I'm afraid you've missed the point completely. Selling 250 copies at 60 euro gives a revenue of 15,000 euro. Selling 1000 copies at 30 euro gives a revenue of 30,000 euro. In that case, a developer who sells at 30 euro is maximising its revenue. On the other hand if reducing price to 30 euro only increases sales to 500 copies then the revenue remains at 15,000 euro. So, why should the developer bother? I repeat, number of sales by itself is not relevant - what matters is revenue. Pricing is a two way process. The developer sets the price and consumers decide whether to buy or not at that price. That's why there are higher-priced detailed add-ons for those who are prepared to pay for that, and lower-priced, less detailed ones for those who aren't. All too often these threads become a plea for high-quality add-ons at the price of low-quality ones. I'd like to run a Ferrari but I have to make do with an Alfa because I have "a limited budget". I don't expect Ferrari to offer a car at the same price as an Alfa.

I have to agree to this one. What you pay is what you get. It has always been like that. I don't even expect high priced addons to become cheaper with time. You basically have to treasure what you buy. More you pay for it, more you will treasure it.And also, why would addon lose on its "worthiness", with time passing? Time invested into development doesn't change, nor does the research value drop. So if you, as buyer, are prepared to pay your part of the costs, then you should pay the same as the person who bought it first day of the release.

I upgrade my PC about every 4 years and this year was an upgrade year so I built a PC that I thought would handle FSX. It does handle FSXbut not with all the sliders to the right...but it still looks and flies nicely. After I got FSX installed, tuned/tweaked, and bought some add-ons, Iturned my attention to getting FS9 setup on the new machine.I guess you never know how many add-ons you really have until you start setting them up again ! There's such a dollar investment in good add-onsfor FS9 that equal out to a variety of my favorite aircraft that aren't yet available in FSX that I'll be flying FS9 for another few years. Not leaving outthe huge selection of good freeware sceneries and aircraft that I have collected over the years and freeware that is still being produced !Given the assortment of addons for FS9 and the differences in the 2 simulators, I'll be moving between the two for quite some time!

Regardless as to what some developers have said in the past about making add-ons for a hobby and only charging to cover their overhead, etc...That is a load of non-sense. It's all about the money, plain and simple.For the developers out there making add-ons strictly for FSX -- Personally I think that is a mistake.brando

Regardless as to what some developers have said in the past about making add-ons for a hobby and only charging to cover their overhead, etc...That is a load of non-sense. It's all about the money, plain and simple.For the developers out there making add-ons strictly for FSX -- Personally I think that is a mistake.brando

Which developers said that?Anyway, what's wrong with money?

Which developers said that?Randazzo (I don't think he needs money at the moment according to Avsim), Shuttleworth of Level D, PSS (When they were alive), Flight 1, Carenado, Just Flight (however they have since acknowledged that they are a serious player in this for the money even though they are not a developer)...Just to name a few.Anyway, what's wrong with money?

Absolutely nothing is wrong with money. However the economics of charging the same amount of money for a product made years ago has yet to be explained -- Oh that's right, these developers can charge whatever they want because they have an absolute advantage where they know they have a following of customers that buy everything they make, which is fine if you want to flight sim all weekend (day & night). They can share music amoungst themselves and their friends, but they better not catch you doing the same thing with their brand new "90 year old Model T" type product; Do as we say, but just don't do as we do. I would like developers to come out and state clearly that they are in it for the money; just as the distributor, Just Flight, did. At the same time, the person who brought up the RIAA never responded to my explanation of the recording industry in Nashville -- I do find that very interesting as well. This has happened before between me and a few of the developers mentioned above; I brought up the sharing music scenario and they went silent -- How interesting!brando

Absolutely nothing is wrong with money. However the economics of charging the same amount of money for a product made years ago has yet to be explained -- Oh that's right, these developers can charge whatever they want because they have an absolute advantage where they know they have a following of customers that buy everything they make, which is fine if you want to flight sim all weekend (day & night). They can share music amoungst themselves and their friends, but they better not catch you doing the same thing with their brand new "90 year old Model T" type product; Do as we say, but just don't do as we do. I would like developers to come out and state clearly that they are in it for the money; just as the distributor, Just Flight, did. At the same time, the person who brought up the RIAA never responded to my explanation of the recording industry in Nashville -- I do find that very interesting as well. This has happened before between me and a few of the developers mentioned above; I brought up the sharing music scenario and they went silent -- How interesting!brando

To blanket all developers as someone who has stolen music or a DVD isn't an accurate statement.You clearly don't like having to pay full price... but... Last I checked, the recording industry takes old songs... burns them to a 'new' CD and sells it at a 'new' price. It too apparently holds it's value through the years. Or do you believe that music is 'different'? Rush (Canadian band) had an album released in the late 70's called "All The World's A Stage". It was re-released in the late 90's. In the 70's I paid about $15 for the cassette tapes. The CD (labeled as remastered) retails for $14. It's the same product, made years ago... with a nifty 'remastered' label tossed on it... and same cost. That's insane!!! At least, according to you. :( There's nothing to state regarding your discussion of Nashville. You have your opinion based on your own microcosim... no one will convince you there's more to the world than what you want to see exists. :( Now... if you want to accuse me of doing something illegal... be very careful... because I take it serious and personal.At this point, I believe you owe me an apology for insinuating that I'm a thief... and yes, I'm serious. :(

To blanket all developers as someone who has stolen music or a DVD isn't an accurate statement.You clearly don't like having to pay full price... but... Last I checked, the recording industry takes old songs... burns them to a 'new' CD and sells it at a 'new' price. It too apparently holds it's value through the years. Or do you believe that music is 'different'? Rush (Canadian band) had an album released in the late 70's called "All The World's A Stage". It was re-released in the late 90's. In the 70's I paid about $15 for the cassette tapes. The CD (labeled as remastered) retails for $14. It's the same product, made years ago... with a nifty 'remastered' label tossed on it... and same cost. That's insane!!! At least, according to you. :( There's nothing to state regarding your discussion of Nashville. You have your opinion based on your own microcosim... no one will convince you there's more to the world than what you want to see exists. :( Now... if you want to accuse me of doing something illegal... be very careful... because I take it serious and personal.At this point, I believe you owe me an apology for insinuating that I'm a thief... and yes, I'm serious. :(

It is very apparent that you are very easily offended. Why is it that when a flight-sim developer is compared to another industry (i.e., music industry) they do one of two things: Go silent, or go on the offense like their life depends on it?At what point did I accuse you of being a thief? Also, where did I accuse you of doing something illegal? Show me where (word for word) I accused or insinuated you specifically of being such. I want to see you quote me.It was not my intent to blanket all developers. Please show me where I said "all developers".Do not talk about an industry unless you really know how it works. If an album is truly remastered -- Do you have any idea of the amount of work it takes to re-master one song, let alone an entire album? No, it is not as easy as running it through Pro-Tools on a Mac as many believe. How many sound studios have you been to and watched engineers work? How many flight-sim add-ons made years ago (PMDG 737NG, LevelD for FS9, etc.) have been "re-mastered", or broken down and re-assembled which is what true re-mastering actually consits of in the music industry? The primary reason music (individual songs) retains it value unlike most other products is due to primarily one thing: Royalties. The royalty system in the music industry is quite complex to say the least. If a music artists (song-writer) royalties are not handled correctly by their attorney(s) with regard to copyrighting, they are screwed; the record label then just sits back and laughs all of the way to the bank.You stated that I do not like to pay full price for items -- That is true. I purchase gasoline, groceries, airline tickets, etc. where it is cheaper. I also go to discounted music stores so I can purchase music at a less cost rather than going to Barnes & Noble or Best Buy. Therefore in your eyes of reasoning I must be a real cheapskate.Why is it that we do not see flight-sim add-ons in stores where you can trade or sell video games as an example?If anyone who reads this post and completely disagrees with me, that is fine -- However please answer one question: If a developer shares their music that they legally purchased with their friends, is it legal in the developer's eyes for simmers to share their legally purchased flight-sim add-ons with their friends?brando

Why is it that we do not see flight-sim add-ons in stores where you can trade or sell video games as an example?If anyone who reads this post and completely disagrees with me, that is fine -- However please answer one question: If a developer shares their music that they legally purchased with their friends, is it legal in the developer's eyes for simmers to share their legally purchased flight-sim add-ons with their friends?brando

You don't directly accuse anyone. You imply, repeatedly. In fact, in your response to me... you did it again in your final "question".You can't "transfer" the license of an addon. Developers have a EULA that generally prohibits it.Your question assumes a developer does such a thing. There's no fact in evidence to support the claim, thus the question has no answer.

You don't directly accuse anyone. You imply, repeatedly. Response: You implied that I did accuse you. In fact, in your response to me... you did it again in your final "question". Response: Not one developer has ever responded when they are compared to other media.You can't "transfer" the license of an addon. Developers have a EULA that generally prohibits it.Your question assumes a developer does such a thing. Response: If I make an assumption as you imply, it is because that question has never been answered by a developer. There's no fact in evidence to support the claim, thus the question has no answer. Response: Technically your response gives a "subtle answer" to my question, or in your eyes a claim that I made.

My responses are above in italics.brando

My responses are above in italics.brando

The way you present the comparison requires that any developer responding admit to stealing. Perhaps that's why you're not getting a response?Here's your question:

However please answer one question: If a developer shares their music that they legally purchased with their friends, is it legal in the developer's eyes for simmers to share their legally purchased flight-sim add-ons with their friends?

You want a developer to respond to it. First the question shows the developer must be breaking the copyright of the music. If a developer doesn't share music... they can't answer the question. If they're not sharing music, but choose to respond... you can then turn around and imply inaccurate things about them. It's a classic "setup" question... and no one with a brain would respond to it.

The way you present the comparison requires that any developer responding admit to stealing. Perhaps that's why you're not getting a response?Here's your question:You want a developer to respond to it. First the question shows the developer must be breaking the copyright of the music. If a developer doesn't share music... they can't answer the question. If they're not sharing music, but choose to respond... you can then turn around and imply inaccurate things about them. It's a classic "setup" question... and no one with a brain would respond to it.

Right off the bat, you are using the word "steal", I am not -- I am using the word "share" in my question. Why are you turning the word "share" into "steal"?No, it is not a setup question. It is a simple question intended for anyone to answer, not just developers -- It is a question that could basically be answered by a simple, Yes, or, No. If developers ever come together and form a union, you should ask to be their union leader.There is nothing wrong with sharing music among friends. People in the music industry themselves do it all of the time. Song-writers even pull actual bars of music from other songs (example records where these songs exist: Goodbye Yellow Brick Road of John/Taupin, Money and Cigarettes of Clapton, the list goes on) which is perfectly legal, it is a process called "Sampling". If someone is writing songs or producing an album, you will see/hear conversations like, 'Hey man, go home and listen to this CD here, go to track "x", and let me know what you think so we can implement part of that sound into our song'. It is illegal however to share music for profit, or share it by P2P networks, etc. The same goes for movies as well.Based upon this back-and-forth exchange it is very easy to extrapolate one common theme of which I have alluded to previously: On the average, it seems that flight-sim developers can share other forms of media between friends/family for as long as they are not making a profit on it -- which is fine. However, when it comes to their media (flight-sim add-ons) that they produce, it seems that their rules are different than any other media -- All in the name, and under the auspicious, of the standard/blanket EULA.I take it by the lack of your response (correct me if I am wrong) to my experienced response concerning re-mastering albums, you now see that your argument of comparing re-mastering an old album to flight-sim add-ons cannot stand by itself. It seems that you only respond, or counter-argue, to statements I make where you think my belief or theory has a hole in it.Therefore the reason that I am not getting a response is because developers want it to be a one-way street with what they produce. They can share music, as an example of other media, all day long because those record companies make tons of money, and developers play the card of breaking even, just getting by, or going under.brando

An interesting topic went south somewhere.zzzzz

Right off the bat, you are using the word "steal", I am not -- I am using the word "share" in my question. Why are you turning the word "share" into "steal"?No, it is not a setup question. It is a simple question intended for anyone to answer, not just developers -- It is a question that could basically be answered by a simple, Yes, or, No. If developers ever come together and form a union, you should ask to be their union leader.There is nothing wrong with sharing music among friends. People in the music industry themselves do it all of the time. Song-writers even pull actual bars of music from other songs (example records where these songs exist: Goodbye Yellow Brick Road of John/Taupin, Money and Cigarettes of Clapton, the list goes on) which is perfectly legal, it is a process called "Sampling". If someone is writing songs or producing an album, you will see/hear conversations like, 'Hey man, go home and listen to this CD here, go to track "x", and let me know what you think so we can implement part of that sound into our song'. It is illegal however to share music for profit, or share it by P2P networks, etc. The same goes for movies as well.Based upon this back-and-forth exchange it is very easy to extrapolate one common theme of which I have alluded to previously: On the average, it seems that flight-sim developers can share other forms of media between friends/family for as long as they are not making a profit on it -- which is fine. However, when it comes to their media (flight-sim add-ons) that they produce, it seems that their rules are different than any other media -- All in the name, and under the auspicious, of the standard/blanket EULA.I take it by the lack of your response (correct me if I am wrong) to my experienced response concerning re-mastering albums, you now see that your argument of comparing re-mastering an old album to flight-sim add-ons cannot stand by itself. It seems that you only respond, or counter-argue, to statements I make where you think my belief or theory has a hole in it.Therefore the reason that I am not getting a response is because developers want it to be a one-way street with what they produce. They can share music, as an example of other media, all day long because those record companies make tons of money, and developers play the card of breaking even, just getting by, or going under.brando

I don't "share" music, I don't "steal" music. I don't do anything you seem to believe developers do by default with regards to music at all.However my work was pirated within 72hrs of it's release. Pirated. Stolen. Given away for free to those who wanted it at no cost.As for the remastering issue... to you it has value. To me, it's the exact same recording. See how that works?

An interesting topic went south somewhere.zzzzz

To stay on topic -- I think that developers thought the majority of simmers would flock to FSX quickly. Then they realized: Oh, FSX takes some new hardware that the average consumer cannot afford. Then MS made the "decision" to no longer make a real sim platform beyond FSX (correct me if I am wrong). Therefore if this "timeline" is correct, developers changed their minds on being platform exclusive. So if I am correct here, in assuming that MS will not make a real sim platform ever again, then developers should be the happiest people in the world. They can continue to make add-ons for FS9 & FSX, and while FS9 users slowly transition over to FSX, developers should be able to expand the envelope even further and continue to make some of the most amazing add-ons for flight-simming ever in the FSX environment.In a way, if what I said above is correct, it is almost as if MS is "handing over" the reigns to developers, that will one day really make a sim all it can be. At least I hope that is what happens.brando

I don't "share" music, I don't "steal" music. I don't do anything you seem to believe developers do by default with regards to music at all.However my work was pirated within 72hrs of it's release. Pirated. Stolen. Given away for free to those who wanted it at no cost.As for the remastering issue... to you it has value. To me, it's the exact same recording. See how that works?

I never said that developers did any of this by default, nor did I blanket them. I simply raised a simple question for anyone to respond to.Re-mastering an album is alot of work. Some people like the sound of a digitally re-mastered album on CD and pay dearly for it when it hits the shelves. Others rather just listen to an old LP because they enjoy the scratchy sound of it that they remembered hearing years ago.However, I now see why this is a sensitive issue for you -- Someone pirated your hard work in the matter of moments, and I am truly sorry that happened.In the music industry I am shocked if a new album is pirated 72 hours post-release, because it normally takes about 6 hours.If you really want to see piracy in the IT world on a grand scale, just compare the visual effects of Vista to Mac OS. The "good ole' boys" in Redmond, WA at it again.To help lower the piracy rate on add-ons, would piracy decline if developers took the extra effort of making it available on CD-ROM only? Also, if a developer lowered their price on an add-on they made years ago -- Would it lower the piracy rate by making old add-ons available at a lower cost? Just a couple of ideas.brando