You can add a tweak to make NO PRELOAD.

 

Worked for years with the NG, never had a problem loading the NG from the start.

 

From memory

[Main]DisablePreload=1

 

But this is the P3d forum  FSX....whats that? 

Hi Mark,

Bottom line is that FSL needs to run its business as it sees fit.

Right you are. And I as customer can decide about my purchases as I see fit. Lefteris mentioned "a certain Boeing" as an argument for FSL pricing - well, I don't buy PMDG airplanes anymore exactly because of their pricing model, and I will do the same with FSL. As a customer, I pay for the product that I will use, not for the work that went into it or the legal obligations of the manufacturer (both of which I cannot verify). Would you pay for a new iPhone the same price again, even if it would have more or less the same look and functionality as a 5-year old model? Just because Apple tells you there are new legal obligations and they worked hard to adapt the new model to the network of your new provider?

 

Setting the price for a product is a business decision. It seems that with cell phone apps some companies do very well even with extremely low prices, simply because their product then attracts a huge number of customers. This is possible because the cost of distributing software is very low. I understand that the potential customer base for a flight sim addon is much smaller than for, say, Angry Birds, so you certainly cannot sell an addon plane for $0.99. However, the higher you set the price, the more customers will opt out. And asking customers to pay the same price again for a product that has essentially the same functionality makes a product even less attractive. As you said - that's completely their decision.

 

Peter

Hi Mark,

Right you are. And I as customer can decide about my purchases as I see fit. Lefteris mentioned "a certain Boeing" as an argument for FSL pricing - well, I don't buy PMDG airplanes anymore exactly because of their pricing model, and I will do the same with FSL. As a customer, I pay for the product that I will use, not for the work that went into it or the legal obligations of the manufacturer (both of which I cannot verify). Would you pay for a new iPhone the same price again, even if it would have more or less the same look and functionality as a 5-year old model? Just because Apple tells you there are new legal obligations and they worked hard to adapt the new model to the network of your new provider?

 

Setting the price for a product is a business decision. It seems that with cell phone apps some companies do very well even with extremely low prices, simply because their product then attracts a huge number of customers. This is possible because the cost of distributing software is very low. I understand that the potential customer base for a flight sim addon is much smaller than for, say, Angry Birds, so you certainly cannot sell an addon plane for $0.99. However, the higher you set the price, the more customers will opt out. And asking customers to pay the same price again for a product that has essentially the same functionality makes a product even less attractive. As you said - that's completely their decision.

 

Peter

 

Totally agree, its very simple,  the company sets the price and the consumer decides if they want to buy.  I think in the Flight Sim community, due to our small size, companies offer explanations for things that you simply don't get from the likes of Apple.  Apply charges more because they can and will continue to do so until consumers stop buying.  In flightsim, particularly with aircraft the value to cost ratio is massive.  I cannot think of any other "entertainment" product or service where you get so many hours and years of use and enjoyment for the price.  It cost more money to take my family to see Star Wars and I can't even remember the plot.

Hi Mark,

Right you are. And I as customer can decide about my purchases as I see fit. Lefteris mentioned "a certain Boeing" as an argument for FSL pricing - well, I don't buy PMDG airplanes anymore exactly because of their pricing model, and I will do the same with FSL. As a customer, I pay for the product that I will use, not for the work that went into it or the legal obligations of the manufacturer (both of which I cannot verify). Would you pay for a new iPhone the same price again, even if it would have more or less the same look and functionality as a 5-year old model? Just because Apple tells you there are new legal obligations and they worked hard to adapt the new model to the network of your new provider?

 

Setting the price for a product is a business decision. It seems that with cell phone apps some companies do very well even with extremely low prices, simply because their product then attracts a huge number of customers. This is possible because the cost of distributing software is very low. I understand that the potential customer base for a flight sim addon is much smaller than for, say, Angry Birds, so you certainly cannot sell an addon plane for $0.99. However, the higher you set the price, the more customers will opt out. And asking customers to pay the same price again for a product that has essentially the same functionality makes a product even less attractive. As you said - that's completely their decision.

 

Peter

 

The iPhone you mention really costs the consumer upwards of $700 and almost $1000 for the top of the line, max memory model, buy since the cost is hidden in the two year carrier contracts, it doesn't affect sales at all. People will still buy what they want no matter the cost. 

People will still buy what they want no matter the cost. 

 

Exactly so what is the point of debating the pricing of flight sim addons.

I think it's rather sad to see some people criticising FSLabs about their pricing model. I do not believe that they (or any other reputable developers) try to rip people off because they think that they can get away with it. We (as customers) have absolutely no idea about the legal implications of selling P3D versions of aircraft addons. P3D is a licensed training product, not a piece of entertainment software for the gaming market. We can all whinge and moan until doomsday, but it isn't going to change anything. FSLabs need to do what is necessary to protect themselves from financial harm.

Setting the price for a product is a business decision. It seems that with cell phone apps some companies do very well even with extremely low prices, simply because their product then attracts a huge number of customers. This is possible because the cost of distributing software is very low. I understand that the potential customer base for a flight sim addon is much smaller than for, say, Angry Birds, so you certainly cannot sell an addon plane for $0.99. However, the higher you set the price, the more customers will opt out. And asking customers to pay the same price again for a product that has essentially the same functionality makes a product even less attractive. As you said - that's completely their decision.

 

Pricing is a very complex topic. If you study Business Administration there are entire classes dedicated to this topic. Most flight sim devs are very good programmers but they apparently have no clue about economics and proper price setting. They all take a cost plus approach and do not properly take into account demand curves (the only exception seems to be Aerosoft). But hey, you really can't blame them for it. They are techies, not business men.

Carlo - most of what you have written above is complete nonsense.

 

Perhaps the vendors who offer purely entertainment titles for Flight Simulation have a broader audience - but that doesn't imply that others who target a niche area of this small community, and therefore price their work appropriately, 'have no clue'.

 

You are correct that we do not price our products at a 'proper' price setting. Given the development time and costs that go into these high-end simulation titles, the 'correct' price point should be significantly higher.

Carlo - most of what you have written above is complete nonsense.

 

Believe me, I know what I am talking about as I'm a finance professor. But no need to discuss this further. I wish you all the best with your business decisions. After all, it's your business, not mine.

 

 

Perhaps the vendors who offer purely entertainment titles for Flight Simulation have a broader audience - but that doesn't imply that others who target a niche area of this small community, and therefore price their work appropriately, 'have no clue'.

 

This has nothing to do with the fact that you are targeting a niche within a niche market. It's all about maximizing profits.

 

And hey, as I'd love to have an in-depth simulation of the A320, I might even purchase the product at its weird pricing point.

Flight sim labs can charge what they want.

 

At the end of the day people will decide if they what to pay that price or not.

 

I will when it come's to the Bus. Is $xx or $xxx worth it to me?

 

I've come to my personally decision not to buy the Concord at that price because the VC is out dated by some way from 2016 standards. At another price point I might have thought "what the hell!"...but to me not at that price point. If the VC was upto current standards I would have bought it.

 

The Bus for me is a "really what to buy" but wait to the price comes out.

 

How long it takes to develop is flightsim labs problem not ours. PMDG take around 1.5-2 years and the pricers they charge are what imo it top price range. If Flight sim labs what to charge more because its taken them .....5 years   :blink:  then they well could price it out of range, but we will have to wait and see. I hope not.

 

PMDG is the bench mark and along with there price. How long its taken is not our problem.

I'm intrigued, Carlo...

 

As someone who has worked in this industry for twenty years, with market analysis data from previous titles to hand upon which our price points are calculated - I would very much like to know what a finance professor believes constitutes a 'weird pricing point'? Presumably, you feel that because a small number of people complain about the price in a small corner of the Internet (which, I might add, represents a very small portion of general sales) - developers should be adjusting their figures to make everyone happy?

 

Please don't take my post as being facetious - I am generally interested in your reply.

I'm sure the systems are amazing but anicent visuals are a deal killer for me. I was really excited for a new Concord but this is a let down. Some say systems is what makes immersion to me systems only go so far, visuals are what makes me feel like I'm really flying.

You can have great systems depth and great visuals (a certain 777 or 737 NG series)

 

 

As for the price, it's FSlabs choice to price it how they choose,in the end it's a of plane that is for a small market, inside the small market of FS itself so of course the price will be higher it's a matter of economics.

Carlo - most of what you have written above is complete nonsense.

 

Perhaps the vendors who offer purely entertainment titles for Flight Simulation have a broader audience - but that doesn't imply that others who target a niche area of this small community, and therefore price their work appropriately, 'have no clue'.

 

You are correct that we do not price our products at a 'proper' price setting. Given the development time and costs that go into these high-end simulation titles, the 'correct' price point should be significantly higher.

 

Well, Andrew, if you're basically admitting that you are not able, with this price to cover your fixed costs (let alone variable ones), then you should not say that Carlo is writing "complete nonsense". There is also a difference between value and cost. It is ultimately your business decisions, but don't take the high road here...

Greetings all,

I myself can't believe that there is no upgrade/discount for previous owners of the 1.2 outside of 365 days. The version number goes from 1.2 to 1.3 leading one to think that this is an update of the 1.2 version. I am a careful buyer of simulation products based on what I look for in an aircraft surrounding its flight model. I will pay for quality and I don't have a problem with the pricing. This is the first developer that I've purchased that does not have an upgrade/discount for previous owners. Someone also mentioned the iphone. With phones, I never pay full price, I always take the upgrade route. Even so, I won't upgrade if there isn't a significant amount of capability gained in the new model. Going from 1.2 to 1.3, i'm looking for capability instead of memory/flight model adjustment. Fortunately for me, I am a real world pilot and experience the joy of real flight in a Gulfstream 5/550 weekly. I take interest in flightsim to gain insight into other aircraft and to assist others in the flightsim world to understand real world flying. I paid full price plus download service the first time around. When I compare the two versions, I can't see enough reason to pay full price plus download service again for the update. I can say it's a real nice product and I love the novelty of flying the Concorde, this is why i paid for it the first time. I wish the developers the best of luck on their future endeavors, this is where i depart from the FSLabs path. As always, many will continue to support the company regardless of price/upgrades. Best of luck!

 

Rick

 

 

Carlo - most of what you have written above is complete nonsense.

+++++1 :clapping: