View Poll Results: A poll
Voters: 189. You may not vote on this poll
RC Flight Simulator Pricing?
#29
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: , OR
I did it 
New here, just checking in.
Downloaded the CV demo and will try it out with my gamepad, when I can dig it out of a box somewhere. I may try my joysticks first though just to see what the scenery and flight performance is like.

New here, just checking in.
Downloaded the CV demo and will try it out with my gamepad, when I can dig it out of a box somewhere. I may try my joysticks first though just to see what the scenery and flight performance is like.
#30

My Feedback: (5)
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: California
So, roughly 25% of folks would buy one for $100.
Roughly 5% regret buying a sim,
and 5% would never buy a sim.
Roughly 10% would buy something else for the money,
and roughly 55% of folks bought a sim for the money and most of them love it.
!!!!The end!!!!
Roughly 5% regret buying a sim,
and 5% would never buy a sim.
Roughly 10% would buy something else for the money,
and roughly 55% of folks bought a sim for the money and most of them love it.
!!!!The end!!!!
#31
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Millington,
TN
ORIGINAL: 50%plane
So, roughly 25% of folks would buy one for $100.
Roughly 5% regret buying a sim,
and 5% would never buy a sim.
Roughly 10% would buy something else for the money,
and roughly 55% of folks bought a sim for the money and most of them love it.
!!!!The end!!!!
So, roughly 25% of folks would buy one for $100.
Roughly 5% regret buying a sim,
and 5% would never buy a sim.
Roughly 10% would buy something else for the money,
and roughly 55% of folks bought a sim for the money and most of them love it.
!!!!The end!!!!
So in addition to what has been mentioned...
1. 64% of the votes are other than "great deal at $200". This seems to support my original argument that the current crop of flight sims are overpriced.
2. 25% of those polled would likely BE customers at $99. So sales would increase by 25% but net income would be $6336 (64 x $99) vs. $7400 (37 x $200).So this would be contrary to my argument that the magic price would be $99. The company makes more at current levels than at $99. (unless the could significantly increase volume - but the numbers don't support that) So on this point, I am wrong!
3. 32% of the people are price sensitive.
So to me it looks like although many agree that the pricing is not great, there are not enough people to make up the difference at a lower price point. Therefore, I would tend to think that the developers will keep current pricing levels intact unless there is drastic changes in the marketplace or competitive pressure develop to force them to do so.
So I think I was right when I said people don't like the $200 price point, but I was totally wrong in thinking that a $99 price point would draw enough volume to make up the looss of revenue for a price cut.
#32

My Feedback: (5)
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: California
ORIGINAL: NightOne
Well that may be one way to analyze the numbers. I think there are some other things to look at though.
So in addition to what has been mentioned...
1. 64% of the votes are other than "great deal at $200". This seems to support my original argument that the current crop of flight sims are overpriced.
2. 25% of those polled would likely BE customers at $99. So sales would increase by 25% but net income would be $6336 (64 x $99) vs. $7400 (37 x $200).So this would be contrary to my argument that the magic price would be $99. The company makes more at current levels than at $99. (unless the could significantly increase volume - but the numbers don't support that) So on this point, I am wrong!
3. 32% of the people are price sensitive.
So to me it looks like although many agree that the pricing is not great, there are not enough people to make up the difference at a lower price point. Therefore, I would tend to think that the developers will keep current pricing levels intact unless there is drastic changes in the marketplace or competitive pressure develop to force them to do so.
So I think I was right when I said people don't like the $200 price point, but I was totally wrong in thinking that a $99 price point would draw enough volume to make up the looss of revenue for a price cut.
ORIGINAL: 50%plane
So, roughly 25% of folks would buy one for $100.
Roughly 5% regret buying a sim,
and 5% would never buy a sim.
Roughly 10% would buy something else for the money,
and roughly 55% of folks bought a sim for the money and most of them love it.
!!!!The end!!!!
So, roughly 25% of folks would buy one for $100.
Roughly 5% regret buying a sim,
and 5% would never buy a sim.
Roughly 10% would buy something else for the money,
and roughly 55% of folks bought a sim for the money and most of them love it.
!!!!The end!!!!
So in addition to what has been mentioned...
1. 64% of the votes are other than "great deal at $200". This seems to support my original argument that the current crop of flight sims are overpriced.
2. 25% of those polled would likely BE customers at $99. So sales would increase by 25% but net income would be $6336 (64 x $99) vs. $7400 (37 x $200).So this would be contrary to my argument that the magic price would be $99. The company makes more at current levels than at $99. (unless the could significantly increase volume - but the numbers don't support that) So on this point, I am wrong!
