Topic: MC Pricing (Read 11191 times)

JimH · « **on:** April 16, 2009, 06:16:22 pm »

We're thinking of increasing the price for MC. I'd appreciate hearing your thoughts about what the right price level should be.

Thanks,

Jim

jack wallstreet · « **Reply #1 on:** April 16, 2009, 10:40:33 pm »

For casual users, a price increase may not be productive as from their viewpoint, MC may not offer much extra.

For serious users, those who have more sophisticated needs, MC is without equal. These people, including me, are seeing an incredible bargain.

You could consider making MC have separate levels of functionality and marketing that way.

You alreaedy have a free version.

So.... all that being said, I will arbitrarily suggest that a $15 to $20 price increase might work. That probably takes it out of the range of those who really don't need the features - and you'll lose those. But, you won't lose those who need or very much value the features, which I would guess is most of us.

However, you won't get new users, except those that need the features and you'd need to find a way to attract those to unique features and capabilities.

glynor · « **Reply #2 on:** April 17, 2009, 12:15:08 am »

I feel like that would eliminate most of the people I know, personally, from considering it as an iTunes replacement.

If you do increase it, I think you'd need to target much more of a "Pro" audience with it. But to target a Pro audience with a multimedia application of this sort, I think you'd also need to add some "pro" features:

true multi-user, networked database (multiple read/write copies on a network all with access to a centralized database)
auto-populating tags, including the previously discussed movie/TV auto-tagging, but also facial recognition for images, sidecar file tagging, and auto-filling from filename/directory path on import.
a built-in, easy to use, well-supported Program Guide for the TV component.
and most importantly, cross-platform support.

The professional "multimedia" world has long been, and is even more so right now, an extremely Mac-friendly world (to say the least). Walk into any music studio, graphic design house, or movie production house and see what they're using. Sure, you can find examples here and there that are Windows-centric, but Apple certainly has a large presence there, and much greater than the "general public" audience of iTunes-competitor-class software.

I feel like MC is already borderline in that "non-pro, consumer" class. The best target for it would really be $20-$30. Much more than that and you really start to push potential customers away. But the same doesn't hold true at all for a pro application. The exact, current features of MC with many (or all) of the above additions would be a bargain to many pro-users and pro-sumers at even a $79-$149 price point.

That doesn't mean you can't do it. That doesn't even mean I'd, frankly, discourage it (I'd happily pay quite a bit more for that handful of things). Just do it with eyes wide open. With a higher price comes additional responsibilities to earn it going forward.

Daydream · « **Reply #3 on:** April 17, 2009, 01:52:39 am »

My simple math tells me that, in the realm of paid software, an audio player + video player + database engine + media center (10ft interface) + portable devices management + picture management + various online services +++ whatever I won't keep on adding, makes way more than the current price tag for MC.

So, for the people in the knowing $10-20 more would make sense, with the current set of features. It's unclear though who are these people, who are we

Masters of more than one thing, who (at least subliminally) recognized MC as being a unique creation, maybe with a unique market. Which brings me to a question that I long delayed asking: do you feel the level of exposure for MC is where it should be? Because I can't find a word about it in certain places where it should be.

rjm · « **Reply #4 on:** April 17, 2009, 02:12:53 am »

I checked a few other prices...
Beyond TV $100
WinDVD $80
ACDSee $80 (home) $130 (pro)
ThumbsPlus Pro $90
Nero $80

MC does a lot more than all of these.

I think $80 feels about right.

)p( · « **Reply #5 on:** April 17, 2009, 03:06:23 am »

I think all of those are way overpriced.

To be honest I felt the price was just right for me to give it a serious go and commitment. Much more and I might not have bothered after a few days using the trial. The main attraction of mc is the combination of a better itunes (standard view) and mce (theaterview) in one app. I am not so sure as the others here that at a higher price point you wont put off new users especially in these for many difficult economic times. Going to a pro audience like Glyner suggests could be possible but would take a big investment from jriver and also would need the setup of a whole new way of customer support imho.

peter

Mr ChriZ · « **Reply #6 on:** April 17, 2009, 03:14:37 am »

Although I believe MC is probably worth much more than $40, I don't believe people would pay much more than that.
Especially in a recession. If it was more than that I wouldn't have bought it originally.
There's too much fairly good free stuff out there, even if it isn't as complete as MC.

