3 ms·

> Still no ability for developers to provide paid upgrades or "active subscription gives you updates" models. While not via the app store itself, you're expect

by judge2020 5y ago

> Still no ability for developers to provide paid upgrades or "active subscription gives you updates" models. While not via the app store itself, you're expected to lock new features behind a new in-app purchase sku, while still providing (security|stability) updates to users who aren't going to pay for new features.

ytpete 5y ago
That doesn't seem like quite the same model though - a new customer has to purchase the base app plus all IAPs in order to gain the full feature set. Whereas in the traditional paid upgrades model, when you pay the full app price you get all current features and then you can pay smaller incremental prices in the future for new-feature updates.
- brimble 5y ago
  You can still structure the IAPs to account for that, no? There's nothing stopping you from creating arbitrary bundles of IAPs, and pricing those bundles separately. One's an upgrade and presented to people who've already bought the last version, another's for new users, and priced higher, but includes the stuff from the earlier version(s).
outcoldman 5y ago
I tried to sell my app in the ways: 1. Free and IAP for Pro features. I knew there are going to be only like 20% of users who would purchase it. And I was fine with that. With this model I got a lot of bad reviews, and some of the felt like fake reviews (my guess from some fake competitive apps, that can generate those fake reviews, like we are talking about in the link - Openly). 2. Because I tired of fake reviews and bad ratings, I have changed the model to something like 50% pay for basic app, 50% for Pro features. Easy change, considering I did not need to change anything in the code. Just change the prices. But now there were real reviews of people who complained about why do you need to pay for Pro if they already purchased the app. Or support emails saying "They purchased a Pro version of the app, but app still asks them to purchase Pro". Which was confusing at first, but at the end I realized that if user pays for an app, he already thinks it is a Pro version. My guess because there are other apps that use "Lite" (free with ads) and "Pro" (paid and no ads) in their names. 3. After that I have removed IAP and made app 100% paid. Ratings recovered from 3.8 to 4.5. I believe I still make the same amount of money. But the idea to give a free version of the app, just did not work for me, I guess.
- starting_fresh 5y ago
  I like that you are selling a frontend for the OS URI handler for 10$. And then there is someone scamming you out of your revenue. A tech savvy standup comedian should be able to get a bit out of this :-)
  - outcoldman 5y ago
    My app makes about 1-2k a month. My guess that those free with IAP apps can make easily the same amount. That will be a very good salary for someone, for example, in India. And scamming with a little profit makes it easier to stay away from some of the eyes.
- criddell 5y ago
  I think some apps create two entries in the app store. One is often something like HN Lite which is the free version and then HN Pro for the paid version. But then I guess you have the problem of reviews being split over the two "different" apps.

ytpete 5y ago

That doesn't seem like quite the same model though - a new customer has to purchase the base app plus all IAPs in order to gain the full feature set. Whereas in the traditional paid upgrades model, when you pay the full app price you get all current features and then you can pay smaller incremental prices in the future for new-feature updates.

brimble 5y ago
You can still structure the IAPs to account for that, no? There's nothing stopping you from creating arbitrary bundles of IAPs, and pricing those bundles separately. One's an upgrade and presented to people who've already bought the last version, another's for new users, and priced higher, but includes the stuff from the earlier version(s).

outcoldman 5y ago

I tried to sell my app in the ways: 1. Free and IAP for Pro features. I knew there are going to be only like 20% of users who would purchase it. And I was fine with that. With this model I got a lot of bad reviews, and some of the felt like fake reviews (my guess from some fake competitive apps, that can generate those fake reviews, like we are talking about in the link - Openly). 2. Because I tired of fake reviews and bad ratings, I have changed the model to something like 50% pay for basic app, 50% for Pro features. Easy change, considering I did not need to change anything in the code. Just change the prices. But now there were real reviews of people who complained about why do you need to pay for Pro if they already purchased the app. Or support emails saying "They purchased a Pro version of the app, but app still asks them to purchase Pro". Which was confusing at first, but at the end I realized that if user pays for an app, he already thinks it is a Pro version. My guess because there are other apps that use "Lite" (free with ads) and "Pro" (paid and no ads) in their names. 3. After that I have removed IAP and made app 100% paid. Ratings recovered from 3.8 to 4.5. I believe I still make the same amount of money. But the idea to give a free version of the app, just did not work for me, I guess.

starting_fresh 5y ago
I like that you are selling a frontend for the OS URI handler for 10$. And then there is someone scamming you out of your revenue. A tech savvy standup comedian should be able to get a bit out of this :-)
- outcoldman 5y ago
  My app makes about 1-2k a month. My guess that those free with IAP apps can make easily the same amount. That will be a very good salary for someone, for example, in India. And scamming with a little profit makes it easier to stay away from some of the eyes.
criddell 5y ago
I think some apps create two entries in the app store. One is often something like HN Lite which is the free version and then HN Pro for the paid version. But then I guess you have the problem of reviews being split over the two "different" apps.