3. 32% of the people are price sensitive.
So to me it looks like although many agree that the pricing is not great, there are not enough people to make up the difference at a lower price point. Therefore, I would tend to think that the developers will keep current pricing levels intact unless there is drastic changes in the marketplace or competitive pressure develop to force them to do so.
So I think I was right when I said people don't like the $200 price point, but I was totally wrong in thinking that a $99 price point would draw enough volume to make up the looss of revenue for a price cut.
(roughly)
55% of folks bought a sim and love it!(if they didn't like it, they would have voted for the third option)
5% of folks are irrelevant here as they won't buy a sim
5% hate the sim
10% didn't want to buy a sim and bought something else.
and the rest are tightwads.
#33
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Millington,
TN
No, 55% didn't buy it and love it. To me the distinction between choice 1 and choice 2 is pretty clear. The people who chose #2 weren't rushing out to buy at $200. (it took them awhile)
I think you are looking at it as you want to see it.
For example, if a poll came out about Bush's handling of the war you might see numbers like:
33% say he is doing a good job
33% are neutral
33% say he doing a bad job
The republicans would probably say that 66% of the people don't think that Bush is doing a bad job.
The democrats would probably say that 66% of the people don't think Bush is doing a good job.
However, the only really truths are the 33%. You can't lump the middle 33% to either side.
As far as your 10% (which is currently showing only 7%) - This is not people that didn't buy a sim, but people who didn't buy a $200 sim. At least that was the intent of the question.
Finally, you seem to be you seem to be Pro-Sim status quo and are particularly fanatical about G3. I'm glad you love your G3. You seem to think that I am anti-Sim (which I am not). I'm remaining objective.
Also, I'm not buying jack until I see FSone being that it is so close to release.
So I suppose we can agree to disagree and be nice.
How about my Chicago Bears owning Seattle last Sunday night?
I think you are looking at it as you want to see it.
For example, if a poll came out about Bush's handling of the war you might see numbers like:
33% say he is doing a good job
33% are neutral
33% say he doing a bad job
The republicans would probably say that 66% of the people don't think that Bush is doing a bad job.
The democrats would probably say that 66% of the people don't think Bush is doing a good job.
However, the only really truths are the 33%. You can't lump the middle 33% to either side.
As far as your 10% (which is currently showing only 7%) - This is not people that didn't buy a sim, but people who didn't buy a $200 sim. At least that was the intent of the question.
Finally, you seem to be you seem to be Pro-Sim status quo and are particularly fanatical about G3. I'm glad you love your G3. You seem to think that I am anti-Sim (which I am not). I'm remaining objective.
Also, I'm not buying jack until I see FSone being that it is so close to release.
So I suppose we can agree to disagree and be nice.
How about my Chicago Bears owning Seattle last Sunday night?
#34

My Feedback: (5)
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: California
No, 55% didn't buy it and love it. To me the distinction between choice 1 and choice 2 is pretty clear. The people who chose #2 weren't rushing out to buy at $200. (it took them awhile)
As far as your 10% (which is currently showing only 7%) - This is not people that didn't buy a sim, but people who didn't buy a $200 sim. At least that was the intent of the question.
Finally, you seem to be you seem to be Pro-Sim status quo and are particularly fanatical about G3. I'm glad you love your G3. You seem to think that I am anti-Sim (which I am not). I'm remaining objective.
Also, I'm not buying jack until I see FSone being that it is so close to release.
[link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_4758708/tm.htm]LINK[/link]
50%
#35
Senior Member
OK, the results are there for everyone to see and interpret.
And we've gotten the benefit of deep and insightful interpretation.
The discussions of each other is off topic. Discuss the topic. Not each other.
And we've gotten the benefit of deep and insightful interpretation.
The discussions of each other is off topic. Discuss the topic. Not each other.
#36
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Millington,
TN
ORIGINAL: darock
OK, the results are there for everyone to see and interpret.
And we've gotten the benefit of deep and insightful interpretation.
The discussions of each other is off topic. Discuss the topic. Not each other.
OK, the results are there for everyone to see and interpret.
And we've gotten the benefit of deep and insightful interpretation.
The discussions of each other is off topic. Discuss the topic. Not each other.
................. edited out opinion of other posters ................. grin.......
Can we take a poll on that?

Let people interpret the results how they want. It doesn't matter to me. I found out what I wanted to.
#37
I have had every version of the RealFlight simulators and all the add-ons including the 2 new G3 add-ons. I view the sims as a training tool, not a game. I fly helicopters and I am always working on advanced 3D maneuvers. One crash alone will pay for the simulator. it's worth every penny I have spent on it.
That's my story and i'm sticking to it!
Rod
That's my story and i'm sticking to it!
Rod
#39
Oh well, you can't please everyone.[
] My personal experience with the sims is it has taught me a lot for a lot less money than I would have spent without it.
End of message..beam me up Scotty.
Rod
] My personal experience with the sims is it has taught me a lot for a lot less money than I would have spent without it.End of message..beam me up Scotty.
Rod
#40
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Charlottesville,
VA
Hello all,
I haven't read the entire thread yet, but will do so. I just ordered RFG3 last night. I'm just about to start experimenting with 3D flying and am hoping to minimize repair costs.
I voted the second option on the poll. I've always felt it would be fun to have a sim, but didn't want to pay what I felt was a grossly inflated price.
Now, however, when weighing the cost of the sim against the cost of a couple of bad dirt naps, it doesn't seem so bad.
For what it's worth, the going rate is indeed $200, but Tower is throwing in a $20 merchandise rebate and still allowing the use of a $20 off code (ad number 014ML), which takes the final cost down to $160. I know that doesn't include shipping, but since I was placing the order anyway (props and such), the incremental cost of adding the sim was truly only $160. Oh, and I don't know if this is anything new, but they are also including Add Ons Volume One at no extra charge. I suspect that is a common enticement offered, but don't know that for sure.
Erik
I haven't read the entire thread yet, but will do so. I just ordered RFG3 last night. I'm just about to start experimenting with 3D flying and am hoping to minimize repair costs.
I voted the second option on the poll. I've always felt it would be fun to have a sim, but didn't want to pay what I felt was a grossly inflated price. Now, however, when weighing the cost of the sim against the cost of a couple of bad dirt naps, it doesn't seem so bad.
For what it's worth, the going rate is indeed $200, but Tower is throwing in a $20 merchandise rebate and still allowing the use of a $20 off code (ad number 014ML), which takes the final cost down to $160. I know that doesn't include shipping, but since I was placing the order anyway (props and such), the incremental cost of adding the sim was truly only $160. Oh, and I don't know if this is anything new, but they are also including Add Ons Volume One at no extra charge. I suspect that is a common enticement offered, but don't know that for sure.Erik
#41
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Vancouver,
BC, CANADA
The approximately $200 cost of RC flight simulators isn't unreasonable to me.
What is unreasonable are the upgrade policies. Upgrading to a new version of a simulator rarely makes economic sense. I have no intention of spending $200, and then having the product become obsolete as little as a year later. If I could buy a simulator, and then be guaranteed that upgrading to new releases would never cost more than, say $75, this would be a big incentive for me to buy that simulator.
Malcolm
What is unreasonable are the upgrade policies. Upgrading to a new version of a simulator rarely makes economic sense. I have no intention of spending $200, and then having the product become obsolete as little as a year later. If I could buy a simulator, and then be guaranteed that upgrading to new releases would never cost more than, say $75, this would be a big incentive for me to buy that simulator.
Malcolm
#42
ORIGINAL: 50%plane
If 55% didn't love it, then why did they not vote for: "I bought one for $200 but regret my purchase" ???
Notice the "(ROUGHLY)" before my numbers. I said in my disection that they bought something else. period.
Finally, you seem to be you seem to be Pro-Sim status quo and are particularly fanatical about G3. I'm glad you love your G3. You seem to think that I am anti-Sim (which I am not). I'm remaining objective.
Also, I'm not buying jack until I see FSone being that it is so close to release.
This coming from a guy who was wining about how AFPD ruined his excellent flight skills after a few hours of "play".
[link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_4758708/tm.htm]LINK[/link]
50%
No, 55% didn't buy it and love it. To me the distinction between choice 1 and choice 2 is pretty clear. The people who chose #2 weren't rushing out to buy at $200. (it took them awhile)
As far as your 10% (which is currently showing only 7%) - This is not people that didn't buy a sim, but people who didn't buy a $200 sim. At least that was the intent of the question.
Finally, you seem to be you seem to be Pro-Sim status quo and are particularly fanatical about G3. I'm glad you love your G3. You seem to think that I am anti-Sim (which I am not). I'm remaining objective.
Also, I'm not buying jack until I see FSone being that it is so close to release.
