[columbo]

Good deal, I think I'll buy this.

When it comes to buying games or apps me or our kids the "Unlock All" option is more than just a nice to have, it's a necessity. For me personally it doesn't have to do with convenience or perceived value: Rather it's because I feel that I am not buying into a scam.

If I see item (X) on the market for "Free" + in-app purchases I'm flat out not going to spend any time on it. You offer the same (X) for $5-$20 with everything unlocked and no gimmicky BS sales tactics then I'll pick it up without hesitation.

There are too many applications out there designed to be time and money sinks. The focus tends to be on giving the user just enough and then stalling until they spend more money. It's a dirty, scummy industry.

If you're selling a product (game, book, series, otherwise) and feel it can stand on its own merits then offer a fair price for the complete item with no strings and I'll most likely purchase it.

[Pxtl]

Yup. Especially if you're handing the app off to somebody who's just learning to read - even if the tablet is locked-down, the kid will be frustrated and need help if they get trapped in the "unlock" content while they were tapping around randomly and exploring the app.

I'm disappointed so few app developers don't offer a "I just want to pay for this so you can stop marketing at me" option. Free/Freemium/pay-up-front are not mutually exclusive revenue streams for an app, release with multiple revenue strategies.

[msacca]

We actually released a version of the app that was $2.99 upfront with no in-app purchases to test which model worked better for us.

The $2.99 version netted us less than $20 in the lifetime of the application. It never was ranked anywhere in the app store and thus was virtually DOA.

I agree it would be great to charge upfront - We didn't have a budget to market these applications to them to show them the value before they reach the store which would be essential in that business model. The freemium model was our only way to leverage the rankings in the store and give parents the ability to see the value in the application before buying.

[Pxtl]

That's surprising to me, as a user. On Android I often search for apps, find the "free" one, read all the reviews and (if it has positive reviews) I seek out the "pro" version and buy that without ever having installed the "free" version. That is, I know the "free" version will have the top placement and the good user-feedback info so that's the one I can quickly get info about, but I skip the middle-step of installing the "free" one and move straight to the pay-up-front thing.

I guess my workflow is unusual.

[gdilla]

It's really because of Apple and their rules. Apple discourages Free and Pro versions of the same app (they may have loosened that up recently, but at one time, in an effort to combat app clutter and promote IAP, they would reject you). On iOS, there is no real way to try-and-buy without Freemium. At least in Android, and I think WP, you can get a refund within a certain time frame. Couple this with users generally seeking out free or super cheap apps and treating them as fairly disposable, just having a premium app for an upfront price, not being an established known brand, is basically a death wish.

[Pxtl]

Ah. Yes, WP actually has built-in support for offering both a "try" and "buy" version of each app, allowing two apps to coexist as the same entry... but in practice, most follow the "free" and "pro" naming-convention and offer two separate apps.

I hadn't realized that Apple's strict curating prevented these patterns.

[MBCook]

You also can't return an app in iOS. If there is something grossly wrong you might be able to talk support into it, but in general that $5 purchase is final. I've heard that as a popular reason for the IAP model after people stopped buying apps after buying real duds for real money.

[iand]

I do this exact same thing

[yaeger]

>If you're selling a product (game, book, series, otherwise) and feel it can stand on its own merits then offer a fair price for the complete item with no strings and I'll most likely purchase it.

Yes. But please don't make it as an in-app-purchase. Why? Well, I maybe want to set up a new phone as brand new without going through a backup. And then, I would like to get the entire app I bought back on my phone. And I would be out of luck if by chance that app is no longer offered in the app store. I might still have the app on my computer that I can sync with my phone. But in order for the in app purchase to work, I am pretty sure the app would still need to be in the app store as well.

So, give me all the content directly in the app so I am in control of everything. IAP purchases are still a red flag for me. Even if it comes as an "unlock all" button. I may put too much emphasis on this, but I really don't want to be in a situation where I payed good money for IAPs only to find that some years don the line, I am unable to reclaim them because either the app doesn't exist anymore or the developer left he app store altogether.

[frogpelt]

Flipside: Not charging for the app allows the user to try the app without buying it.

If the content is worth paying for the user can choose how much to "invest" in it even though, generally, the in-app purchase model is going to cost way more than up-front purchase.

[r00fus]

There's "added content/DLC", then there's "freemium". My hint: look for tokens/credits for purchase. If you see that, avoid the app. I could love the concept or see it as great for my kids but as soon as I'm "buying tokens" I realize it's been engineered to get my money and not deliver a solid product for a fixed price.

The "added content/DLC" model works well for me - I love games/apps like Carcasonne, Ascension, or 123 Color where you buy expansions or additional patterns. But again, most of these types of apps aren't free to begin with.