Online game costs too much

This has been discussed many times before over the yearz. You can rationalize the economic benefits all you want. Others have tried to make a point that the costs of producing the game justifies the cost.

The bottom line is the game is too expensive. It takes forever for leagues to fill. Multiple 12 team leagues should easily fill on the same night if the game were price correctly. Unfortunately, SOM is shortsighted in this area. They should lower their pricepoint. It would likely result in a lot more businesz.

Um, Redrum, I didnt' "rationalize" the economic benefits at all; I provided a clear presentation of the services provided by On-Line Strat and a solid explanation of why the price of the game is a fair charge for those services. Go back and look at them...If you think I was wrong, and can actually show me and the forum how, then do so. Don't just spout polemical platitudes like "The Bottom Line is the game is too expensive" without supporting it or you won't convince anyone.

Now here I could just as easily say "the bottom line is the game is priced fairly," but I would rather convince than rest on platitudes. So, I will refer you back to my earlier post (Apr. 24 2:27 pm) where I presented Strat's main services and the actual costs for those services --31-37 cents a day--and ask you the same question concerning them that I earlier asked Scott:

1. What do you think are better deals out there for 31-37 cents a day?

and

2. If you consider On-Line Strat too expensive at 31-37 cents a day, how much per day would be a fair price for Strat to charge?

I'm looking forward to your (and Scott's) answers.

This has been discussed many times before over the yearz. You can rationalize the economic benefits all you want. Others have tried to make a point that the costs of producing the game justifies the cost.

The bottom line is the game is too expensive. It takes forever for leagues to fill. Multiple 12 team leagues should easily fill on the same night if the game were price correctly. Unfortunately, SOM is shortsighted in this area. They should lower their pricepoint. It would likely result in a lot more businesz.

Um, Redrum, I didnt' "rationalize" the economic benefits at all; I provided a clear presentation of the services provided by On-Line Strat and a solid explanation of why the price of the game is a fair charge for those services. Go back and look at them...If you think I was wrong, and can actually show me and the forum how, then do so. Don't just spout polemical platitudes like "The Bottom Line is the game is too expensive" without supporting it or you won't convince anyone.

Now here I could just as easily say "the bottom line is the game is priced fairly," but I would rather convince than rest on platitudes. So, I will refer you back to my earlier post (Apr. 24 2:27 pm) where I presented Strat's main services and the actual costs for those services --31-37 cents a day--and ask you the same question concerning them that I earlier asked Scott:

1. What do you think are better deals out there for 31-37 cents a day?

and

2. If you consider On-Line Strat too expensive at 31-37 cents a day, how much per day would be a fair price for Strat to charge?

I'm looking forward to your (and Scott's) answers.

l.strether,

I was not referring to "YOU" specifically. I was referring to "you" as in all the people past and present over the years (at SOM and TSN) who made a case that the game is fairly priced. The question is not wheter it is a good deal.

I am not trying to convince anyone and I frankly don't care if I convince anyone. It is a fact. Look at this issue simply from a supply vs demand viewpoint. New leagues are insanely slow to fill. I play exclusively 200m and Live Draft under another name. It is impossible to fill a 12 team league Mon-Wed. And then Thurs-Sun maybe you can fill 1-2 leagues in a good week... Many leagues do not fill, and die a lonely death.

ex. Wheter you spend $16 at the movies for one night's entertainment vs 8 weeks worth of entertainment playing this game is irrelevant. If the movie theatre fills at $16 for that showing, the price is justified.

The problem is there is not enough demand for the product at the current price level. What they really should do is create a tiered price system, so that the more credits you buy, the cheaper the game gets.

This is a pointless argument because SOM does not care if anyone plays or not. You can debate the issue all you want. It won't make a difference.

This has been discussed many times before over the yearz. You can rationalize the economic benefits all you want. Others have tried to make a point that the costs of producing the game justifies the cost.

The bottom line is the game is too expensive. It takes forever for leagues to fill. Multiple 12 team leagues should easily fill on the same night if the game were price correctly. Unfortunately, SOM is shortsighted in this area. They should lower their pricepoint. It would likely result in a lot more businesz.

Um, Redrum, I didnt' "rationalize" the economic benefits at all; I provided a clear presentation of the services provided by On-Line Strat and a solid explanation of why the price of the game is a fair charge for those services. Go back and look at them...If you think I was wrong, and can actually show me and the forum how, then do so. Don't just spout polemical platitudes like "The Bottom Line is the game is too expensive" without supporting it or you won't convince anyone.

