockenberry and Farmer are correct in their statements.

I agree, I don't think either of them is wrong. I also think though, that there are way too many apps, in that, there are so many "pointless" apps, and it is hard to navigate it all on your phone. The app store on the iphone is becoming like the mobile itunes store, just for specific searches. If you really want to figure out which app is good or not, you have to use your computer, unfortunately.

lofight

Dec 10, 2008, 02:23 PM

zombitronic

Dec 10, 2008, 02:26 PM

He points out that lower prices aren't what convinces people to buy Beyonce's album, but instead the multi-million dollar marketing campaigns surrounding the brand.

Lower prices are a HUGE factor in what convinces me to buy an app. I'm about 5 times more likely to impulse buy an app for $0.99 over an app for $1.99. Increase that dollar amount, and I'm less and less likely to buy the app. Even a few games that I'd love to try out, I've been holding off on. I've bought a few $9.99 apps, but it's not an impulse buy. Many games, I'm fine with the free version.

I don't know any official numbers, but I would bet that a good $0.99 game or app could outsell a great $9.99 game by enough to actually out-profit it.

Luke1robb

Dec 10, 2008, 02:26 PM

There sure is alot of junk in the app store- I think both the developers are right - marketing is important and the junk apps do impede development. It's also increasingly hard to find the gems in the app store since there is so much junk.

To your point the rating system is also crap, creating a system where you can't trust anything to show you the what the good apps are. See my thread about the rating system here --> http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=614504

capnjiggins

Dec 10, 2008, 02:27 PM

for the most part, this is an open market. If your app is quality, you can experience success with $10 apps (Monkey ball,many of gamelofts titles, etc..) The user base is large enough to sustain many developers at .99 per app. The model the store and it's pricing are at right now is perfect IMO. Some developers need to quit blaming the market for their faults.

twoodcc

Dec 10, 2008, 02:29 PM

well, i can see where he's coming from. but as a consumer, i want to see those lower prices. heck, if the app is good, and it's $0.99, you can still make a ton of money if a lot of people buy it

sfh

Dec 10, 2008, 02:29 PM

catch me if I'm wrong but the app store is basically the only means of getting the app to the vast majority of customers, so where are they supposed to look elsewhere to get higher prices.

dwd3885

Dec 10, 2008, 02:31 PM

itcheroni

Dec 10, 2008, 02:35 PM

What if Apple sold ad space to developers on iTunes? My gut says, I don't like it, but my head asks, why not.

Small White Car

Dec 10, 2008, 02:37 PM

well, i can see where he's coming from. but as a consumer, i want to see those lower prices. heck, if the app is good, and it's $0.99, you can still make a ton of money if a lot of people buy it

Let's port this idea over to the desktop world.

Should everything there cost $25? Things like Photoshop, Final Cut Pro, and Office...who needs those programs anyway!?

Because that's where we currently are in the iPhone world. Nothing that requires a lot of work to make is going to get made because they can't make a profit with it.

I'm glad to see you're happy with the situation, but I think it's kind of sad.

fleshman03

Dec 10, 2008, 02:38 PM

Also, doesn't this ******* know we're in a recession?

My thought exactly. He sounds like he's wining that people don't want to shell out what he feels is fair for the app. People will pay what they feel is fair. (Supply and demand doesn't quote hold true, since supply isn't limited. Competition on the other hand...)

This d-bag never took an econ class?

Besides, his argument that there is a killer app that is going to take 6/9 months and $150k/$225K is slightly moot. How many people do you need putting 6 or 9 months into an app? If that many people are needed, he'll have to proceed slower than he would like. Put two people on it and let them work for a year. Build up those .99 cents and put that towards development.

Luke1robb

Dec 10, 2008, 02:40 PM

Lower prices are a HUGE factor in what convinces me to buy an app. I'm about 5 times more likely to impulse buy an app for $0.99 over an app for $1.99. Increase that dollar amount, and I'm less and less likely to buy the app. Even a few games that I'd love to try out, I've been holding off on. I've bought a few $9.99 apps, but it's not an impulse buy. Many games, I'm fine with the free version.

I don't know any official numbers, but I would bet that a good $0.99 game or app could outsell a great $9.99 game by enough to actually out-profit it.

I think the only $9.99 apps that have really succeed beyond the honeymoon period of the first two weeks of the app store, are mostly Gameloft games. Gameloft has repeatedly hit it out of the park with their games and they seem to show no sign of stopping.

Small White Car

Dec 10, 2008, 02:45 PM

My thought exactly. He sounds like he's wining that people don't want to shell out what he feels is fair for the app.

No, this isn't what he's saying at all.

He's complaining that the store seems to be centered around the "top downloaded" lists. And of course that list will allways be full of the cheaper apps. So even programs that "fairly" cost $10 will hardly ever appear on those lists.

He wants the store to be presented in different ways that give all price-ranges a chance of being seen, not just the lowest prices.

In short, I don't think you understood him at all.

Luke1robb

Dec 10, 2008, 02:45 PM

The developer has a point, but if the app is good and it's 7.99, people would buy it. The reason is that the .99 apps are worth a shot. If you want to make yourself a 7.99 game, then make a FREE demo for people who might be on the fence, then you got your 7.99 if the game is any good

I would argue that free or lite versions hurt sales of these games. Nearly every person I know with an iPhone or iPod Touch has downloaded at most 2-3 $.99 apps, and they have more than 15 free apps. I feel like the market is not even started to open up yet, people are just afraid to spend money on the app store. They don't see the value in these apps, most of which are games. Could it be that the iPhone is so amazing by itself that many people don't see the need for more apps? I wonder....

Luke1robb

Dec 10, 2008, 02:48 PM

What if Apple sold ad space to developers on iTunes? My gut says, I don't like it, but my head asks, why not.

I'm torn on this, on one hand, I say this would be terrible and would allow EA and Gameloft to dominate just by shear money control, but at the same time, I would think good apps would rise to the top no matter what. I think the developer's argument is spot on, in that developers have yet to figure out how to market the apps to people as well as make them worth while to people. I have yet to see an ad for games on the iphone anywhere but on MacRumors and other Apple blogs.... what if Gameloft showed a commercial with 5 apps on TV, would it be successful?

Eswip

Dec 10, 2008, 02:53 PM

I really liked reading the blog from tap tap tap. The owner of tap tap tap, John Casasanta, has an intereseting view on this matter.. and I think he is right..

Read the article here: http://www.taptaptap.com/blog/how-to-prevent-the-app-store-from-becoming-the-crap-store/

nagromme

Dec 10, 2008, 02:53 PM

jfarmer

Dec 10, 2008, 02:55 PM

catch me if I'm wrong but the app store is basically the only means of getting the app to the vast majority of customers, so where are they supposed to look elsewhere to get higher prices.

It's not about price, it's about demand. You can stimulate demand by lowering the price, or marketing.

Right now everyone is going the former because they view the App Store as their only means of marketing. I'm suggesting that instead they look outside the App Store to stimulate demand.

Luke1robb

Dec 10, 2008, 02:57 PM

He wants the store to be presented in different ways that give all price-ranges a chance of being seen, not just the lowest prices.

So what ways could this be done? Have a list? $.99 apps, $1.99-$4.99 apps, $5.99-$9.99apps, etc.? Or maybe a Youtube style thing (Most popular: today, this week, this month, this year, ever)? Any other ideas?

bigmc6000

Dec 10, 2008, 02:57 PM

Tulse

Dec 10, 2008, 02:59 PM

camel jockey

Dec 10, 2008, 03:01 PM

Perhaps. But I know that the really good apps cost money, and I will pay for them. Much of the 99 cent stuff is junk.

commander.data

Dec 10, 2008, 03:02 PM

I think the fundamental concern is true. There really aught to be some type of demoing or trial system in place for the App Store that better allows users to try out applications. That doesn't hurt the numbers of $0.99 apps, but it'll certainly better justify the more expensive apps. Everyone wins.

Luke1robb

Dec 10, 2008, 03:10 PM

It's not about price, it's about demand. You can stimulate demand by lowering the price, or marketing.

