05-03-12 08:28 AM
926 ... 3031323334 ...
tools
  1. sut#CB's Avatar
    Love the product and have been using it daily...went to puchase and was pretty suprised at the price. I was expecting a price of around $2.99 given that it has some unique functionality over the $.99 apps. I understand the costs to provide the service, but i don't think the app market will support that price point in any quantity. I'm going to pass even at the $7 beta price but I still think you have a great app and have done a stellar job getting it into production so quickly. Best of luck with this app.
    Last edited by sut; 04-14-11 at 11:49 PM.
    04-14-11 11:37 PM
  2. markmcd's Avatar
    Poor Product now that they charge $7+ not worth the Money! Maybe a .99 program definitely Not worth the Money! Just unistalled now.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    04-15-11 04:10 AM
  3. Tony2255's Avatar
    Ok guys I have to say that there are lots of people that will pay $8 for a starbucks coffee but not 7 for a program that will be a great piece of software that requires maintance on the servers? I think .99 is not enough for most of the apps out there. Apple set the bar here and I perdonally think they undercut their developers. Anyone that has ever written a program would agree. Something is definently wrong with this picture. Anyway just my two cents!

    Great piece of software and I can not wait to see what you guys will do with it from here.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    04-15-11 05:17 AM
  4. smeagle5's Avatar
    Ok guys I have to say that there are lots of people that will pay $8 for a starbucks coffee but not 7 for a program that will be a great piece of software that requires maintance on the servers? I think .99 is not enough for most of the apps out there. Apple set the bar here and I perdonally think they undercut their developers. Anyone that has ever written a program would agree. Something is definently wrong with this picture. Anyway just my two cents!

    Great piece of software and I can not wait to see what you guys will do with it from here.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Like i said, i might not have a huge issue with 7.50 an app. the same goes with most people on this forum, but most people will simply just pass that up in App World looking at the price. Given that this requires servers, i agree 99 cents is too little, but i think more revenue could be generate at a price point of 2.99
    04-15-11 07:24 AM
  5. kolonji's Avatar
    Working great!
    04-15-11 07:28 AM
  6. trucky's Avatar
    Thanks for the feedback! I totally understand that some of our users were going to say it's way overpriced due to the fact they are used to paying a couple of dollars for an app. The major difference between our app and other alarm clocks is require servers which require maintenance and have a monthly recurring fee. At the moment, we do only have the core functionality of text-to-speech compared to other alarms, but that's why we're asking for money... So we can commit out developers to work on adding features. Developer salaries aren't cheap! Anyways, I just wanted to be clear this is why we are charging more then other alarm clock apps... We also appreciate you committing your time in the forums discussing and beta testing the app!

    Just want to thank everyone who has purchased so far! Exciting to see the sales trickle in.
    Thanks for the ride, and for the opportunity to be a part of the beta testing, and to suffer through the missed alarms, failed server responses and multiple updates. All are expected in a beta process. Also generally expected as a beta tester is a complementary or at least very reduced price for the product if we choose to continue using it. You have a great concept and I wish you well. I am not in the group that will pay for what the product MAY be in the future, but for what it is now. Understand that developer salaries are not cheap, but the price of a product should be for its percieved worth, not the potential lifestyle of your developers. I updated this morning and got the "Thank you for your time and effort while beta testing our app, now pay us". Product deleted. Thanks for the ride, its be fun. i

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    04-15-11 07:32 AM
  7. andyahs's Avatar
    Poor Product now that they charge $7+ not worth the Money! Maybe a .99 program definitely Not worth the Money! Just unistalled now.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    So this is your first post here obviously having never made one comment during the beta phase but now you chime in to complain about the price.......
    04-15-11 08:16 AM
  8. j.p.hatfield's Avatar
    Ok guys I have to say that there are lots of people that will pay $8 for a starbucks coffee but not 7 for a program that will be a great piece of software that requires maintance on the servers? I think .99 is not enough for most of the apps out there. Apple set the bar here and I perdonally think they undercut their developers. Anyone that has ever written a program would agree. Something is definently wrong with this picture. Anyway just my two cents!

    Great piece of software and I can not wait to see what you guys will do with it from here.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Where does someone pay $8 for Starbucks?????? Maybe 2.99 for wakeful but not $7.....sorry and I testes from day
    One....great app but that a little steep...

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    04-15-11 08:25 AM
  9. Ferretling's Avatar
    Heck, I'd even be fine with $5 for it. I just have to debate about $7.50. (I can't afford Starbucks.)
    04-15-11 08:36 AM
  10. DrSavant's Avatar
    I'm glad to see a debate on the pricing, and here's something which wasn't mentioned yet:

    The $7.50 price, is INTRODUCTORY!

    So, this leads to one of the two possible scenarios - if this is really an introductory offer (which is greatly overpriced then), the price will go up, and the app simply won't have success, because there won't be enough pull to generate serious revenues - read fail, or wallow in misery. Now, there are lots of companies out there wallowing in misery, but happy with what they've got, so to each his own.

    The second scenario, is that the price of the app will stay at $7.50. If that's the case, then calling it introductory, as a thank you for the testing efforts (and I can honestly say I've contributed plenty to the effort, having some discussions via email with the folks at Wakeful, offering suggestions/corrections and what not), is the least to say offensive.

    A lot can be said about Apple's policies and the so called undercutting of developers. This is not the place and the time, however as a quick comment, all I can say is think of volume car dealers. They make more money then the mom and pop shops not wanting to discount their vehicles properly. So do the developers creating great iOS software.

    My personal response to Wakeful's survey was a price point of $2.99, thinking of justification points such as the higher price of Blackberry apps and the server maintenance costs for Ninja Otter (which they use as an explanation of the price). $2.99 is reasonable, and that is a pricing strategy which can lead to success.

    Bottom line - at $7.50 ($7.49 as the fanboys will rush to point out) - F A I L.
    04-15-11 08:39 AM
  11. smeagle5's Avatar
    I'm glad to see a debate on the pricing, and here's something which wasn't mentioned yet:

    The $7.50 price, is INTRODUCTORY!

    So, this leads to one of the two possible scenarios - if this is really an introductory offer (which is greatly overpriced then), the price will go up, and the app simply won't have success, because there won't be enough pull to generate serious revenues - read fail, or wallow in misery. Now, there are lots of companies out there wallowing in misery, but happy with what they've got, so to each his own.

    The second scenario, is that the price of the app will stay at $7.50. If that's the case, then calling it introductory, as a thank you for the testing efforts (and I can honestly say I've contributed plenty to the effort, having some discussions via email with the folks at Wakeful, offering suggestions/corrections and what not), is the least to say offensive.

    A lot can be said about Apple's policies and the so called undercutting of developers. This is not the place and the time, however as a quick comment, all I can say is think of volume car dealers. They make more money then the mom and pop shops not wanting to discount their vehicles properly. So do the developers creating great iOS software.

    My personal response to Wakeful's survey was a price point of $2.99, thinking of justification points such as the higher price of Blackberry apps and the server maintenance costs for Ninja Otter (which they use as an explanation of the price). $2.99 is reasonable, and that is a pricing strategy which can lead to success.

    Bottom line - at $7.50 ($7.49 as the fanboys will rush to point out) - F A I L.
    I wonder if they were planning a non introductory price of $10 (or $9.99). This app is still essentially in beta. Hard to justify 7.50 for something that might not work every morning.

    If devs want this app to succeed:

    1. ditch buying via your website
    2. get into appworld asap
    3. cut the price to at most 2.99
    04-15-11 08:59 AM
  12. andyahs's Avatar
    I wonder if they were planning a non introductory price of $10 (or $9.99). This app is still essentially in beta. Hard to justify 7.50 for something that might not work every morning.

    If devs want this app to succeed:

    1. ditch buying via your website
    2. get into appworld asap
    3. cut the price to at most 2.99
    Why ditch that? The purchase is via mobihand which a lot of people use.
    04-15-11 09:04 AM
  13. piwh1000's Avatar
    Hey Guys! I'm not really surprised to see some discussion around our price point because in our survey about 30% said they wanted the application for free and had no intentions of buying. Of those 30%, almost 75% said they would no longer use the application if it supported ads either. That doesn't leave us to make any money at all!

    So by charging anything we immediately cut off 30% of our beta testers. It didn't really matter because we wanted to focus on those customers who would pay for the product, so we can make it a better overall product for them. Of the 70% of the users who said they would pay, we found that the median price was around $7. And this was from a sample size of 1,000 survey results. And around 15% said they would only pay $1...

    We felt given the fact that 75% of our audience was still using the product daily since our original launch that the $7 price tag was obviously justified from the survey results.

    So from this data, we concluded just by charging anything we were immediately going to have 30% of our customers not use the product and if we charged more then $1 another 15% were not going to use the product... Almost 1/2 of our audience, were not going to like any price tag over $1.

