1500 crowns per outfit slot (1 slot) just under $1200 for every slot
-
anitajoneb17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Sorry to say, but market statistics run contrary to what you are saying here. The more likely scenario is they made $1000 to have 10 mildly satisfied customers instead of $5,000 having 100 happy customers.
Except you have ZERO data about that, ZERO statistics regarding the behaviour of ESO players, NOTHING. It's pure assumtion from your side. Marketing doesn't work with assumptions.Like it or not, there is not a single brand on this planet that can charge an 1800% premium on brand strength alone. NOT A SINGLE ONE.
Dior, Mercedes, Rolex, Vuitton, Chanel, Hilton, just to name a few. In fact, ALL luxury businesses do this, and very successfully. And some who are not in the luxury segment manage to overprice significantly and successfully on brand name alone (Apple).Plain and simple, whoever came up with the pricing on these slots is so far out in left field it isn't even funny. I can guarantee, this price cost ZoS a lot of lost revenue. And I do mean a LOT.
Too bad I can't buy your guarantee, I'd make a fortune.
Edited by anitajoneb17_ESO on April 11, 2018 12:10PM0 -
exiars10✭✭✭
Vast majority of marketing people in gaming industry came outside. I talk about big corps (irrelevant if it's public or private like ZeniMax). Those people don't care about gaming culture.
I am baffled how majority of people posting on this forum thinks that ZOS manage marketing and finance. It is always about corporate overlord i.e. it's all about ZeniMax Media. Just look who is sitting in their Board of Directors! Those people want max profit with the least possible investment (which is modus operandi of every business) so don't blame devs who have nothing with it.anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »Morgha_Kul wrote: »The key to a successful business is happy customers.
It's FAR better to make $1000 and have 100 happy customers than to make $1000 and have 1 happy customer and 99 unhappy ones.
But making $5000 and have 60 happy and 40 unhappy customers is much better than making $1000 and have 100 happy customers.
Besides, low prices don't make customers "happy". Depending on the product and the market segment, low prices may just as well devalue the product psychologically, hence reducing the "happiness" expected in the purchase and the use of the product.
Sorry to say, but market statistics run contrary to what you are saying here. The more likely scenario is they made $1000 to have 10 mildly satisfied customers instead of $5,000 having 100 happy customers.
Like it or not, there is not a single brand on this planet that can charge an 1800% premium on brand strength alone. NOT A SINGLE ONE.
Plain and simple, whoever came up with the pricing on these slots is so far out in left field it isn't even funny. I can guarantee, this price cost ZoS a lot of lost revenue. And I do mean a LOT.
Not likely. Corporate Overlords, as you call them, usually just set revenue targets - not get involved in individual pricing. There is usually a product manager in charge of the CS - working with devs to determine what is needed for the CS - and also setting the individual pricing.
That being said, this one was a huge miss. I have no idea, with such established pricing on the market, how you set a price so in the stratosphere people just shake their head and avoid buying it. Additionally, whoever set this price knew it was way out in left field and therefore the lack of clarity in the description. I would be willing to bet many that bought them for the price they are thought they were an account-wide unlock, not a single slot on a single character.
Corporate overlords care about margins, not revenue. That's why they nickle and dim (a talk about AAA game industry). It's all about fat margins i.e. MTXs are cheap to produce but bring huge margins like never before.
Btw, I agree about pricing and all of that.
I don't play ESO since 15.06. because Cyrodiil is broken since Summerset (PvE isn't much better, too)...
Aldmeri Dominion (PC Europe via Steam)
The cowardly Wood Elves are best noted for their unwillingness to engage in a face-to-face attack; a Bosmer will strike at you from every side except the front. You won't cross swords with a Bosmer, but you might catch an arrow in the throat. Be wary in forests and jungles, and watch your back.0 -
Morgha_Kul✭✭✭✭✭
✭anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »Morgha_Kul wrote: »The key to a successful business is happy customers.
It's FAR better to make $1000 and have 100 happy customers than to make $1000 and have 1 happy customer and 99 unhappy ones.