Now here I could just as easily say "the bottom line is the game is priced fairly," but I would rather convince than rest on platitudes. So, I will refer you back to my earlier post (Apr. 24 2:27 pm) where I presented Strat's main services and the actual costs for those services --31-37 cents a day--and ask you the same question concerning them that I earlier asked Scott:

1. What do you think are better deals out there for 31-37 cents a day?

and

2. If you consider On-Line Strat too expensive at 31-37 cents a day, how much per day would be a fair price for Strat to charge?

I'm looking forward to your (and Scott's) answers.

l.strether,

I was not referring to "YOU" specifically. I was referring to "you" as in all the people past and present over the years (at SOM and TSN) who made a case that the game is fairly priced. The question is not wheter it is a good deal.

I am not trying to convince anyone and I frankly don't care if I convince anyone. It is a fact. Look at this issue simply from a supply vs demand viewpoint. New leagues are insanely slow to fill. I play exclusively 200m and Live Draft under another name. It is impossible to fill a 12 team league Mon-Wed. And then Thurs-Fri maybe you can fill 1-2 leagues in a good week... Many leagues do not fill, and die a lonely death.

ex. Wheter you spend $16 at the movies for one night's entertainment vs 8 weeks worth of entertainment playing this game is irrelevant. If the movie theatre fills at $16 for that showing, the price is justified.

The problem is there is not enough demand for the product at the current price level. What they really should do is create a tiered price system, so that the more credits you buy, the cheaper the game gets.

This is a pointless argument because SOM does not care if anyone plays or not. You can debate the issue all you want. It won't make a difference.

First of all, it is a question of whether or not it is a good deal. If something is a good deal--and Strat On-Line is, as I've shown in previous posts, a good deal--it is not too expensive. It may (and it may not) be optimal for the dealer to lower the price of their product, but that does not make it a product too expensive for the consumer...such as your "justified" $16 theater showing. Many Strat players complaining about the price are still consuming Strat's product; using your flawed theater logic, that would make the price justified for those consuming players. Sufficient to excessive consumption of an overly expensive product at a particular time, however--as in your theater showing example-- does not negate the expensiveness of the product, but merely indicates the current popularity of that expensive product. So, while On-line Strat players are paying for a good deal on a fairly-priced product, your theater-goers are collectively over-paying (for one night) for a bad deal on an expensive one.

And you can assert "it is a fact" Strat is too expensive all you want, but just asserting it does not make it so if you don't back it up, and you haven't. Yes, leagues can take awhile to fill, but it is not a fact that that is due to the 20 dollar or 5-for-80 dollar price (or to that price alone), since there are many factors that are contributing to this. First of all, there are many more league options for a player than there were when many of us (including myself) started. At the beginning there was just Strat; now we have 60's league, 70's league, 80's league, 90's league, 1986 league, 1999 league, all the unleashed leagues, ATG V, ATG VI, ATG VI NL only...and I think you get the point. With all these league options, of course, individual leagues are going to take longer to fill than they used to; all these league options are sapping up the players. Also, with all these new leagues, players have developed tastes for specialization, exclusivity, and/or variation. So, many players now only play theme leagues, keeper leagues, and/or other private leagues that preclude their participation in any of the other leagues while making their own leagues at times more difficult to fill. Your example of your 200m live draft leagues supports my point. That type of league is an extremely particular (if not peculiar) league that does not attract the regular player. The fact that it is slow to fill cannot reasonably be used to show that On-line Strat is too expensive for the regular consumer.

So, as we see, the fact that leagues take longer to fill does not necessarily make Strat more expensive. Sure, Strat could lower the price and lowering the price would probably bring more consumers--lowering prices almost always does--but it may not be profitable or even feasible for them to do so. And the fact that they could lower the price neither makes Strat too expensive--which I've shown in this and earlier posts that it isn't--nor changes the fact that Strat is currently a good deal, which I've shown in earlier posts that it is. So, in the end, Strat's being expensive or not does hinge on whether or not it is a good deal.

Now, you claim that Strat being a good deal doesnt matter, so I assume you yourself think Strat is a good deal. However, if you don't', I'd like to ask you those questions I asked you in my previous post. I'm pretty sure you avoided answering them before because you know, if you answered them honestly, your answers would support On-line Strat as being a good deal and inexpensive, so, I imagine you'll avoid answering them again:

1. On-line Strat costs 31-37 cents a day; what do you think are better deals out there for 31-37 cents a day?

and

2. If you consider On-line Strat expensive at 31-37 cents a day, how much per day would be a fair price for Strat to charge?...(considering you're advocating Strat to lower their prices, you should especially answer this one)

.......and Strat already does have a tiered pricing system, did you want them to create a new and/or another one?

The best price for SOM online baseball is the price that generates them the most profit. If they dropped their price to say $10/team, the number of players would go up. However, the increased numbers would generate far less revenue than their current price. In fact, they might start losing money, which brings up my next point...

There is a base cost to put this product out. They have several full-time programmers supporting the game. There is the cost of the infrastructure to run the game. There is a cost to support the game from an administrative and customer support standpoint. There is the cost of creating the game in the first place. Add up all these costs and figure out how many leagues you need to run just to break even.

Another point that prevents a cheaper cost is that this is a niche market. SOM online baseball will never be as popular as a World of Warcraft. Too bad, because if we had a five million subscribers to the game, the price would be significantly cheaper. However, because of the nature of the product, SOM could give away their online game and not approach five million subscribers. It's a great game, but it does not appeal to the masses.

I get frustrated at some of the decisions SOM makes. However, pricing isn't one of them. I want them to make a profit. If they don't, we won't have a SOM online game. Just take a look at SOM online football. It cost more to run it than TSN (who ran the game at the time there was a SOM online football) brought in. Hence, no more online football.

Don't get me wrong. I'd love to see SOM lower their prices. But if the current cost is what's needed to pay the bills that make this product possible, I'm more than willing to pay.

blah, blah, blah, blah ,blah.

I am not going to answer your questions because I don't look at it from a standpoint of personal value. I am looking at it from a business standpoint as an issue of supply-demand. Maybe, when I stay it is too expensive you do not understand it in the context that I view it. Maybe, I should clarify and say the price-point is too high to attract sufficient demand to fill leagues on a regular basis.

I am not going to argue with you about spending 37cents on entertainment. Because to me that is not the issue. If you think the product is priced well or underpriced, I suggest you volunteer to pay a higher price.

It doesn't matter. All your arguments have already been made numerous times in years past. Nothing has changed in the last 8 years. I doubt it will change in the next 8 years.

Have fun debating this issue.

I actually did only read it half-way thru the first time. I posted a snide remark initially, which I thought better of. Then I went back and read the rest of your post and edited my comment.

I never whined about the price being too expensive. I just posted why I believe the price-point should be lowered. The price is cheaper than when it was on TSN. And I will say it again...the bottom line is more people will play at a lower price-point.

You can choose to view it from a stand-point of wheter you feel the value compared to other forms of entertainment is worth it to you.

And I will view it, per my previous post, as an issue of supply/demand.

If you are correct, why don't leagues fill constantly? I think if everyone viewed it the same way as you, that would not be a problem.

I think I am done with this topic. But, I always have a problem not getting the last word. Personal issues. lol

Btw - thanks for the new vocabulary word. Polemic platitudes. I really like that. I have to start working that into my everyday conversations.

regards

blah, blah, blah, blah ,blah.

I am not going to answer your questions because I don't look at it from a standpoint of personal value. I am looking at it from a business standpoint as an issue of supply-demand. Maybe, when I stay it is too expensive you do not understand it in the context that I view it. Maybe, I should clarify and say the price-point is too high to attract sufficient demand to fill leagues on a regular basis.

I am not going to argue with you about spending 37cents on entertainment. Because to me that is not the issue. If you think the product is priced well or underpriced, I suggest you volunteer to pay a higher price.

It doesn't matter. All your arguments have already been made numerous times in years past. Nothing has changed in the last 8 years. I doubt it will change in the next 8 years.

Have fun debating this issue.

blah, blah, blah is right; for someone who says he has no interest in debating the issue, you sure keep coming back to yap about it.

Firstly, If you're not factoring in issues of "personal value" to your usage of the word "expensive," then you are misusing the word and should not use it in your arguments; whether or not a product is too "expensive" for a consumer is always contingent on the "personal value" of the consumer...go look up the definition of the word. As to whether or not Strat needs to lower its prices to attract sufficient demand, I explained why that probably is not the case in the second paragraph of my last post--go read it again--and Coyote expounded further on the matter in his recent post.

And you're apparently ok with the 31-37 cent a day price (since you're not going to "argue" the matter")...as you should be. I myself never said that price was too little, so your silly suggestion I pay more and your puerile little eyeroll were
both unwarranted and lame.

Finally, I'd be happy if all my arguments had been made before, particularly since that doesn't change the fact that they are right. In fact, it's good to know there are other smart people out there who agree with me and my accurate and incisive views on the matter.

I, too, have no particular interest in debating the matter further; I'm content with the prices. However, if you ever do want to answer the questions you keep avoiding, or whine further about the prices of a game you keep playing, I'll debate you. Otherwise, I'm cool with the whole issue just going away.

I actually did only read it half-way thru the first time. I posted a snide remark initially, which I thought better of. Then I went back and read the rest of your post and edited my comment.

I never whined about the price being too expensive. I just posted why I believe the price-point should be lowered. The price is cheaper than when it was on TSN. And I will say it again...the bottom line is more people will play at a lower price-point.

You can choose to view it from a stand-point of wheter you feel the value compared to other forms of entertainment is worth it to you.

And I will view it, per my previous post, as an issue of supply/demand.

If you are correct, why don't leagues fill constantly? I think if everyone viewed it the same way as you, that would not be a problem.

I think I am done with this topic. But, I always have a problem not getting the last word. Personal issues. lol

Btw - thanks for the new vocabulary word. Polemic platitudes. I really like that. I have to start working that into my everyday conversations.

regards

Lol, I repeat again, you really like talking about this issue you claim to have no interest in debating.

Anyway, your question about why On-line Strat isn't filling "constantly" is irrelevant. Strat's success--for itself and its consumers--is not contingent on its leagues filling constantly, but on them filling at a rate acceptable by most of its consumers and profitable for Strat. I did, however, explain--in the second paragraph of my Sun/May4/12:50pm post--why leagues are primarily filling at their current rate and why you are mistaken to view the matter primarily as an issue of supply and demand. Go read it again, and if you want to continue discussion, I will...but I assume you don't.

I'm glad you like "polemical platitude," and I wish you well with it...particularly since you keep spouting polemical platitudes about "the bottom line"...

Peace

"I play exclusively 200m and Live Draft under another name. It is impossible to fill a 12 team league Mon-Wed. And then Thurs-Sun maybe you can fill 1-2 leagues in a good week... Many leagues do not fill, and die a lonely death"

"The problem is there is not enough demand for the product at the current price level."

The cost isn't the problem, the lack of demand to play $200M leagues is the problem. SOM like any other business would simply eliminate this option rather than cut the price.

I havent checked this post in awhile so i wasnt aware of the further dis ussion on the subject. So here is my opinion on why its not a good deal at 20.00.

But first let me clarify a cpl things others have stated so to make my position clearer.

What redrum is talking about is something called the supply and deman equilibrium scale. In marketing you try to find this equilibrium at all times when you sell a product or service.

It works like this. You want to sell a product for as much as possible at a price that will make you the most profit. So if your data states that if you price a product at 20.00 you will sell 100 units per month but if you sell at 10.00 you will sell 500 units a month, then you should sell at 10.00 because you will make more money taking into account of course the fixed and variable costs for do so.

What I.strether is talking about is the value is good for him. But that means little to anyone other than him. His opinion is that its worth the price. My opinion is that it is not. My thinking is that if som priced it lower i would buy more teams. I would spend more money over all if the price was lower. If the price was 10.00 i would be less reticent in joining leagues where im less sure i would have fun playing. Or to join a league when my confidence is less strong. I have bought 4 teams so far with 2 being autodrafts and 1 being a multi frwnchise draft and one being a live draft.

At 20.00 i will not enter an auto draft again. The learning curve to become good at auto drafts is not worth 20.00 a shot. Going through 10 to 15 auto draft losing seasons in order to become experieced enought at the unique skills needed to auto draft is not worth it especially when i could do a live draft instead and have a much better chance at winning.

I tried the double frachise draft and found it also a waste of 20.00. Unless you are at the top of the draft you are destined to lose. And the losing aspect is my main point on why it is priced to high.

So here are the main points of why its too expensive for me.

1. I personally think that if the price was 10.00 or even 5.00 the loss per individual purchase would be easily outweighed by the increase in the frequency of purchases and the increased retention of and increase of new players joining of players.

2. 20.00 is too much to pay for a losing season or experiment with various drafts and leagues to become skilled at them. If i spend 50.00 playing 10 teams in an auto draft to get the skill i need to compete is much more attractive than 200.00. I get hundreds of hours of fun from the cd rom version for less than 100.00 so spending 200.00 on 10 losing teams to learn how to play autodraft leagues is easy to see as expensive.

Let me reiterate my last point. Spending 20.00 in order to play with a team that is a loser is not worth it to me. So if i am going to spend 20.00 i better do it in a way that i know i can compete as it matters not at all to me 37 cents a day if im spending 10min to 30min a day checking losing box scores each day. Its a chore not a pleasure. 5.00 or perhaps 10.00 a team leaves much less of a bad taste in my mouth. If i win a division every 4 or 5 times i draft it means im spending 80.00 to 100.00 for a fun time as the other times im just in automode of quickly clicking my mouse in order togo do something else more fun.

Scott.