    We based the pricetag on what you the audience told us from the survey results!
    andyahs and kolonji like this.
    04-15-11 09:24 AM
  14. BB Musketeers's Avatar
    Recommendations to developer for this app to succeed:

    1) Make the app more robust. Offer everything that the other alarm apps offer and this (world clock, ability to schedule multiple alarms, ability to schedule alarms daily, weekly, bi-weekly, monthly, quarterly, and annually -[NOTE: I've yet to find an alarm app that does all of these, but some that do most of these], short and long term timers, and stop-watch, and then add your web based alarm to it....then you got the best alarm out there, and one that does something none of the rest do. These other functions can all operate within the device and would serve as an excellent backup in the event of a server issue (e.g. server alarm for Wakeful does not go off at 8 am because of a server problem, but automatically reverts to an Mp 3 alarm that consumer has preselected).

    2) Make the server based alarm more robust...more customizing by consumer such as sports scores including types of sports, types of news feeds (local, national, world), etc.

    3) Price at the same price as the other alarm apps (most of which are priced at $4.99, but often are on sale for at least half off. If this is not adequate income for maintaining the servers, then make it an annual subscription. Although, even here I think you run the risk of alienating a lot of consumers. Nonetheless, they would still have the rest of the app's functions, even if they chose not to renew their subscription, and would feel they got their money's worth.
    Last edited by BB Musketeers; 04-15-11 at 09:41 AM.
    04-15-11 09:31 AM
  15. piwh1000's Avatar
    If devs want this app to succeed:

    1. ditch buying via your website
    Another product we sell generates 70% of its revenue from it's website, so why would we ditch selling from our own site?
    04-15-11 09:34 AM
  16. BB Musketeers's Avatar
    Hey Guys! I'm not really surprised to see some discussion around our price point because in our survey about 30% said they wanted the application for free and had no intentions of buying. Of those 30%, almost 75% said they would no longer use the application if it supported ads either. That doesn't leave us to make any money at all!

    So by charging anything we immediately cut off 30% of our beta testers. It didn't really matter because we wanted to focus on those customers who would pay for the product, so we can make it a better overall product for them. Of the 70% of the users who said they would pay, we found that the median price was around $7. And this was from a sample size of 1,000 survey results. And around 15% said they would only pay $1...

    We felt given the fact that 75% of our audience was still using the product daily since our original launch that the $7 price tag was obviously justified from the survey results.

    So from this data, we concluded just by charging anything we were immediately going to have 30% of our customers not use the product and if we charged more then $1 another 15% were not going to use the product... Almost 1/2 of our audience, were not going to like any price tag over $1.

    We based the pricetag on what you the audience told us from the survey results!
    I would suggest that its possible that the survey results are from people who already have investment and a bias in favor of this app. I'm not sure you're going to find the average consumer willing to spend that much. But this is all based on my limited experience and opinion. However, if you can make a go of it at that price point, then why not? Afterall, you all are a business. I wish you the best. As you can tell, even though I'm not going to purchase this product at this price, I still feel an attachment to it and would like to see it succeed.
    Last edited by BB Musketeers; 04-15-11 at 09:54 AM.
    04-15-11 09:38 AM
  17. maddie1128's Avatar
    I don't know what the big deal is about the pricing. Some of my most used apps have been 9.99 or more and they still get updated. I think alot of time goes into making these apps and I am sure they take pretty long to recoup the money that goes into them. I don't know why the developers would want to keep on making apps for others for nothing. And as for the apple .99 apps- who wants most of them? I don't need or want farts or horns on my phone. I see this complaint all the time with themes as well- nothing is free and I don't expect it to be.
    04-15-11 09:40 AM
  18. DrSavant's Avatar
    Patrick - I don't think anyone of the serious testers doubts the sincerity of your efforts. I think my comments were very pointed, and leave no room to thinking that you guys are just out to try and get rich (good luck btw )

    The issue at hand is as the post right after yours stresses - there is nearly no functionality offered to justify the price tag. And here I'm talking as a part of the established customer base. Now your job is to go out and get new clients, and putting myself in the shoes of that new client, as I picture myself browsing Mobihand or AppWorld and seeing your app, with it's price - I would simply skip it and keep going. Even if I was on a quest for an alarm clock, I would think, well, cool, talking clock. For $7.50. Yeah right. (I'm not a fan of role play like this, however it is a VERY effective marketing tool ).

    As for survey results - experience shows, that surveys like this don't tend to offer an accurate representation of the market's wants and needs. To properly gauge the state of the market, research is needed.

    I'm sharing years of experience, so please don't take this as a condescending approach or an attempt to educate

    Hey Guys! I'm not really surprised to see some discussion around our price point because in our survey about 30% said they wanted the application for free and had no intentions of buying. Of those 30%, almost 75% said they would no longer use the application if it supported ads either. That doesn't leave us to make any money at all!

    So by charging anything we immediately cut off 30% of our beta testers. It didn't really matter because we wanted to focus on those customers who would pay for the product, so we can make it a better overall product for them. Of the 70% of the users who said they would pay, we found that the median price was around $7. And this was from a sample size of 1,000 survey results. And around 15% said they would only pay $1...

    We felt given the fact that 75% of our audience was still using the product daily since our original launch that the $7 price tag was obviously justified from the survey results.

    So from this data, we concluded just by charging anything we were immediately going to have 30% of our customers not use the product and if we charged more then $1 another 15% were not going to use the product... Almost 1/2 of our audience, were not going to like any price tag over $1.

    We based the pricetag on what you the audience told us from the survey results!
    Last edited by DrSavant; 04-15-11 at 02:49 PM. Reason: Didn't realize free trial was an option now
    04-15-11 09:47 AM
  19. smeagle5's Avatar
    Another product we sell generates 70% of its revenue from it's website, so why would we ditch selling from our own site?
    Keep the website. But what i was trying to say was that the problem you willhave is that your are limiting the audience.

    your right that from the surveys you have, 7.50 might be appropriate, but not to the "average" user. You have to remember that 90% of blackberry users dont know about crackberry or other blogs that reccomend apps.

    I think that targeting a broader base at a lower price point might be more appropriate.
    04-15-11 09:50 AM
  20. HawkC026's Avatar
    I've really enjoyed being part of the beta test team and watching this app evolve into what it is today. The Wakeful team has a truly unique product here and they've done a fantastic job incorporating many of the suggestions that the beta testers have brought forward to make it an even better product than what they started with.

    Unfortunately, even after being involved in the beta testing and seeing first hand what this app can do, I think the $7.49 "introductory price" is going to put many people (including myself) off buying it. I would have gladly paid $2.99 to $3.99 for it, but at $7.49 I'm going to have to pass and at $14.99 I'm going to run away and hide.

    Thanks again for including me in the testing, I wish you and your team all the best!
    04-15-11 09:58 AM
  21. BB Musketeers's Avatar
    Well I remember beta testing Fixmo Tools. At that time it had approximately 7 or 8 things that it would do (which is still more than the one thing that Wakeful does). They started at a price point of $19.99 if memory serves. That price is now down to $14.99, and that is after adding other functions bringing up to 17 things that it does. Even at that price, Fixmo is often on sale for anywhere from $7.99 to $9.99. I'm sure some people paid the $19.99, but it clearly wasn't enough to keep that price point. Believe me, I love Fixmo...it has saved me a couple times in several different ways, but most people aren't going to dish out money for apps that they don't have to have.

    On the other hand, the 30% who thought the app should be free are living in fantasy world. Clearly, there is a price point that this app will sell at and will still net a profit. Not sure what that price point is, but I'm leary of the present point.
    04-15-11 10:00 AM
  22. Tony2255's Avatar
    Where does someone pay $8 for Starbucks?????? Maybe 2.99 for wakeful but not $7.....sorry and I testes from day
    One....great app but that a little steep...

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    OK so maybe its $6 to $7 for Starbucks...I just know every time I have to go for my wife its like $13+ for the two of us and that is TOO expensive....anyway I regress. The point is that this is not a build and use forever app. It takes servers and maintenance and the price they are asking is not too steep for what it does. If you think it is well that is that but just do not buy it!

    Anyway everyone will have their own opinion. All I can say is great app and I would have paid $10 for it. I just hope it does not hurt the number of sales that you will get.
    04-15-11 12:10 PM
  23. elmejor1009's Avatar
    I'm not going to complaint about the whole price thing.... But I will say the 50% is not just for beta testers. The coupon is out there for others to use. So it's not really a reward or anything if it's available for everyone else as well.
    04-15-11 01:08 PM
  24. pkcable's Avatar
    I paid for the app. At first I thought about dropping the mod card, plus reminding the wakeful folks how helpful my beta test reports have been. I've been in direct contact with the head programmer. But then I thought about it, they DO have on going server costs, and good app development DOES have costs, and 7.50 is NOT that much money in the grand scheme of things, so why not pay?

    Keep up the good work Patrick and gang!
    04-15-11 02:19 PM
  25. DrSavant's Avatar
    It's not about the money per se for many, imo. I think as those who helped make this app a reality, we would like to see it succeed.

    This is one of the reasons there is a discussion on the price, because at such a high "introductory" price, the guys are limiting their own success (while still needing to pay the server costs and etc).

    I paid for the app. At first I thought about dropping the mod card, plus reminding the wakeful folks how helpful my beta test reports have been. I've been in direct contact with the head programmer. But then I thought about it, they DO have on going server costs, and good app development DOES have costs, and 7.50 is NOT that much money in the grand scheme of things, so why not pay?

    Keep up the good work Patrick and gang!
    04-15-11 02:45 PM
926 ... 3031323334 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD