[android-developers] Re: In-App payment options
We currently offer Android developers a simple to use in-app payment application for the Android platform and mobile web. Feel free to drop me a note with any questions. John Loschky j...@billingrevolution.com On Dec 19 2010, 11:43 pm, Tauno Talimaa wrote: > Just to clarify, Rovio is using in-apppaymentsfrom Fortumo > (http://fortumo.com/in-app-payments) - and that's available to 3rd > parties already right now :) > > On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 5:32 PM, JP wrote: > > Also check out Rovio. They're building their own in-app payment system > > they call "Bad Piggy Bank". I read somewhere they wanted to make this > > available to third parties, but that'll take them some time to take > > the market I'm sure. > > > On Dec 16, 7:47 am, Xavier wrote: > >> Thanks JP, never heard of them before, I will take a look. The Android > >> integrations looks pretty good. > > >> On 13 dic, 02:29, JP wrote: > > >> > There's probably a few options, including these guys:http://www.boku.com/ > >> > I ran into one of their staff a couple of weeks ago and asked what > >> > their position on distributing in-app payment based apps in Android > >> > Market was. That that was walking a thin line was acknowledged but > >> > basically they consider it OK to distributebokuin-app-payment based > >> > apps in Android Market. I am not so sure if that holds, but OTOH > >> > Android Market might be losing out in the long run if they don't > >> > support engagement based monetization models. At least where things > >> > stand today, not many starting out dare not to have an engagement > >> > angle to their monetization model. That's my perception anyways, hope > >> > this helps. > > >> > On Dec 11, 11:14 am, Xavier wrote: > > >> > > Hi, > > >> > > Imagine an app distributed outside the Google Market, so no > >> > > restrictions for that. What possibilities do I have to integrate some > >> > > method ofpaymentsinside it? (Paypal is not an option) I guess what I > >> > > should be looking for is some kinf of API from a credit card merchant? > > >> > > Could someone point me on several directions I could begin look at? > > >> > > X. > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "Android Developers" group. > > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: In-App payment options
Just to clarify, Rovio is using in-app payments from Fortumo (http://fortumo.com/in-app-payments) - and that's available to 3rd parties already right now :) On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 5:32 PM, JP wrote: > Also check out Rovio. They're building their own in-app payment system > they call "Bad Piggy Bank". I read somewhere they wanted to make this > available to third parties, but that'll take them some time to take > the market I'm sure. > > On Dec 16, 7:47 am, Xavier wrote: >> Thanks JP, never heard of them before, I will take a look. The Android >> integrations looks pretty good. >> >> On 13 dic, 02:29, JP wrote: >> >> > There's probably a few options, including these guys:http://www.boku.com/ >> > I ran into one of their staff a couple of weeks ago and asked what >> > their position on distributing in-app payment based apps in Android >> > Market was. That that was walking a thin line was acknowledged but >> > basically they consider it OK to distributebokuin-app-payment based >> > apps in Android Market. I am not so sure if that holds, but OTOH >> > Android Market might be losing out in the long run if they don't >> > support engagement based monetization models. At least where things >> > stand today, not many starting out dare not to have an engagement >> > angle to their monetization model. That's my perception anyways, hope >> > this helps. >> >> > On Dec 11, 11:14 am, Xavier wrote: >> >> > > Hi, >> >> > > Imagine an app distributed outside the Google Market, so no >> > > restrictions for that. What possibilities do I have to integrate some >> > > method of payments inside it? (Paypal is not an option) I guess what I >> > > should be looking for is some kinf of API from a credit card merchant? >> >> > > Could someone point me on several directions I could begin look at? >> >> > > X. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: In-App payment options
Also check out Rovio. They're building their own in-app payment system they call "Bad Piggy Bank". I read somewhere they wanted to make this available to third parties, but that'll take them some time to take the market I'm sure. On Dec 16, 7:47 am, Xavier wrote: > Thanks JP, never heard of them before, I will take a look. The Android > integrations looks pretty good. > > On 13 dic, 02:29, JP wrote: > > > There's probably a few options, including these guys:http://www.boku.com/ > > I ran into one of their staff a couple of weeks ago and asked what > > their position on distributing in-app payment based apps in Android > > Market was. That that was walking a thin line was acknowledged but > > basically they consider it OK to distributebokuin-app-payment based > > apps in Android Market. I am not so sure if that holds, but OTOH > > Android Market might be losing out in the long run if they don't > > support engagement based monetization models. At least where things > > stand today, not many starting out dare not to have an engagement > > angle to their monetization model. That's my perception anyways, hope > > this helps. > > > On Dec 11, 11:14 am, Xavier wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Imagine an app distributed outside the Google Market, so no > > > restrictions for that. What possibilities do I have to integrate some > > > method of payments inside it? (Paypal is not an option) I guess what I > > > should be looking for is some kinf of API from a credit card merchant? > > > > Could someone point me on several directions I could begin look at? > > > > X. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: In-App payment options
Thanks JP, never heard of them before, I will take a look. The Android integrations looks pretty good. On 13 dic, 02:29, JP wrote: > There's probably a few options, including these guys:http://www.boku.com/ > I ran into one of their staff a couple of weeks ago and asked what > their position on distributing in-app payment based apps in Android > Market was. That that was walking a thin line was acknowledged but > basically they consider it OK to distribute boku in-app-payment based > apps in Android Market. I am not so sure if that holds, but OTOH > Android Market might be losing out in the long run if they don't > support engagement based monetization models. At least where things > stand today, not many starting out dare not to have an engagement > angle to their monetization model. That's my perception anyways, hope > this helps. > > On Dec 11, 11:14 am, Xavier wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > Imagine an app distributed outside the Google Market, so no > > restrictions for that. What possibilities do I have to integrate some > > method of payments inside it? (Paypal is not an option) I guess what I > > should be looking for is some kinf of API from a credit card merchant? > > > Could someone point me on several directions I could begin look at? > > > X. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: In-App payment options
There's probably a few options, including these guys: http://www.boku.com/ I ran into one of their staff a couple of weeks ago and asked what their position on distributing in-app payment based apps in Android Market was. That that was walking a thin line was acknowledged but basically they consider it OK to distribute boku in-app-payment based apps in Android Market. I am not so sure if that holds, but OTOH Android Market might be losing out in the long run if they don't support engagement based monetization models. At least where things stand today, not many starting out dare not to have an engagement angle to their monetization model. That's my perception anyways, hope this helps. On Dec 11, 11:14 am, Xavier wrote: > Hi, > > Imagine an app distributed outside the Google Market, so no > restrictions for that. What possibilities do I have to integrate some > method of payments inside it? (Paypal is not an option) I guess what I > should be looking for is some kinf of API from a credit card merchant? > > Could someone point me on several directions I could begin look at? > > X. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: In-app payment options
At this point, most of customers appear to refund based on their taste of the app/game and just a few on the fact that it did not work on their device (thanks to the filtering system implemented in the market and developers bringing more stable app), so it might have not been "trial" at the beginning but now really sounds like a trial experience to me;) On Feb 20, 4:15 am, DB wrote: > One benefit is that people would get to try your app... I've > downloaded and paid for tens of apps from Android Market and had no > idea that you could get a 24 hour version of any paid app for > free. :) > > On Feb 19, 10:32 am, Carlo wrote: > > > > > can somebody explain the benefit of a lite version in a market where > > there is 24h trial of the full version for everybody ? > > > On Feb 19, 11:19 pm, Mark Murphy wrote: > > > > Carl Whalley wrote: > > > > Instead of having 2 versions on the market for apps, one lite (free) > > > > and one paid, is it possible to have just the lite one but offer a > > > > payment page in the app which upgraded it once the payment is > > > > received? > > > > If you can find a way to do that while staying within the bounds of the > > > Android Market Developer Distribution Agreement, yes. > > > > It's those pesky agreement terms that have been the issue to date when > > > this topic has come up. > > > > IANALNDIPOOTV (I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV), TINLA (this > > > is not legal advice), and so forth...but my personal interpretation is > > > that the only way you could do in-app payments under the Agreement is if > > > Google offers that feature, the way Apple does. > > > > You're certainly welcome to distribute the app outside of the Market, in > > > which case you will have fewer impediments to your model. > > > > And, you are certainly welcome to seek qualified legal counsel and try > > > to come up with some other loophole. > > > > -- > > > Mark Murphy (a Commons > > > Guy)http://commonsware.com|http://twitter.com/commonsguy > > > > _Android Programming Tutorials_ Version 1.0 In Print!- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: In-app payment options
One benefit is that people would get to try your app... I've downloaded and paid for tens of apps from Android Market and had no idea that you could get a 24 hour version of any paid app for free. :) On Feb 19, 10:32 am, Carlo wrote: > can somebody explain the benefit of a lite version in a market where > there is 24h trial of the full version for everybody ? > > On Feb 19, 11:19 pm, Mark Murphy wrote: > > > > > Carl Whalley wrote: > > > Instead of having 2 versions on the market for apps, one lite (free) > > > and one paid, is it possible to have just the lite one but offer a > > > payment page in the app which upgraded it once the payment is > > > received? > > > If you can find a way to do that while staying within the bounds of the > > Android Market Developer Distribution Agreement, yes. > > > It's those pesky agreement terms that have been the issue to date when > > this topic has come up. > > > IANALNDIPOOTV (I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV), TINLA (this > > is not legal advice), and so forth...but my personal interpretation is > > that the only way you could do in-app payments under the Agreement is if > > Google offers that feature, the way Apple does. > > > You're certainly welcome to distribute the app outside of the Market, in > > which case you will have fewer impediments to your model. > > > And, you are certainly welcome to seek qualified legal counsel and try > > to come up with some other loophole. > > > -- > > Mark Murphy (a Commons > > Guy)http://commonsware.com|http://twitter.com/commonsguy > > > _Android Programming Tutorials_ Version 1.0 In Print!- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: In-app payment options
This is a nice summary Bob. I've learned a lot about the Android Market over the last few months, and I'm a big fan of the Lite/Pro approach to rolling out an app for a couple of reasons. 1. Feedback. Users are more forgiving of beta-quality and rough edges in a free Lite version. Use this good will to explore your application's features and to build good will. Be responsive to your Lite users and do frequent releases to incorporate new features. 2. Springboard for Pro Version. Lite applications are a great marketing tool in-and-of themselves. I think the following steps make a good Lite/Pro mix. - Market the snot out of the Lite version. Get it reviewed, get it discussed on the forums, and get it downloaded as much as possible. - Be patient. You've got to build a good Lite user base because the Lite version is your springboard into success with the Pro version. You will need to wait until you have a substantial user base for the Lite version (I waited until I had 30,000 downloads) before you release your Pro version. - Add key features to Pro. The Pro version should add high-value features for which users showed interest in the Lite version. - Provide an upgrade route. When your pro version is ready, add an "Upgrade to Pro" option in the Lite version. This will give you the ability to "harvest" your Lite user base. The effect of this approach has been truly fascinating to me. I saw an initial surge of movement from Lite to Pro. My most loyal users of Lite were happy to support my efforts, and consequently were also likely to leave the Pro version installed since they were already convinced with the Lite version. This has the effect of stacking the market stats in your favor, and I've seen my Pro version move up very quickly to the top ten in its category, and top 25 overall. Once that happens life gets a lot easier for an app... On Feb 19, 2:18 pm, Bob Kerns wrote: > The 24h trial isn't so much for trial usage as it is to give people > courage to make that download, knowing that they might not like it > once they get to see it, or it might not even work. > > And at the typical price point, you do NOT want to have to support > customers who aren't happy (and won't be happy) with your product. > You want them to just move along. Hopefully without griping on the > comments page for your app! > > Especially since the space for descriptions in the Marketplace is SO > INCREDIBLY LAME. It's a poor channel to communicate what your app > does, so people who SHOULD buy it won't, and people who SHOULDN'T buy > it, will. > > Apple's store is roughly 2x as good. > > And while some use a "lite" version to give a taste, others use it to > provide a full-featured version, but supported by advertising. And > others use a hybrid model -- advertising and limited features -- > generally with the lite version having enough features to satisfy most > users, but for ones who seriously use your app, and need more > features, you give them an upgrade path, and for those disliking ads, > you give them an alternative, too. > > Still others, on each release of their paid version, make the prior > feature set available as their free version. So you get new features, > either way, you just get them sooner if you pay. (This is a less > common model, but I think it's a valid model, and suitable in some > circumstances). > > Lite versions give you more customers, from whom you can learn more > about what features people would like and what what they might pay > for. > > The wealth of free apps of all descriptions, including lite versions, > adds to the richness of the platform, and helps to expand the market > for all of us. > > It sounds to me like what you want is a "time limited trial version", > rather than a lite version. What you can do, instead of an in-app > upgrade, is to simply provide an in-app link to your full paid app in > the market place. Make it available at any time, and make it the only > option when the trial is expired. The user experience would be > similar, but Google and their carrier partners get their 30% cut, and > you stay within the agreement. > > Don't sweat the 2x listings issue. The Marketplace is pretty much > oriented around it, separating "free apps" and "paid apps" at every > opportunity. I'm not that happy with how they do it -- it's a pain, as > a user, and it doesn't do anything to inform users about a paid or > free alternative to the one they're looking at. But it's not your > issue. If you HAVE a free/paid model, or a demo/paid model, just be > sure to mention that in your description! You don't want people to > write off your paid app, because they didn't know they could get a > demo first. > > On Feb 19, 11:00 am, Carlo wrote: > > > about games, if the "more than 24h" is needed i can understand that a > > light version is certainly needed , however 99% of the lite version on > > the markets seems to be a "lighted" version of the paid version (with > > less features
[android-developers] Re: In-app payment options
> Especially since the space for descriptions in the Marketplace is SO > INCREDIBLY LAME. I agree, and specially that we have no extra spaces to list the new features during the update -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: In-app payment options
We shouldn't even be calling a 24h trial. Google doesn't call it that, and it's NOT that. It's a 24h refund policy. It's a buyer security policy, and NOT A TRIAL POLICY. We have to nip that meme in the bud. It's a bad way to think of it for both developers AND for users. If you want a 24-hour demo app CREATE A 24H DEMO APP. Yup, that means you have two apps, and yup, there are drawbacks. But it does put you in control of when to release updates, and how often people get to try. Generally, they get 24-hours (or whatever time you choose) recorded for a particular version. New version, new clock. For a game, I'd suggest making the timer based on play time, rather than clock or calendar time. This 24-hour refund thing is just a (welcome) security blanket for users, and not a marketing tool for we developers. On Feb 19, 11:15 am, TreKing wrote: > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Carlo wrote: > > I thought the 24H trial was installed, in the first > > place, for that exact reason :) > > Yeah, but the problem with this is that the 24 trial is one-time thing per > app for the lifetime of the app. Most apps are under development and would > theoretically see continued improvements / new features over its lifetime so > the one-time trial would not give you any idea about the potential of the > app in the future. If Market allowed a 24-trial per app PER VERSION then > this would be another story so people could try out each version of your app > as it gets released to see if they're ready to purchase, but it does not. > > --- > -- > TreKing - Chicago transit tracking app for Android-powered > deviceshttp://sites.google.com/site/rezmobileapps/treking -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: In-app payment options
The 24h trial isn't so much for trial usage as it is to give people courage to make that download, knowing that they might not like it once they get to see it, or it might not even work. And at the typical price point, you do NOT want to have to support customers who aren't happy (and won't be happy) with your product. You want them to just move along. Hopefully without griping on the comments page for your app! Especially since the space for descriptions in the Marketplace is SO INCREDIBLY LAME. It's a poor channel to communicate what your app does, so people who SHOULD buy it won't, and people who SHOULDN'T buy it, will. Apple's store is roughly 2x as good. And while some use a "lite" version to give a taste, others use it to provide a full-featured version, but supported by advertising. And others use a hybrid model -- advertising and limited features -- generally with the lite version having enough features to satisfy most users, but for ones who seriously use your app, and need more features, you give them an upgrade path, and for those disliking ads, you give them an alternative, too. Still others, on each release of their paid version, make the prior feature set available as their free version. So you get new features, either way, you just get them sooner if you pay. (This is a less common model, but I think it's a valid model, and suitable in some circumstances). Lite versions give you more customers, from whom you can learn more about what features people would like and what what they might pay for. The wealth of free apps of all descriptions, including lite versions, adds to the richness of the platform, and helps to expand the market for all of us. It sounds to me like what you want is a "time limited trial version", rather than a lite version. What you can do, instead of an in-app upgrade, is to simply provide an in-app link to your full paid app in the market place. Make it available at any time, and make it the only option when the trial is expired. The user experience would be similar, but Google and their carrier partners get their 30% cut, and you stay within the agreement. Don't sweat the 2x listings issue. The Marketplace is pretty much oriented around it, separating "free apps" and "paid apps" at every opportunity. I'm not that happy with how they do it -- it's a pain, as a user, and it doesn't do anything to inform users about a paid or free alternative to the one they're looking at. But it's not your issue. If you HAVE a free/paid model, or a demo/paid model, just be sure to mention that in your description! You don't want people to write off your paid app, because they didn't know they could get a demo first. On Feb 19, 11:00 am, Carlo wrote: > about games, if the "more than 24h" is needed i can understand that a > light version is certainly needed , however 99% of the lite version on > the markets seems to be a "lighted" version of the paid version (with > less features) and so customer should better have the taste of the > real full version, ...i am just concerned about the 2x listing and the > flood of the market with multiple listing (look at the iphone appstore > for example), I thought the 24H trial was installed, in the first > place, for that exact reason :) > > On Feb 20, 2:30 am, Angel Cruz wrote: > > > > > Wouldn't the paid version have more features than a free one? The free one > > should be fully functional, but is more of an appetizer for main course (the > > paid version). > > > Also, as the paid version ages and is being retired, some turn them into > > free version eventually. > > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:12 AM, TreKing wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Carlo wrote: > > > >> can somebody explain the benefit of a lite version in a market where > > >> there is 24h trial of the full version for everybody ? > > > > A free version is a good marketing strategy to getting users to your paid > > > app. > > > > Suppose you only had the paid app, which you are actively working on. A > > > user tries it out and uses up there one 24 trial. It doesn't quite have > > > the > > > features they want so they refund. Now your app is lost to them with no > > > way > > > of knowing that you're improving it. Maybe they come across it again in > > > the > > > just in list out of dumb luck and see that it's been updated. But now if > > > they buy it there's no going back - no more refunds. Most people will > > > probably not risk getting stuck with your app if they didn't like it the > > > first time, so they'll pass and you lose out potential sales. > > > > However, if you have a free version, even if it's not quite what the user > > > wants, they'll probably keep it since it's free. As you add features to > > > your > > > paid app, you update your free version as well to fix issues, add some > > > basic > > > features, and let the free-version users know what they get if they get > > > the > > > paid version. Now those that have the free version know
Re: [android-developers] Re: In-app payment options
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Carlo wrote: > I thought the 24H trial was installed, in the first > place, for that exact reason :) > Yeah, but the problem with this is that the 24 trial is one-time thing per app for the lifetime of the app. Most apps are under development and would theoretically see continued improvements / new features over its lifetime so the one-time trial would not give you any idea about the potential of the app in the future. If Market allowed a 24-trial per app PER VERSION then this would be another story so people could try out each version of your app as it gets released to see if they're ready to purchase, but it does not. - TreKing - Chicago transit tracking app for Android-powered devices http://sites.google.com/site/rezmobileapps/treking -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: In-app payment options
about games, if the "more than 24h" is needed i can understand that a light version is certainly needed , however 99% of the lite version on the markets seems to be a "lighted" version of the paid version (with less features) and so customer should better have the taste of the real full version, ...i am just concerned about the 2x listing and the flood of the market with multiple listing (look at the iphone appstore for example), I thought the 24H trial was installed, in the first place, for that exact reason :) On Feb 20, 2:30 am, Angel Cruz wrote: > Wouldn't the paid version have more features than a free one? The free one > should be fully functional, but is more of an appetizer for main course (the > paid version). > > Also, as the paid version ages and is being retired, some turn them into > free version eventually. > > > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:12 AM, TreKing wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Carlo wrote: > > >> can somebody explain the benefit of a lite version in a market where > >> there is 24h trial of the full version for everybody ? > > > A free version is a good marketing strategy to getting users to your paid > > app. > > > Suppose you only had the paid app, which you are actively working on. A > > user tries it out and uses up there one 24 trial. It doesn't quite have the > > features they want so they refund. Now your app is lost to them with no way > > of knowing that you're improving it. Maybe they come across it again in the > > just in list out of dumb luck and see that it's been updated. But now if > > they buy it there's no going back - no more refunds. Most people will > > probably not risk getting stuck with your app if they didn't like it the > > first time, so they'll pass and you lose out potential sales. > > > However, if you have a free version, even if it's not quite what the user > > wants, they'll probably keep it since it's free. As you add features to your > > paid app, you update your free version as well to fix issues, add some basic > > features, and let the free-version users know what they get if they get the > > paid version. Now those that have the free version know that a new version > > of you paid app is available and what they're getting for their money so > > they are more confident about buying and probably won't refund. > > > Essentially, you can use a free version to create a user base of potential > > sales. > > > --- > > -- > > TreKing - Chicago transit tracking app for Android-powered devices > >http://sites.google.com/site/rezmobileapps/treking > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "Android Developers" group. > > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > cr...@googlegroups.com> > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: In-app payment options
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Angel Cruz wrote: > Wouldn't the paid version have more features than a free one? > Yes ... I don't think I said otherwise ... the free version would have limited features but also let the user know what they can get from the full version. > The free one should be fully functional, but is more of an appetizer for > main course (the paid version). > Right ... that's the point ... > Also, as the paid version ages and is being retired, some turn them into > free version eventually. > What? - TreKing - Chicago transit tracking app for Android-powered devices http://sites.google.com/site/rezmobileapps/treking -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: In-app payment options
Wouldn't the paid version have more features than a free one? The free one should be fully functional, but is more of an appetizer for main course (the paid version). Also, as the paid version ages and is being retired, some turn them into free version eventually. On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:12 AM, TreKing wrote: > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Carlo wrote: > >> can somebody explain the benefit of a lite version in a market where >> there is 24h trial of the full version for everybody ? >> > > A free version is a good marketing strategy to getting users to your paid > app. > > Suppose you only had the paid app, which you are actively working on. A > user tries it out and uses up there one 24 trial. It doesn't quite have the > features they want so they refund. Now your app is lost to them with no way > of knowing that you're improving it. Maybe they come across it again in the > just in list out of dumb luck and see that it's been updated. But now if > they buy it there's no going back - no more refunds. Most people will > probably not risk getting stuck with your app if they didn't like it the > first time, so they'll pass and you lose out potential sales. > > However, if you have a free version, even if it's not quite what the user > wants, they'll probably keep it since it's free. As you add features to your > paid app, you update your free version as well to fix issues, add some basic > features, and let the free-version users know what they get if they get the > paid version. Now those that have the free version know that a new version > of you paid app is available and what they're getting for their money so > they are more confident about buying and probably won't refund. > > Essentially, you can use a free version to create a user base of potential > sales. > > > - > TreKing - Chicago transit tracking app for Android-powered devices > http://sites.google.com/site/rezmobileapps/treking > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: In-app payment options
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Carlo wrote: > can somebody explain the benefit of a lite version in a market where > there is 24h trial of the full version for everybody ? > A free version is a good marketing strategy to getting users to your paid app. Suppose you only had the paid app, which you are actively working on. A user tries it out and uses up there one 24 trial. It doesn't quite have the features they want so they refund. Now your app is lost to them with no way of knowing that you're improving it. Maybe they come across it again in the just in list out of dumb luck and see that it's been updated. But now if they buy it there's no going back - no more refunds. Most people will probably not risk getting stuck with your app if they didn't like it the first time, so they'll pass and you lose out potential sales. However, if you have a free version, even if it's not quite what the user wants, they'll probably keep it since it's free. As you add features to your paid app, you update your free version as well to fix issues, add some basic features, and let the free-version users know what they get if they get the paid version. Now those that have the free version know that a new version of you paid app is available and what they're getting for their money so they are more confident about buying and probably won't refund. Essentially, you can use a free version to create a user base of potential sales. - TreKing - Chicago transit tracking app for Android-powered devices http://sites.google.com/site/rezmobileapps/treking -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: In-app payment options
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Carlo wrote: > can somebody explain the benefit of a lite version in a market where > there is 24h trial of the full version for everybody ? > Some products require a longer trial period than 24 hours. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: In-app payment options
can somebody explain the benefit of a lite version in a market where there is 24h trial of the full version for everybody ? On Feb 19, 11:19 pm, Mark Murphy wrote: > Carl Whalley wrote: > > Instead of having 2 versions on the market for apps, one lite (free) > > and one paid, is it possible to have just the lite one but offer a > > payment page in the app which upgraded it once the payment is > > received? > > If you can find a way to do that while staying within the bounds of the > Android Market Developer Distribution Agreement, yes. > > It's those pesky agreement terms that have been the issue to date when > this topic has come up. > > IANALNDIPOOTV (I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV), TINLA (this > is not legal advice), and so forth...but my personal interpretation is > that the only way you could do in-app payments under the Agreement is if > Google offers that feature, the way Apple does. > > You're certainly welcome to distribute the app outside of the Market, in > which case you will have fewer impediments to your model. > > And, you are certainly welcome to seek qualified legal counsel and try > to come up with some other loophole. > > -- > Mark Murphy (a Commons > Guy)http://commonsware.com|http://twitter.com/commonsguy > > _Android Programming Tutorials_ Version 1.0 In Print! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
