Guild Wars 2

^
What Coulter said.

Ya, they should also make fall out 4 50% off if you’re a veteran. They should do the same with Halo 5 and Dark Souls 3. For gosh sakes, I bought the original Halo around 13 years ago and have never once got a discount on any of their next games for being a veteran player. Therefore, I should get an even larger discount. What is the entire gaming industry thinking?

IronEdge.2481:

I have come to notice that new players will be spending only $60 for the entire game and HoT, while original players who have been supporting the community from the beginning will have to pay an additional $60, on top of the $60 they’ve already spent, to obtain the expansion alone. What do we get in return for our loyalty, not to mention our original $60? I suggest Anet get on top of this, since the costume they gave us is hardly a satisfying compensation.

Hopefully, what you got for your $60 was to play the game for however long you wanted to between then and now. I certainly did.

Rewoken.1209:

Bought this game 1 yeas or so ago and i think its a little bit to harsh for veterans to pay full cost of the game when we already haw the game.
Discuss !

There’s already a merged thread about the pricing discussion here: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/hot/HoT-Price-Feedback-Base-game-included-merged/first

There is also nothing to “Discuss!”. You’re a player, but by no means a “veteran” of the game. I’ve been playing GW2 since the beta weekends in Spring 2012, before the launch. Karka event: I was there. Mad King’s first return in over 300 years: I was there. The crazy Wintersday toys: I was there.

I am a veteran of this game. And guess what? I happily payed the $100 for the best version of HoT. Why? Because I support the game I enjoy. I don’t ask for everything free or cheap.

What is this Rage ?? Are your guys from LOL community ? OK i didint use search to find threat about this topic but you all dont need to be such kittens !!
There are people who are spending all there money on games and there are people who dosnt like the thought that he is spending money on Game.
Im the one who dosnt like to spend on game and when i do i would like to spend less on it.
I did bought core game whi do i need to spend same amount to buy expansion ?
If you guys dont haw info on whi cant they lower the price than dont post your Rage thoughts here.
Haw a nice day.

Rewoken.1209:

What is this Rage ?? Are your guys from LOL community ? OK i didint use search to find threat about this topic but you all dont need to be such kittens !!
There are people who are spending all there money on games and there are people who dosnt like the thought that he is spending money on Game.
Im the one who dosnt like to spend on game and when i do i would like to spend less on it.
I did bought core game whi do i need to spend same amount to buy expansion ?
If you guys dont haw info on whi cant they lower the price than dont post your Rage thoughts here.
Haw a nice day.

You dident need to use the search function if you had read the thread titles on the first page you would have seen it.

You have to pay the same anmunt to buy expansion becouse thats what the expansion cost, your welcome to wait for the second expansion and buy that for what they announce that for and get this one for free.

As a veteran who got the game pre-release, with headstart, I too felt a little troubled about having to buy this expansion at full price, and learning that the core game was going Free to Play.
However, I soon came to understand what I think most people on this thread don’t want to understand. And don’t get me wrong, it kinda hurts, I know, but then again.. in the end.. It IS fair.
So:
- We experienced 3 years of amazing experiences(lets say this is subjective, but if you didn’t living through amazing experiences, watching Scarlet die, taking on the Aetherblades, watching the very first Molten Alliance groups show up, or the Ancient Karka ONE-TIME EVENT WE GOT TO SLAY, or how beautiful Kessex Hills ONCE WAS , ask yourself, why have you endured it this long?)
- When we buy the XPack, we’re not just buying the base expansion, but all subsequent updates coming after, until the next expansion hits, which might very well be in another 3 years(admittedly I don’t lie the idea of core-players not getting LS updates with the Living World concept, considering it was one of the highest, if not the highest, selling point of the base GW2). So ask yourself, is 60$/Eur per 3 years worth it? Maybe 10 per month + 50 per 1-2 years is more in line..? And this brings me to the next point.
- GW2 has been about challenging convention. Not to say it’s always been executed in the best manner, but they did change up the formula of things in MMO’s, and changing the formula from a business-model standpoint seems like a natural next step. Don’t think about GW2, but imagine a business model where every 3 years an expansion was released, and every base/expansion prior to that became f2p. That’s what’s happening. And sure, it can SEEM a little off-putting, having to pay for something others who wait 3 years don’t, but then again, it’s 3 years. A lot happens in 3 years. And a lot HAS happened in 3 years. You got to experience content all the new players haven’t. And now all the new players will get to experience content that new players in 3 years won’t get to, at least not in such a fresh and grand scale, cos it’s “new”.

All this is like taking a paid game, and releasing it’s tutorial area for free. As years pass, new content gets added, and a new lower-lvl area gets released for free, just on a much bigger scale.

whispers(I still think veterans deserve a discount)whispers

Mirta.5029:

maddoctor.2738:

As an “old” player you will get -character- times a dye of your choice. Spend it wisely and you can have the price of HoT in no time.

everyone’s 3 year old character will eventually get it. Plus, you can’t sell it. It’s immediately account bound :/

What’s the difference if it’s account bound? You can get some very expensive dyes without paying anything. But anyway someone who starts with HoT will get his 3-year present 3 years after HoT release, by that time you will get your 6th year birthday present (if you started at release). Of course that’s good only if the birthday presents continue to improve (no more Queen Jennah minis please)

guild is now free and hearth of thorns is the same price that normal guild was

I have no idea what exactly you want to say or ask, but here goes. My personal view:

Guild wars CORE game is free with RESTRICTIONS till you are a paying costumer. You become one by either having bought the core game in the past (so old players already are, just the new free download players aren’t) or by buying the new expansion. The later everyone has to do to be able to play the expansion, regardless of already being a paying costumer or becoming one by buying the expansion.

I am a paying costumer as i have bought the core game years ago. So yeah I bought the now free game (but obviously i don’t have the restrictions free to play has so i don’t have exactly the free game, I have better, then again i payed for that obviously.) I have not bought the new expansion yet as I so far knowing what i know feel it’s overpriced. Had i been a totally new player i probably would have bought it as it would also have meant restriction removal.

So I would have gained more by buying it making it feel more it’s money’s worth. I never once thought the core game was overpriced and i gladly payed it and sure found i got my money’s worth. I don’t feel the expansion will give me my money’s worth yet. So I am waiting till I feel it does. This has nothing to do with core game going free or whatnots.

zeldara.4127:

I have no idea what exactly you want to say or ask

“Anybody that paid for the (original) game should get Heart of Thorns for free.”

“Since the game is now free and Heart of Thorns is the same price as the original game, it should be given to existing players for free.”

(maybe)

As it was said SOOOOOOO MANY TIMES:
50$ is HoT price and nothing more (gw2 vanilla was given for free as an offer prior to vanilla wentf2p), therefore it is normal that HoT price hasn’t change since GW2 went f2p.

If you concern about HoT being the same price as GW2 vanilla use to be just remember that you play 3 years for only 50$ and in order to keep doing game update Anet have to pay their employe so if we have to pay 50$ from time to time it’s not a big deal.

PS: i can understand why the price seems high too ^^

I think he’s just stating a fact? Not really worth arguing over this again…

Yes, OP, you are correct. Except that the free version of Guild Wars 2 has many limitations. It’s not exactly the same as the game I purchased.

Technically, HoT is $10 cheaper (9,99 to be exact) than the pre purchase price for gw2. So they aren’t exactly the same price.

This is seriously disappointing. I’ve bought the game long ago for the full price and now to get the expansion, I have to pay again the full price – not just the expansion. 45 euros for an expansion is way too much for any game.

Qumi.1825:

This is seriously disappointing. I’ve bought the game long ago for the full price and now to get the expansion, I have to pay again the full price – not just the expansion. 45 euros for an expansion is way too much for any game.

That is subjective. “Cheap” or “expensive” is something that only each person can decide for themselfs.
What is expensive to you, it is cheap for another.

And about that you have to pay for an expansion, after you paid for the core game, thats the normal way.

I respect that it is expensive to you, but the thing about buying the core and buying the expansion is something normal.
My advice to you is wait 3 years (or whatever) till next expansion, so you can buy the next one, with HoT for free.

And if you want total free-deal: never buy.

PS: of course think about what you’ll miss before taking my advice ^^, hour and hours of amazing gameplay.

Silicato.4603:

And about that you have to pay for an expansion, after you paid for the core game, thats the normal way.

http://www.pcgamesn.com/guildwars/guild-wars-2s-future-we-dont-need-expansion-pay-bills
http://www.usgamer.net/articles/guild-wars-2s-april-update-a-paid-expansion-without-the-paid-part

Everyone should ask in this day and age, where server bandwidth is not very expensive, what are you getting for your money? There are certainly games where you get a good amount of stuff for your money. We just want folks to know there’s a game out there where you don’t have to pay for any of that.

besides these interviews when the game just released they were also promising that you will never have to pay ever again. If there will ever be expansions they will come for free. That kind of was their selling point.

From the articles you linked:

“We don’t need an expansion to pay the bills, and we’re not focused on an expansion right now. I won’t try and predict the future, maybe someday we will do one, maybe we won’t…." Nothing about costs associated with expansions, but pay once to play what you paid for, indeed.

http://www.pcgamesn.com/guildwars/guild-wars-2s-future-we-dont-need-expansion-pay-bills

“We haven’t ruled out the possibility of doing expansions. The things we’re doing now is this big feature pack and the living world content….” Again, the article speaks about Feature Packs and how the author feels it was equal to an expansion (we all know many forum-goers felt that it was just the opposite). Nothing about costs of GW2 expansions, but mention of paid ‘expansions’ (campaigns) in GW1.

http://www.usgamer.net/articles/guild-wars-2s-april-update-a-paid-expansion-without-the-paid-part

We can all pick and choose what parts of articles to quote. =)

Good luck.

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

From the articles you linked:

“We don’t need an expansion to pay the bills, and we’re not focused on an expansion right now. I won’t try and predict the future, maybe someday we will do one, maybe we won’t…." Nothing about costs associated with expansions, but pay once to play what you paid for, indeed.

http://www.pcgamesn.com/guildwars/guild-wars-2s-future-we-dont-need-expansion-pay-bills

“We haven’t ruled out the possibility of doing expansions. The things we’re doing now is this big feature pack and the living world content….” Again, the article speaks about Feature Packs and how the author feels it was equal to an expansion (we all know many forum-goers felt that it was just the opposite). Nothing about costs of GW2 expansions, but mention of paid ‘expansions’ (campaigns) in GW1.

http://www.usgamer.net/articles/guild-wars-2s-april-update-a-paid-expansion-without-the-paid-part

We can all pick and choose what parts of articles to quote. =)

Good luck.

Thank you for that, truly, it puts a whole new light on what has and hasn’t been said.

Mirta.5029:

Silicato.4603:

And about that you have to pay for an expansion, after you paid for the core game, thats the normal way.

http://www.pcgamesn.com/guildwars/guild-wars-2s-future-we-dont-need-expansion-pay-bills
http://www.usgamer.net/articles/guild-wars-2s-april-update-a-paid-expansion-without-the-paid-part

Everyone should ask in this day and age, where server bandwidth is not very expensive, what are you getting for your money? There are certainly games where you get a good amount of stuff for your money. We just want folks to know there’s a game out there where you don’t have to pay for any of that.

besides these interviews when the game just released they were also promising that you will never have to pay ever again. If there will ever be expansions they will come for free. That kind of was their selling point.

That is marketing
Welcome to 2015.
Thats how things are sold nowadays, and for a lot of years before.

Silicato.4603:

Mirta.5029:

Silicato.4603:

And about that you have to pay for an expansion, after you paid for the core game, thats the normal way.

http://www.pcgamesn.com/guildwars/guild-wars-2s-future-we-dont-need-expansion-pay-bills
http://www.usgamer.net/articles/guild-wars-2s-april-update-a-paid-expansion-without-the-paid-part

Everyone should ask in this day and age, where server bandwidth is not very expensive, what are you getting for your money? There are certainly games where you get a good amount of stuff for your money. We just want folks to know there’s a game out there where you don’t have to pay for any of that.

besides these interviews when the game just released they were also promising that you will never have to pay ever again. If there will ever be expansions they will come for free. That kind of was their selling point.

That is marketing
Welcome to 2015.
Thats how things are sold nowadays, and for a lot of years before.

They never said expansions would be free, They said they wouldent have expansion something they then changed since community wanted it.

Linken.6345:

Silicato.4603:

Mirta.5029:

Silicato.4603:

And about that you have to pay for an expansion, after you paid for the core game, thats the normal way.

http://www.pcgamesn.com/guildwars/guild-wars-2s-future-we-dont-need-expansion-pay-bills
http://www.usgamer.net/articles/guild-wars-2s-april-update-a-paid-expansion-without-the-paid-part

Everyone should ask in this day and age, where server bandwidth is not very expensive, what are you getting for your money? There are certainly games where you get a good amount of stuff for your money. We just want folks to know there’s a game out there where you don’t have to pay for any of that.

besides these interviews when the game just released they were also promising that you will never have to pay ever again. If there will ever be expansions they will come for free. That kind of was their selling point.

That is marketing
Welcome to 2015.
Thats how things are sold nowadays, and for a lot of years before.

They never said expansions would be free, They said they wouldent have expansion something they then changed since community wanted it.

I know, but some people like mirta understood, what they wanted to understand. That whats marketing does.

You can sell a house saying:

• I sell a house! (no marketing)
• I sell a beautifull house! (marketing used, and as you can see, beautifull can means whatever each person understand as “beautifull”)
• I sell a beautifull house, but worst that your actual house! (antimarketing used)

ArenaNet, lower expansion price to 30 €. I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold. Just ask Gabe Newell.

VictorTroska.3725:

ArenaNet, lower expansion price to 30 €. I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold. Just ask Gabe Newell.

Not happening in the near future, mate. You buy the game now for the price they are asking, or wait until the expansion goes on sale. Those are your options.

Any cheaper legitimate alternatives for Aussies to get HoT upgrade besides through Anet?

The only thing that bothers me about the pricing is on launch of Gw2 I got the game for $60 AUD . Now, partly due to the horrible usd → aud conversion, it’s $71 for an expansion (standard edition) that I hiiiiiiiighly doubt is going to double the existing content. Struggling to justify it really but I do want to play HoT.

I haven’t played in months, but I was planning to come back for the expansion but I’m not paying £35 for an expansion, especially with the price being inflated by the base game which I already own.

Cool man, see you on launch day.

MrH.2591:

I haven’t played in months, but I was planning to come back for the expansion but I’m not paying £35 for an expansion, especially with the price being inflated by the base game which I already own.

The price is not being inflated, it that for the expansion, and if you do not have the core game for new players, you get it for free.

VictorTroska.3725:

I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold.

Now, when you say, “guarantee,” do you mean that you are willing to financially guarantee this ? Do you have the necessary funds to cover the difference in revenue if your prediction does not come to pass ?