Just for reference the software we sell we have different packages.
Certain features on the Lite packages are greyed out but still clickable.
When you click on them it brings up a web page extoling the virtues of upgrading to a more complete package.
If these iritate you, then you can hide them.

Rather than increasing the price I could see a market for the following:
Media Jukebox : Free Audio Player
Media Center Lite: $30 - This would not have Theater View, or Television Features - but adds Video
Media Center Image: $40 - Includes Imaging tools - Imaging tools would needs some polishing...
Media Center Theater: $60 - Adds Television / Theater Ability

Media Center Complete: $80 Combines Images and Theater View.

Free Trial would be Media Center Complete

rick.ca · « **Reply #7 on:** April 17, 2009, 04:18:53 am »

Ah, the joys of running a business. There's no question, among those inclined to respond, MC is a bargain at $99. But it would be pointless to sell 10,000 units at $99 if the alternative is to sell a million at $9.95. It's important that price match a positive perception of the product. As glynor seems to be saying, that positive perception in MC's case is probably it's the best pro-sumer-like product available. If it's priced too high, it's likely to be shunned by what could be it's biggest market. Most of those sales would be lost not because the price is too high, but because the price supports the perception the product is too much for the buyer's needs. It's much more important the price matches potential buyers' perception of what they need, rather than what committed users believe it's "worth." This is why many software products have a "pro" version. It allows purchasers of the regular version to believe they are foregoing features they really don't need—and reinforces the idea they are getting good value for their money.

In today's economy, a product that can help people reduce their overall entertainment budget (by supporting the "cocooning" phenomenon) should do well—if priced right. This is a good fit with the pro-sumer nature of the product. Consumers are willing to pay more for something they might perceive as being feature-rich and/or "over their head"—as long as it holds the promise of the desired result. As Daydream suggests, it also seems clear MC needs better market penetration. Perhaps there will be opportunity at the higher end of the market (e.g., for a "pro" version), but you probably need to broaden the base first.

The right price level? Probably more than it is now. Less than $100. A lot less, without better marketing to make the case.

Frobozz · « **Reply #8 on:** April 17, 2009, 04:52:48 am »

Splitting it into two versions would make a price increase easier for those of us using it primarily for audio and basic video. I use it almost exclusively for audio and some video. I have never even touched the TV and theater features. I'm already a paid user so I'm good for upgrade prices on future versions. But a new user who uses MC like I do would find it harder to justify a higher price.

Media Center Basic - audio, pictures and video maybe include DVD playback
Media Center Professional - all the features with TV and theater

I know making two versions makes development more difficult.

darichman · « **Reply #9 on:** April 17, 2009, 06:27:20 am »

I would pay up to $100. The casual user or the "potentially interested" user might hesitate a little bit at that though.

Maybe a small price increase ($5-$10) might increase your returns slightly without scaring off too many potential buyers?

gappie · « **Reply #10 on:** April 17, 2009, 06:58:22 am »

i think mc is worth more than it costs. not only is it cheap, but its also possible to insall it on a few machines in your household within the same licence.
but i dont know how potential buyers will react. sometimes only a higher price can make software look more serious.

gab

AoXoMoXoA · « **Reply #11 on:** April 17, 2009, 07:02:35 am »

Quote from: darichman on April 17, 2009, 06:27:20 am

I would pay up to $100.

I would not. Unless that included updates.

(actually I have paid over $100 so far including updates since MC9)

DiiPii · « **Reply #12 on:** April 17, 2009, 07:36:46 am »

just my 10cents...but for me price isn't the most important factor if the product meets my needs and there are no other clear competitors. That being said, I think $100 would have been my ceiling. I would also note that I held off upgrading to MC13 until it offered something I actually wanted...at which point the upgrade price became a negligible factor even though it was only a tiny feature.

For any customer that is marginal, any price increase is too much. Everyone seems to want somtheing for free these days...but they can have that with Juke Box....I think JR's challenge is to help potential customers see the value proposition in paying for MC. If you make a strong enough case, people will pay the asking price.

FYI, it was MC's association with Promixis that introduced me to Media Centre...I think that says a lot about the type of user I (and most here) are. I agree with the comments above on marketing...it's only by chance that I ended up at the promixis site (who likewise don't market that well)...if I had gone with the better marketed alternative I would probably have never ended up here..I've never seen it advertised anywhere else. Glad I did

darichman · « **Reply #13 on:** April 17, 2009, 07:39:23 am »

Quote from: AoXoMoXoA on April 17, 2009, 07:02:35 am

I would not. Unless that included updates.

Well, I consider MC a necessity for my media management - and that's something I'm really passionate about.
That dependency has grown over years though... price will be a much more important factor for new users who may not be sure whether they 'need' the program or not.

Doof · « **Reply #14 on:** April 17, 2009, 07:44:37 am »

Just something to think about: http://www.edge-online.com/features/valve-are-games-too-expensive

I can tell you right now that if MC jumps to $80, MC13 is where I get off the train. It's not that I don't love the software. I do, but $80 is just too much for me to justify. I could easily shrug off a $5 increase. A $10 increase would require some internal debate. Beyond that and I'm not even considering it anymore.

If you added in glynor's list of additional features, then a price increase along the lines of what's being suggested would be more in line. But I would also add increased plugin developer support. I honestly believe that the reason Winamp has done so well over the years is because of the extensive library of plugins available. That's something that MC doesn't have and won't ever have given the constraints on the SDK. And in a "pro" market I think it would need to be a necessity.

I think one fallacy of adding up all the features that MC has in it and assigning a pricepoint based on that is that, unfortunately, all of those features are what's necessary just to be a name in the market these days. And the vast majority of the market is still free. Between winamp, mediamonkey, songbird, and foobar are all free. Picasa is free. Windows Live Photo Gallery is free. XBMC, and MythTV are free. And these are just the products I know off the top of my head. I'm not suggesting that MC be free, just pointing out that it becomes increasingly difficult to compete in a market of free software, especially when your price keeps going up.

AoXoMoXoA · « **Reply #15 on:** April 17, 2009, 08:07:15 am »

Suggestion: Modules

I would pay an increase if I could buy the parts I desire. For instance at the moment I have no use for TV tuner support or Theater View. Someday if I spend for a big-screen/hi-def I may desire that functionality enough to pay for it. Currently my use is music ONLY.

I would pay the full cost of Media Center for solely the music functionality (in reality, what I did). Others would be willing to pay additional for the modules that do the TV or Video or Image functions (I currently would not). The whole home-theater thing seems a market in itself.

I would still hope to see the core program not rise above the current price (or not by more than $5 - $10) and the additional modules be no more than $25 - $35 depending on the functionality (with discounts for groups of modules).

There's your additional cash flow.

p7389 · « **Reply #16 on:** April 17, 2009, 08:09:45 am »

I think MC is great value, and I only use the audio part of the program. As such, I even hesitated to get 13 since the development focused so much on the areas that I don't care about. This is a problem with a software like MC that does so many thing - you feel like you pay for a lot of stuff you don't need. Even for only the audio part, though, it is definitely worth its current asking price, but much higher, I might have hesitated. I don't know how you can handle this. I'm not a fan of different editions, but if you do, I'd say do a free, an ordinary and a TV-edition. That's about how far I think that could be stretched. The TV functionality is the one I'm pretty sure I'm never going to use, and I could forego it in good conscience of not missing out on anything that I want.

Dirhael · « **Reply #17 on:** April 17, 2009, 08:58:27 am »

Quote from: Doof on April 17, 2009, 07:44:37 am

Just something to think about: http://www.edge-online.com/features/valve-are-games-too-expensive

I can tell you right now that if MC jumps to $80, MC13 is where I get off the train. It's not that I don't love the software. I do, but $80 is just too much for me to justify. I could easily shrug off a $5 increase. A $10 increase would require some internal debate. Beyond that and I'm not even considering it anymore.

If you added in glynor's list of additional features, then a price increase along the lines of what's being suggested would be more in line. But I would also add increased plugin developer support. I honestly believe that the reason Winamp has done so well over the years is because of the extensive library of plugins available. That's something that MC doesn't have and won't ever have given the constraints on the SDK. And in a "pro" market I think it would need to be a necessity.

I think one fallacy of adding up all the features that MC has in it and assigning a pricepoint based on that is that, unfortunately, all of those features are what's necessary just to be a name in the market these days. And the vast majority of the market is still free. Between winamp, another program, songbird, and foobar are all free. Picasa is free. Windows Live Photo Gallery is free. XBMC, and MythTV are free. And these are just the products I know off the top of my head. I'm not suggesting that MC be free, just pointing out that it becomes increasingly difficult to compete in a market of free software, especially when your price keeps going up.

This pretty much sums up my feelings on the subject. Keeping the price <= $50 sounds about right to me.

Peter_T · « **Reply #18 on:** April 17, 2009, 09:59:57 am »

Yup... I definitely love the power of MC's database, but a large price increase would likely scare me off too. Unless there was something big and relevant to my world. Lately I have only been using MC for music management. I prefer Picasa for photos and XBMC for my living room (as Doof pointed out, both free) and I even use EAC for ripping. Oh and then there's iTunes for syncing with my iPod Touch.

All that said, I use MC most days since I'm a chronic collector/sorter/organizer/tagger.

DiiPii · « **Reply #19 on:** April 17, 2009, 02:37:33 pm »

how about support for iphone......now there's something people would pay for

JimH · « **Reply #20 on:** April 17, 2009, 03:06:27 pm »

Quote from: DiiPii on April 17, 2009, 02:37:33 pm

how about support for iphone......now there's something people would pay for

Tell Apple what you want.

leezer3 · « **Reply #21 on:** April 17, 2009, 03:18:15 pm »

Can I be the first to suggest going GPL

Seriously though, the main area which currently needs improving is the documentation/ support, both in the help file, and the Wiki. There are many features of MC which can be obtuse at times, and better documentation (And possibly support, something to think on there too) would justify a price increase of some description.

Also, re one of Glynor's points, I've said this before, and I'll say this again-
I'm willing to pay a large premium if you can give me a Linux version (I'd even settle for a Mac version), MC is perhaps the only application keeping my desktop/ HTPC stuck on Windows.

-Leezer-

benn600 · « **Reply #22 on:** April 17, 2009, 03:45:37 pm »

While I cannot say I would stop buying MC at a certain price point, I think upgrades @ $40 would be good with the initial price being $60 or $80. Immediate upgrades discounted to $30...

While many other products are in the $80 - $120 price range, remember that they are sold in retail markets and pushed on new users heavily. In the media management market iTunes and WMP are hugely detrimental and the #1 reason for not using MC by people I talk to. Yes, we all know MC is worth a lot...

glynor · « **Reply #23 on:** April 17, 2009, 04:07:14 pm »

Quote from: Mr ChriZ on April 17, 2009, 03:14:37 am

Although I believe MC is probably worth much more than $40, I don't believe people would pay much more than that.

Just thought I'd add...

I certainly believe MC is worth $80 as is. Heck, for as much as I use it, I'd pay way more than that. I need it, like a fix. But that doesn't address attracting new customers at all, and that probably wouldn't apply to future upgrades quite so easily (if it was $80 to upgrade, even I might hold off a while for MC to mature when v14 came out).

We're talking about appealing to people who don't know how much they need it yet. There are plenty of times when I won't even download a free trial for a product that I feel is overpriced just because I'm unlikely to actually make the purchase once the trial ends. So, it isn't just about after they try it and decide that it is worth the $80. It is about them looking and saying "I'm never going to pay $80 for an iTunes-replacement". They'll never get to find out that it does much more than that already.

Oh, and that list above from rjm of applications that cost more? That is a near-perfect illustration of my point. Each one of those applications has specific features (most of which are included in my list) that appeal to a more "pro" application segment. For BeyondTV it is the integrated, supported, easy-to-use program guide, with built-in set-top box control (via USB-UIRT, serial, and firewire control). For Thumbsplus Pro it is network database support and the ability to use another SQL database such as SQL Server 7, SQL 2000 or Sybase Adaptive Server Anywhere. WinDVD has built-in MPEG-2 decoders and DVD decryption codecs (with their associated licensing fees), meaning you don't have to go out and buy your own (or find and use free ones).

pank2002 · « **Reply #24 on:** April 17, 2009, 05:37:43 pm »

If we look into economic theory you want to be a discriminating monopolist -- that is getting all of the utility for yourself, meaning taking the maximum of whatever each user wants to pay. This is, however, not possible.

But I think the way to increase product it to make a differentiated product to catch the people who are not willing to pay a lot (like me) and take a great premium for the people who cannot live without MC. The challenge is to make a cheap edition that at x dollars (and still better than the free alternatives) and an expensive edition at y dollars. The thing is you don't want people who can afford/want the expensive package to settle at the cheaper edition.

You could make a spreadsheet and make different scenarios.

--Rasmus

PS: As others, the only features I would want to pay extra for at the moment would be Linux support and improved image handling.

rick.ca · « **Reply #25 on:** April 17, 2009, 06:33:47 pm »

Quote

The thing is you don't want people who can afford/want the expensive package to settle at the cheaper edition.

And you don't want new users thinking they are being "baited" and will ultimately be forced to upgrade to the expensive edition. Maybe a better image to project is one that seems to fit the facts. MC does three times (by some measure) what any average user wants or needs. This is necessary so that each of those users gets everything they need. One uses it for nothing but a 500,000-track music collection. Another for a much smaller numbers, but of every different kind of media there is. Some use it a complete entertainment center, while others more focused on the media collection aspect. Is there any sensible way to measure "utility" to different users clearly enough to warrant different prices? Perhaps the main strength of MC is its ability to do any or all things required in a wide range of possibilities. If so, the best way to support a positive perception of that is probably to have one edition, one price.

)p( · « **Reply #26 on:** April 18, 2009, 12:57:55 am »

Quote from: rick.ca on April 17, 2009, 06:33:47 pm

Perhaps the main strength of MC is its ability to do any or all things required in a wide range of possibilities.

Exactly and that makes it hard to market...there are no obvious spear points that mae it stand out that can attract new users as the main thing that differentiates it from the competition is it completeness's. (OK for met it was the powerful database that stood out...but I don't think that alone will bring that many new customers...)

A suggestion...integration of pmc in mc might bring more new customers...subscribers could then be give the option to upgrade to all the mc features without the need to install a new program or even pay a slightly higher subscription to have all the mc features.

peter

rjm · « **Reply #27 on:** April 18, 2009, 01:52:42 am »

As the many intelligent comments in this thread suggest there is no easy answer to pricing. A much easier solution to revenue would be more customers. This must be feasible given the low profile of MC. Something should be done to increase the visibility of MC in the market.

JimH · « **Reply #28 on:** April 18, 2009, 05:50:52 am »

Quote from: rjm on April 18, 2009, 01:52:42 am

As the many intelligent comments in this thread suggest there is no easy answer to pricing. A much easier solution to revenue would be more customers. This must be feasible given the low profile of MC. Something should be done to increase the visibility of MC in the market.

That would be nice. I'll start a new thread with this.

I agree that there are many useful and thoughtful comments in this thread.

keither · « **Reply #29 on:** April 18, 2009, 01:00:25 pm »

Just to add a thought - MC's 10-foot interface may be nice, but it's got nothing on boxee, and boxee is free. I love MC for what I use it for, but even though I'm a power-user in general, boxee's simplicity is exactly what I want for my HTPC use.

It'd be great if boxee would read my MC database, but ultimately, I don't know that trying to sell a 10' interface as a feature for MC is going to net you more revenue than a partnership with people who have got the UI situation down but really need a more robust and fully featured database.

johnnyboy · « **Reply #30 on:** April 19, 2009, 10:14:21 am »

Just my two cents.
I barely use MC these days, haven't done in ages but I bought the upgrade to 13 the other day purely because it was so cheap I figured why not, try it out, lets see how it is.
I am not sure how much I am going to use it but figured I might as well.
If the upgrade price had been higher I am 95% sure I would not have bought the upgrade.

With the $40 price mark, I can talk casual users into buying it, anything more than that and I doubt they would.

I say remove the TV, media server and other 'advanced' features and charge extra for them.
They're not what the 'general public' would be using.
Put them in the app but with 10 use trials for each, to unlock them costs $10 each for example.

Listener · « **Reply #31 on:** April 20, 2009, 01:36:10 am »

JimH,

I've used MC 11 and 12 for audio for about 3 years. I think about using it for an image library but I have not done it yet.

I tried the MC 13 betas while they were open but they offered no compelling reason to upgrade for audio. I have no clue whether there would be any reason for me to upgrade now. I tried to follow the new release threads but you need to provide concise summaries of all the improvements from MJ 12 to MC 13 and MC 12 to MC 13.

I also tried using the video features in MC 12. My USB tuner device wasn't supported under MC 12; that wasn't clear until after I bought the device and tried to use it. I had some interactions with an JRiver employee but nothing was ever resolved. I was left with the impression that you were not serious about making video work. That isn't a basis for getting me to pay more for video features.

I evangelize for MC on several other audio forums. Many people expect CD ripper, music file tag editor and music player software to be free. Certainly most of the alternatives people consider are free. MC is a hard sell at $ 40. MJ made those conversations easier. At $ 100, selling MC to prospective users just would not fly.

Your website doesn't begin to explain why MC is different from other music players and why it is worth more than free alternatives. You are going to need much better documentation and marketing material before you raise the price.

Bill

steveklein · « **Reply #32 on:** April 20, 2009, 07:20:14 am »

I paid $40 for it and it was a stretch for me.

There are a lot of programs that can do a lot of what MC does for free, even if it isn't as sexy or a complete package. MC was worth the $40 for me, but at $50-$60, I very well may have never taken the plunge.

Just my honest opinion.

FWIW, I'm 23 and my take home income is about $600/week

johnnyboy · « **Reply #33 on:** April 20, 2009, 09:49:05 am »

Just a PS - some people talk about the pricing of Directory Opus.
I love the app and have used it several times.
I have never taken the leap and bought it though and probably never will as to me the price is just way too much for what I actually use it for.
For most casual users I think they have way over priced their product and lose a lot of business as a result. If it was $40 I'd have bought it, if it was $50 I dont know if I would have, more and I wont.
Same goes with MC for me I think.

Alex B · « **Reply #34 on:** April 20, 2009, 10:12:20 am »

I don't have an opinion about the "correct" price (There are too many factors. A software product can have practically any price.), but any changes in the pricing policy should be logical and not give the impression that the product was previously under- or overpriced.

As others have said, perhaps you should be moderate. If there is a need to increase the price, do that, but don't increase it too much at once. I think this "rule" is valid for any goods. You probably would not be happy to see in a shop that the item you were interested in a few days ago has a double price when you are actually going to buy it. You could easily accept a moderate increase if the product is good, but if the price has changed too much you are tempted to look other products or just not buy anything.

Psychologically it would be better to change the price when a new version with lots of new and improved features is released, but that is not possible now, if ever. MC seems to always get better gradually in baby steps and thus the major version number changes have not been very significant milestones. For instance, the first public builds of MC13 were a lot more similar to MC12 than the latest MC13 build is now.

I think this kind of development model is good for a media player/organizer program - a lot better than when practically nothing is improved during the time between two major versions, but it may be challenging for the "marketing department". (For comparison: big software companies like MS, Adobe, etc release bug and compatibility fixes, but for several reasons the actual features usually must remain as they originally were until the next version is released.)

JimH · « **Reply #35 on:** April 20, 2009, 11:37:08 am »

I've removed a couple of posts that were off topic. Please provide your thoughts on pricing, not features, etc.

Orbach · « **Reply #36 on:** April 20, 2009, 02:07:56 pm »

I think the beauty of this is
that you don't have to think twice before you buy it.

taklamakan · « **Reply #37 on:** April 20, 2009, 06:57:05 pm »

I took advantage of the weekend sale price to buy Media Center despite the fact that I have used Jukebox for a couple years and am completely satisfied with it and may never use MC. I only need it for music. I have no intention of using MC for video or images. I bought it as a donation in gratitude for unequaled software that I cannot live without. If MC were priced at $80 I probably would not have bought it at this time. I'm not saying it's not worth $80, but Jukebox has absolutely everything I need, it constantly delights me, and I recommend it to others whenever I can.

Media Jukebox is part of the problem here. It's too good. Smartlists alone are worth $80. I have dozens of well thought-out, interlocking smartlists that serve up my collection to me perfectly. Then there's all those Library Tools functions. I use "Rename, Move & Copy Files" all the time. The interface customizations allow for anything I've been able to conceive. And the extensibility! I just created a track info view that pulls artist bio and pics from Last.FM, just with a bit of javascript.

