app store pricing
Latest
Voices that Matter iPhone: App Store prices
Here's just a quick shot from Jeffrey Hughes' lunchtime presentation on marketing iPhone apps here at this weekend's Voices that Matter iPhone developers' conference here in Seattle. Because the presentation ran a little long, he had to hurry through his planned section on pricing, but he did share these interesting figures, culled from 148Apps.biz. The average non-game app price in the iPhone store right now is actually over US$3. But the average game price, $1.39 (driven way down by the many 99 cent games available) actually brings the overall app price down another 20 cents or so, putting the total at just $2.79. That might seem low (especially if you're an app developer who has worked a lot on what you think is a quality app). But given all the 99 cent and free apps out there, it actually seems somewhat higher than I expected. And apparently this includes iPad apps, too, many of which have settled down at $9.99. Interesting stat to see.
Dev raises price of $3 app to $40 just to spite customers
I like the way Schiau Studios thinks -- when customers complained about the price of their $2.99US App Store game Alchemize, they raised the price up to $39.99. Over on the TouchArcade forums, they make their case: most devs, they say, when faced with complaints about price, will just lower their price even though their software is already cheap. So they wanted to buck the trend, and instead raised it up to almost $40 (which, incidentally, is slightly more than what you might pay for a handheld console game). Lest you simply complain that they were greedy, they say they were only out to make a point: everyone who purchased the game at the higher price point will have all of their money go to charity, and now that the game's back at the $2.99 price point, 33% of all the profits to be gained will go to the same charity. Regardless of whether the game's any good or not, we like their thinking. Can we all agree to stop griping about price points? I've actually heard this come up lately on a comedy podcast of all places -- when Chicago broadcasting legend Steve Dahl (and one of my favorites) started up a podcast about a month ago, and introduced an app to go along with it. Steve was inundated with comments complaining about the $2.99 price, which he responded to with a great argument on the show: he's put a lot of money into the app and the show behind it, and if you're already a fan of his, paying less than the cost of a cup of Starbucks should not even be an issue. Sure, when the App Store first started up, it was the Wild West -- both prices and quality were all over the place. But at this point, Apple's review system has more or less settled down, and blogs like ours are full of recommendations, with enough free apps to last any rabid app user most of their iPhone time. If you have any interest in an app at all, a couple of bucks shouldn't be enough to give you pause -- either pick it up and make sure the dev gets their due (small as that may be), or move on to find an app you'd rather buy.
Updating doesn't help your iPhone app, but price drops do
Here are two different insights from Pocket Gamer about how developers can grow the profile of their iPhone apps. The first comes to us from the wisdom of Peggle, that game that I just can't stop playing. Apparently, they've coined the term "Peggling," which means lowering the price of your app, and seeing a huge benefit from it. Whenever a game drops its price down to 99 cents, much as Peggle did soon after release, it sees a significant bump in the charts. I'm sure there are many other factors at play here -- Peggle was a great game, so you can't sell more of a crappy game just by selling it for cheaper, and I saw a lot of Twitter and blog attention when the price dropped, so it pays to have people watching the price in the first place. But under the right circumstances, dropping the price can do a lot for a game that's already selling pretty well.But an update, apparently, won't. That's what the makers of Zen Bound told Pocket Gamer -- they say that when they released an update with new levels and new features, it didn't make a difference in their sale numbers at all. Games like Pocket God have made a reputation for themselves by providing regular and solid updates, and certainly it seems like those updates have at least spurred sales, if not made them blow up, but the Zen Bound guys say that singular updates on major products probably won't kick sales into gear.Interesting. We're at least a few generations into App Store sales at this point, and we're started to see trends and consumer behavior in better relief; developers are getting better and better ideas every day about how to price and service their apps and customers.
Would Blackberry's price minimum ensure a quality App Store?
Here's an interesting idea for the App Store. Gizmodo posts that the new Blackberry "App World" has set a minimum price on its apps, asking no less than $2.99 for whatever you buy in there. At first glance, that's pretty rough -- there are a lot of free apps on the App Store right now that we wouldn't pay 99 cents for, much less $2.99. But then again, Gizmodo is willing to at least suggest the benefit of the doubt: maybe it's done on purpose, to get us past the scourge of the many fart and other useless apps populating the App Store. Maybe if every app is sold for $3 or more, they'll end up all being worth that much, too.But we have to agree with Gizmodo's conclusion, too: while it would be nice if every app on the store was worth more than $3, there are definitely a few apps out there that are worth having the lower (and free) prices for. And to add to that, it's hard to believe that, even at $3, every app would strive to live up to that price -- most likely what will happen is that you'll end up with just as much crap on the Blackberry's store, except that you'll be paying $2 more for it.Still, it's an idea. If Apple did a little price tweaking, is it possible that they could ensure a little more quality to what shows up on the store? Or, in the case of the junk that's on there now, will we just end up with higher-priced junk?
iPhone is dominating independent gaming
Our friends at Joystiq make a very insightful and very telling discovery: the iPhone more or less owns the finalist list for the 2009 Independent Games Festival Mobile category. 11 of the 14 contestants aren't on the Nintendo DS or PSP -- they're built and played on the iPhone and the iPod touch. The popular Fieldrunners and Igloo Games' Dizzy Bee are standouts, but even innovative games like Galcon and the pseudogame experience Ruben and Lullaby are being honored with nods.Very, very telling -- the relatively low cost of entry into the App Store and the versatility of Apple's SDK makes the iPhone/iPod touch a dream platform for independent game developers, and clearly, even with less than a year of development time, Apple's handheld is making a big splash in the industry. Sure, there's still a few pricing hiccups that need to be worked out to get bigger developers on board in a big way, but for smaller and single person independent game developers, there's never been a better platform on which to make and market your games.
Stats: 99 cent apps aren't selling any better
This is interesting: the prevailing argument about App Store pricing seems to be that developers are rushing down to 99 cents because apps priced there sell better (and developers say they can't fund really great apps priced there). But Mobile Orchard did a little number crunching, and their conclusion upends the whole premise: 99 cent apps don't sell any better than their more expensive counterparts. They plotted each app's popularity against its price, and while there are a few 99 cent apps out there selling better than any higher-priced app, the only real way to make the app "sell" better is to give it away for free. Above $0, price doesn't really matter than much in terms of popularity.You could argue that Apple's 0 to 1 popularity scale doesn't tell us much (we're not looking at actual sales here, just a number Apple has given to each app in terms of downloads), but Mobile Orchard's conclusion makes sense, in a strange way: free apps, we know, are much more popular than any paid apps, and if people are willing to pay 99 cents, why wouldn't they be willing to pay more? Why should a 99 cent app sell better than an app of equal usability that costs $1.99? It shouldn't, and according to this data, it doesn't.Very interesting. There is an exception -- in the Entertainment category, 99 cent apps do sell markedly better than the apps above them (Games, also, as you can see above, seem a little stronger in the 99 cent bar). But in the Business and Productivity categories, higher-priced apps actually sell better than their cheaper counterparts. People will pay what your app is worth, whether that's $1, $10, or even higher. The problem may be getting people to understand the app's worth in the first place (and that's where something like an App Store trial system might work), but Mobile Orchard's data says that price isn't a factor in an app's sales.Thanks, Dan!
