Dear all,(this is not a PMDG company announcement - this is Lefteris thinking out loud):You must all realize by now that the Fly!2 customer base is shrinking. I firmly believe that it has reached a critical mass of die-hard supporters (such as myself!), but this critical mass is definitely not of a size that would economically sustain a commercial vendor, with prices where they are today.So I have a simple question to ask of you:Would you consider our Fly!2 product line good enough to warrant higher prices, so that it can continue its existence? An example would be: Would you like us to price, say, an upcoming 767 at $99, so that it would at least produce some economic return for us? (It would still not break even, but at least it would be worth talking about ;-) )It is not a secret that, even though our numbers are higher than those Real Air Simulations announced (possibly due to the general populace preference in large aircraft), they do not warrant any significant economic returns, given the developer crew size (at last count, PMDG had over 12 people working very hard to produce the quality products everyone enjoys)!So, how many of you would still feel they are paying a fair amount, to receive the quality they receive? How many would instead opt for the "competition"?You are our customer base. We need to communicate with you. Let's hear what you have to say!

A $100 bucks??? Yikes!!! The release would have to have killer reasons to justify the cost. Sorry to hear the customer base no longer supports continued development at the present price point. Should you be forced to head in that rarified air, I for one would mourn that eventuality. Could I afford a $100 add-on? No, that is way beyond my comfort level. $60-70 is probably my gag threshold, but if the product lived up to expectations, I would venture to say I'd buy.My 10000 cents worth,Pete

Lefteris,Maybe you didn't pick the best example. The 767 is very similar to the 757 so I don't know if I would spend $100 on it. I would definitely spend (or invest) $50 though.Now, if you were talking about a brand new 747 (whatever series), 737 (whatever series) a corporate or regional jet, or something along those lines with the quality, attention to detail and features we've all come to expect (or even more), then I would spend maybe $80 or even $89.99 (if you want to push it). It's just that $100 sounds too much, especially to explain to the wife... ;-)Regards,Alejandro AmigorenaSyracuse, NYAthlon XP 1800ABIT KR7A-RAID768Mb RAMGeForce 3 64MBSB Audigy GamerCH Flight Yoke USBCH Pro Pedals USB

Lefteris,I'm sorry to see that it's coming to this. I am a long-time flight sim hobbyist (18 years...I started with SubLogic's Flight Simulator for the Commodore 64). In my opinion, the Fly!II 757 represents the best there is, and I'm truly sorry that it hasn't been economically viable. It does not bode well for the hobby as a whole. There's going to be a strong temptation to make this a discussion of MS products versus the rest of the world (no pun intended). I hope we can keep this discussion above that.The people producing the best "extras" for our hobby have always been motivated by a love of the game, not by financial gain. Squawkbox, VATSIM, Virtual Airlines, "gapfiller" scenery, dozens of aircraft and countless repaints...all offered by people with a desire to share their talent and imagination with other hobbyists. How many tens of thousands of evenings are represented by the thousands of files here at AvSim alone?I think PMDG's organization is a remarkable achievement. I look at the names on your roster and can recognize each one from the quality of their work before they joined Rob's company...and the 757 is no less remarkable for being offered at $30 a copy...but the bottom line is that this is a hobby.I grew up in a hobbyist's household. My dad was a prominent member of the model railroading community, and I remember many a Saturday spent at the Train Exchange looking at the locomotives all modeled in brass. Those represented the best of the hobby...but they were prohibitively expensive. (One locomotive cost several hundred dollars even in the early sixties.) So, he made sacrifices in terms of realism and learned to cut corners. He had his share of brass, to be sure, but he also learned to make a plastic model look pretty good. By the time I was in high school, I could go to a convention with my dad, and people would whisper, "That's Al Kalbfleisch...the guy who did the..." and he still never worried about making money from it. Once, rather than pay a guy $600 to do a particularly intricate brass etching for a ship model, my dad learned how to do it himself. The result of THAT labor-of-love is in a museum, appraised by the Smithsonian's folks at nearly $20,000. He donated it to the Cowpens National Battlefield Museum. It wasn't his job, it was his hobby. I'm sorry that it isn't economically feasible to meet the demand for realism. But, this is a hobby. A hundred bucks for the 767? I'd rather make my own.I love you guys, but this is a hobby.

>>I love you guys, but this is a hobby. Kurt,I enjoyed reading about your Dad.I only wanted to point out that some hobbies tend to be expensive, much more expensive in fact. I just met some fellow whose hobby is radio-controlled aircraft. He bought himself a used radio-controlled glider about 5' in wing span, very pretty and extremely well built, from composite materials, he paid $700 plus on top he had to buy all the electronics and servo-motors - don't know how much the whole thing was. For some reason sim ethusiasts think that software should be very inexpensive. Maybe it is due to the notion that software is not a 'tangible' asset, like a brass locomotive or a fiberglass wing.Michael J.

Lefteris,I, as the others, am a staunch Fly! and PMDG fan (and will continue to be). I have no problem paying for a quality product; PMDG produces a quality product. A $100 product is a bit steep, especially with the limitations in FlyII (the sporadic crashing, memory issues, etc.). In this type of setting my threshold would be $70-80. If the sim was stable, I would gladly pay $100 for any of PMDG's products.I own PS1 and had no problem paying it's price ($260) because it is a stable and fluid sim and doesn't require a 'base' program to run it. Now if PMDG was to take over FlyII and correct it's flaws I would have no problem paying $260 to PMDG (I'm sure most of the community would pay higher 'fees' if this was to occur).I hope PMDG still plans on releasing the Arrow and Tobago TB-9. If not, please say so. We, the community, are looking for honesty and information.Regards,Bob Lyddy

Personally I would not consider paying more than US$30 for any Fly!2 addon, mostly because that is what I paid for Fly!2.Now if you want to produce a high quality Fly!3 and charge an appropriately higher price for it, then I would be willing to pay more for add-ons too (so it's a matter of relativity).I think that the Fly! series would have a better future if it was built, marketed, and priced as the ELITE GA (mostly) flight sim.Let's face it, MSFS owns the minds of the "average flight simmer" (whatever that is). Just my US$ 0.02,Edwin King

Lefteris,I can honestly say that I $50-$60 would be the top of my prefered market, but I would spend $80-$90 on an A/C that surpasses even the 757 in functionality and performance with the right sim as a backrop. The only problem I see is that I am not sure that FLY II in its current state can push it that far. If an A/C were developed to even higher standards than the 757, I would have no problem shelling out my hard earned cash for something I could use everyday not to mention it could open up comercial opportunities in the Airline Industry (procedures, systems trainer with visuals!)The problem as I see it, is that I want the A/C to works like a FLY II A/C (scrolling panels, things where they belong) with a simulator that doesn't suffer from some of the shortcomings that caused problems even for the 757. If someone could find a way to mesh the best things from FLY II with the good things in FS 2K2, I'd probably be spend way to much money and time Simming, oh wait, already doing that :-) RegardsPaul:-cool

Michael,This is a hobby that can get expensive, too. My old PII/350 was more than adequate for general use (Internet w/broadband access, word processing, etc.) and I was perfectly happy with it when flying the Fly!2K 757...until the Fly!II 757 came out. I was a beta tester for Fly!II, so I knew very well how it would run on my old machine. Still, I actually bought the new 757 before I had a machine that would run it, and installed Fly!II with all the patches, so that I could install the 757 and get to the manual. Then, I went and plunked down $600 on the parts I needed to build a machine I felt would be adequate for a while...a P4/1.6. Away went the old Compaq PII, cannibalized as much as possible. The change-over took an entire weekend. In my case, it's safe to say that I didn't spend $30 on the 757...I spent close to $630, with the knowledge that I have more to spend...I will need another 256Megs of memory, for example. Certainly, the computer serves other purposes than flying the 757....but I would not have bought it, had it not been for the release of the new 757. This ain't a cheap hobby. :-lol

I think the question needs rephrasing, Lefteris. I am willing to pay any amount if the project has a sense of direction. For example, with all due respect to all those who want to see many airplanes, I've always been more interested in a "complete product" from a different stand point. If, for instance, PMDG proposed a "career" mode for FLY2, in which someone would find ATC, structured flights, weather changes and a career score at the end of the flight, this would be a departure from what the competition is doing and, yes, I would be willing to pay $100.00 for this. Tie this with more intuitive interfaces with VAtsim requirements, and the projects no longer compete with MS and all the planes that are being produced. Let's face it, the work that goes into a "different" heavy rarely shows in how the simmer experiences that difference. FLY2 should represent a real niche, not simply more planes . I want PMDG to succeed, and if they need to make planes for MSFS, they should indeed. But FLY2 is indeed tempting for a vendor: one because it takes one bright idea to bring customers this way and, two, like anything else if too many vendors compete for one product they may find that it's still hard to make a profit.tony

I would be willing to pay higher prices for the quality we get from PMDG But as mentioned above not for say another 767 because its not that much different from the 757.Personaly I would pay

I tend to agree about the 767 being to similar to the 757, so it would be a hard call to shell out NZ$200+ for it.That said, the money amounts to very little when spread out over the many months of development - just put away $5 - $10 per week in your PMDG cookie jar :) .Lets face it, we are not bombarded with countless payware addons every day like MSFS2002, so its hardly a choice of "which" addon to purchase (for us Fly!ers).I would be willing to pay good money for a complex 747, 737 etc, but not for a single or light twin. We already know the quality of PMDG products, so I would be willing to pay $100 for a decent airliner.Kind RegardsAndyHere is my first deposit, now get cracking :-lol

50$ for an aircraft should be enough.....but of course if the product is outstanding I would go further.But a 100$ is out of the question.I also think that the price for lets say a cessna should be lower than a 747.But I'm also open for dicussions :) if I want something hard enough....the price really doesnt matter....Not many have second thoughts spending a 100 bucks on some beers and fun :)Johnny"I'LL BE BACK"[div align=center]http://www.avsim.com/hangar/fly/josve/fly2/vas.gif][/div

There are two key problems with paying high prices for Fly!2 add-ons.The first, as has been mentioned, is that Fly!2 is a great, but still somewhat an unstable buggy program. Framerates are still questionable in areas of highly detailed scenery, Winrun.cpp crashes seem to occur regularly. Certain features, like weather radar, don't work. Don't get me wrong - this is a magnificant simulator. I spend more hours on my PC simming than on any other hobby. And for the current price point, you simply can't beat it. But that's my point -- at the "current price point." As such (and this is my second point), add-ons, including PMDG's fine aircraft, must be priced to take into account the platform on which they run. No matter how accurate, how graphically appealing, etc. the add-on aircraft, a user must still put up with the limitations of the environment. So charging $100 for an add-on in an environment with limitations is steep. The best suggestion I saw so far in this thread was the suggestion that PMDG join forces with the best developers in our community and Rich Harvey to bring Fly!2 to a more stable and (even just slightly) more advanced Fly!3. I would pay $100 for Fly!3 if I knew it was stable, ran smoothly on reasonably up-to-date systems, etc. I would probably pay another $50 for each add-on "big jet" in consideration of the complexity. Smaller GA aircraft - perhaps a bit less. But I have to believe that the core community here would be willing to shell out some more serious dough for a simulator that closely resembles reality, was virtually bug-free, ran smoothly, and gave them a simulator experience that was exciting, engaging and offered a future. Afterall, its still fractions of the cost of really flying, and quite a bit safer!-DK----David KohlFly! II v230Dell 8200 P4/1.8G, 512MB RAM, Nvidia GF4 Ti4600 v28.83, WinXP Home Edition.CH Pro Pedals and Yoke USB.

Hi Lefteris,I`m a die-hard Fly II user, and could never change back to the competitor. (I tried and it was downright horrible). Fly II is such advanced quality that I will use it for many years to come. I would use more money on this hobby and quality addons if they were available. But first, make the sim more stable.