I'm sorry if I have talked about features too much, but they are a natural part of the discussion of price. If MJ only let me create 5 smartlists, I would have bought MC years ago at any price.

steveklein · « **Reply #38 on:** April 20, 2009, 07:02:21 pm »

smartlists worth $80? really? pretty sure iTunes (and other free pieces of software, including Media Jukebox, like you mentioned) deliver it for free.

i think charging $10-$20 for MJ and leaving the MC price alone would be a better way to go.

JimH · « **Reply #39 on:** April 20, 2009, 07:07:48 pm »

Quote from: taklamakan on April 20, 2009, 06:57:05 pm

I took advantage of the weekend sale price to buy Media Center despite the fact that I have used Jukebox for a couple years and am completely satisfied with it and may never use MC. I only need it for music. I have no intention of using MC for video or images. I bought it as a donation in gratitude for unequaled software that I cannot live without.

Thank you.

raldo · « **Reply #40 on:** April 21, 2009, 01:49:46 am »

Quote from: steveklein on April 20, 2009, 07:02:21 pm

[...] pretty sure iTunes (and other free pieces of software, including Media Jukebox, like you mentioned) deliver it for free.

iTunes is not free. They just have another business model which makes it "look" free.

Mr ChriZ · « **Reply #41 on:** April 21, 2009, 02:18:59 am »

Quote from: raldo on April 21, 2009, 01:49:46 am

iTunes is not free. They just have another business model which makes it "look" free.

[Joke Alert]
The way it works is that you get the music player free, which allows you to buy songs which you can only play on their software and hardware. With those songs you can buy more hardware which will only be compatible with your other Apple hardware. Before long you will have to have an Apple compatible car which will only drive if you have an ipod plugged in, and you'll have to pay for a rediculously expensive rolling contract with Ford, to do what most other cars did before but with some nifty (but fairly obvious) extra features no one else can use because Apple patented them 6 years ago(before there was hardware to do such things). If your granny doesn't have an apple the car won't start when she's in the car, so you will have to leave your granny at the road side, or buy a new iGranny Touch.

It's ok though because you will have an apple toaster, an apple fridge, and even apple clothes which will all talk together harmoniously, and allow you to buy apple fruit from the grocery store.
[/Joke Alert]

MrC · « **Reply #42 on:** April 21, 2009, 03:18:14 am »

While I'm OK with a price increase (and I'm not too concerned about the increment), others may not be so comfortable.

A bump of 10% won't be out of line, but is certainly ahead of today's economy! Anything more than this has to be justified by a feature set appropriate to your intended audience.

ThoBar · « **Reply #43 on:** April 21, 2009, 03:51:15 am »

Just thought I'd add that thanks to the w/e special, I bought a 2nd license of MC, because I figured I use it heavily (multiple machines), and you just never know...

I certainly wouldnt have done so if the price was $80. I found the lower price was very justifiable, rather than a stretch.

I do agree with some advanced functionality being extra -IF- its completely new to MC (think multi-write capable networked DB

)

raldo · « **Reply #44 on:** April 21, 2009, 04:01:32 am »

You could put advertisements within the player. Google Ads?

MrC · « **Reply #45 on:** April 21, 2009, 04:09:54 am »

Quote from: raldo on April 21, 2009, 04:01:32 am

You could put advertisements within the player. Google Ads?

Don't even joke about that!

edbro · « **Reply #46 on:** April 21, 2009, 06:40:02 am »

How about going modular?

I think that MC is an incredible bargain for the features it offers but, I don't use most of those. I simply use it for organizing and listening to music. For me, the current price is about right. I think that the servers, tv tuner, etc. could be offered as optional plugins at a higher price.

If you continue to add features (good thing) and up the price to match it you will shift your appeal to a different crowd. As it is, I should probably be using the free Jukebox but I continue buying to support MC.

JimH · « **Reply #47 on:** April 21, 2009, 06:53:43 am »

Quote from: confishy on April 21, 2009, 03:51:15 am

Just thought I'd add that thanks to the w/e special, I bought a 2nd license of MC, because I figured I use it heavily (multiple machines), and you just never know...

Thanks!

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: MC Pricing (Read 11191 times)