It is very difficult for software sellers to guage how to price a product with near-zero marginal cost. Microsoft prices its products at a level just below that at which it believes governments will step in and use monopoly legislation against them. Adobe has established such a lead over its competitors that it can charge what it likes, and does. Both these companies are hugely profitable because their prices are way out of line with their costs, and they can get away with it.
Capture One seems to set its prices on the basis that people will think that something that costs a lot must be worth a lot.
This is a strategy that works for some companies, but it works because fools have convinced themeselves that there must be a correlation between price and quality.
The wise consumer does a cost/benefit analysis, and buys accordingly.
John
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:40:00 -0600, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: "David Zaninovic" Subject: Re: Capture One Pro vs Adobe RAW converter
Maybe they would sell more of these if they set more realistic price and get paid even more.
I was at a seminar a few years back given by a successful and talented professional photographer.
He said that for every 10% you drop your price, you need to increase sales by 40% to make the same actual profit.
I don't know how many copies of Capture One will sell, but I expect Photoshop will sell several times that number.
Anyway, it is just another consumer commodity with a price on it.
If you think the price is fair, buy it, if you don't, then leave it alone.
William Robb
-- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
-- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.11 - Release Date: 14/04/2005
