Hacker News Reader

Comment by Wingman4l7 | Hacker News Reader

There is no excuse why downloadable content should cost more -- economies of scale, shipping costs, and differences in taxes and exchange rates are all irrelevant. Even in the case of physical goods, the disparity is often drastically more than can be accounted for by the above reasons. This comment sums it up quite well: http://news.cnet.com/8618-1001_3-57568633.html?assetTypeId=1...

There is a parliamentary committee currently looking into this disparity in pricing: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-57568633-92/apple-microsoft...

View on HN

Why would they need an "excuse"? Pricing is only indirectly related to costs; doubly so with software, where gross profit margins are often higher than 90%. Why is this particular arbitrary price bad, while other arbitrary prices aren't? Sure they'd still make money if they charged the same, but so what?

Maybe because it's particularly insulting to the intelligence, especially when your customers are computer savvy people who know just how arbitrary region-based pricing of digital goods is?

Exploiting human irrationality and stupidity is one of the most venerable, time-proven ways of making money.

If you feel your intelligence insulted, then don't buy it...?

(aka, vote with your wallet, and let others do the same)

In this case, voting with your wallet puts you at a competitive disadvantage in your industry. What replaces Photoshop?

If the value you're getting from using Photoshop versus the free alternative is greater than its price, maybe it's not completely arbitrary.

I'm not saying it's without merit, but my blood pressure raises a little every time I hear this argument. It comes across as, "STFU and don't buy if you don't want it!"

When in reality, the original consumer considered this but would rather pursue a more active response than to sulkily and more important silently use something else.

Yes "voting with one's wallet" is certainly an option. But it should not be the sole option as you seem to suggest.

That's fine, there are indeed more options! Nobody mentioned silence :)

You can start a newsletter, informing fellow inflicted customers. Tell your friends and family. Launch a slandering campaign on facebook/internet (within the bounds of law, preferably!). Support a competitor. Promote fewer business regulations, so there are more competitors. Post on Hacker News. Etc &c, depending on one's disposition.

But my blood pressure raises every time I hear someone's blood pressure fluctuated and they want to pass a global regulation affecting everyone (incl. me) because of it. No, thanks.

I, personally, don't want global legislation. I want either companies to not act like total dicks (Pricing in Ethiopia should be lower, pricing in Australia shouldn't be twice as much) OR for the AUS and US governments to make a joint agreement to, at the least, issue a large, nasty "Please Explain" from a body of authority.

But I am also coming from a background where the governmental consumer watchdog is very powerful, so that colours my opinions on what can/should usefully be done.

Or you could pirate it. Not saying that you should...

How about you buy one license and pirate another? That way the price would be roughly equal to what it would have cost if you had bought 2 copies in the US... All is fair in the world :)

So there are often strategies put in place to ensure that an Australian customer can't purchase at the US price, on the basis that... well... fuck you we want your money that's why.

I would agree with your point if digital content producers didn't use geocoding to prevent me from accessing their US store o block non-US credit cards. The problem is not that this price is arbitrary, but that it's not. It's a deliberate, nasty piece of geographical discrimination.

There is no excuse why a movie ticket for a 7:00 PM showing should cost more than a movie ticket for the first showing of the day. If anything it should cost less because there are more people in attendance making the cost per attendee lower. Outrage! Let's get the United Nations, Interpol, and the Parliament to intervene!

The movie ticket represents a claim on some very limited resources (i.e. space inside the theater).

I don't want to be crass but have you heard of this thing called "supply and demand?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand

no excuse is too broad.

If country X holds me liable under their law for selling goods in country X†, then I am either going to have to pay someone to understand that liability and quantify the expected variable cost, or just guess at it and hope.

If country X is a relatively small market for me those fixed costs amortized over the sales are going to be noticeable even if the risk per sale isn't higher than my home country.

␄

† Are they going to arrest me and keep me in jail when I come to speak at a conference? Are they going to nab me when a connecting flight lands on their soil and put me in jail? Are they going to enter a massive default judgement against me if I don't hire a defense each time someone files a claim? Can they collect those?

Downloadable / electronic distribution really has nothing to do with it. They value their product to be significantly more than the average price of a game etc, hence the higher price. If their customers don't think the product is that valuable they will either go out of business because no one is buying it at that price, or they will lower their prices.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com