VictorTroska.3725:

ArenaNet, lower expansion price to 30 €. I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold. Just ask Gabe Newell.

As stated someone else, since you guarantee it, are you willing to bet your own money and pay someone else?

The 30 euro your suggesting is about $33.50 in the U.S. How many existing players do you think will not purchase the expansion between now and when Anet does reduce the price? Would the $17.50 loss in sales from each player, be cancelled out by the ones hesitating to buy the expansion now purchasing it? Would the new price bring in enough new players, who would not have bought it at $50, to cancel out the loss Anet would take?

You know you kittened up the pricing when…

There’s a 136 page (on going) thread with + 6.7k replies talking about the pricing…

That and just how poorly handled it was in general – Like the sneaky FAQ change, and other things… ($10 sales… refunds… blah blah blah).

Ayrilana.1396:

VictorTroska.3725:

ArenaNet, lower expansion price to 30 €. I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold. Just ask Gabe Newell.

As stated someone else, since you guarantee it, are you willing to bet your own money and pay someone else?

The 30 euro your suggesting is about $33.50 in the U.S. How many existing players do you think will not purchase the expansion between now and when Anet does reduce the price? Would the $17.50 loss in sales from each player, be cancelled out by the ones hesitating to buy the expansion now purchasing it? Would the new price bring in enough new players, who would not have bought it at $50, to cancel out the loss Anet would take?

thats what finding a price point is all about, I’d say yes. Especially since the cost per consumer is minute, they have nigh infinite inventory, and each new user adds little in terms of cost.
Not to mention a system that profits from selling stuff to players who are fairly engaged with the game.

Of course its impossible to know for sure without testing it both ways. Truth is i probably would have prepurchased without much questions if they had a lower cost and a release date(about 40 bucks). Now that some places are selling it at an even lower price, i still hesitate, because the info they released looks grim. I’m waiting for some critical player feedback now.

of course we ll never no for sure unless we tested both scenarios.

Something tells me this is a decision from on high that the team we interact with can do virtually nothing about. Arenanet undoubtedly has to answer to NCSoft and justify the monetary costs of an expansion of this size with certain price parameters.

This is also pre-order pricing (it will probably go on sale some time after release) they are not a sub-based game, and there is no guarantee that the expansion would give a significant boost to gem store sales, so they have to make up the cost somewhere.

I’m sure all of the grindstone devs wish they could give everybody a free expansion. Probably wish they could give out free candy to all the GW2 fans, too. But keeping the lights on costs money.

The pricing choice may bleed out some old players, but if you look at it from a business perspective, it will probably bring in a lot of new ones too. The idea of giving out the original game free with the expansion means no intimidating wall to people who haven’t played the game before, but hear about it because of the expansion. It is still only a single purchase, which may (at release) be more costly than buying the original game to try it, but psychologically, it’ll be more appealing than two separate purchases.

It would be nice if they found a way to throw vet expansion purchases a bone or two, but I doubt they can do anything about the price itself.

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

VictorTroska.3725:

ArenaNet, lower expansion price to 30 €. I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold. Just ask Gabe Newell.

As stated someone else, since you guarantee it, are you willing to bet your own money and pay someone else?

The 30 euro your suggesting is about $33.50 in the U.S. How many existing players do you think will not purchase the expansion between now and when Anet does reduce the price? Would the $17.50 loss in sales from each player, be cancelled out by the ones hesitating to buy the expansion now purchasing it? Would the new price bring in enough new players, who would not have bought it at $50, to cancel out the loss Anet would take?

thats what finding a price point is all about, I’d say yes. Especially since the cost per consumer is minute, they have nigh infinite inventory, and each new user adds little in terms of cost.
Not to mention a system that profits from selling stuff to players who are fairly engaged with the game.

Of course its impossible to know for sure without testing it both ways. Truth is i probably would have prepurchased without much questions if they had a lower cost and a release date(about 40 bucks). Now that some places are selling it at an even lower price, i still hesitate, because the info they released looks grim. I’m waiting for some critical player feedback now.

of course we ll never no for sure unless we tested both scenarios.

Except if the majority of players were willing to pay the $50 (only Anet would know the actual percentage) then there would be no point in testing to see what would happen if the price were reduced. Based on that, the rest of the players who would forego purchasing the expansion, and the new players who would only have purchased the game if it were at that lower price, would in no way compensate for the loss.

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

VictorTroska.3725:

ArenaNet, lower expansion price to 30 €. I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold. Just ask Gabe Newell.

As stated someone else, since you guarantee it, are you willing to bet your own money and pay someone else?

The 30 euro your suggesting is about $33.50 in the U.S. How many existing players do you think will not purchase the expansion between now and when Anet does reduce the price? Would the $17.50 loss in sales from each player, be cancelled out by the ones hesitating to buy the expansion now purchasing it? Would the new price bring in enough new players, who would not have bought it at $50, to cancel out the loss Anet would take?

thats what finding a price point is all about, I’d say yes. Especially since the cost per consumer is minute, they have nigh infinite inventory, and each new user adds little in terms of cost.
Not to mention a system that profits from selling stuff to players who are fairly engaged with the game.

Of course its impossible to know for sure without testing it both ways. Truth is i probably would have prepurchased without much questions if they had a lower cost and a release date(about 40 bucks). Now that some places are selling it at an even lower price, i still hesitate, because the info they released looks grim. I’m waiting for some critical player feedback now.

of course we ll never no for sure unless we tested both scenarios.

Except if the majority of players were willing to pay the $50 (only Anet would know the actual percentage) then there would be no point in testing to see what would happen if the price were reduced. Based on that, the rest of the players who would forego purchasing the expansion, and the new players who would only have purchased the game if it were at that lower price, would in no way compensate for the loss.

Its fairly likely that the majority of people who bought gw2 did not purchase gw2 hot. Because at this point last time they had already released preorder numbers in the millions.
Not only that, but you couldnt even measure it with the number of initial gw2 sales, because the overall market for MMOs is much higher than gw2 sales ever were.

anyhow, even assuming a perfect non expanding pool of players, your math is wrong, even with a majority of players accepting the price you can still be at a bad price point.

51% of people will buy at 50 dollars
81% of people will buy at 40 dollars
91% of people will buy at 30 dollars

81 is the best price point given that data. Stopping at 51% you would lose out on 27% more earnings.

finding the right price point isnt as simple as majority is ok.

in fact with their system, if they could get the same exact profit, but more customers, they would profit more in the long term.
so IF they could find the proper 81% price that would equal a 51% price point, it would be better to go for the 81% because they would make more money off that extra 30% in the long term

some more math, if dropping the price 10 dollars would have got them even 13% more (of the theoretical maximum amount of players) it would be more profitable directly, and definately more profitable in the long term.

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

VictorTroska.3725:

ArenaNet, lower expansion price to 30 €. I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold. Just ask Gabe Newell.

As stated someone else, since you guarantee it, are you willing to bet your own money and pay someone else?

The 30 euro your suggesting is about $33.50 in the U.S. How many existing players do you think will not purchase the expansion between now and when Anet does reduce the price? Would the $17.50 loss in sales from each player, be cancelled out by the ones hesitating to buy the expansion now purchasing it? Would the new price bring in enough new players, who would not have bought it at $50, to cancel out the loss Anet would take?

thats what finding a price point is all about, I’d say yes. Especially since the cost per consumer is minute, they have nigh infinite inventory, and each new user adds little in terms of cost.
Not to mention a system that profits from selling stuff to players who are fairly engaged with the game.

Of course its impossible to know for sure without testing it both ways. Truth is i probably would have prepurchased without much questions if they had a lower cost and a release date(about 40 bucks). Now that some places are selling it at an even lower price, i still hesitate, because the info they released looks grim. I’m waiting for some critical player feedback now.

of course we ll never no for sure unless we tested both scenarios.

Except if the majority of players were willing to pay the $50 (only Anet would know the actual percentage) then there would be no point in testing to see what would happen if the price were reduced. Based on that, the rest of the players who would forego purchasing the expansion, and the new players who would only have purchased the game if it were at that lower price, would in no way compensate for the loss.

Its fairly likely that the majority of people who bought gw2 did not purchase gw2 hot. Because at this point last time they had already released preorder numbers in the millions.
Not only that, but you couldnt even measure it with the number of initial gw2 sales, because the overall market for MMOs is much higher than gw2 sales ever were.

anyhow, even assuming a perfect non expanding pool of players, your math is wrong, even with a majority of players accepting the price you can still be at a bad price point.

51% of people will buy at 50 dollars
81% of people will buy at 40 dollars
91% of people will buy at 30 dollars

81 is the best price point given that data. Stopping at 51% you would lose out on 27% more earnings.

finding the right price point isnt as simple as majority is ok.

in fact with their system, if they could get the same exact profit, but more customers, they would profit more in the long term.
so IF they could find the proper 81% price that would equal a 51% price point, it would be better to go for the 81% because they would make more money off that extra 30% in the long term

That’s assuming the percentages you listed are accurate. You’re also forgetting about opportunity cost as Anet is loosing out on the difference of the $59 and whatever new price point you set.

I don’t see how my math is wrong when I didn’t even do any.

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

VictorTroska.3725:

ArenaNet, lower expansion price to 30 €. I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold. Just ask Gabe Newell.

As stated someone else, since you guarantee it, are you willing to bet your own money and pay someone else?

The 30 euro your suggesting is about $33.50 in the U.S. How many existing players do you think will not purchase the expansion between now and when Anet does reduce the price? Would the $17.50 loss in sales from each player, be cancelled out by the ones hesitating to buy the expansion now purchasing it? Would the new price bring in enough new players, who would not have bought it at $50, to cancel out the loss Anet would take?

thats what finding a price point is all about, I’d say yes. Especially since the cost per consumer is minute, they have nigh infinite inventory, and each new user adds little in terms of cost.
Not to mention a system that profits from selling stuff to players who are fairly engaged with the game.

Of course its impossible to know for sure without testing it both ways. Truth is i probably would have prepurchased without much questions if they had a lower cost and a release date(about 40 bucks). Now that some places are selling it at an even lower price, i still hesitate, because the info they released looks grim. I’m waiting for some critical player feedback now.

of course we ll never no for sure unless we tested both scenarios.

Except if the majority of players were willing to pay the $50 (only Anet would know the actual percentage) then there would be no point in testing to see what would happen if the price were reduced. Based on that, the rest of the players who would forego purchasing the expansion, and the new players who would only have purchased the game if it were at that lower price, would in no way compensate for the loss.

Its fairly likely that the majority of people who bought gw2 did not purchase gw2 hot. Because at this point last time they had already released preorder numbers in the millions.
Not only that, but you couldnt even measure it with the number of initial gw2 sales, because the overall market for MMOs is much higher than gw2 sales ever were.

anyhow, even assuming a perfect non expanding pool of players, your math is wrong, even with a majority of players accepting the price you can still be at a bad price point.

51% of people will buy at 50 dollars
81% of people will buy at 40 dollars
91% of people will buy at 30 dollars

81 is the best price point given that data. Stopping at 51% you would lose out on 27% more earnings.

finding the right price point isnt as simple as majority is ok.

in fact with their system, if they could get the same exact profit, but more customers, they would profit more in the long term.
so IF they could find the proper 81% price that would equal a 51% price point, it would be better to go for the 81% because they would make more money off that extra 30% in the long term

That’s assuming the percentages you listed are accurate. You’re also forgetting about opportunity cost as Anet is loosing out on the difference of the $59 and whatever new price point you set.

I don’t see how my math is wrong when I didn’t even do any.

the game is 49 dollars not 59, and im including the opportunity cost.

i made up numbers but you dont need to make up the number to see how much more % you need to gain to profit.

you spoke about majority, majority is 51%
if 51% buy at 50 dollars that is equal to 63.5% buying at 40 dollars

so mathematically, if dropping the price gives you 13% more of the total, you would make MORE money.

its just math.
The problem is its generally impossible to find out for certain how much a price point will add to your totals. So you basically guess. People almost always guess wrong. Generally takes years of data to find the right point, and even then you are never certain if it was the right answer at that moment in time.

Based on the initial high backlash though, and the market standard for expansions, i dont think they picked the right price point. You generally dont get a substantial backlash from the right price point.

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

VictorTroska.3725:

ArenaNet, lower expansion price to 30 €. I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold. Just ask Gabe Newell.

As stated someone else, since you guarantee it, are you willing to bet your own money and pay someone else?

The 30 euro your suggesting is about $33.50 in the U.S. How many existing players do you think will not purchase the expansion between now and when Anet does reduce the price? Would the $17.50 loss in sales from each player, be cancelled out by the ones hesitating to buy the expansion now purchasing it? Would the new price bring in enough new players, who would not have bought it at $50, to cancel out the loss Anet would take?

thats what finding a price point is all about, I’d say yes. Especially since the cost per consumer is minute, they have nigh infinite inventory, and each new user adds little in terms of cost.
Not to mention a system that profits from selling stuff to players who are fairly engaged with the game.

Of course its impossible to know for sure without testing it both ways. Truth is i probably would have prepurchased without much questions if they had a lower cost and a release date(about 40 bucks). Now that some places are selling it at an even lower price, i still hesitate, because the info they released looks grim. I’m waiting for some critical player feedback now.

of course we ll never no for sure unless we tested both scenarios.

Except if the majority of players were willing to pay the $50 (only Anet would know the actual percentage) then there would be no point in testing to see what would happen if the price were reduced. Based on that, the rest of the players who would forego purchasing the expansion, and the new players who would only have purchased the game if it were at that lower price, would in no way compensate for the loss.

Its fairly likely that the majority of people who bought gw2 did not purchase gw2 hot. Because at this point last time they had already released preorder numbers in the millions.
Not only that, but you couldnt even measure it with the number of initial gw2 sales, because the overall market for MMOs is much higher than gw2 sales ever were.

anyhow, even assuming a perfect non expanding pool of players, your math is wrong, even with a majority of players accepting the price you can still be at a bad price point.

51% of people will buy at 50 dollars
81% of people will buy at 40 dollars
91% of people will buy at 30 dollars

81 is the best price point given that data. Stopping at 51% you would lose out on 27% more earnings.

finding the right price point isnt as simple as majority is ok.

in fact with their system, if they could get the same exact profit, but more customers, they would profit more in the long term.
so IF they could find the proper 81% price that would equal a 51% price point, it would be better to go for the 81% because they would make more money off that extra 30% in the long term

That’s assuming the percentages you listed are accurate. You’re also forgetting about opportunity cost as Anet is loosing out on the difference of the $59 and whatever new price point you set.

I don’t see how my math is wrong when I didn’t even do any.

the game is 49 dollars not 59, and im including the opportunity cost.

i made up numbers but you dont need to make up the number to see how much more % you need to gain to profit.

you spoke about majority, majority is 51%
if 51% buy at 50 dollars that is equal to 63.5% buying at 40 dollars

so mathematically, if dropping the price gives you 13% more of the total, you would make MORE money.

its just math.
The problem is its generally impossible to find out for certain how much a price point will add to your totals. So you basically guess. People almost always guess wrong. Generally takes years of data to find the right point, and even then you are never certain if it was the right answer at that moment in time.

Based on the initial high backlash though, and the market standard for expansions, i dont think they picked the right price point. You generally dont get a substantial backlash from the right price point.

I had meant $50. Majority means different things and you choosing the lowest possible value for it doesn’t make you any more right.

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

VictorTroska.3725:

ArenaNet, lower expansion price to 30 €. I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold. Just ask Gabe Newell.

As stated someone else, since you guarantee it, are you willing to bet your own money and pay someone else?

The 30 euro your suggesting is about $33.50 in the U.S. How many existing players do you think will not purchase the expansion between now and when Anet does reduce the price? Would the $17.50 loss in sales from each player, be cancelled out by the ones hesitating to buy the expansion now purchasing it? Would the new price bring in enough new players, who would not have bought it at $50, to cancel out the loss Anet would take?

thats what finding a price point is all about, I’d say yes. Especially since the cost per consumer is minute, they have nigh infinite inventory, and each new user adds little in terms of cost.
Not to mention a system that profits from selling stuff to players who are fairly engaged with the game.

Of course its impossible to know for sure without testing it both ways. Truth is i probably would have prepurchased without much questions if they had a lower cost and a release date(about 40 bucks). Now that some places are selling it at an even lower price, i still hesitate, because the info they released looks grim. I’m waiting for some critical player feedback now.

of course we ll never no for sure unless we tested both scenarios.

Except if the majority of players were willing to pay the $50 (only Anet would know the actual percentage) then there would be no point in testing to see what would happen if the price were reduced. Based on that, the rest of the players who would forego purchasing the expansion, and the new players who would only have purchased the game if it were at that lower price, would in no way compensate for the loss.

Its fairly likely that the majority of people who bought gw2 did not purchase gw2 hot. Because at this point last time they had already released preorder numbers in the millions.
Not only that, but you couldnt even measure it with the number of initial gw2 sales, because the overall market for MMOs is much higher than gw2 sales ever were.

anyhow, even assuming a perfect non expanding pool of players, your math is wrong, even with a majority of players accepting the price you can still be at a bad price point.

51% of people will buy at 50 dollars
81% of people will buy at 40 dollars
91% of people will buy at 30 dollars

81 is the best price point given that data. Stopping at 51% you would lose out on 27% more earnings.

finding the right price point isnt as simple as majority is ok.

in fact with their system, if they could get the same exact profit, but more customers, they would profit more in the long term.
so IF they could find the proper 81% price that would equal a 51% price point, it would be better to go for the 81% because they would make more money off that extra 30% in the long term

That’s assuming the percentages you listed are accurate. You’re also forgetting about opportunity cost as Anet is loosing out on the difference of the $59 and whatever new price point you set.

I don’t see how my math is wrong when I didn’t even do any.

the game is 49 dollars not 59, and im including the opportunity cost.

i made up numbers but you dont need to make up the number to see how much more % you need to gain to profit.

you spoke about majority, majority is 51%
if 51% buy at 50 dollars that is equal to 63.5% buying at 40 dollars

so mathematically, if dropping the price gives you 13% more of the total, you would make MORE money.

its just math.
The problem is its generally impossible to find out for certain how much a price point will add to your totals. So you basically guess. People almost always guess wrong. Generally takes years of data to find the right point, and even then you are never certain if it was the right answer at that moment in time.

Based on the initial high backlash though, and the market standard for expansions, i dont think they picked the right price point. You generally dont get a substantial backlash from the right price point.

I had meant $50. Majority means different things and you choosing the lowest possible value for it doesn’t make you any more right.

majority means 51 to 100 % 51 is used to show that majority is not the proper term.
but 51 is arbitrary, it can be many %

71% at 50 is equal to 88.75% at 40 dollars

the point is that losing a minority of people actually can very realistically lose you money.
if a 10 dollar drop is discouraging even 15% of buyers, you could be losing money.
even at 71% satisfaction, if 10 dollars cheaper would get you 18% more people it would be profitable.

now, there are other factors, like outside buyers, but along with that one must consider anet is way better off making the sale themselves than having people who wait for price drops from other retailers.

anyhow main point is for finding the right price point you cant simply look to majorities, its all about ratios

Erm as a company don’t they need to declare to the government what their profit margin is so they can pay tax? You guys are acting like “cost of creating HoT” has no number attached.. You can’t just say “sell for £25 and sell more than £35” they have set a cost of development and projection on sales per unit and clearly have found their projection on £35 is best for the company. They need to generate profit for their shareholders and pay tax and wages and cover costs of development – you can’t just ask them to charge less money and maybe more will be sold…

All these factors need to be worked into the cost of a sale and so slashing 30% off the price to customer impacts the profit margin and that makes the product less viable – remember by law they have shareholders, tax and wages to consider – not to mention company liquidity and future planning – Anet will also be publishing GW2 from now on. Thats a lot of responsibility and burden.

Everyone likes things cheaper, that doesn’t mean the thing you want can survive if it is…

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

VictorTroska.3725:

ArenaNet, lower expansion price to 30 €. I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold. Just ask Gabe Newell.

As stated someone else, since you guarantee it, are you willing to bet your own money and pay someone else?

The 30 euro your suggesting is about $33.50 in the U.S. How many existing players do you think will not purchase the expansion between now and when Anet does reduce the price? Would the $17.50 loss in sales from each player, be cancelled out by the ones hesitating to buy the expansion now purchasing it? Would the new price bring in enough new players, who would not have bought it at $50, to cancel out the loss Anet would take?

thats what finding a price point is all about, I’d say yes. Especially since the cost per consumer is minute, they have nigh infinite inventory, and each new user adds little in terms of cost.
Not to mention a system that profits from selling stuff to players who are fairly engaged with the game.

Of course its impossible to know for sure without testing it both ways. Truth is i probably would have prepurchased without much questions if they had a lower cost and a release date(about 40 bucks). Now that some places are selling it at an even lower price, i still hesitate, because the info they released looks grim. I’m waiting for some critical player feedback now.

of course we ll never no for sure unless we tested both scenarios.

Except if the majority of players were willing to pay the $50 (only Anet would know the actual percentage) then there would be no point in testing to see what would happen if the price were reduced. Based on that, the rest of the players who would forego purchasing the expansion, and the new players who would only have purchased the game if it were at that lower price, would in no way compensate for the loss.

Its fairly likely that the majority of people who bought gw2 did not purchase gw2 hot. Because at this point last time they had already released preorder numbers in the millions.
Not only that, but you couldnt even measure it with the number of initial gw2 sales, because the overall market for MMOs is much higher than gw2 sales ever were.

anyhow, even assuming a perfect non expanding pool of players, your math is wrong, even with a majority of players accepting the price you can still be at a bad price point.

51% of people will buy at 50 dollars
81% of people will buy at 40 dollars
91% of people will buy at 30 dollars

81 is the best price point given that data. Stopping at 51% you would lose out on 27% more earnings.

finding the right price point isnt as simple as majority is ok.

in fact with their system, if they could get the same exact profit, but more customers, they would profit more in the long term.
so IF they could find the proper 81% price that would equal a 51% price point, it would be better to go for the 81% because they would make more money off that extra 30% in the long term

That’s assuming the percentages you listed are accurate. You’re also forgetting about opportunity cost as Anet is loosing out on the difference of the $59 and whatever new price point you set.

I don’t see how my math is wrong when I didn’t even do any.

the game is 49 dollars not 59, and im including the opportunity cost.

i made up numbers but you dont need to make up the number to see how much more % you need to gain to profit.

you spoke about majority, majority is 51%
if 51% buy at 50 dollars that is equal to 63.5% buying at 40 dollars

so mathematically, if dropping the price gives you 13% more of the total, you would make MORE money.

its just math.
The problem is its generally impossible to find out for certain how much a price point will add to your totals. So you basically guess. People almost always guess wrong. Generally takes years of data to find the right point, and even then you are never certain if it was the right answer at that moment in time.

Based on the initial high backlash though, and the market standard for expansions, i dont think they picked the right price point. You generally dont get a substantial backlash from the right price point.

I had meant $50. Majority means different things and you choosing the lowest possible value for it doesn’t make you any more right.

majority means 51 to 100 % 51 is used to show that majority is not the proper term.
but 51 is arbitrary, it can be many %

71% at 50 is equal to 88.75% at 40 dollars

the point is that losing a minority of people actually can very realistically lose you money.
if a 10 dollar drop is discouraging even 15% of buyers, you could be losing money.
even at 71% satisfaction, if 10 dollars cheaper would get you 18% more people it would be profitable.

now, there are other factors, like outside buyers, but along with that one must consider anet is way better off making the sale themselves than having people who wait for price drops from other retailers.

anyhow main point is for finding the right price point you cant simply look to majorities, its all about ratios

I’d go into the math but there’s no reason to. They can sell it at $50 and capture a certain percentage of the player population. They can then sell it at a reduced price later on and capture the rest.

EDIT #1:

Also, which I think you’re ignoring, if 80% of the player base were willing to spend $50 on the expansion, you’d need the entire population to purchase the expansion if it were priced at $40. If more than 80% were willing, then Anet would be taking a loss.

EDIT #2:

Let’s say there’s the player population consists of 100 people, to keep it simple, and we’re comparing between the expansion being $50 or $40.

If 80 people are willing to purchase the expansion at $50, this would bring in revenue of $4,000. In order to match that at $40, you’d need 100 people to purchase it.

If 51 people are willing to purchase the expansion at $50, this would bring in revenue of $2,550. In order to match that at $40, you’d need 63.75 people to purchase it.

If 51 people are willing to purchase the expansion at $50, this would bring in revenue of $2,550. If 49 people would be willing to pay $40, but no more, this would bring in revenue of $1,960. Total revenue would then be $4,510.

Out of option 2 and 3, option 3 is far superior. Anet can capture the sales from those 49 people at a later time. They also would only need 36.25 of those 49 to purchase the expansion at the price of $40 in order to break even with option 2.

The problem you’re not accounting for is how much more of the population will be willing to purchase the expansion at the $50 price between now and when it gets reduced.

Note: I will also add that those examples were out of a population of 100. You can easily refer to them as a percentage instead.

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

VictorTroska.3725:

ArenaNet, lower expansion price to 30 €. I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold. Just ask Gabe Newell.

As stated someone else, since you guarantee it, are you willing to bet your own money and pay someone else?

The 30 euro your suggesting is about $33.50 in the U.S. How many existing players do you think will not purchase the expansion between now and when Anet does reduce the price? Would the $17.50 loss in sales from each player, be cancelled out by the ones hesitating to buy the expansion now purchasing it? Would the new price bring in enough new players, who would not have bought it at $50, to cancel out the loss Anet would take?

thats what finding a price point is all about, I’d say yes. Especially since the cost per consumer is minute, they have nigh infinite inventory, and each new user adds little in terms of cost.
Not to mention a system that profits from selling stuff to players who are fairly engaged with the game.

Of course its impossible to know for sure without testing it both ways. Truth is i probably would have prepurchased without much questions if they had a lower cost and a release date(about 40 bucks). Now that some places are selling it at an even lower price, i still hesitate, because the info they released looks grim. I’m waiting for some critical player feedback now.

of course we ll never no for sure unless we tested both scenarios.

Except if the majority of players were willing to pay the $50 (only Anet would know the actual percentage) then there would be no point in testing to see what would happen if the price were reduced. Based on that, the rest of the players who would forego purchasing the expansion, and the new players who would only have purchased the game if it were at that lower price, would in no way compensate for the loss.

Its fairly likely that the majority of people who bought gw2 did not purchase gw2 hot. Because at this point last time they had already released preorder numbers in the millions.
Not only that, but you couldnt even measure it with the number of initial gw2 sales, because the overall market for MMOs is much higher than gw2 sales ever were.

anyhow, even assuming a perfect non expanding pool of players, your math is wrong, even with a majority of players accepting the price you can still be at a bad price point.

51% of people will buy at 50 dollars
81% of people will buy at 40 dollars
91% of people will buy at 30 dollars

81 is the best price point given that data. Stopping at 51% you would lose out on 27% more earnings.

finding the right price point isnt as simple as majority is ok.

in fact with their system, if they could get the same exact profit, but more customers, they would profit more in the long term.
so IF they could find the proper 81% price that would equal a 51% price point, it would be better to go for the 81% because they would make more money off that extra 30% in the long term

That’s assuming the percentages you listed are accurate. You’re also forgetting about opportunity cost as Anet is loosing out on the difference of the $59 and whatever new price point you set.

I don’t see how my math is wrong when I didn’t even do any.

the game is 49 dollars not 59, and im including the opportunity cost.

i made up numbers but you dont need to make up the number to see how much more % you need to gain to profit.

you spoke about majority, majority is 51%
if 51% buy at 50 dollars that is equal to 63.5% buying at 40 dollars

so mathematically, if dropping the price gives you 13% more of the total, you would make MORE money.

its just math.
The problem is its generally impossible to find out for certain how much a price point will add to your totals. So you basically guess. People almost always guess wrong. Generally takes years of data to find the right point, and even then you are never certain if it was the right answer at that moment in time.

Based on the initial high backlash though, and the market standard for expansions, i dont think they picked the right price point. You generally dont get a substantial backlash from the right price point.

I had meant $50. Majority means different things and you choosing the lowest possible value for it doesn’t make you any more right.

majority means 51 to 100 % 51 is used to show that majority is not the proper term.
but 51 is arbitrary, it can be many %

71% at 50 is equal to 88.75% at 40 dollars

the point is that losing a minority of people actually can very realistically lose you money.
if a 10 dollar drop is discouraging even 15% of buyers, you could be losing money.
even at 71% satisfaction, if 10 dollars cheaper would get you 18% more people it would be profitable.

now, there are other factors, like outside buyers, but along with that one must consider anet is way better off making the sale themselves than having people who wait for price drops from other retailers.

anyhow main point is for finding the right price point you cant simply look to majorities, its all about ratios

I’d go into the math but there’s no reason to. They can sell it at $50 and capture a certain percentage of the player population. They can then sell it at a reduced price later on and capture the rest.

So you are basically saying they are trying to pimp early adopters?
Thats a valid tactic

however, then you start having to add in hard to quantify factors, like hype train derail, competition, whether they buy it from the company or outside vendors, and as they get closer to an expansion, it becomes a bad idea to buy the last expansion.

In general banking a price point based on sales is a bad strategy. Having to put things on sales is usually a result of poor pricing. Any time a customer leaves the store without you making a sale, its less likely you will get them back later

not to mention, the game makes consistent money off highly engaged players. Last i saw they made 5 dollars per month per player on average. That means if some one stops playing because they are waiting for hot to have a sale, and it takes two months for them to buy the game, they lose on average 10 dollars. If it takes 5 months? 25 dollars.

so overall i would say the goal is to get as many people to buy hot initially as possible, they get money up front, and will on average make money off these players each month. Reduces customer dissatisfcation, and people who buy late then find out a new expansion is coming soon and want refunds/money back.

Really i think they thought people would over all love the 50 dollar price tag. They didnt actually believe so many would find it not worth it.

Essentially they didnt think they would lose 12-15% of people at that price point. Will they? its hard to to say.

Coulter.2315:

Erm as a company don’t they need to declare to the government what their profit margin is so they can pay tax? You guys are acting like “cost of creating HoT” has no number attached.. You can’t just say “sell for £25 and sell more than £35” they have set a cost of development and projection on sales per unit and clearly have found their projection on £35 is best for the company. They need to generate profit for their shareholders and pay tax and wages and cover costs of development – you can’t just ask them to charge less money and maybe more will be sold…

All these factors need to be worked into the cost of a sale and so slashing 30% off the price to customer impacts the profit margin and that makes the product less viable – remember by law they have shareholders, tax and wages to consider – not to mention company liquidity and future planning – Anet will also be publishing GW2 from now on. Thats a lot of responsibility and burden.

Everyone likes things cheaper, that doesn’t mean the thing you want can survive if it is…

firstly, my point still stands. In order to consider what you are talking about, you only have to look at raw production costs per customer, not costs of development. This product doesnt have a lot of those costs, especially if they can make people order from them, with a attractive price point and marketing.

for this type of good, especially the way they sell it now.

The initial cost per sale is very low. The main cost is development and standard running of the company. This doesnt really change much based on number of users
This is the type of product that is well matched with a strat that hits as many different customers as possible.

like say for example ; say im making a song to be sold via digital distribution on my website.
The costs are virtually the same whether i sell one song or 1 million songs

now, also imagine on average, the people who buy my song bring in 4 dollars more per month in watching youtube videos, and advertisements on my website.

In this situation, with a extremely low cost per sale, no inventory costs, and distribution costs, my best bet is to sell as many songs as humanly possible while still making the same, or more money.
so if i can choose between selling songs for 25cents at 4 million customers, or selling 100,000 at 10 dollars, i should choose the the 25cent price point.

now of course this is simplified, 25 cents would be unfeasible due to CC transaction costs, but point is, regardless of your development costs, the end result goal is to get as many customers and as much money as you can. You can actually achieve that a lot better with lower price points and still make more money.

phys.7689:

Ayrilana.1396:

VictorTroska.3725:

ArenaNet, lower expansion price to 30 €. I guarantee your sales will increase so much that it will surpass current numbers with 45 € price tag by tenfold. Just ask Gabe Newell.

As stated someone else, since you guarantee it, are you willing to bet your own money and pay someone else?

The 30 euro your suggesting is about $33.50 in the U.S. How many existing players do you think will not purchase the expansion between now and when Anet does reduce the price? Would the $17.50 loss in sales from each player, be cancelled out by the ones hesitating to buy the expansion now purchasing it? Would the new price bring in enough new players, who would not have bought it at $50, to cancel out the loss Anet would take?

thats what finding a price point is all about, I’d say yes. Especially since the cost per consumer is minute, they have nigh infinite inventory, and each new user adds little in terms of cost.
Not to mention a system that profits from selling stuff to players who are fairly engaged with the game.

Of course its impossible to know for sure without testing it both ways. Truth is i probably would have prepurchased without much questions if they had a lower cost and a release date(about 40 bucks). Now that some places are selling it at an even lower price, i still hesitate, because the info they released looks grim. I’m waiting for some critical player feedback now.

of course we ll never no for sure unless we tested both scenarios.

The thing is that the current approach can be both scenarios. The higher price point is paid by those willing or able and a lower price is paid, when HoT goes on sale, by those unwilling or unable to pay the higher price.

If they had started with the lower price then revenue would be lost from those willing to spend more as they are not likely to wait for prices to go up before purchasing.

phys.7689:

Coulter.2315:

Erm as a company don’t they need to declare to the government what their profit margin is so they can pay tax? You guys are acting like “cost of creating HoT” has no number attached.. You can’t just say “sell for £25 and sell more than £35” they have set a cost of development and projection on sales per unit and clearly have found their projection on £35 is best for the company. They need to generate profit for their shareholders and pay tax and wages and cover costs of development – you can’t just ask them to charge less money and maybe more will be sold…

All these factors need to be worked into the cost of a sale and so slashing 30% off the price to customer impacts the profit margin and that makes the product less viable – remember by law they have shareholders, tax and wages to consider – not to mention company liquidity and future planning – Anet will also be publishing GW2 from now on. Thats a lot of responsibility and burden.

Everyone likes things cheaper, that doesn’t mean the thing you want can survive if it is…

firstly, my point still stands. In order to consider what you are talking about, you only have to look at raw production costs per customer, not costs of development. This product doesnt have a lot of those costs, especially if they can make people order from them, with a attractive price point and marketing.

for this type of good, especially the way they sell it now.

The initial cost per sale is very low. The main cost is development and standard running of the company. This doesnt really change much based on number of users
This is the type of product that is well matched with a strat that hits as many different customers as possible.

like say for example ; say im making a song to be sold via digital distribution on my website.
The costs are virtually the same whether i sell one song or 1 million songs

now, also imagine on average, the people who buy my song bring in 4 dollars more per month in watching youtube videos, and advertisements on my website.

In this situation, with a extremely low cost per sale, no inventory costs, and distribution costs, my best bet is to sell as many songs as humanly possible while still making the same, or more money.
so if i can choose between selling songs for 25cents at 4 million customers, or selling 100,000 at 10 dollars, i should choose the the 25cent price point.

now of course this is simplified, 25 cents would be unfeasible due to CC transaction costs, but point is, regardless of your development costs, the end result goal is to get as many customers and as much money as you can. You can actually achieve that a lot better with lower price points and still make more money.

Your words would have more weight if you knew more than a single number, £35. Since you don’t all your saying is “HoT’s publisher has chosen a price to deliberately lose them money, don’t ask how I know but let me tell you about my imaginary music which cost nothing, required no marketing to get 4M customers and had zero distribution costs.”

Did you know that many actual AAA companies have their main seats in the same building in “Backwatertown” in the middle of the USA, where they pay the same % of taxes that your wife or man pays if she has or he a minimum wage part time job? Taxes mean nothing for companies over a certain size, sadly.

A product that is not ripped from your shelves as soon as it appears there is not automatically a failure. It could take some time or a better public relation or adds before it soars. A product that is still collecting dust in your shelves after you advertised it is either made of garbage, unattractive, had a really bad marketing strategy, another product that is simply better than it, is too expensive for the common customer but not exclusive enough for the luxury types or is just plain useless.

There are a lot of great products that vanished from the markets because they were too good and too sturdy(pantyhose for example. A little bit thicker, and they would accompany a woman her whole life), and others stay there in spite of being nearly useless(like any eyepot or apple toy) or substitutable by almost every other similar product on the market, but still it sells like hot cake because people like it for some wacky reason.

We can already safely assume that the maketing campain of Anet was probably garbage at this point, the backlash was terrific and so much of a kick in the balls for them that they even had to make a better offer for the customers with the extra character place. Even if HoT is the best expansion since the invention of the wheel, you can bet your lucky dollar that there was major money going down the drain for them with their first, disastrous offer. What damage was done to the PR department is hard to calculate in money, but it surely has not helped at all.

Coulter.2315:

phys.7689:

Coulter.2315:

Erm as a company don’t they need to declare to the government what their profit margin is so they can pay tax? You guys are acting like “cost of creating HoT” has no number attached.. You can’t just say “sell for £25 and sell more than £35” they have set a cost of development and projection on sales per unit and clearly have found their projection on £35 is best for the company. They need to generate profit for their shareholders and pay tax and wages and cover costs of development – you can’t just ask them to charge less money and maybe more will be sold…

All these factors need to be worked into the cost of a sale and so slashing 30% off the price to customer impacts the profit margin and that makes the product less viable – remember by law they have shareholders, tax and wages to consider – not to mention company liquidity and future planning – Anet will also be publishing GW2 from now on. Thats a lot of responsibility and burden.

Everyone likes things cheaper, that doesn’t mean the thing you want can survive if it is…

firstly, my point still stands. In order to consider what you are talking about, you only have to look at raw production costs per customer, not costs of development. This product doesnt have a lot of those costs, especially if they can make people order from them, with a attractive price point and marketing.

for this type of good, especially the way they sell it now.

The initial cost per sale is very low. The main cost is development and standard running of the company. This doesnt really change much based on number of users
This is the type of product that is well matched with a strat that hits as many different customers as possible.

like say for example ; say im making a song to be sold via digital distribution on my website.
The costs are virtually the same whether i sell one song or 1 million songs

now, also imagine on average, the people who buy my song bring in 4 dollars more per month in watching youtube videos, and advertisements on my website.

In this situation, with a extremely low cost per sale, no inventory costs, and distribution costs, my best bet is to sell as many songs as humanly possible while still making the same, or more money.
so if i can choose between selling songs for 25cents at 4 million customers, or selling 100,000 at 10 dollars, i should choose the the 25cent price point.

now of course this is simplified, 25 cents would be unfeasible due to CC transaction costs, but point is, regardless of your development costs, the end result goal is to get as many customers and as much money as you can. You can actually achieve that a lot better with lower price points and still make more money.

Your words would have more weight if you knew more than a single number, £35. Since you don’t all your saying is “HoT’s publisher has chosen a price to deliberately lose them money, don’t ask how I know but let me tell you about my imaginary music which cost nothing, required no marketing to get 4M customers and had zero distribution costs.”

Im not saying the chose a price to deliberately lose them money, im saying now that we can see how this played out, we can see that most likely they chose the wrong price point.
They decided to charge on the upper teir of expansions (the only one i can name is WoW) with substantially less content in the purchase. Even wow had issues with that price point with more content offered.

Based on the backlash alone, you can tell you chose the wrong price point. People generally dont crazy unless the number you pick just seems wrong to them.

Im sure they didnt do it deliberately, deciding to go above average on your price point is always a gamble, they thought they were winning. I think they overestimated the current perception of anet and the product.

Now i fully concede its possible im wrong, its possible that 80% of the people who hot could have gotten at any price purchased, but from the information available that seems highly unlikely.

They can basically compare people who bought the first gw2 as a theoretical maximum (though its possible to go higher, but improbable) im fairly certain the current re adoption rate of HoT is not large. Might change when its in more stores, but i dont think you ll see numbers like last time, which had like 3 mil in the first few months i think? without a china release.

Short version; I think they made a bad guess, and could have made more money with a different package and marketing.

anyhow im sure they will still profit. They just wont profit as much, with as much good will (my opinion)

It’s not always pricing a product at a price to maximize profit at its release. I showed you an example above where that pricing it at a premium (as some people like to call it), and then reducing the price a little while after its release, could provide you more profit. You’re too focused at an all or nothing where the sales must occur at or before its release or they won’t occur at all.

phys.7689:

Coulter.2315:

phys.7689:

Coulter.2315:

Erm as a company don’t they need to declare to the government what their profit margin is so they can pay tax? You guys are acting like “cost of creating HoT” has no number attached.. You can’t just say “sell for £25 and sell more than £35” they have set a cost of development and projection on sales per unit and clearly have found their projection on £35 is best for the company. They need to generate profit for their shareholders and pay tax and wages and cover costs of development – you can’t just ask them to charge less money and maybe more will be sold…

All these factors need to be worked into the cost of a sale and so slashing 30% off the price to customer impacts the profit margin and that makes the product less viable – remember by law they have shareholders, tax and wages to consider – not to mention company liquidity and future planning – Anet will also be publishing GW2 from now on. Thats a lot of responsibility and burden.

Everyone likes things cheaper, that doesn’t mean the thing you want can survive if it is…

firstly, my point still stands. In order to consider what you are talking about, you only have to look at raw production costs per customer, not costs of development. This product doesnt have a lot of those costs, especially if they can make people order from them, with a attractive price point and marketing.

for this type of good, especially the way they sell it now.

The initial cost per sale is very low. The main cost is development and standard running of the company. This doesnt really change much based on number of users
This is the type of product that is well matched with a strat that hits as many different customers as possible.

like say for example ; say im making a song to be sold via digital distribution on my website.
The costs are virtually the same whether i sell one song or 1 million songs

now, also imagine on average, the people who buy my song bring in 4 dollars more per month in watching youtube videos, and advertisements on my website.

In this situation, with a extremely low cost per sale, no inventory costs, and distribution costs, my best bet is to sell as many songs as humanly possible while still making the same, or more money.
so if i can choose between selling songs for 25cents at 4 million customers, or selling 100,000 at 10 dollars, i should choose the the 25cent price point.

now of course this is simplified, 25 cents would be unfeasible due to CC transaction costs, but point is, regardless of your development costs, the end result goal is to get as many customers and as much money as you can. You can actually achieve that a lot better with lower price points and still make more money.

Your words would have more weight if you knew more than a single number, £35. Since you don’t all your saying is “HoT’s publisher has chosen a price to deliberately lose them money, don’t ask how I know but let me tell you about my imaginary music which cost nothing, required no marketing to get 4M customers and had zero distribution costs.”

Im not saying the chose a price to deliberately lose them money, im saying now that we can see how this played out, we can see that most likely they chose the wrong price point.
They decided to charge on the upper teir of expansions (the only one i can name is WoW) with substantially less content in the purchase. Even wow had issues with that price point with more content offered.

Based on the backlash alone, you can tell you chose the wrong price point. People generally dont crazy unless the number you pick just seems wrong to them.

Im sure they didnt do it deliberately, deciding to go above average on your price point is always a gamble, they thought they were winning. I think they overestimated the current perception of anet and the product.

Now i fully concede its possible im wrong, its possible that 80% of the people who hot could have gotten at any price purchased, but from the information available that seems highly unlikely.

They can basically compare people who bought the first gw2 as a theoretical maximum (though its possible to go higher, but improbable) im fairly certain the current re adoption rate of HoT is not large. Might change when its in more stores, but i dont think you ll see numbers like last time, which had like 3 mil in the first few months i think? without a china release.

Short version; I think they made a bad guess, and could have made more money with a different package and marketing.

anyhow im sure they will still profit. They just wont profit as much, with as much good will (my opinion)

My point is we cannot see how this played out… NONE of us can see the sales figures.. Remember people typing stuff into the forums on this topic is a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of the player base, we just don’t know and asking for a price reduction because “they picked the wrong price” from your position of ignorance has nothing to stand on.