I have a free app that I want to monetize now that the Market supports
paid apps. Is the following an ok strategy:
1. Launch new version of Free app that has additional features but is
a time-limited trial
2. Launch the same app as a time-unlimited Paid app
3. When the trial expires, the trial app points the user to the Paid
app on the Market for purchase
In particular I'm wondering if there is anything wrong with Step 1
above. I would announce loud & clear in the description that if you
are an existing user and want to keep the free app forever with no
upgrades, DONT UPGRADE because you then have to lose it or pay after
the trial period. Of course users doing a blanket upgrade using the
new RC33 feature will not see that message.
My thoughts would be that you leave the free version in the market
indefinitely and add your trial/paid app under a different name (in
order to take away the direct upgrade path). For example, you'll have
"lite", "trial", and "paid", where theoretically, the trial and paid
versions will be more feature rich than the free version. You can add
an update to the free version with information pointing users to the
paid version for more features.
On Feb 20, 3:35 pm, Jay-andro <jayan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a free app that I want to monetize now that the Market supports
> paid apps. Is the following an ok strategy:
> 1. Launch new version of Free app that has additional features but is
> a time-limited trial
> 2. Launch the same app as a time-unlimited Paid app
> 3. When the trial expires, the trial app points the user to the Paid
> app on the Market for purchase
> In particular I'm wondering if there is anything wrong with Step 1
> above. I would announce loud & clear in the description that if you
> are an existing user and want to keep the free app forever with no
> upgrades, DONT UPGRADE because you then have to lose it or pay after
> the trial period. Of course users doing a blanket upgrade using the
> new RC33 feature will not see that message.
Yes, the problem though is that the free app is very feature rich and
was always intended to convert to paid. I just didnt realize that
Google wont allow me to flip the price from free to paid when the paid
market launches. I had always intended for the free users to keep the
full free product if they want no upgrades, and new users and upgrade
users would pay the fee.
I think the ambiguities of the distribution agreement and Google's
silence on these topics are causing much unnecessary FUD for
developers....
On Feb 20, 4:16 pm, lbcoder <lbco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My thoughts would be that you leave the free version in the market
> indefinitely and add your trial/paid app under a different name (in
> order to take away the direct upgrade path). For example, you'll have
> "lite", "trial", and "paid", where theoretically, the trial and paid
> versions will be more feature rich than the free version. You can add
> an update to the free version with information pointing users to the
> paid version for more features.
> On Feb 20, 3:35 pm, Jay-andro <jayan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I have a free app that I want to monetize now that the Market supports
> > paid apps. Is the following an ok strategy:
> > 1. Launch new version of Free app that has additional features but is
> > a time-limited trial
> > 2. Launch the same app as a time-unlimited Paid app
> > 3. When the trial expires, the trial app points the user to the Paid
> > app on the Market for purchase
> > In particular I'm wondering if there is anything wrong with Step 1
> > above. I would announce loud & clear in the description that if you
> > are an existing user and want to keep the free app forever with no
> > upgrades, DONT UPGRADE because you then have to lose it or pay after
> > the trial period. Of course users doing a blanket upgrade using the
> > new RC33 feature will not see that message.
I've had the same dilemma. The problem with this strategy is that I
don't think there's a reasonable way to notify those who currently
have your free app NOT to upgrade. When I've upgraded in the past I
remember seeing a list of my installed apps and next to one of them I
would see something like "upgrade now".
It occurred to me that I could "update" my free app and remove some
vital features while allowing the look and feel of the app to remain.
It could also point to the new paid-for app. While this works fine
for NEW users it screws over those who got your app free, fair-and-
square. If we did this, not only would it be super lame on our part,
but I imagine that these folks would rate us down and ruin the
reputation that we wanted to preserve in the first place.
So... for now I just said screw it, pulled my free app and released
my paid-for app. I guess those 2000 downloads and 4+ star rating mean
nothing now.
On Feb 20, 1:28 pm, Jay-andro <jayan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, the problem though is that the free app is very feature rich and
> was always intended to convert to paid. I just didnt realize that
> Google wont allow me to flip the price from free to paid when the paid
> market launches. I had always intended for the free users to keep the
> full free product if they want no upgrades, and new users and upgrade
> users would pay the fee.
> I think the ambiguities of the distribution agreement and Google's
> silence on these topics are causing much unnecessary FUD for
> developers....
> On Feb 20, 4:16 pm, lbcoder <lbco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > My thoughts would be that you leave the free version in the market
> > indefinitely and add your trial/paid app under a different name (in
> > order to take away the direct upgrade path). For example, you'll have
> > "lite", "trial", and "paid", where theoretically, the trial and paid
> > versions will be more feature rich than the free version. You can add
> > an update to the free version with information pointing users to the
> > paid version for more features.
> > On Feb 20, 3:35 pm, Jay-andro <jayan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I have a free app that I want to monetize now that the Market supports
> > > paid apps. Is the following an ok strategy:
> > > 1. Launch new version of Free app that has additional features but is
> > > a time-limited trial
> > > 2. Launch the same app as a time-unlimited Paid app
> > > 3. When the trial expires, the trial app points the user to the Paid
> > > app on the Market for purchase
> > > In particular I'm wondering if there is anything wrong with Step 1
> > > above. I would announce loud & clear in the description that if you
> > > are an existing user and want to keep the free app forever with no
> > > upgrades, DONT UPGRADE because you then have to lose it or pay after
> > > the trial period. Of course users doing a blanket upgrade using the
> > > new RC33 feature will not see that message.
In hindsight, I think what Google should have done would be to
restrict the transition of free to paid apps AFTER paid apps went
live. If you were one of the folks to get your app up early for free
than yeah, you could rack up some ratings.
On Feb 20, 4:28 pm, 3D <ernestgfre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've had the same dilemma. The problem with this strategy is that I
> don't think there's a reasonable way to notify those who currently
> have your free app NOT to upgrade. When I've upgraded in the past I
> remember seeing a list of my installed apps and next to one of them I
> would see something like "upgrade now".
> It occurred to me that I could "update" my free app and remove some
> vital features while allowing the look and feel of the app to remain.
> It could also point to the new paid-for app. While this works fine
> for NEW users it screws over those who got your app free, fair-and-
> square. If we did this, not only would it be super lame on our part,
> but I imagine that these folks would rate us down and ruin the
> reputation that we wanted to preserve in the first place.
> So... for now I just said screw it, pulled my free app and released
> my paid-for app. I guess those 2000 downloads and 4+ star rating mean
> nothing now.
> On Feb 20, 1:28 pm, Jay-andro <jayan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yes, the problem though is that the free app is very feature rich and
> > was always intended to convert to paid. I just didnt realize that
> > Google wont allow me to flip the price from free to paid when the paid
> > market launches. I had always intended for the free users to keep the
> > full free product if they want no upgrades, and new users and upgrade
> > users would pay the fee.
> > I think the ambiguities of the distribution agreement and Google's
> > silence on these topics are causing much unnecessary FUD for
> > developers....
> > On Feb 20, 4:16 pm, lbcoder <lbco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > My thoughts would be that you leave the free version in the market
> > > indefinitely and add your trial/paid app under a different name (in
> > > order to take away the direct upgrade path). For example, you'll have
> > > "lite", "trial", and "paid", where theoretically, the trial and paid
> > > versions will be more feature rich than the free version. You can add
> > > an update to the free version with information pointing users to the
> > > paid version for more features.
> > > On Feb 20, 3:35 pm, Jay-andro <jayan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I have a free app that I want to monetize now that the Market supports
> > > > paid apps. Is the following an ok strategy:
> > > > 1. Launch new version of Free app that has additional features but is
> > > > a time-limited trial
> > > > 2. Launch the same app as a time-unlimited Paid app
> > > > 3. When the trial expires, the trial app points the user to the Paid
> > > > app on the Market for purchase
> > > > In particular I'm wondering if there is anything wrong with Step 1
> > > > above. I would announce loud & clear in the description that if you
> > > > are an existing user and want to keep the free app forever with no
> > > > upgrades, DONT UPGRADE because you then have to lose it or pay after
> > > > the trial period. Of course users doing a blanket upgrade using the
> > > > new RC33 feature will not see that message.
Question:
Do you think if you re-Publish a previously unPublished app (same
package name), it will pick up from where it left off, in terms of
download counts, ratings, comments etc? I dont have time right now to
add and test the Free Trial logic, so like you 3D, I want to just
unpublish my free app and publish my paid-for one. But in a few days I
want to come back and republish the free app as a trial product.
Another question:
I am interpreting 3.3 "You may not collect future charges from users
for copies of the Products that those users were initially allowed to
download for free" to mean that you cannot start charging (by way of
content or subscription fees) for the exact copy/version that they
downloaded earlier for free. I believe it is permissible for a new
version of a previously free unlimited product to now be a free
limited-time trial product. Anyone disagree? Google?
On Feb 20, 7:34 pm, 3D <ernestgfre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In hindsight, I think what Google should have done would be to
> restrict the transition of free to paid apps AFTER paid apps went
> live. If you were one of the folks to get your app up early for free
> than yeah, you could rack up some ratings.
> On Feb 20, 4:28 pm, 3D <ernestgfre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > @Jay-andro
> > I've had the same dilemma. The problem with this strategy is that I
> > don't think there's a reasonable way to notify those who currently
> > have your free app NOT to upgrade. When I've upgraded in the past I
> > remember seeing a list of my installed apps and next to one of them I
> > would see something like "upgrade now".
> > It occurred to me that I could "update" my free app and remove some
> > vital features while allowing the look and feel of the app to remain.
> > It could also point to the new paid-for app. While this works fine
> > for NEW users it screws over those who got your app free, fair-and-
> > square. If we did this, not only would it be super lame on our part,
> > but I imagine that these folks would rate us down and ruin the
> > reputation that we wanted to preserve in the first place.
> > So... for now I just said screw it, pulled my free app and released
> > my paid-for app. I guess those 2000 downloads and 4+ star rating mean
> > nothing now.
> > On Feb 20, 1:28 pm, Jay-andro <jayan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Yes, the problem though is that the free app is very feature rich and
> > > was always intended to convert to paid. I just didnt realize that
> > > Google wont allow me to flip the price from free to paid when the paid
> > > market launches. I had always intended for the free users to keep the
> > > full free product if they want no upgrades, and new users and upgrade
> > > users would pay the fee.
> > > I think the ambiguities of the distribution agreement and Google's
> > > silence on these topics are causing much unnecessary FUD for
> > > developers....
> > > On Feb 20, 4:16 pm, lbcoder <lbco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > My thoughts would be that you leave the free version in the market
> > > > indefinitely and add your trial/paid app under a different name (in
> > > > order to take away the direct upgrade path). For example, you'll have
> > > > "lite", "trial", and "paid", where theoretically, the trial and paid
> > > > versions will be more feature rich than the free version. You can add
> > > > an update to the free version with information pointing users to the
> > > > paid version for more features.
> > > > On Feb 20, 3:35 pm, Jay-andro <jayan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I have a free app that I want to monetize now that the Market supports
> > > > > paid apps. Is the following an ok strategy:
> > > > > 1. Launch new version of Free app that has additional features but is
> > > > > a time-limited trial
> > > > > 2. Launch the same app as a time-unlimited Paid app
> > > > > 3. When the trial expires, the trial app points the user to the Paid
> > > > > app on the Market for purchase
> > > > > In particular I'm wondering if there is anything wrong with Step 1
> > > > > above. I would announce loud & clear in the description that if you
> > > > > are an existing user and want to keep the free app forever with no
> > > > > upgrades, DONT UPGRADE because you then have to lose it or pay after
> > > > > the trial period. Of course users doing a blanket upgrade using the
> > > > > new RC33 feature will not see that message.
did you mean republish a *free* app? I haven't tried it yet but I'm
sure that if you unpublished your app and then republished it that you
would indeed retain the ratings.
On Feb 20, 5:28 pm, Jay-andro <jayan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Question:
> Do you think if you re-Publish a previously unPublished app (same
> package name), it will pick up from where it left off, in terms of
> download counts, ratings, comments etc? I dont have time right now to
> add and test the Free Trial logic, so like you 3D, I want to just
> unpublish my free app and publish my paid-for one. But in a few days I
> want to come back and republish the free app as a trial product.
> Another question:
> I am interpreting 3.3 "You may not collect future charges from users
> for copies of the Products that those users were initially allowed to
> download for free" to mean that you cannot start charging (by way of
> content or subscription fees) for the exact copy/version that they
> downloaded earlier for free. I believe it is permissible for a new
> version of a previously free unlimited product to now be a free
> limited-time trial product. Anyone disagree? Google?
> On Feb 20, 7:34 pm, 3D <ernestgfre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In hindsight, I think what Google should have done would be to
> > restrict the transition of free to paid apps AFTER paid apps went
> > live. If you were one of the folks to get your app up early for free
> > than yeah, you could rack up some ratings.
> > On Feb 20, 4:28 pm, 3D <ernestgfre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > @Jay-andro
> > > I've had the same dilemma. The problem with this strategy is that I
> > > don't think there's a reasonable way to notify those who currently
> > > have your free app NOT to upgrade. When I've upgraded in the past I
> > > remember seeing a list of my installed apps and next to one of them I
> > > would see something like "upgrade now".
> > > It occurred to me that I could "update" my free app and remove some
> > > vital features while allowing the look and feel of the app to remain.
> > > It could also point to the new paid-for app. While this works fine
> > > for NEW users it screws over those who got your app free, fair-and-
> > > square. If we did this, not only would it be super lame on our part,
> > > but I imagine that these folks would rate us down and ruin the
> > > reputation that we wanted to preserve in the first place.
> > > So... for now I just said screw it, pulled my free app and released
> > > my paid-for app. I guess those 2000 downloads and 4+ star rating mean
> > > nothing now.
> > > On Feb 20, 1:28 pm, Jay-andro <jayan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Yes, the problem though is that the free app is very feature rich and
> > > > was always intended to convert to paid. I just didnt realize that
> > > > Google wont allow me to flip the price from free to paid when the paid
> > > > market launches. I had always intended for the free users to keep the
> > > > full free product if they want no upgrades, and new users and upgrade
> > > > users would pay the fee.
> > > > I think the ambiguities of the distribution agreement and Google's
> > > > silence on these topics are causing much unnecessary FUD for
> > > > developers....
> > > > On Feb 20, 4:16 pm, lbcoder <lbco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > My thoughts would be that you leave the free version in the market
> > > > > indefinitely and add your trial/paid app under a different name (in
> > > > > order to take away the direct upgrade path). For example, you'll have
> > > > > "lite", "trial", and "paid", where theoretically, the trial and paid
> > > > > versions will be more feature rich than the free version. You can add
> > > > > an update to the free version with information pointing users to the
> > > > > paid version for more features.
> > > > > On Feb 20, 3:35 pm, Jay-andro <jayan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I have a free app that I want to monetize now that the Market supports
> > > > > > paid apps. Is the following an ok strategy:
> > > > > > 1. Launch new version of Free app that has additional features but is
> > > > > > a time-limited trial
> > > > > > 2. Launch the same app as a time-unlimited Paid app
> > > > > > 3. When the trial expires, the trial app points the user to the Paid
> > > > > > app on the Market for purchase
> > > > > > In particular I'm wondering if there is anything wrong with Step 1
> > > > > > above. I would announce loud & clear in the description that if you
> > > > > > are an existing user and want to keep the free app forever with no
> > > > > > upgrades, DONT UPGRADE because you then have to lose it or pay after
> > > > > > the trial period. Of course users doing a blanket upgrade using the
> > > > > > new RC33 feature will not see that message.
