I am debating concepts, assumptions, and hypotheticals put out by payware developer supporters.I am not however naming any names, or atacking personally any posters here, unlike what you just did to me.I see a distinct difference.Am I to the point, yes. Do I hold someones words here to a high level, you betcha. But my points still stand. And to the casual observer or anyone else, I am not too concerned as to whether they think I am bitter or not.BTW - Fo rthose that have known me a long time, this has always been my style. Straight to the point, and I don't mince words too often.Please don't assume I am bitter, for IMHO, I am not. I'm actually in a great mood, and getting ready to head out to my son's Boy Scout Troop Meeting. Oh and dinner as well.I stated opinions, and responded to what some here have said on this topic. BTW - I sent you a forum message, you may want to check that. Regards,Joe

Got it and you may want to check yours as well:-)

He has been raising rates, but it is a balance between rasing rates, and keeping growth and inflation in check.As our economy continues to grow, increasing the rate slowly keeps that growth going at a reasoanble pace vs. stopping it altogether.There are many other reasons besides interest rates as to why our currency is behaving like it is, but it would take quite a while to reason all the nuances as to the why.Regards,Joe

>You're probably right. I just look at something like the ATR>and think what could possibly be added to it that would>justify a significant price increase? I mean how much more>detail could there be? Now, all bets are off for FS10 or>whatever the next iteration will be. I just can't imagine>cramming much more into FS9...OK...I may have an overactive imagination. But...how 'bout enhanced GPWS? How about programmable or random system failures or other emergencies, including a functional circuit breaker panel? How about weather radar integrated into the glass avionics like the real thing? How about TCAS-II with true resolution advisories? How about programmable initial conditions so that the sim could be started on a dogleg to final with all the systems spun up to practice approaches etc?Don't get me wrong...we're in great shape with add-ons like this parked in our virtual hangars...but there will be room for "mo-better-faster" for some time I think. It gives us something to live for... :-)CheersBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Washington, DC

Yea, I agree, Joe. It's certainly not a single thing. Actually, the economy is fairly decent here in OKC, but that doesn't help me much with all the cool stuff developed outside the U S of A.Aww, cr*p. I'm getting OT even further - Ciao.Best,Bill

>>I am debating concepts, assumptions, and hypotheticals....<

>Your analogies about Fly! III don't apply unless you talk about the >payware developers that produce for that series. We are not >talking about a non-product, we are talking about current >developers. My only refrence to Fly was in regards ot >the >community which still supports it, that is it. You missed the point.My analogy regarding FLY! was in direct response to your disagreement that MSFS units sales were close to a million.TRI estimated that's what it would cost. Since they had two previous FLY! releases, they'd have a good idea what it would have costed to produce ver III. From that we can determine FLY! being a fraction of the FS Market that FS2004 unit sales could indeed possibly approach 1 million.Thus the MSFS price is a bargain due to high sales volume, and payware add-ons prices should not be judged against the bargain price of the 'full simulator'.>To me, it is an integrity issue, which is why I responded to you >line by line. I think you understand where I am coming from, and I >appreciate your position, but it does not change my opinion that >unless evidence is presented, I have no reason to believe what some >say here.But again you deny MSFS could have sales approaching 1 million units without proof. Which means you accept sales are considerably less than that number I quoted.If we are to accept your disagreement, you have in effect proven the point even further that the add-on market is indeed very small with small profit margins.You seem to want to hold out for official sales figures from the developers when if you just do the math on the market size its obvious the add-on market is relatively small.Regards.Ernie.

Er Joe,Sorry mate but your figures are all wrong. So wrong that any 3rd party developer getting within even a tenth of the sales you are contemplating would consider themselves the luckiest developer on earth.Ian P has it about right. The average developer is VERY lucky to achieve more than a couple of thousand sales on a given addon. In the last year you could diminish that figure even more due to a lot of competition and a high number of addons jockeying for position.Sorry, but you are talking rubbish. No harm meant. Rob Young

Ive totally stoped buying..Last thing I bought was PSS A340 because it was such a good deal.. I think it was about 10-15$.I used to buy alot but its just so expensive

>Ernie, I fully appreciate your point in sales volume. But>you have to ask.... why is there such a huge disproportion? >Is it marketing? They have cut the price of the sim several>times since it was released. I would think that if MS sold a>million copies of FS then shouldn't you be able to attract at>least a quarter of those customers to enhance their simulator>experience.Ok a quarter of those customers is 250,000. The average user is only buying 5 or 6 add-on packages a year. Making the market sizeapprox 1,500,000 units.Divide that by the approx 600 add-on titles out there, and that only works out to an average of 2500 units per title.Obviously some will sell much more than 2500, especially the high quality Aircraft add-ons but some will undoubtly sell less than 1000 units.With the time effort , complexity , and money it takes to produce high quality add-ons for FS2004 to the quality people expect/demand now. A $10 price just would not be worth it for 2500 units, or even 5000 units. Maybe ok for a single developer who put it together in a few of months. I think any more effort than that you have to consider making the price higher to make it worth all the the effort.>By the way, your FSBuild is an add on that I own and enjoy and i've >recommended it many times.Thanks very much.Regards.Ernie.

Well,the only problem with your argumentation is: Ernie is actually selling a product. At least he will know about his sales figures. I have a lot of insight into sales figures for FS addons as well, and his numbers sound very reasonable. Which leads to the question: Do you trust his figures?*ThrowingTheBallBackIntoYourCourt* :).Yours,Martin Georg/EDDFVACC-SAG PR & Events Coordinator *** mailto:[email protected]http://vatsim.pilotmedia.fi/statusindicato...r=SAG01&a=a.jpg

Avsim does stop blatant advertising.Users can show off their addons, manufacturers cannot.Yes, some addon creators like to get public praise in addition to payment.That's only human IMO.I fully agree that demanding it and whining when it's not given is poor taste. Whether the person guilty of that is releasing his products commercially or for free makes no difference to me, it's childish behaviour.I think a good way to get more people to make real products instead of just pumping out loads of repaints, Afcad files and AI flightplans would be to set strict quality standards that have to be met and/or to not upload more than one of those per submitter per week.I've seen days seeing an entire airline's fleet of 737s being uploaded by a single person, the only difference being the tail number. Clearly that person is after only 1 thing: getting his name high in the list of most productive submitter.If such things weren't possible maybe some of them would seek to gain fame by actually making something worthwhile like a quality new aircraft or scenery package.Helping them by providing a forum where people can link up sounds like a good idea indeed.

Joe sounds like the small kid who can no longer afford to buy his candy now that the store has had to raise prices because of inflation and starts whining "it's not fair. Mummy won't give me more pocket money so you cannot make my candy more expensive"...

Seems to me that according to you no single argument can ever work out unless that argument supports your point of view (for which you provide no evidence whatsoever while you do keep screaming that people provide hard evidence for theirs...).

You should be happy that most addon developers will provide you with one (and sometimes 2) free upgrades (yes, they're product upgrades, not patches as they're often mistakenly called even by those developers who usually don't originate in the software industry but picked up the incorrect use of the term from other end users) to work in the next version of FS.In most other environments you'd likely have to pay big money (often 50% or more of the original purchase price) for such an upgrade.