[link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_4758708/tm.htm]LINK[/link]
50%
#43

My Feedback: (5)
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: California
ORIGINAL: malcolmm
The approximately $200 cost of RC flight simulators isn't unreasonable to me.
What is unreasonable are the upgrade policies. Upgrading to a new version of a simulator rarely makes economic sense. I have no intention of spending $200, and then having the product become obsolete as little as a year later. If I could buy a simulator, and then be guaranteed that upgrading to new releases would never cost more than, say $75, this would be a big incentive for me to buy that simulator.
Malcolm
The approximately $200 cost of RC flight simulators isn't unreasonable to me.
What is unreasonable are the upgrade policies. Upgrading to a new version of a simulator rarely makes economic sense. I have no intention of spending $200, and then having the product become obsolete as little as a year later. If I could buy a simulator, and then be guaranteed that upgrading to new releases would never cost more than, say $75, this would be a big incentive for me to buy that simulator.
Malcolm
50%
#44
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Millington,
TN
ORIGINAL: riotgear
Sorry, but that guy is just a bad pilot. Blaming AFPD is just lame. I used AFP and soloed in 2 weekends.
Sorry, but that guy is just a bad pilot. Blaming AFPD is just lame. I used AFP and soloed in 2 weekends.
#45
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Millington,
TN
ORIGINAL: 50%plane
I don't know what sim you are referring to here. FSone has FREE upgrade patches. G3 has FREE upgrade patches.(soon FREE upgrade ot G3.5) and AFPD has patches I believe. All of the aformentioned upgrades are FREE. These patches improve the sim. I see no reason to buy another sim if you already own G3, or FSone. (AFPD and REFLEX were excluded to the fact I don't pay much attention to them anymore) There are no other $200 sims on the market that I'm aware of.
50%
ORIGINAL: malcolmm
The approximately $200 cost of RC flight simulators isn't unreasonable to me.
What is unreasonable are the upgrade policies. Upgrading to a new version of a simulator rarely makes economic sense. I have no intention of spending $200, and then having the product become obsolete as little as a year later. If I could buy a simulator, and then be guaranteed that upgrading to new releases would never cost more than, say $75, this would be a big incentive for me to buy that simulator.
Malcolm
The approximately $200 cost of RC flight simulators isn't unreasonable to me.
What is unreasonable are the upgrade policies. Upgrading to a new version of a simulator rarely makes economic sense. I have no intention of spending $200, and then having the product become obsolete as little as a year later. If I could buy a simulator, and then be guaranteed that upgrading to new releases would never cost more than, say $75, this would be a big incentive for me to buy that simulator.
Malcolm
50%
#46
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Brisbane Qld, AUSTRALIA
I believe the Sims are expensive. Whether that is the required price to recover their production costs and make a reasonable profit. Or is it more than that price because that is what people are willing to pay.
There are a few who own more than one sim. Others who own none as they consider them too expensive.
I own one. I would like to own the major 3 (G3, AFPD, and XTR). But at $200 USD a sim. That would be too much. At $99 USD a sim I probably would.
Comments on the cost of updates is very valid too. Even updating one sim at $30 USD adds up (two expansion packs / updates = $60 USD).
It Appears Real Flight has 5 Add Ons and 2 Expansion packs. Thats $210USD on top of your initial $200USD.
There appears to be many still running G2.
I do think more people would buy them and update them if they were less expensive. The question is, would they make more money through highers sales numbers at lower prices, or continue with fewer sales and upgrades at the higher prices.
There are a few who own more than one sim. Others who own none as they consider them too expensive.
I own one. I would like to own the major 3 (G3, AFPD, and XTR). But at $200 USD a sim. That would be too much. At $99 USD a sim I probably would.
Comments on the cost of updates is very valid too. Even updating one sim at $30 USD adds up (two expansion packs / updates = $60 USD).
It Appears Real Flight has 5 Add Ons and 2 Expansion packs. Thats $210USD on top of your initial $200USD.
There appears to be many still running G2.
I do think more people would buy them and update them if they were less expensive. The question is, would they make more money through highers sales numbers at lower prices, or continue with fewer sales and upgrades at the higher prices.
#48
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Auckland, NEW ZEALAND
I got tru-flite 3d free with my df4. It isn't great but it helps. It would be great if I had a pc that could handle a good sim and a good sim to go with it.
#49
Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Miami, OK
I like being able to play my sim with my computer tx, I think using your real tx with a sim is overlooked, it is very handy for playing with all bells and whistles of your new computer tx. Just a thought, Clink





