Right now everyone is going the former because they view the App Store as their only means of marketing. I'm suggesting that instead they look outside the App Store to stimulate demand.

But how? TV? Internet? iPhone optimized websites like ESPN.com? Ideas?

dwd3885

Dec 10, 2008, 03:11 PM

Let's port this idea over to the desktop world.

Should everything there cost $25? Things like Photoshop, Final Cut Pro, and Office...who needs those programs anyway!?

Because that's where we currently are in the iPhone world. Nothing that requires a lot of work to make is going to get made because they can't make a profit with it.

I'm glad to see you're happy with the situation, but I think it's kind of sad.

Well there are demo versions of all those desktop apps. Gimme a demo version of a paid iPhone app and I bet the paid versions sell better after the demo version is out

Small White Car

Dec 10, 2008, 03:12 PM

So what ways could this be done? Have a list? $.99 apps, $1.99-$4.99 apps, $5.99-$9.99apps, etc.? Or maybe a Youtube style thing (Most popular: today, this week, this month, this year, ever)? Any other ideas?

Something like that. I'd suggest this:

FREE: No cost
Inexpensive: $1 - $5
Moderate: $6 - $13
Pro: $14 and up

There's enough room for 4 buttons across the top instead of the 2 that are there now.

Imagine the "top 20" in that 'moderate' price group. There would probably be some really great programs in that list that don't even exist yet because whoever has those ideas knows they'll never rise to the top of the current "paid" list.

Combine this idea with a way to do trial periods (critical for this to work) and you'll start seeing a lot cooler apps for the iPhone that just don't exist today.

EDIT:
Well there are demo versions of all those desktop apps. Gimme a demo version of a paid iPhone app and I bet the paid versions sell better after the demo version is out

Exactly. But I think both parts are critical: The demos and the different price tiers.

ztigerpaw

Dec 10, 2008, 03:12 PM

There sure is alot of junk in the app store- I think both the developers are right - marketing is important and the junk apps do impede development. It's also increasingly hard to find the gems in the app store since there is so much junk.

This is why I'm looking forward to Sim City for iPhone. It looks like and has been said to be full featured (port!!). Maybe even well wroth the $9.99. Which is the first, in my opinion, for a mobile device. Other cross-platform games seem to be watered down when they hit mobile devices. Were only on the first year of the App Store and who knows what the second will bring in terms of applications. Just hope they do something about the junk apps.

Lemme make one thing straight to the developers who make useless apps... you payed $99 just to submit that!?

semi5

Dec 10, 2008, 03:15 PM

5 of the top 10 paid apps are over .99 cents. Where is the problem?

smortimer

Dec 10, 2008, 03:16 PM

I kind of disagree with Hockenberry's argument. For some reason, if the app is good and valuable to me, I'm happy to pay $4.99 for it.

agreed, agreed.

i also reckon i'd be much happier to pay for apps if i wasn't already paying AT&T $130 a month. $30 for unlimited data is fine with me, but another $15 or $20 for sms that can't do mms?!! come on!!

Small White Car

Dec 10, 2008, 03:17 PM

I don't understand Hockenberry's complaint -- of the top ten paid apps currently listed on the Canadian app store, only two of those are 99 cents, and four are at $4.99 or more. How is this supposed to indicate that there is a race to the bottom?

See this article another poster listed earlier:

http://www.taptaptap.com/blog/how-to-prevent-the-app-store-from-becoming-the-crap-store/

Scroll down to the bar graph a bit down the page. That pretty much explains it.

Luke1robb

Dec 10, 2008, 03:18 PM

I don't understand Hockenberry's complaint -- of the top ten paid apps currently listed on the Canadian app store, only two of those are 99 cents, and four are at $4.99 or more. How is this supposed to indicate that there is a race to the bottom? Gameloft (mentioned by several earlier posters) is doing fantastic business and getting great reviews with games that cost up to $9.99 (Hero of Sparta, Brothers in Arms). How does this not demonstrate that good games with polish and depth cannot sell at well about $0.99?

In the US, the top 10 is made up of 5 $.99 apps, 1 $1.99 app (Enigmo, which was $.99 until just a couple days ago, so its kind of a psuedo $.99 app), 1 $2.99 app, 2 $4.99 apps, and 1 $9.99 app. That's an average price of $2.99.

What we're seeing is a spectrum of prices with a wide standard deviation, with only app falling on the mean app price and the median app price being $1.49. That's kind of sad. We need apps that either blow us away (i.e. anything Gameloft puts out) or really adds value. Few apps have been able to do the ladder.

KindredMAC

Dec 10, 2008, 03:18 PM

gillybean

Dec 10, 2008, 03:19 PM

Luke1robb

Dec 10, 2008, 03:24 PM

Perhaps. But I know that the really good apps cost money, and I will pay for them. Much of the 99 cent stuff is junk.

This all comes back to the thought of too much impulse buying. I am a firm believer that this should be a free market kind of thing, its good in the end to have tons of apps, the more the merrier.

fordyingseasons

Dec 10, 2008, 03:25 PM

I agree with Farmer 100%. More advertising on the behalf of many of these developers could be done.

Let's start with some no brainer marketing ideas, the developer could create a myspace with photos and video of their apps and some app store link buttons for other fan's of that application to advertise on their myspaces. If it's a game developer they could submit a "sneak peak" of their game to toucharcade.com to get some free exposure (most of the games I own were first previewed on toucharcade.com). Developers could create logos so that people associate their name with their products. Lastly, developers could create their own website with as many screen shots and videos they want on their apps and look for webmasters to host some adds for them with banners that link directly to the app store. If they are a bit more serious they could buy some google ad space and get even more exposure across the web. If the app has depth, originality, is useful and developers build a brand name for their company (look at gameloft for example) while getting their product known, I think there are a lot of people that will buy their app for more than $.99.

The app store is also a very young platform and new distribution model, as apps and games get more complex and have more features the developer can grow their brand name over time by adding to their titles and naturally charge more. And if the developer's product is cheap crap, it will naturally fall out of existence and no one will really care (except maybe that developer :-p) while the developers that people value will grow a brand name and a following.

To sum things up, I see nothing unhealthy about the app store, period.

jfarmer

Dec 10, 2008, 03:25 PM

But how? TV? Internet? iPhone optimized websites like ESPN.com? Ideas?

Well, *that* knowledge is worth something. If you're interested drop me a line and maybe we can find a way to work together.

ZiggyPastorius

Dec 10, 2008, 03:26 PM

I agree with Hockenberry, but I think there's another side to this.

Which are there more of out in the world, iPhones or iPod touches? iPod touches, most certainly. Who is the most likely market for an iPod touch? For an iPhone? I'm guessing teenagers for the earlier and adults/businessmen/et cetera for the latter.

With the rating system + expensive apps, you would see adults who do real work with their phones buying and complimenting these apps that really help them, whereas kids come on and rate one star and go "This app's too expensive. Gay." I think teenagers and people without a lot of money for "pro" apps make up the majority of the customers in the app store, and I think it's that reason you see more of these free and cheap apps hitting #1, not necessarily because people have to make their apps cheap.

Arran

Dec 10, 2008, 03:26 PM

But how? TV? Internet? iPhone optimized websites like ESPN.com? Ideas?

The App Store lets the developer link directly to their own website where they can pitch their app however they want.

I've often found myself wondering whether to buy an app, clicked on the link to the developer's website or support page and been sorely disappointed. Often it's just a single page, "coming soon", sort-of website. A missed marketing opportunity, if you ask me.

Spades

Dec 10, 2008, 03:28 PM

Take out adverts on webpages with links right back to your app in the store.

But then aren't you linking to the same place where the cheaper, crappier version of your program sits, right next to yours?

Of course the cheaper, better version may be there as well. But I can see how it's not a friendly system for the developer.

dwd3885

Dec 10, 2008, 03:28 PM

Small White Car

Dec 10, 2008, 03:28 PM

Farmer's take on the situation is absolutely correct.

If you want your app to be successful you have to market it, not just put it up on the App Store and expect people to flock to it. If you don't have a website, create one and feature the app with embedded video on what it does and how you use it. Take out adverts on webpages with links right back to your app in the store.

This is common sense to me but then again I work in the Marketing/Design industry.

That applies to the real world, where there are many ways to sell a product.

Since the app store is the ONLY place these programs can be sold, the rules are much different.

In the real world, selling 5,000 apps for $1 or 250 apps for $20 works out the same. In the iTunes world, however, the $10 app falls off the top-25 list very quicly and is never heard from again no matter how good it is, because those 250 buyers are nothing compared to the 5,000 buying the $1 app.

John Gruber suggested that they multiply price by units sold and list them in THAT order (without giving the number itself). By those rules, both of these applications would continue to be listed together. That's another way of fixing the problem instead of my "multiple price lists" idea.

alexbates

Dec 10, 2008, 03:28 PM

Farmer's take on the situation is absolutely correct...

Exactly what I am thinking. I have been concerned that some of the apps that I bought a couple of moths ago for $9.99 have now dropped down to as low as $0.99. (Like Cro-mag rally and Moto Chaser) This is not encouraging me to buy any more applications from the companies that do that. The right way to market is not by using the Top 25, but by advertising in the media, without having to lower the price of your application.

Luke1robb

Dec 10, 2008, 03:33 PM

That applies to the real world, where there are many ways to sell a product.

Since the app store is the ONLY place these programs can be sold, the rules are much different.

In the real world, selling 5,000 apps for $1 or 250 apps for $20 works out the same. In the iTunes world, however, the $10 app falls off the top-25 list very quicly and is never heard from again no matter how good it is, because those 250 buyers are nothing compared to the 5,000 buying the $1 app.

John Gruber suggested that they multiply price by units sold and list them in THAT order (without giving the number itself). By those rules, both of these applications would continue to be listed together. That's another way of fixing the problem instead of my "multiple price lists" idea.

I think we're getting onto something with the gross profits ranked list, but then couldn't a developer have a friend buy a $500 version of their app in the first day and then change the price to whatever they wanted and cattapult themselves in the top 10?

Luke1robb

Dec 10, 2008, 03:35 PM

Well, *that* knowledge is worth something. If you're interested drop me a line and maybe we can find a way to work together.

Hey Farmer message me if you could... I'm not a developer...yet, but I'm very interested in getting involved with apps and the app store in some way, possibly working with or for someone to develop, market, review, betatest, or something. Frankly I'll be honest, I love my iPhone and I could see myself working with them forever. HAHA, there you go, I am an addicted fanboy.

Small White Car

Dec 10, 2008, 03:36 PM

I think we're getting onto something with the gross profits ranked list, but then couldn't a developer have a friend buy a $500 version of their app in the first day and then change the price to whatever they wanted and cattapult themselves in the top 10?

I think the scale of these things will blow away a plan like that very quickly.

They'd be competing with programs making thousands of dollars. It's possible someone might cheat by spending $5,000 on their app the first day. But the second day? Third day? I think Apple would be suspicious of something that cost that much and was selling so briskly.

Remember, they eventually fixed the problem with people naming their apps with a blank space to be placed before the "a" names. They are looking for this kind of stuff and fixing it when they find it.

TechnoLawyer

Dec 10, 2008, 03:42 PM

Jesse Farmer hit the nail on the head. Every developer should read his essay. It's just like YouTube videos. I've seen so many companies upload a video to YouTube and think that's all they have to do for it to go viral. Nope. They need to market the hell out of it.

krye

Dec 10, 2008, 03:42 PM

True. The iTunes Store may be the place where you purchase the app, but it doesn't necessarily have to be the place where you advertise it. I have installed several apps on my iPhone because of the link on the developer's website, not because I found it in iTunes.

iOrlando

Dec 10, 2008, 03:51 PM

bbrosemer

Dec 10, 2008, 03:54 PM

Just like there are pricing tiers in the submitting the apps, if there was a top paid in each tier, I think this would be an easy and promising solution for the app store. Some people just aren't happy paying $20 for any iPhone app no matter how useful it is. Therefore I think this tier top app in each section would push people in each category to create better apps in each tier.

kdarling

Dec 10, 2008, 03:57 PM

Windows Mobile, Symbian and Blackberries have had thousands of apps for years. And most of them have been available via easy to find places like Handango. You can even search by category.

Sometimes I've gone out searching for a particular kind of app. But rarely. More often, I see an advertisement in a magazine, or read a review or announcement in somebody's blog.

So I have to agree... advertising is a necessary step.

fordyingseasons

Dec 10, 2008, 04:07 PM

I agree with the points:
1) If i have an app that i think should be worth $7 bucks...how would someone know what its like before buying? Maybe reviews online with video snipets would help...but I want to see how it plays. If an app is $0.99, i wouldnt care much...if i dont like it, i just wont play it, but at $7 bucks..i want to know I would like it.

Many developers release limited free "lite" versions for this purpose

2) These developers have no means of marketing their apps to the masses, so that is alittle unrealistic, but it is very comparable to a new music artist. they can pretty easily get their song on itunes, but how would someone find them?

Your absolutely right, new artists send out free sample cd's of their music, set up a myspace page to get their name out. If someone with money (a record label) likes them then they give them more capital to market themselves. If the masses think that artist is good, they become a hit. Look at ngmoco they are kind of like an early record company in the app store helping the guy who is making Rolando make a top notch product that can be sold for more.

GQB

Dec 10, 2008, 04:08 PM

catch me if I'm wrong but the app store is basically the only means of getting the app to the vast majority of customers, so where are they supposed to look elsewhere to get higher prices.

This argument (not your comment, but the overall topic) is akin to claiming that shelf placement in a supermarket is 100% responsible for sales.
Yes, shelf placement is important. And an entire mechanism (or shall we call it graft) dictates shelf placement. In addition, there's a whole marketing decision around placing cheap impulse buys right at the register where a talented whiney kid can get a few things thrown into the cart at the last minute. And some adjustment to the rating/review system needs to be evolved by Apple in conjunction with developers. For example, as a buyer, I want to know what version a specific comment is refering to.

But any producer who relied purely on shelf placement to drive sales would be out of business quickly.
Developers have to take control of their own marketing (as opposed to distribution, which is what the iTunes app store is), and start
- advertising
- promoting
- demo-ing (on YouTube or their own web sites)
- bundling.
- etc etc etc

MacLogically

Dec 10, 2008, 04:09 PM

Market forces should be allowed to take their own course. Of course apples marketing and positioning of apps will have an in impact on price points but if this is currently swayed in favour of the consumer (which personally I don't believe) isn't that a good thing?

iChan

Dec 10, 2008, 04:15 PM

I think the only $9.99 apps that have really succeed beyond the honeymoon period of the first two weeks of the app store, are mostly Gameloft games. Gameloft has repeatedly hit it out of the park with their games and they seem to show no sign of stopping.

Intua's beatmaker, admittedly very niche seems to be doing very well also... they haven't succumbed to the "race to the bottom"

BigNTasty

Dec 10, 2008, 04:15 PM

It should be weighted. (10) 0.99 apps should = (1) 9.99 app. when being shown as the most popular on the app store. That way it encourges developers to find that sweet spot between quanitity and price. =-)

WVUAppleSeed

Dec 10, 2008, 04:19 PM

God for bid developers make something consumer friendly in the worst economic time in America's history.

This guy is just pissed he's not making more dough. Get over it.

iChan

Dec 10, 2008, 04:21 PM

It strikes me as insane when people hesitate to pay $5 for a game (likely worth $20-$30 for Mac, PC or PSP) waiting to see if it becomes $1.

That $4 you saved is a fraction of the cost of the meal you bought yesterday, maybe didn't even like, and have now forgotten.

There are reviews and screenshots--that's enough to make a few bucks an acceptable, even trivial risk for me. The higher the price, the more sure I have to be before I buy, but I certainly don't complain that the developers are making too much money!

I personally feel that it's the very success of the app store that is creating this downward pricing pressure. There are so many great apps coming out that people are pacing their spending to buy "best-in-class" software. Intua's Beatmaker, deep green chess, these serve their niches very well and should be able to maintain their prices for some time to come. There's no way you'd find this kind of quality for free.

When an app spills over the tipping point of being simply a novelty (Classics) to being truly useful and/or brilliant, people will pay, i'm sure of it.

KindredMAC

Dec 10, 2008, 04:26 PM

But then aren't you linking to the same place where the cheaper, crappier version of your program sits, right next to yours?

Of course the cheaper, better version may be there as well. But I can see how it's not a friendly system for the developer.

You can hard link a hyperlink to open iTunes and take you right to your app. Arn links all the time in the iPhone section of MacRumors.

Best way to do it. Take every potential customer to the front of the line.
Not sure if you can link it the same way if you were using the iPhone browsing and app buying but still.

kockgunner

Dec 10, 2008, 04:27 PM

I somewhat agree with the second guy. Many developers of the iPhone are start-up companies or one guy coding the app. They don't have websites or any other way to advertise their apps.

orbital

Dec 10, 2008, 04:27 PM

This is what I find funny. 99% of app store apps are crap. So can you imagine what would have happened if apple didn't monitor what gets posted? It would be 10,000 flashlight apps. I agreed with both developers, I am a film maker and I see a lot of other filmmakers that finish a film put tons of effort into it (years worth) then do nothing with it. Where's the marketing. You have to market your own app and get it out there. For me 60% of the apps I like I find on a site, the rest are in the iTunes homepage or the featured list on the phone. Be proactive and market your product! Business Business!!

blackpond

Dec 10, 2008, 04:30 PM

orbital

Dec 10, 2008, 04:31 PM

Bubba Scruggs

Dec 10, 2008, 04:39 PM

Dollars grossed is the only fair way to rank these things, just like movies.

BigNTasty

Dec 10, 2008, 04:57 PM

I completely agree!

bigmc6000

Dec 10, 2008, 05:00 PM

Dollars grossed is the only fair way to rank these things, just like movies.

Yeah but a good movie charges you just as much as a bad one does. There needs to be a system that weighs price, downloads and customer rating. Heck - make it like the BCS - just average all 3 of them and only list the top 2 because all the other apps must obviously suck!

(That's a college football joke ;) )

Lictor

Dec 10, 2008, 05:07 PM

Well there are demo versions of all those desktop apps. Gimme a demo version of a paid iPhone app and I bet the paid versions sell better after the demo version is out

These desktop applications do not work because of the demos. The business "model" is that student are taught them, they pirate them, and when they move to the workplace, they make their employers buy them. That's how softwares like Photoshop or Office are nearing 100% market shares.

As for the iPhone, the problem with the demos is that you can't capitalize on them. I mean, you can have a $10 application and the free demo version. The free demo version might rank 5/5, as far as the Apple Store is concerned, it has no link whatsoever to the full application.

That's actually a major problem with the AppStore: it was thought to handle a few hundred applications at most, not thousands. The hierarchy is very poor, you have 90% of the applications in 2-3 categories. Moreover, it's completely flat - you have no way to group together applications (for instance, free, standard and "pro"), you have no way to issue time limited demo versions... Likewise, there is no meaningful ranking system or even a way to weight the meaningful comments more than the really useless ones.

The AppStore needs to have a system built to handle million of applications. Something where comments are weighted (like Amazon), where there is an horizontal navigation between applications (people who bought X also bought Y, people who bought X recommend Y instead...)...

Cappy

Dec 10, 2008, 05:18 PM

I don't know what's worse...apps that are junk or whiny developers.

If you want to charge more make sure it's worth it so that consumers will actually pay for it, then get the app some exposure.

This is what is called competition people and a prime example of why competition is good for the consumer. Anyone who might/should know a thing about business should know that there's always a shakeout with something like this. Consumers will speak with their wallets as to what they're willing to pay for what. They first need to know about what you sell though and that's not really Apple's job.

Developers: Man up and get to work! No one ever said it would be a free ride.

filterban

Dec 10, 2008, 05:19 PM

What if Apple sold ad space to developers on iTunes? My gut says, I don't like it, but my head asks, why not.

They do.

nostaws

Dec 10, 2008, 05:22 PM

See this article another poster listed earlier:

http://www.taptaptap.com/blog/how-to-prevent-the-app-store-from-becoming-the-crap-store/

Scroll down to the bar graph a bit down the page. That pretty much explains it.

If you haven't read the link it is a good read. And I think the idea of ranking apps on how much $$ they gross, and not shear numbers would be a great idea. I personally have no problem paying for a great $3+ great app, at the same time, when looking for an app I go to the top 100 list like most people :(

filterban

Dec 10, 2008, 05:25 PM

Top sales lists shouldn't be listed by download. They should be listed by earnings. That way a .99 cent app would have to be 10 times more popular than a 9.99 app to surpass it in the list... if I'm thinking correctly. :o

Seems fair and balances the playing field.

There are a few technical problems here. What happens if I change the price of my app from $.99 to $9.99? Apple would have to keep track of the price everyone paid on each download and then aggregate that to present its top lists.

That's not the way iTunes was originally designed -- originally everything was supposed to have the same price ($0.99) and so Apple didn't have to build in this kind of stuff.

Besides, what this seems to me to be is a secondary sorting order, not a primary. I still think the "Top Paid" apps should be ranked by number of downloads, not the amount of revenue.

firewood

Dec 10, 2008, 05:30 PM

The flood is making it extremely difficult to find anything other than impulse buys in the iTunes App store. This is great for the developers of popular impulse buy apps. And that's why they are flooding the store with even more.

For the other types of apps, this creates an opportunity for a (non-Apple, Arn?) App portal, providing a centralized marketing outlet for higher priced apps. Paid article content and expert reviews (why this app is worth $19.99, or more, to customers with discerning needs, etc.). Comparative reviews (buy every flashlight in the store and report how bad they all are). Well moderated user reviews. Reviews allowing developer replies. Lot's of quality high priced ads... after the site becomes popular. Maybe even a sister print publication. Links to Apple's App store for fulfillment (using the click statistics to sell even more targeted advertising, etc.).

Buyers with money will go to this site, or sites like it, when they can't find anything but impulse buys and cheap cr*p in Apple's store. Let Apple be Walmart. Someone else now has the opportunity to be the real, quality, iPhone app store.

.

arn

Dec 10, 2008, 05:51 PM

Th
For the other types of apps, this creates an opportunity for a (non-Apple, Arn?) App portal, providing a centralized marketing outlet for higher priced apps.

TouchArcade.com (http://toucharcade.com) is that for games. AppShopper.com (http://appshopper.com) will eventually get positioned with more premium content. right now it's just listings.

arn

dejo

Dec 10, 2008, 05:52 PM

Apple would have to keep track of the price everyone paid on each download...
They already do that. And they better! Otherwise the revenues going to the developers are inaccurate and Apple would be liable.

irun5k

Dec 10, 2008, 06:07 PM

The app store on the iphone is becoming like the mobile itunes store, just for specific searches. If you really want to figure out which app is good or not, you have to use your computer, unfortunately.

Aye, and I can't accept that the only apps that are any good are the ones that make it into the top 25. I suspect there are gems that aren't regarded as such due to not being free or not being 99 cents. I'm not sure how you find them otherwise though. If they aren't featured in some way, they are buried in 10,000 other apps.

Eventually we won't search for apps in the app store at all I guess. We'll google for them and follow links to the app store just to make our purchases.

jbernie

Dec 10, 2008, 06:22 PM

First issue with the AppStore, the ability to recognize and trust a company that more than likely you have never heard of before, and that could be some kid at home or some large company that happens to be based outside of your home territory.

If we see Apple, Adobe, Microsoft, Google, EA etc we know those names from seeing products in stores and so on. See an app from BoobyJohnSmithHAHA and you wonder what you are really buying.

Also, as you buy a software product the consumer has been taught (for better or worse) to expect that the product is not 100% perfect initially and it will require updates over time, so if you spend a few $$ on an app and then find that the functionality really isnt there, will it be supported? will updates be provided or did you just get screwed over and someone/people profit from an half assed appliction being sold to thousands of people with no intention to fix/support the application.

If the app is free then you can just delete it and not worry about it, the more you pay the more resentment you have to a vendor when you have no recourse for an app that does not realistically live up to expectations. The concern for Apple is that if a person has enough bad experiences with the Apps that they download through the iTunes Store they will eventually reach a point where the device & the store are no valued at all and they will move on to to something different. As much as Apple is not the creator of these apps it is their store and they are the only store, so their reputation is tarnished by bad experiences.

rockosmodurnlif

Dec 10, 2008, 06:39 PM

I would say that the lack of easily playable demos are what keeps people at a 99 price-point: they don't want to buy something, play it for a few minutes, realize it blows and then feel ripped-off.
Demos would really help make prices stable.

It strikes me as insane when people hesitate to pay $5 for a game (likely worth $20-$30 for Mac, PC or PSP) waiting to see if it becomes $1.

That $4 you saved is a fraction of the cost of the meal you bought yesterday, maybe didn't even like, and have now forgotten.

There are reviews and screenshots--that's enough to make a few bucks an acceptable, even trivial risk for me. The higher the price, the more sure I have to be before I buy, but I certainly don't complain that the developers are making too much money!
I care about how I spend my hard earned money. Maybe you don't. Paying money for a meal you've forgotten is better than paying it for an app you've already forgotten.

The first thing I do before I buy an app is check appshopper to see the history of the pricing. If it's been sold for cheap at some point then I will wait. Because there's nothing like buying an app for $5 and finding out two days later it costs $0.99. My advice to developers, choose a price and stick to it.

dmelgar

Dec 10, 2008, 06:52 PM

The Appstore made a good start but it suffers from two huge problems.

1) There is no way to try and buy. That leads to lower prices where people are willing to risk on an unseen app. If there were a way to use an app on a trial basis, people could later decide to purchase it or not.

2) Poor categorization and search. The Appstore provides remarkably few ways to find an application. There are few categories. There are no sub-categories. On the iPhone, there you cannot do much if any sorting of lists. The end result is that you end up with 10,000 apps on which only the top few sellers or "featured" or newest get any attention. Anything else regardless of how good it is gets lost in the noise.

These two problems need to be fixed for Apple's sake mostly but also for developers and consumers. Today the only viable way to sell on the Appstore is to give away a free version of an application as a way to sell either a pro-version or a desktop companion program or service.

rstansby

Dec 10, 2008, 07:18 PM

It strikes me as insane when people hesitate to pay $5 for a game (likely worth $20-$30 for Mac, PC or PSP) waiting to see if it becomes $1.

That $4 you saved is a fraction of the cost of the meal you bought yesterday, maybe didn't even like, and have now forgotten.

There are reviews and screenshots--that's enough to make a few bucks an acceptable, even trivial risk for me. The higher the price, the more sure I have to be before I buy, but I certainly don't complain that the developers are making too much money!

$4 is also the cost of the 4@ $0.99 apps that I bought and used for about 5 minutes. I think the app store needs a better system for demos of programs.

Also I agree with Mr. Farmer when he says that marketing is different than distribution. I don't buy a car because it is in the showroom at the dealer, I buy a car because of reviews and advertisements that are often not paid for by the dealership. The same goes for Mac software. I don't buy Microsoft word because of the box at Best Buy.

Apple gets more money from higher priced apps, so they should certainly take part in helping these apps be seen.

firewood

Dec 10, 2008, 07:25 PM

Aye, and I can't accept that the only apps that are any good are the ones that make it into the top 25.

They're not. The top 25 is and will probably always be filled with impulse purchase apps. A good quality app is usually not an impulse purchase. Those apps will probably have to be found elsewhere.

Think of it this way. The candy counter by the cash register is for highest volume impulse purchases, and not the best nor highest profit items in the store. The iTunes App store lists have become candy counters.

.

Delirium39

Dec 10, 2008, 08:25 PM

They do.

Developers do not have the opportunity to buy ad space on iTunes. The ads are completely chosen by Apple, just like the featured lists.

Chupa Chupa

Dec 10, 2008, 09:13 PM

What a bunch of hooey. The race to the bottom is called the market. I have a few paid apps on my iPhone, many of which cost more than .99, and all of which I discovered outside of iTunes. Bottom line is I think most people will pay what they think an app is worth, and sales will increase when it's priced correctly.

Fact is the majority of iPhone apps are crap, barely worth the .99 fee. Many were 3,4,5 time more expensive at launch only for developers to find they overpriced their wares. That is the real reason for the race to .99. Blame Apple for this? C'mon. I'm so sick of developers belly aching instead of realizing there creations are not that good or valuable.

KindredMAC

Dec 10, 2008, 09:13 PM

I somewhat agree with the second guy. Many developers of the iPhone are start-up companies or one guy coding the app. They don't have websites or any other way to advertise their apps.

It's not that hard to contact a webmaster of a domain and ask how much it is to advertise on their site. Then create any old GIF or SWF with a hyperlink to your app in the App Store.

Hell if a "coder" can't do it I'll gladly freelance for anyone out there and create some web ads.

Chupa Chupa

Dec 10, 2008, 09:17 PM

firewood

Dec 10, 2008, 09:46 PM

The Appstore made a good start but it suffers from two huge problems.

1) There is no way to try and buy. That leads to lower prices where people are willing to risk on an unseen app.

That does not lead to lower prices. That leads to less sales.

Developers don't have to lower their prices to attempt to make up for lost sales. (I experimented with raising the price on one app while lowering it on another... made around the same amount of revenue per app either way! YMMV.)

I've also done try-before-buy on another platform. Implementing the app time-out and the registration scheme was a pain, and this app produced far less revenue compared with one in the iTunes App store.

And the funny thing is that Apple already has time-limiting DRM for the iPhone... for their movie rentals.

.
.

ninjadex

Dec 10, 2008, 09:47 PM

One reason I stopped buying interesting but unnecessary apps as they come out is I got tired of paying $9.99 for every app, then watching them fall to $7.99, then $5.99, then $2.99 as the weeks passed, making me feel like I wasted the $7.

True, pick a price and stick to it for a fairly regular period. If they drop the price to .99 cents "on sale" it really does not give much confidence to potential future customers that the app is worth the whatever the full price may be.

firewood

Dec 10, 2008, 09:51 PM

What a bunch of hooey. The race to the bottom is called the market.

The market does not force a race to the bottom. The jewelry store nearby does not sell any diamonds for $0.99... in spite of the fact that near-starving people find small ones lying on the ground some places in the world, and there being multiple jewelry stores in my neighborhood. Marketing makes up the price difference.

.

flurffmeister

Dec 10, 2008, 10:08 PM

Nothing's stopping you from making a $10 app. You just need to market it properly. Make it WORTH someone's time to spend $10 on something they may only play once, twice, or every month or two. Make the experience such an enjoyable or useful or fulfilling one that they do not regret that $10. As the price of the app goes up, so does the challenge in proving it worth the value that you set it at. Or just hop on the bandwagon, price your $10 app at $1, and watch it more than make up for the per-UNIT revenue with sheer volume.

That's why everything's a buck in the music store, and that's why so many apps are starting to show up at a buck. That's the point at which somebody is least likely to mind if they spend that money on something they never end up listening to, using, or playing. Hardly anybody is going to buy a $5 copy of the Macarena. For most, the song isn't listenable for long enough to make it worth the $5. But for every 1 die-hard fan that would still throw $5 at it, there are 20 who would throw $1 at it for the novelty. Now you've made $14 on it instead of $3.50.

Bottom line, your app doesn't have to be a throwaway with limited lifespan and narrow appeal in order to be priced at $1.

kas23

Dec 10, 2008, 10:33 PM

I don't understand what exactly the problem is? Isn't this how products are sold in any other industry? You lower the price of a product to compete with other products. There is nothing new here. It's the customers that win in a capitalistic society. I agree, the developers should find other ways to market their products.

As for the reasoning that 99 cent will move easier than a more expensive app, there are problems with this reason. Yes, there are hundreds of 99 cent apps that amount to nothing more than fluff. I just don't buy these - they're garbage. Thus, is he saying that people are going to buy the 99 cent apps regardless of their content? Not me. And I hope there's not other people out there that would. I buy my apps based on their content, not their price. I have bought many apps that are $4.99 because their content justifies this price. If a developer make quality apps, people will buy them.

Now, I do agree that it is becoming very hard to search through the mounds and mounds of crap apps. You have to be very on top of your game (constantly checking Appshopper is what I do) to find good apps. It is very hard to find good quality apps. But, this is just due to the organization of the app store, which can be easily fixed.

And I know this may not be entirely fair, but Apple has to start using a garbage filter. We don't need anymore countdown apps (I just my first Valentines Day app - do we really need one for every holiday?), menstrual calenders, aviation checklists, and BMI calculators.

Aeroplane

Dec 10, 2008, 11:27 PM

Yeah I agree, Beyonce is nothing but a brand.

auxplage

Dec 11, 2008, 12:55 AM

The App store needs better organization - no doubt about it.

However, that said, everyone needs to take at least one course in microeconomics.

Make an app that is worth $10, and I will buy it.

The initial $10 games were not worth that: There was just limited competition; i.e., the initial sellers were able to extract more money from consumers and attain larger profits. That is not a good thing unless you are a shareholder or developer.

In reality, the big developers are scared to death that they will fail and random person x will win. I love competition.

Sehnsucht

Dec 11, 2008, 01:07 AM

The only useful, cool and cleanly designed 99-cent app I've found is Clinometer by Peter Breitling. I think I might be one of the very few who'd pay $20 for the "Coolest-Thing-Since-Sliced-Bread" app that we're all waiting for. ;)

"Waaaaahhh! Why is this app TWENTY BUCKS?!!??!!?! C'mon, make it free!!! Waaaaahhh!!!!" :D

wbeasley

Dec 11, 2008, 06:59 AM

True, pick a price and stick to it for a fairly regular period. If they drop the price to .99 cents "on sale" it really does not give much confidence to potential future customers that the app is worth the whatever the full price may be.

Go to a movie, pay $15, wait a few months, buy the video for $30 or rent it for $5, wait a year and watch it for free on tv or buy it $10. Most entertainment options have this cycle: music, movies, games. If you want it first you usually pay more for it.

A few bucks for an App is cheap enough for most people to try. If it works, is useful or fun then it's done it's job. I'm quite happy with many apps I've bought.

I'm more amazed Microsoft still charge $$$ when OpenOffice is free. I'm not bagging M$'s developement/support costs but sometimes you gotta wonder if they are getting good value for their programming investment. The advice they pay for can't be good... Vista anyone??? Yawn. :)

kornyboy

Dec 11, 2008, 07:23 AM

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5G77 Safari/525.20)

I tend to agree more with Farmer. I also think that if a well featured app selling for a higher price will actually do well in the App Store. The developer just has to work to stay ahead of the competition.

johnmcboston

Dec 11, 2008, 08:17 AM

Now that I'm a touch owner and am buying apps - the biggest problem for me on higher priced apps is worrying about liking them/finding them useful. Although it's short money, spending $5 or $10+ on something only to find I don't really like it or use it can prevent me from making the purchase. I am happy to find free 'lite' versions of apps, so I can try before I buy. The reviews help, but they won't help you tell if an app is right for you.

christian_k

Dec 11, 2008, 09:27 AM

God for bid developers make something consumer friendly in the worst economic time in America's history.

LOL ! Everyone had to buy a house and easily spent 100,000s of $. John Doe can do it so I must do it, too.
Wealth? Income? Who cares?

Now $1,99 for an app (less than a fast food meal!) is too much.

America, America...

Christian

Stately

Dec 11, 2008, 09:43 AM

There sure is alot of junk in the app store- I think both the developers are right - marketing is important and the junk apps do impede development. It's also increasingly hard to find the gems in the app store since there is so much junk.

I agree it does become difficult to sift through the apps that aren't very valuable. There are some very powerful apps however. As a result, with enough determination, one can sift through the craziness and have a powerful phone. :cool:

chameleon81

Dec 11, 2008, 11:02 AM

I was asking the same question to myself. Why iPhone apps are so cheap? I got motor racer ( the one we had on macrumors website ) and enigmo both of them especially enigmo is an extra ordinary game. Those applications would not sell on any other platform for that price. (They were 0.59 pences if I remember correct)

There must me a reason why people are offering their software so cheap. Either they reach such sales figures because of appstore they do not mind for the cheap price or -which is more likely in my opinion- the structure of APpstore forces people to compete on price nothing else.

kingtj

Dec 11, 2008, 11:05 AM

There are PLENTY of quality apps for the iPhone that don't cost a penny!
Look at the popularity of, say, the AP News Wire reader software, or "UrbanSpoon", or the Aurora Feint game. I've personally installed 4 or 5 screens full of FREE applications, games and utilities that I like a lot and find useful.

The *only* reason you see people paying more for software on other phone platforms is because the competition isn't there. If you're tied to a contract for a year or 2 on some Moto Razr phone (say, with US Cellular, for the sake of example), you're stuck buying "BREW" based games and apps from their little "app store", at mostly inflated prices. In the grand scheme of things, they figure "This sucks, but I guess I may as well pay $5.99 for this game if I want to play something on this phone for the next 2 years I'm stuck in this contract that already costs me $60+ a month anyway."

When you develop for the iPhone, yes, you're under more pressure to deliver "value for the dollar". If you can't handle that? Good ... go away and shovel your more costly software at people using inferior phones, who are FORCED to pay more.

The comment in the original article is VERY insightful. Too many developers acted like the Apple app store was some kind of "golden ticket" to generate thousands in "automatic sales". In reality, they need to *advertise* their product just as much as anyone else would. Give people direct links to buy your app from iTunes or whatever ... but MARKET the thing! Otherwise, yeah -- it's gonna sit there with THOUSANDS of other apps, often FREE or 99 cents each, and be BURIED under them.

And this is the reason I'm going towards contract work instead of developing my own apps. If your app is not $0.99 you get bad reviews on how it should be free or cheap, and there is always someone out there willing to copy your app idea, make it cheap and undercut you. Unlike blackberry and Windows Mobile users iPhone users are not willing to pay for quality software.

With that said, there are not that many quality apps on the store either...people are just trying to make a quick buck so they "bust" out a crappy app in a week or too and post it on the store.

I doubt I will release anything on the store under $4.99 now, it's not worth my time to create useless apps.

Luke1robb

Dec 11, 2008, 11:15 AM

Aye, and I can't accept that the only apps that are any good are the ones that make it into the top 25. I suspect there are gems that aren't regarded as such due to not being free or not being 99 cents. I'm not sure how you find them otherwise though. If they aren't featured in some way, they are buried in 10,000 other apps.

Eventually we won't search for apps in the app store at all I guess. We'll google for them and follow links to the app store just to make our purchases.

This would be an interesting idea, just google an app or what you need in an app and a whole list pops up... Google? You out there? (rhetorical question) Please make a new Lab that is app search, how hard could this be to do, but how amazing would it be.

rotarydialz

Dec 11, 2008, 11:21 AM

One idea is dor developers to release the first level of a game for free and charge for the full version. Another idea is for developers to provide a link to a demo of their app. I'm not interested in paying for something that may turn out to be garbage. Maybe there should be a group of impartial reviewers who would be given a free copy of an app to test it's worthiness. Pay now, cry later is not the best business model.

tveric

Dec 11, 2008, 11:22 AM

I'm amazed that a developer has the gall to complain about the App Store.

Consider this: anyone can submit an app to the store, and most of them get approved, giving them INSTANT access to a marketplace of millions of people. Contrast this with music, movies.... or even the software you see for sale at your local electronics chain! If a no-name filmmaker makes a movie, can he get it to be shown at multiplexes around the world? No. Can a musician instantly get his album into Wal-Mart and everywhere else without a record deal? No. If you write some great software for, say, a Mac, will your software show up in a nice box in the local Apple retail store? No.

Part of the reason we have to pay $10 for a movie when it comes out or $15-20 for a CD is that the distribution channels are so tightly controlled. It's really a de facto monopoly that allows those in charge to get more $$$/person than they would get in a truly open market. Their heavy marketing takes care of ensuring that enough people feel they HAVE to pay $X.99 for whatever they're peddling.

By contrast, the App Store has removed these distribution barriers, mostly. The downside for a developer, of course, is that suddenly everyone else has the same access to this new market that you do - making it extremely difficult to make your product stand out. So what do you do? As some have suggested, put up a 'Lite' version of your app for free - it's kind of the new shareware. But don't cry to me about how it's a race to the bottom - the App Store is true capitalism, the good apps will survive and people will pay what they're worth, because in a real open market, the definition of what something is worth is simple - it's whatever people are willing to pay for it.

There's another strength to the App Store that not many have mentioned - if I don't want to pay for a movie or CD or even Photoshop, it's pathetically easy to download any of these from the Net and use them. If I want to do the same for an App Store app, I have to jailbreak my iPhone - not a trivial matter and I run the risk of not having the phone work properly and i can't update the iPhone software, etc... by making it so difficult, Apple has provided protections to App Store developers that movie studios and recording artists (not to mention software companies like Adobe) don't have.

pubwvj

Dec 11, 2008, 11:25 AM

The problem with most of the more expensive Apps is there is no try before you buy. I don't want to spend money before knowing the application is going to do what I need. This was the whole point of the evolution of demoware, shareware and trials. Some iApps developers get this point and they bring out free Lite versions. I have downloaded quite a few of those, found several that I really liked and bought the full version.

There is another major problem with the whole Apps issue: integration with the desktop. If I'm going to have applications on my iPod Touch or iPhone to do real work then they need to be able to share data back and forth with my Mac notebook computer where I do most of my work. For example, most of the spreadsheets in the Apps store are a joke. Besides not working well, crashing and such they don't share data with the desktop machines. Building spreadsheets is hard to do on the iApp. However the iApps are a great place to use ones that were created on the desktop. But then one needs a way to transfer the saved data back home. Some developers are working on this issue but it is convoluted right now.

This will improve but until it gets seriously better the iApps aren't worth more than a couple of bucks. They're just teasers as to what could be...

liptonlover

Dec 11, 2008, 11:30 AM

tveric, it's not that developers aren't grateful. I'm grateful that I can write an iphone app and *instantly* have it available to the whole iphone community. That being said, apple owes the developers more as well. Apple needs the developers as much as the developers need apple. So they do have a right to complain, in the hopes that a better relationship comes about.
The problem is partly apple's fault, because of how the store works. The ratings inveritably go down when users delete apps, and position is based solely on downloads. Finally, the new section is so messed up it's impossible to find new apps. If they fix that, the prices will go where they're supposed to be and we'll get better apps. The games that compare to psp and ds games so far are all $10 and under. That's not fair to the developers but it's what they have to do.
Nate

chameleon81

Dec 11, 2008, 12:03 PM

tveric did you see the most popular games or applications recently? I saw turkey hunt for a long while. Did you check the game? Appstore has to change the way it rates the software and the way we browse the store.

Luke1robb

Dec 11, 2008, 12:25 PM

Xian Zhu Xuande

Dec 11, 2008, 02:24 PM

I think there are a lot of developers who will not develop for a 99 cent platform. Someone out there has the next Better Than Sliced Bread application idea but won't build it because they know they can't sell it for the 5 or 10 or 20 bucks needed to build and support it.
There are plenty of high-end applications on the iPhone which are sold at higher pricepoints without trouble. This ranges from professional apps to references like the American Heritage Dictionary, right down to games. Fieldrunners has been purchased a multitude of times and it is, what, $4? $5? There are other $10 games which sell every bit as well. Just look at the top charts for paid apps. It is amazing enough to even see some of them among the $.99 apps (and not all of them got there by being free for a while).

I'll wager the apps being made by some of the whiners aren't exactly top-tier revolutionary or production quality products.

As for me, I've spent over $150 on apps. I know a few people who have spent just about as much. There are people out there who actually have a job and don't mind spending some money on a great app for their phone.

Xian Zhu Xuande

Dec 11, 2008, 02:33 PM

When you develop for the iPhone, yes, you're under more pressure to deliver "value for the dollar". If you can't handle that? Good ... go away and shovel your more costly software at people using inferior phones, who are FORCED to pay more.
This is offset completely by the actual demand for iPhone apps. Far more iPhone users download apps than do RAZR users, and the RAZR users who download apps only download a fraction of what is offered on the iPhone. Would you rather sell an app 200 times for $5 or 59,000 for $1.99? And don't forget that you keep more of your sales value on the iPhone than you do on the other platforms (unless you're a heavy duty developer on a platform that has a large up-front payment).

Xian Zhu Xuande

Dec 11, 2008, 02:40 PM

The problem is partly apple's fault, because of how the store works. The ratings inveritably go down when users delete apps, and position is based solely on downloads. Finally, the new section is so messed up it's impossible to find new apps. If they fix that, the prices will go where they're supposed to be and we'll get better apps. The games that compare to psp and ds games so far are all $10 and under. That's not fair to the developers but it's what they have to do.
Nate
I have seen a downward trend in ratings as a result of the rate-as-you-delete feature, though for the most part those ratings aren't much lower than the actual ratings left for an app. It is a somewhat different playing field for free apps, but I don't buy an argument that this is a bad thing. The apps with low ratings are apps with real problems that are generally discussed at length in real feedback. There are many high quality free apps which has solid ratings despite the rate-as-you-delete feature.

And frankly, it is nice to see immediate feedback.

kingtj

Dec 11, 2008, 02:46 PM

The games "that compare to psp and ds games" are selling for under $10, and that's "unfair" how?

IMHO, if you want to run games like this on a PHONE, vs. an actual portable game system, you're already getting a sub-standard experience - because there's no true physical buttons to press to control the game. Yeah, they can do some creative things with the motion sensor ... but in the end, many games just won't translate that well to a touch-screen.

Plus, you have to consider that most iPhone users out there have battery life concerns. We need to be able to take and make our PHONE CALLS throughout the day. If I spend too much time playing battery-draining games on my phone, I compromise my talk time, so I tend to "game" a lot less on the iPhone.

I just don't think it's sensible to expect me to want to pay more than $10 for a game I'll only use casually at best, on a device that's not even specifically designed for the purpose of gaming. That's why they can't break through that "$10 price barrier" ... and it has nothing to do with Apple's store forcing it on developers.

tveric, it's not that developers aren't grateful. I'm grateful that I can write an iphone app and *instantly* have it available to the whole iphone community. That being said, apple owes the developers more as well. Apple needs the developers as much as the developers need apple. So they do have a right to complain, in the hopes that a better relationship comes about.
The problem is partly apple's fault, because of how the store works. The ratings inveritably go down when users delete apps, and position is based solely on downloads. Finally, the new section is so messed up it's impossible to find new apps. If they fix that, the prices will go where they're supposed to be and we'll get better apps. The games that compare to psp and ds games so far are all $10 and under. That's not fair to the developers but it's what they have to do.
Nate

liptonlover

Dec 11, 2008, 02:46 PM

I have seen a downward trend in ratings as a result of the rate-as-you-delete feature, though for the most part those ratings aren't much lower than the actual ratings left for an app. It is a somewhat different playing field for free apps, but I don't buy an argument that this is a bad thing. The apps with low ratings are apps with real problems that are generally discussed at length in real feedback. There are many high quality free apps which has solid ratings despite the rate-as-you-delete feature.

And frankly, it is nice to see immediate feedback.

Sorry I didn't mean to sound like I don't think it's a good thing. I just dont' think it's gone far enough. It should have all the options of a review, including a written one. Also, a bug report option because a lot of times that's what causes me to delete an app.
Also, I mentioned in another thread they could make this dialog come up at other times, like after you close the app for the first time. Then they could give you an option to save it for next time in case you aren't ready to decide. Or you could say you never want to see the review box again for said app.

The only bad thing about it I think is that it affects free apps more than paid apps. I bought quite a few apps that I didn't delete because I wanted them updated. I never gave them a rating. But free apps I delete and rate all the time.
Anyways, I shouldn't have even brought up the reviewing. I suppose that's not really part of the problem.

liptonlover

Dec 11, 2008, 02:57 PM

The games "that compare to psp and ds games" are selling for under $10, and that's "unfair" how?

IMHO, if you want to run games like this on a PHONE, vs. an actual portable game system, you're already getting a sub-standard experience - because there's no true physical buttons to press to control the game. Yeah, they can do some creative things with the motion sensor ... but in the end, many games just won't translate that well to a touch-screen.

Plus, you have to consider that most iPhone users out there have battery life concerns. We need to be able to take and make our PHONE CALLS throughout the day. If I spend too much time playing battery-draining games on my phone, I compromise my talk time, so I tend to "game" a lot less on the iPhone.

I just don't think it's sensible to expect me to want to pay more than $10 for a game I'll only use casually at best, on a device that's not even specifically designed for the purpose of gaming. That's why they can't break through that "$10 price barrier" ... and it has nothing to do with Apple's store forcing it on developers.

The iPhone isn't the one being advertised as a gaming platform. It's the touch. So forget about calling people being a problem for now. Sure the battery isn't nearly as good as the DS or PSP, but it's still decent. It's certainly useable.

Some games won't work, but most will. I've only had interface/control problems with a few apps that just didn't do it right.

I'll use brother in arms as an example. It's what, $30 on the DS? I could get it for $10. I haven't bought it so I can't say from personal experience that it's on par, but the reviews say it is. No one complains about the battery life cutting short their enjoyment of the game, nor do they say that the controls were horrible and unuseable. The game is exactly the same, on a different device. I see no reason why it should be $10.

michaellinehan

Dec 11, 2008, 04:01 PM

"One man's trash is another man's treasure."
and
"I don't see a problem. The 99 cent apps are fine."

Not when you get twenty-five slightly different iterations of the same idea. Multiply that and we have an app store with a far too large percentage of "me too" drivel. Apple, if you're there, puh-lease put some kind of brake on how many times the same thing can be repeated.

Bevz

Dec 11, 2008, 06:19 PM

What about creating a new price point breakdown of apps on the app store? So as well as listing all games by date or top paid, top free, what if you could also see a breakdown by FREE, $0.99, $1.99, $2.99 etc... That way the 4.99 apps will not be drowned out by the $0.99 apps, and human nature being human nature people will naturally begin checking out the higher price point lists thinking they are getting a better quality app; although it may encourage a culture of "i'll up it's price point to increase perceived quality" amongst some developers, i think it will genuinely help developers who are for e.g. programming quality 4.99+ apps but who are dropping off lists quickly before they get a foothold in the market because of all the 0.99 apps flooding the store.... I have nothing against 0.99 apps it's just they are aimed at a different consumer than an app for 4.99 or even 49.99!

High street shops essentially already do this, yes, you'll have a cheap whiskey next to an expensive one, but they're side by side; you can compare and make your choice; but the app store doesn't give you such a luxury as a consumer, all apps are essentially treated as "equal" no matter what the price point and all shoved on the same "shelf"....

Just my thoughts.... ;)

ratz

Dec 11, 2008, 06:47 PM

I know that I for one will pay more for a app that is worth it. If a developer develops an app that is useful and well developed I have no problem paying what it's worth.

I think if you develop an app where there's a need or one that is useful enough to charge a higher price word will get out and it will sell.

tveric

Dec 12, 2008, 12:21 AM

That being said, apple owes the developers more as well. Apple needs the developers as much as the developers need apple.

Well, you're free to hold that opinion, but I would argue that the advantage in this relationship is certainly Apple's. Your point hinges on the argument that the "developers" are a single entity, as much as Apple is, and if that were true, you'd be correct. Of course, we know they're not a single entity, and unless they form some sort of wacky App Store Developers' Union (not remotely likely), Apple will continue to not need each single developer as an individual or even small software company, because there's literally hundreds of them around, and all of them want to make money.

I'll repeat this again: it's as pure a form of capitalism as you're currently going to see in software development. People vote with their dollars. If your App is worth the price you set, you'll make money. If not, you have three choices: a) charge less b) write a better app c) stop writing Apps.

It seems the guy who wrote the original article doesn't want to do any of those things, which is understandable, to a point. Unfortunately for him, those are the de facto rules of making a profit on the App Store.

The games that compare to psp and ds games so far are all $10 and under. That's not fair to the developers but it's what they have to do.

I'm not sure there's any iPhone games that compare to the best games on the PSP or DS; if you know of any I'd love to try them out and even buy them after I read a few reviews. But consider this: the people creating the games for the PSP and DS don't enjoy the freedom that you get writing for the iPhone, while a crappy game that costs $40 for the PSP or DS won't sell either, at least not much.

No one is holding a gun to a developer's head to make them write iPhone apps. Think you can make more writing for another platform, or working for some giant company like EA? Then you should go do that. Fair has nothing to do with it. It's just survival of the fittest.

iphonedevguy

Dec 12, 2008, 01:46 AM

Come on, $1 for an app is really uninspiring. An app should be priced around $5 for some utility and around $10 for more usefulness. May be Apple should enforce price slabs - free, $2, $5, $10 etc. Then this revenue-by-volume experimentists would go and only serious app devs would stay. We should follow Apple's strategy : Enhance the app, keep the price same! Other than that, marketing is going to be crucial as app-mountain is rising. And we need a more frugal VC or angel funding model (http://www.iphonedev.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54:inifund-could-outperform-ifund&catid=34:iphone&Itemid=56).

whitehexagon

Dec 12, 2008, 04:18 AM

Assume every App will be Free or .99, then develop & market accordingly, ie go for volume. With this level of developer interest, and such easy entry into the market, sooner or later someone going to undercut you anyway.

At which point we'll probably see the ugly head of software patents appearing. That's the thing that worries me as a developer. Why to spend 6 months on a quality App, when either Apple can reject it because it competes with something they had in mind, or someone else has got to the market first and the sues you for copying.

liptonlover

Dec 12, 2008, 09:45 AM

Well, you're free to hold that opinion, but I would argue that the advantage in this relationship is certainly Apple's. Your point hinges on the argument that the "developers" are a single entity, as much as Apple is, and if that were true, you'd be correct. Of course, we know they're not a single entity, and unless they form some sort of wacky App Store Developers' Union (not remotely likely), Apple will continue to not need each single developer as an individual or even small software company, because there's literally hundreds of them around, and all of them want to make money.

I'll repeat this again: it's as pure a form of capitalism as you're currently going to see in software development. People vote with their dollars. If your App is worth the price you set, you'll make money. If not, you have three choices: a) charge less b) write a better app c) stop writing Apps.

It seems the guy who wrote the original article doesn't want to do any of those things, which is understandable, to a point. Unfortunately for him, those are the de facto rules of making a profit on the App Store.

I'm not sure there's any iPhone games that compare to the best games on the PSP or DS; if you know of any I'd love to try them out and even buy them after I read a few reviews. But consider this: the people creating the games for the PSP and DS don't enjoy the freedom that you get writing for the iPhone, while a crappy game that costs $40 for the PSP or DS won't sell either, at least not much.

No one is holding a gun to a developer's head to make them write iPhone apps. Think you can make more writing for another platform, or working for some giant company like EA? Then you should go do that. Fair has nothing to do with it. It's just survival of the fittest.

The advantage is obviously apple's, but they should still show more love to the developers. If they're going to run the only app store available for unjailbroken iphones, they should make it the best one possible. It's beneficial to them, to, as they'll get less bad press about it (not that there's too much of that) and everyone will be happier. If fixing the app store involves giving developers more money, the bigger names may get in on the iphone, or those already there may put more on.

I almost agree. Exposure and press has a LOT to do with how well you do. If you have one star ratings from a thousand people out of a thousand and one, your sales will slow dramatically. If you have a 5 star rating in the said scenario, you'll sell like hotcakes, even if you're overpriced.

I just said, brothers in arms is identical on the iphone and ds, except of course for different controls. And the fact that the iphone version is $20 less. Not sure you're going with the freedom point...

The obvious problem with that is the psp and ds don't have open stores like the iphone. You'd have to get with one of the companies. And the reason for not doing that from my point of view at least, is actually freedom. I want to create what I want, without deadlines or forced parameters or anything.