CS767 announced

[BrianW 124]

Isn't the base pack a 300ER?  Why would they release a JT9D for an airframe that doesn't use that engine? 

[Steve Dra 7,573]

6 minutes ago, thibodba57 said:

In that customers defense I think he implying CS needs to step up and do better.  Not that they do stand for CS but rather should. 

Hehe...I love implying things.....no wait....its CS who loves to do that. 🙂   They implied in the beginning that we could expect all the variants for free after paying $99.76 for the base model.  Of course...that was only to hook people into giving them their cash infusion before they dropped the real plans of their "Expansion" plans.

Customer: "I want my money back...I had no idea you were going to make me buy a freighter I don't want to get the GE engine I do want"

CS: "let me forward your request to our refund department, they will process your claim shortly"....Do I really need to provide a CS-speak conversion here...or can you guys figure out what this really means? 🤣

Customer: "Thank you CS....Even though I won't be owning your 767, I appreciate all you do for us"

[thibodba57 462]

12 minutes ago, BrianW said:

Isn't the base pack a 300ER?  Why would they release a JT9D for an airframe that doesn't use that engine? 

Same reason they want to release the -200ER with an Engine variant no one got.  The RR.  They have to PUSH people to purchase an expansion they would never have bothered with.

It would be like PMDG releasing the 777-200ER and offer you the LR only on the basis if you purchase the 777-300ER to get access to the engine variant.  Even though you have no desire for the -300ER you have to get it to get that engine.  Except this is actually worse than that example because 1. I doubt they'll truly model the engine performance variations. 2. There actually a lot more differences in the 777-200ER vs 777-200LR.  

[thibodba57 462]

18 minutes ago, Steve Dra said:

CS: "let me forward your request to our refund department, they will process your claim shortly"....Do I really need to provide a CS-speak conversion here...or can you guys figure out what this really means? 🤣

I'm sure Steve isn't trying to imply you can maybe get a refund from CS. But just in case anyone thinks you CAN get a refund so they'll just give it shot.  There are no refunds at CS.  

https://captainsim.com/purchase/index.html

[micstatic 4,299]

just curious.  Does anybody have breakdowns by airplanes sold of each engine type?  In the real world. 

[Steve Dra 7,573]

2 minutes ago, BrianW said:

Isn't the base pack a 300ER?  Why would they release a JT9D for an airframe that doesn't use that engine? 

Here's the plan...listen carefully...because this is their shell game at its finest.....

The base pack right now is $99.76.

When they try to justify the release price of $134...and people will gasp and demand to know what "justifies" the increased cost as nothing seems to be different than the "beta" version?

CS response: Well we're giving you a whole new engine type...so that is the reason.

See what they did there?  Brilliant...absolutely brilliant.

[regis9 3,999]

This gets crazier with every development. 

[themasterWookie 17]

5 minutes ago, Steve Dra said:

Here's the plan...listen carefully...because this is their shell game at its finest.....

The base pack right now is $99.76.

When they try to justify the release price of $134...and people will gasp and demand to know what "justifies" the increased cost as nothing seems to be different than the "beta" version?

CS response: Well we're giving you a whole new engine type...so that is the reason.

See what they did there?  Brilliant...absolutely brilliant.

Hey Steve, 

I'm SteamingSpoon, one of the people whose messages you screenshotted from the CS forum earlier. At this point I've realized it's nothing but futile to try and bring their habitual lies and false advertising to their attention on their forum. After all, it is their forum and they have the power to control what is said and not said on there. This in itself speaks to their affinity with censorship and suppressing any form of criticism that calls them out on their obvious lies and false advertising. However, seeing everything they're trying to get away with now, this censorship is probably the least of their crimes. 

I'm still in disbelief as to how people can fall for their pricing and marketing tactics. When they confirmed that there would be no specific engine expansions, I'm sure that led a lot of their customers to believe that they would be included at no extra cost as an update to the base pack sometime in the future. Seeing as how the 757 did include specific engine expansions this probably came as good news to a large portion of their customer base; maybe even as a much needed respite from their exorbitantly scammy pricing strategies. But lo and behold, there are no engine expansions, but variant expansions which include the engines. They're still locked behind a paywall.

All in all, this means, and I can say this without any doubt whatsoever, that many customers ended up paying for a product they thought they'd receive at no extra cost in the future. CS intentionally dodged questions from concerned customers on their forums, keeping everyone in the dark up until now. I'm no lawyer, but this probably comes close to false advertising and misleading marketing territory. I can't help but feel bad for all those unsuspecting customers who probably thought they'd be receiving free expansions. I'm not sure if CS has any refund policy but I'm suspecting that they probably do, given they announced their expansion plans at a later enough date from their initial 'no engine expansions' announcement, allowing enough time for potential customers to be baited into their scheme. 

As someone else on here said, I'm speechless. Simply at a loss for words as to how a developer can get away with this in this day and age. A lot of companies before have gotten away with sketchy practices, but nothing even comes close to this (maybe with the exception of the FSL malware fiasco, but at least they apologized and removed it). I wish we could do something about this, but as you said before, this community simply isn't united enough to take a collective stand and boycott CS. People just want a 767 in their sims, and to a large majority of them a pretty looking exterior model is enough to justify spending any amount of money on it. 

I'm trying to get in touch with a member of the FSElite editorial team at the moment and can only hope a major source of Flightsim media such as them publishes some sort of opinion or even news piece bringing CS's practices to light. Till that happens, we can only hope. 

Edited April 30, 2020 by themasterWookie

[Steve Dra 7,573]

2 minutes ago, themasterWookie said:

Hey Steve, 

 

I'm SteamingSpoon, one of the people whose messages you screenshotted from the CS forum earlier. At this point I've realized it's nothing but futile to try and bring their habitual lies and false advertising to their attention on their forum. After all, it is their forum and they have the power to control what is said and not said on there. This in itself speaks to their affinity with censorship and suppressing any form of criticism that calls them out on their obvious lies and false advertising. However, seeing everything they're trying to get away with now, this censorship is probably the least of their crimes. 

 

I'm still in disbelief as to how people can fall for their pricing and marketing tactics. When they confirmed that there would be no specific engine expansions, I'm sure that led a lot of their customers to believe that they would be included at no extra cost as an update to the base pack sometime in the future. Seeing as how the 757 did include specific engine expansions this probably came as good news to a large portion of their customer base; maybe even as a much needed respite from their exorbitantly scammy pricing strategies. But lo and behold, there are no engine expansions, but variant expansions which include the engines. They're still locked behind a paywall.

All in all, this means, and I can say this without any doubt whatsoever, that many customers ended up paying for a product they thought they'd receive at no extra cost in the future. CS intentionally dodged questions from concerned customers on their forums, keeping everyone in the dark up until now. I'm no lawyer, but this probably comes close to false advertising and misleading marketing territory. I can't help but feel bad for all those unsuspecting customers who probably thought they'd be receiving free expansions. I'm not sure if CS has any refund policy but I'm suspecting that if they do given they announced their expansion plans at a significantly later enough date from their initial 'no engine expansions' announcements, allowing enough time for potential customers to be baited into their scheme. 

As someone else on here said, I'm speechless. Simply at a loss for words as to how a developer can get away with this in this day and age. A lot of companies before have gotten away with sketchy practices, but nothing even comes close to this (maybe with the exception of the FSL malware fiasco, but at least they apologized and removed it). I wish we could do something about this, but as you said before, this community simply isn't united enough to take a collective stand and boycott CS. People just want a 767 in their sims, and to a large majority of them a pretty looking exterior model is enough to justify spending any amount of money on it. 

I'm trying to get in touch with a member of the FSElite editorial team at the moment and can only hope a major source of Flightsim media such as them publishes some sort of opinion or even news piece bringing CS's practices to light. Till that happens, we can only hope. 

RESPECT BROTHER!

I've been sniping your posts over there because it seemed you had a clear vision of what they were trying to pull (Wait...what's this trying business...they DID pull this!)

If you saw my post where you saw the screen I posted of my start date with CS way back in 2007, you know I've seen a lot from them over the years (decades) and have grown more dismayed at how they can keep duping customers without our community standing together and putting a stop to it. 

I can only hope this is the proverbial straw that breaks the flightsimming community's back and we see a sandstorm the likes of what we've read in the bible in the Sodom and Gomorrah story and it consumes the the pestilent scourge that is CS (A little melodramatic there huh?) 🙂  Thought its appropriate though

 

 

[HighTowers 1,434]

CS seems to be running a clown show. Supporters and even negative press brings attention and curiosity. This would all get solved very fast with strong competition. Sadly there is no other on the horizon thus the taking advantage of the situation with such poor business practices and simmers accepting the inevitable.  Hard to challenge when you see so many screenshots of the CS767 on FB and the like. 

[sharksfan166269 3]

This whole situation is quite upsetting, was really looking forward to a 767, but I just cannot justify a 100 dollar price tag. I may be wrong here, but I'm seeing many people sharing this opinion, I'm sure if they had lowered the price, they'd have gotten way more sales and thus more profit, which I'm assuming is what they want, right?

[micstatic 4,299]

they appear to have doubled down on the wrong side of this thing.  I was willing to overlook price if the reviews were stellar.  But they aren't. 

[Boomer 1,619]

The youtube streamers are the worst with their unwarranted and naive (intentionally misleading?) praise for this substandard product.

Edited April 30, 2020 by Boomer

[thibodba57 462]

29 minutes ago, themasterWookie said:

I'm not sure if CS has any refund policy but I'm suspecting that they probably do, given they announced their expansion plans at a later enough date from their initial 'no engine expansions' announcement, allowing enough time for potential customers to be baited into their scheme. 

Please reference my earlier post.  https://captainsim.com/purchase/index.html No refund.  But it would be great if enough people contacted their CC holders and had the charged declined as it wasn't the advertised product.

[Boomer 1,619]

Just now, thibodba57 said:

But it would be great if enough people contacted their CC holders and had the charged declined as it wasn't the advertised product.

Oh excellent idea, brother!