4 ms·

I think there's a deeper cause behind many of these arguments. People hate to feel ripped off, to a degree that is highly irrational if you assess the impact in

I think there's a deeper cause behind many of these arguments. People hate to feel ripped off, to a degree that is highly irrational if you assess the impact in purely utilitarian terms. Even a billionaire will feel a bit shitty after paying $0.99 for a lemon. There are various reasons why this happens. Partly it's the fact they wasted time researching and purchasing the app, and people's time is usually more important than $0.99 or coffee. Partly it's an innate sense of justice. But the main factor is that we don't like to feel that we screwed up. Even worse if you just paid for an app before learning there's a better one that's free. A good book that covers this is The Paradox of Choice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice:_Why_More_Is_Less http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice:_Why_More...; credit Build and Analyze podcast for raising the topic a while back.)

DougBTX 14y ago
Lets take it that people are worried about being ripped off. If it was easy to return an app for a refund from Apple, would you expect the baseline $0.99 price to go up?
- crazygringo 14y ago
  I totally would. I purchased Dark Sky a couple weeks ago on the recommendation of a friend. I thought the $3.99 price tag was way too steep for what is mostly likely another crappy app, and I would never have bought it if my friend hadn't sung its praises. And it's now one of the most useful apps on my phone, and if it had been a 14-day free trial, I'd happily pay $20 for it. If free trials were available, like are common in the desktop software world, I think app prices could go waaay up.
fleitz 14y ago
Yes, it reminds me of a story about a guy named Joe who spent hours on the phone with the phone company and had the erroneous billing charges removed saving him $11. Joe tells his neighbour Bob of his ordeal and how he got his $11 back, Bob has the same problem and asks whether the Joe could take care of his billing problems with the phone company for $11, but Joe refuses insisting he isn't being paid enough to deal with the phone company for hours.
- gerts 14y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tat The goal is to make it not worth the oppressor's effort to rip you off.
graue 14y ago
This also reminds me of a study mentioned in Dan Ariely's book Predictably Irrational (currently reading, great so far). Tversky and Kahneman gave people two scenarios. You go to buy a new office pen and find one for $25, but then you remember the same pen is on sale for $18 at a store 15 minutes away. Do you go? Most people do. Now you're shopping for a suit and you find a great one for $455, but someone tells you it's on sale for $448 at a store 15 minutes away. This time, most people don't make the trip. So is $7 worth fifteen minutes of your time, or isn't it? We apply a different standard depending on the reference price. I'm not sure this is the same phenomenon that's going on with mobile apps, but a case can be made it's related. Arguably, the reference price is $0, so any deviation from that is going to be treated with the greatest significance. But now I'm just getting back to the OP's point that "Starbucks Has No Free Alternative", from a slightly different angle.

DougBTX 14y ago

Lets take it that people are worried about being ripped off. If it was easy to return an app for a refund from Apple, would you expect the baseline $0.99 price to go up?

crazygringo 14y ago
I totally would. I purchased Dark Sky a couple weeks ago on the recommendation of a friend. I thought the $3.99 price tag was way too steep for what is mostly likely another crappy app, and I would never have bought it if my friend hadn't sung its praises. And it's now one of the most useful apps on my phone, and if it had been a 14-day free trial, I'd happily pay $20 for it. If free trials were available, like are common in the desktop software world, I think app prices could go waaay up.

fleitz 14y ago

Yes, it reminds me of a story about a guy named Joe who spent hours on the phone with the phone company and had the erroneous billing charges removed saving him $11. Joe tells his neighbour Bob of his ordeal and how he got his $11 back, Bob has the same problem and asks whether the Joe could take care of his billing problems with the phone company for $11, but Joe refuses insisting he isn't being paid enough to deal with the phone company for hours.

gerts 14y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tat The goal is to make it not worth the oppressor's effort to rip you off.

graue 14y ago

This also reminds me of a study mentioned in Dan Ariely's book Predictably Irrational (currently reading, great so far). Tversky and Kahneman gave people two scenarios. You go to buy a new office pen and find one for $25, but then you remember the same pen is on sale for $18 at a store 15 minutes away. Do you go? Most people do. Now you're shopping for a suit and you find a great one for $455, but someone tells you it's on sale for $448 at a store 15 minutes away. This time, most people don't make the trip. So is $7 worth fifteen minutes of your time, or isn't it? We apply a different standard depending on the reference price. I'm not sure this is the same phenomenon that's going on with mobile apps, but a case can be made it's related. Arguably, the reference price is $0, so any deviation from that is going to be treated with the greatest significance. But now I'm just getting back to the OP's point that "Starbucks Has No Free Alternative", from a slightly different angle.