But making $5000 and have 60 happy and 40 unhappy customers is much better than making $1000 and have 100 happy customers.
Besides, low prices don't make customers "happy". Depending on the product and the market segment, low prices may just as well devalue the product psychologically, hence reducing the "happiness" expected in the purchase and the use of the product.
And if you made that $5000 and had 50000 happy customers?
Low prices don't make people happy in and of themselves. It's that they can have the item they want, whatever it is. When they can't have it, especially when the only reason they can't is simple greed, it makes them unhappy.
Unhappy customers talk about being unhappy. That will spread to other customers, including customers you don't have yet... and inspire them to NOT become customers. It damages your business.Exploring Tamriel since 1994.0 -
Morgha_Kul✭✭✭✭✭
✭Like it or not, there is not a single brand on this planet that can charge an 1800% premium on brand strength alone. NOT A SINGLE ONE.
Dior, Mercedes, Rolex, Vuitton, Chanel, Hilton, just to name a few. In fact, ALL luxury businesses do this, and very successfully. And some who are not in the luxury segment manage to overprice significantly and successfully on brand name alone (Apple).
[/quote]
The difference is that those items are ACTUALLY rare. There's limited stock available. In this game there IS no limit on stock. There's no rarity, so the only reason to price them as if they ARE limited is simple greed.Exploring Tamriel since 1994.4 -
OlafdieWaldfee✭✭✭✭I now have installed Votan's Improved Outfit Station and I'm soooo loving it!
I have saved my different outfits (even goes cross-character) and I just have to pay the gold-cost for changing it. That may cost me my daily earnings in some cases (rare cases. Most of my outfits cost around 6 to 7k to change) but saving, sharing and changing outfits without feeding corporate greed is so effin worth it!
Thank you for the tipp!2 -
anitajoneb17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Morgha_Kul wrote: »Like it or not, there is not a single brand on this planet that can charge an 1800% premium on brand strength alone. NOT A SINGLE ONE.
Dior, Mercedes, Rolex, Vuitton, Chanel, Hilton, just to name a few. In fact, ALL luxury businesses do this, and very successfully. And some who are not in the luxury segment manage to overprice significantly and successfully on brand name alone (Apple).
The difference is that those items are ACTUALLY rare. There's limited stock available. In this game there IS no limit on stock. There's no rarity, so the only reason to price them as if they ARE limited is simple greed.
It's the other way around. A Mercedes car is not expensive because it's rare, it's rare because it's expensive.
But you're displacing the debate. The point was "not a single brand on this planet that can charge an 1800% premium on brand strength alone". That's wrong. Many brands can. And do.
0 -
exiars10✭✭✭
Lets not start about Swiss watch industry... where you basicaly pay for marketing (brand) and not watch itself.anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »Morgha_Kul wrote: »Like it or not, there is not a single brand on this planet that can charge an 1800% premium on brand strength alone. NOT A SINGLE ONE.
Dior, Mercedes, Rolex, Vuitton, Chanel, Hilton, just to name a few. In fact, ALL luxury businesses do this, and very successfully. And some who are not in the luxury segment manage to overprice significantly and successfully on brand name alone (Apple).
The difference is that those items are ACTUALLY rare. There's limited stock available. In this game there IS no limit on stock. There's no rarity, so the only reason to price them as if they ARE limited is simple greed.
It's the other way around. A Mercedes car is not expensive because it's rare, it's rare because it's expensive.
But you're displacing the debate. The point was "not a single brand on this planet that can charge an 1800% premium on brand strength alone". That's wrong. Many brands can. And do.
I don't play ESO since 15.06. because Cyrodiil is broken since Summerset (PvE isn't much better, too)...
Aldmeri Dominion (PC Europe via Steam)
The cowardly Wood Elves are best noted for their unwillingness to engage in a face-to-face attack; a Bosmer will strike at you from every side except the front. You won't cross swords with a Bosmer, but you might catch an arrow in the throat. Be wary in forests and jungles, and watch your back.0 -
OrdoHermetica✭✭✭✭✭
✭anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »OrdoHermetica wrote: »But instead, it's this price. Which is literally over 1000% higher than most of the direct competition.
Competition ? What competition ? It's not like you can buy an outfit slot for ESO at Blizzard's.
I get what you mean, but it's the wrong point of view. It's like, if you buy a Ford, you can't get spare parts at Volkswagen.
We're the type of customers called "captive". That's why spare parts for cars (or for anything branded) are so expensive. And that's why ZOS can afford to do that with outfit slots.
Uh... no. No, we're not a captive audience or captive customers. Not by a long shot. There are plenty of competing products out there - and to be clear, the product here is the game itself, not features within the game - that we can choose from. And people can and do make product choices based on the availability and potential added cost of optional features.
If someone was trying to decide what car to buy, whether it's going to cost them an arm and a leg to fix when it breaks down (or if they want to install an optional feature) or not will absolutely be part of that purchasing decision. A competitor with a comparable product in terms of quality but cheaper features/fixes/etc. can definitely lure a would-be customer away, either at the initial point of sale or later on after someone has gotten fed up with paying a ridiculous premium on parts. Or Outfit Slots, in this case.anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »
It's the other way around. A Mercedes car is not expensive because it's rare, it's rare because it's expensive.
But you're displacing the debate. The point was "not a single brand on this planet that can charge an 1800% premium on brand strength alone". That's wrong. Many brands can. And do.
Fair. But ESO is not a luxury product, and the Elder Scrolls is not a luxury brand. In fact, ESO as a product is pretty bargain bin in terms of quality - some great ideas and some fantastic lore and story, but a mail system that's eclipsed by MMOs made 20 years ago, a UI that's frustratingly obtuse and primitive by modern design standards, bugs that can and often do go years without being addressed, lackluster server performance, comparatively limited functionality in long-time industry staples like player housing, etc, etc.
Compared to several of its competitors, ESO lags behind in a number of categories. It does plenty of things right, granted, otherwise we wouldn't be here discussing it. But it's decidedly rough around the edges, and sometimes downright broken in areas, even if its strengths keep it worthwhile on balance. Charging luxury prices for a feature in a game that cannot by any stretch of the imagination be described as a luxury product is... pretty crazy. And that's what they're doing.Edited by OrdoHermetica on April 12, 2018 12:19AM4 -
Wayshuba✭✭✭✭✭Morgha_Kul wrote: »
Dior, Mercedes, Rolex, Vuitton, Chanel, Hilton, just to name a few. In fact, ALL luxury businesses do this, and very successfully. And some who are not in the luxury segment manage to overprice significantly and successfully on brand name alone (Apple).
The difference is that those items are ACTUALLY rare. There's limited stock available. In this game there IS no limit on stock. There's no rarity, so the only reason to price them as if they ARE limited is simple greed.
Go review those brands you mentioned. Yes, they can in fact charge a premium for their brands - but not 1800%. For example, if you look at the priceo n an S-Class versus similarly equipped cars from "lesser" brands you will see it is a bout a 200%-300% differential. Apple pulls about a 30%-40% differential.
What ZoS has done, to follow your example, would be the same as Mercedes changing the price of an S-Class from $120k average to $680k average. That is an example of the difference in price that ZoS thinks it can get with outfit slots. See the absurdity?Edited by Wayshuba on April 12, 2018 10:23AM2 -
MrWesleyPipes✭✭✭We have recently removed a few non-constructive posts.Please be sure to keep this discussion civil and respectful.
HA didnt see that coming jk
should be account wide 1500 per slot per character is outrageous and you should expect negative comments when butcher something like this. not condoning by any means but seriously what did u expect?
2 -
Wayshuba✭✭✭✭✭anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »Except you have ZERO data about that, ZERO statistics regarding the behaviour of ESO players, NOTHING. It's pure assumtion from your side. Marketing doesn't work with assumptions.
Here we go again. What exactly did I write? I have almost 30 years of that data I just mentioned - it is what company's pay me to help them with for a living. What I wrote was an example through decades of doing this stuff. Stop challenging me on things I happen to know very, very well with mountains of data to support my comments. Sure, it may not be the same with ZoS, but in all the years I have been doing this, they would be the FIRST exception I have run into.anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »Dior, Mercedes, Rolex, Vuitton, Chanel, Hilton, just to name a few. In fact, ALL luxury businesses do this, and very successfully. And some who are not in the luxury segment manage to overprice significantly and successfully on brand name alone (Apple).
While I have addressed this is a follow up comment, what you just wrote proves my point. For example, a Lincoln averages $40k in price, a Mercedes S-Class averages $120k. That is a 200% markup differential on Mercedes brand strength. Do you think they would get away with selling an S-Class at $680k instead? That is what an 1800% markup looks like.
Not a single brand you just mentioned can get away with an 1800% markup on their brand strength. NOT ONE. Sure, some brands can get a differential, but that is usually in the 50%-300% range - not 1800%.
One thing I want to point out, I did NOT say no brand can get a premium, many luxury brands do. But no mass market brand on the planet charges an 1800% differential to market base line. Again I will say it - NOT ONE.anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »Too bad I can't buy your guarantee, I'd make a fortune.
No you would lose - a lot. I have done this long enough that many companies hire me - and pay very good money - for me to fix this exact problem. When you have seen this hundreds of times over, it is easy to spot the issues. Unless ZoS is the one exception to the hundreds of companies I have dealt with, you would be taking a big chance on those very low odds.
Every time you respond to me you start with one very bad assumption - that ZoS is the magical example that is different from the rest of the business world. They are not. You also tend to hang on - but you haven't seen their numbers. So what. I have seen enough of these same mistakes in other companies to know when things are being done wrong and in all my years of doing it, I have never seen an exception - not once. So unless ZoS is the one time it is, well good for them.
Edited by Wayshuba on April 12, 2018 10:43AM5 -
Wayshuba✭✭✭✭✭]Morgha_Kul wrote: »The key to a successful business is happy customers.
Not likely. Corporate Overlords, as you call them, usually just set revenue targets - not get involved in individual pricing. There is usually a product manager in charge of the CS - working with devs to determine what is needed for the CS - and also setting the individual pricing.
That being said, this one was a huge miss. I have no idea, with such established pricing on the market, how you set a price so in the stratosphere people just shake their head and avoid buying it. Additionally, whoever set this price knew it was way out in left field and therefore the lack of clarity in the description. I would be willing to bet many that bought them for the price they are thought they were an account-wide unlock, not a single slot on a single character.
Vast majority of marketing people in gaming industry came outside. I talk about big corps (irrelevant if it's public or private like ZeniMax). Those people don't care about gaming culture.
Corporate overlords care about margins, not revenue. That's why they nickle and dim (a talk about AAA game industry). It's all about fat margins i.e. MTXs are cheap to produce but bring huge margins like never before.
Btw, I agree about pricing and all of that.
Yes, margins are important but they view them from two perspectives - margins against fixed assets and those against variable assets.
Variable assets are those where a production or acquisition cost is required for each unit sold. As with manufacturing a car for example. The objective then is to make as much margin as the market will bear on each item sold.
Fixed assets are those were there is a one time cost of production - as with digital goodies in gaming. The objective the becomes to sell as many as possible since each one sold further increases the margin and revenue.
This is why the outfit slot pricing is so baffling. The market in MMOs shows these slots typically sell for under a dollar for a single character slot and about $3 for account wide. ZoS is trying to get $15 for one slot on one character - which is just causing many people not to buy it in the first place. Considering there was a fixed cost in producing it, they are failing on the margin front as the idea is to sell volumes of the stuff after.
I am pretty confident that the $15 price point has severely curtailed the total revenue ZoS could have made on this. This was really a very big miss on their part.Edited by Wayshuba on April 12, 2018 10:54AM3 -
THEKATWOMAN70Soul ShrivenI av been reading some of the post on ere is this a game u can play or KIDS [snip] about ow as got the most gold.As they all say stop spitting ur dummy out and crying over spit milk its just a game were ppl can enjoy not child play.
[Edited to remove profanity]Edited by ZOS_KatP on April 14, 2018 12:46PM0 -
Wayshuba✭✭✭✭✭OlafdieWaldfee wrote: »I now have installed Votan's Improved Outfit Station and I'm soooo loving it!
I have saved my different outfits (even goes cross-character) and I just have to pay the gold-cost for changing it. That may cost me my daily earnings in some cases (rare cases. Most of my outfits cost around 6 to 7k to change) but saving, sharing and changing outfits without feeding corporate greed is so effin worth it!
Thank you for the tipp!
Add-Ons are developed to solve a problem. A mini-map addon solves the lack of one in game.
So what problem was this one trying to solve? That outfit slots are insanely overpriced and few are buying them. This helps address that issue. Just this add on being developed is a sign how far ZoS missed the mark on this with the pricing.1 -
DPShiro✭✭✭✭✭
✭I would buy a few if they were account wide, but for one character? Nope.~ Gryphon Heart ~
~ Immortal Redeemer ~
~ Grand Master Crafter ~
~ Master Angler ~
~ Former Emperor ~4 -
anitajoneb17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Here we go again. What exactly did I write? I have almost 30 years of that data I just mentioned - it is what company's pay me to help them with for a living. What I wrote was an example through decades of doing this stuff. Stop challenging me on things I happen to know very, very well with mountains of data to support my comments. Sure, it may not be the same with ZoS, but in all the years I have been doing this, they would be the FIRST exception I have run into.
And in all your posts, you show only two basic arguments :
1 - You know better than everyone else because you do this for a living
2 - You don't need ZOS' figures because you have other people's figures and you know for sure (see point 1) that they're the same.
I don't believe point 2 and as a consequence don't believe point 1 either.While I have addressed this is a follow up comment, what you just wrote proves my point. For example, a Lincoln averages $40k in price, a Mercedes S-Class averages $120k. That is a 200% markup differential on Mercedes brand strength. Do you think they would get away with selling an S-Class at $680k instead? That is what an 1800% markup looks like.
Not at all. People react totally differently if it's a matter of 20$ than if it is a matter of 500K$. Profit margins of fluff cheap products can be huge and consumers don't even notice. Because it's all "pocket money" and "small change", nothing decisive at the end of the month.
0 -
Wayshuba✭✭✭✭✭anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »And in all your posts, you show only two basic arguments :
1 - You know better than everyone else because you do this for a living
2 - You don't need ZOS' figures because you have other people's figures and you know for sure (see point 1) that they're the same.
I don't believe point 2 and as a consequence don't believe point 1 either.
You don't need ZoS figures to know. You simply can not seem to grasp that. Releasing a price and making money with it doesn't mean you have optimized to make the best margins or revenue you can. This is done through various types of market testing. If this testing was done, because it is market facing, we would see it. But it hasn't been done. We would see these actions regardless of figures.
You started this discussion by saying the figures they have compiled in a vacuum they would know if they are right. They don't, because they haven't tried anything different to measure against their current method to see if what they are doing is best for them. I am not the only one in this thread that has tried explaining this to you, but you completely refuse to listen.
Also, you continue to argue that ZoS is the magical unicorn that bucks normal market trends. As I have said repeatedly, when you have see hundreds of pigs, the color of the lipstick doesn't change the fact it is a pig.
Therefore, without even having ZoS figures you can, without doubt, say they do not have a definitive answer if there pricing model is in fact the most advantageous. Go back to the beginning of our discussion on this.anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »Not at all. People react totally differently if it's a matter of 20$ than if it is a matter of 500K$. Profit margins of fluff cheap products can be huge and consumers don't even notice. Because it's all "pocket money" and "small change", nothing decisive at the end of the month.
I haven't the foggiest clue what you just said here. You still haven't provided one example of a brand that charges 1800% off known market base line to disenfranchise the point that ZoS is whacked thinking they can get a premium that high from baseline.
Edited by Wayshuba on April 12, 2018 6:42PM2 -
anitajoneb17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭You don't need ZoS figures to know.
Yes you do.Therefore, without even having ZoS figures you can, without doubt, say they do not have a definitive answer if there pricing model is in fact the most advantageous.
They don't have to prove anything to us. Their decision, their risk, their business.
I didn't say I knew for sure they made the right decision. I said that YOU DO NOT KNOW if they did or not.
Now let's agree to disagree (unless you enjoy repeating the same things over and over).
0 -
OrdoHermetica✭✭✭✭✭
✭anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »
No... no you don't. What Wayshuba is talking about is industry standards and best practices. You do not need to know exact numbers to know whether or not this is abnormal. Or, rather, you do, and we have the numbers we need; we know for a fact how much they're charging vs. the competition, and we know what kind of pricing model features like this tend to follow.
As someone who ALSO has a fair amount of experience in marketing and sales (completing a graduate program on the topic within the next couple months, as a matter of fact), what he's saying is completely accurate, at least as far as my education and experiences go. He's not blowing smoke here. While it's possible that ZOS is magically making money hand-over-fist using this pricing, it is actually quite safe to say that this is abnormally high pricing for this kind of feature, to put it mildly.anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »Therefore, without even having ZoS figures you can, without doubt, say they do not have a definitive answer if there pricing model is in fact the most advantageous.
They don't have to prove anything to us. Their decision, their risk, their business.
I didn't say I knew for sure they made the right decision. I said that YOU DO NOT KNOW if they did or not.
Now let's agree to disagree (unless you enjoy repeating the same things over and over).
Pretty sure he was saying that he's personally pretty confident that they're making a poor decision based on his experience doing marketing and sales, not that they're objectively making a terrible mistake. Because you're right, we WOULD need the numbers to make a definitive determination like that. But even without that data, we can make a pretty good educated guess.
Edited by OrdoHermetica on April 12, 2018 7:25PM2 -
heaven13✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »Here we go again. What exactly did I write? I have almost 30 years of that data I just mentioned - it is what company's pay me to help them with for a living. What I wrote was an example through decades of doing this stuff. Stop challenging me on things I happen to know very, very well with mountains of data to support my comments. Sure, it may not be the same with ZoS, but in all the years I have been doing this, they would be the FIRST exception I have run into.
And in all your posts, you show only two basic arguments :
1 - You know better than everyone else because you do this for a living
2 - You don't need ZOS' figures because you have other people's figures and you know for sure (see point 1) that they're the same.
I don't believe point 2 and as a consequence don't believe point 1 either.While I have addressed this is a follow up comment, what you just wrote proves my point. For example, a Lincoln averages $40k in price, a Mercedes S-Class averages $120k. That is a 200% markup differential on Mercedes brand strength. Do you think they would get away with selling an S-Class at $680k instead? That is what an 1800% markup looks like.
Not at all. People react totally differently if it's a matter of 20$ than if it is a matter of 500K$. Profit margins of fluff cheap products can be huge and consumers don't even notice. Because it's all "pocket money" and "small change", nothing decisive at the end of the month.
Not true (for me). I see fluff content, that's digital that is exclusive to this game and see a company trying to charge me $20 for fluff and it makes me mad. Doesn't matter if I consider that "pocket change". To me, for digital fluff (especially since it doesn't have an ongoing production cost), I see this as incredibly high.
As has been mentioned in this thread multiple times, even if you only compare costs within ESO, you can buy a new character slot with the same amount of crowns. If you delete the character you put in that slot, you still keep the slot. You can buy costumes that are account wide for less than that (in some cases 2 or even 3 costumes for that price) and they can be worn simultaneously by mutiple characters on your account and dyed independently between each character wearing it. 1500 crowns is an entire month's worth of ESO+ allotment.
So no, $20 or $15 or 1500 crowns is not some insignificant, inconsequential, never-notice-it's-gone, kind of thing to me. Especially not for something that's character bound and if you delete the character your money is gone for good.Edited by heaven13 on April 12, 2018 8:57PMPC/NAMountain God | Leave No Bone Unbroken | Apex Predator | Pure Lunacy | Depths Defier | No Rest for the Wicked | In Defiance of DeathMeet my characters :
Defanged the Devourer | Nature's Wrath | Relentless Raider | True Genius | Bane of Thorns | Subterranean Smasher | Ardent Bibliophile
vAA HM | vHRC HM | vSO HM | vDSA | vMoL HM | vHoF HM | vAS+2 | vCR+2 | vBRP | vSS HM | vKA | vRGIT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL THE SAME NOW, THANKS ZOS4 -
Stovahkiin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭THEKATWOMAN70 wrote: »I av been reading some of the post on ere is this a game u can play or KIDS bitching about ow as got the most gold.As they all say stop spitting ur dummy out and crying over spit milk its just a game were ppl can enjoy not child play.
English is hardBeware the battle cattle, but don't *fear* the battle cattle!0 -
OlafdieWaldfee✭✭✭✭Stovahkiin wrote: »THEKATWOMAN70 wrote: »I av been reading some of the post on ere is this a game u can play or KIDS bitching about ow as got the most gold.As they all say stop spitting ur dummy out and crying over spit milk its just a game were ppl can enjoy not child play.
English is hard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpcOQVEOsR4OlafdieWaldfee wrote: »I now have installed Votan's Improved Outfit Station and I'm soooo loving it!
I have saved my different outfits (even goes cross-character) and I just have to pay the gold-cost for changing it. That may cost me my daily earnings in some cases (rare cases. Most of my outfits cost around 6 to 7k to change) but saving, sharing and changing outfits without feeding corporate greed is so effin worth it!
Thank you for the tipp!
Add-Ons are developed to solve a problem. A mini-map addon solves the lack of one in game.
So what problem was this one trying to solve? That outfit slots are insanely overpriced and few are buying them. This helps address that issue. Just this add on being developed is a sign how far ZoS missed the mark on this with the pricing.
This addon would even have it's uses if the slots weren't as obscenely priced as they are now, because it kind of "exports" complete outfits and you can share these setups with all your friends and between characters.
But in my case it's main use is to avoid buying additional slots, of course. I'm neither made of money nor was I born yesterday.
I hope the old saying "a fool and his money are easily parted" does not apply to too many ESO-players and ZoS reconsiders.Edited by OlafdieWaldfee on April 13, 2018 6:48AM1 -
Wayshuba✭✭✭✭✭anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »
Yes you do.
We have everything we need now. We know that costume slots in the MMO market sell for less than a dollar for a single slot on a single character and about $3.00 for an account wide unlock for a slot. We know that ZoS is trying to charge $15.00 for the same slot for a single character (about 1800% more than market standard).
We know ZoS has not done the following:
1.) Put proposed live pricing on PTS to see customer reaction to real pricing.
2.) Tried various pricing levels to see the volume differential and total market upside changes.
3.) Have tried different sale periods (7 days, 10 days, etc.) to see if 4 days is optimal.
Given the above, what I am saying is we KNOW everything above and therefore we KNOW they do not know if their pricing has been set optimal.anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »They don't have to prove anything to us. Their decision, their risk, their business.
I didn't say I knew for sure they made the right decision. I said that YOU DO NOT KNOW if they did or not.
Now let's agree to disagree (unless you enjoy repeating the same things over and over).
I never said they had to prove anything. What this whole point has been is that by putting the ludicrous price they did on a single outfit slot, they more than likely have lost A LOT of revenue as a result.
Because of what I just mentioned above, even they do not know if they did or not because they have not done any of the market tests to determine if the prices they are setting are making them the most they can. However, based on most standards for price elasticity against established markets, it is a very safe assumption to say they are not unless they are the one exception I have seen in my career.
Let me give another example. When Dragon Bones was on PTS somewhere it was mentioned that slots were going to be around 300-350 Crowns (don't remember where that reference came from). Now that price is still high versus market, but within the typical 50%-300% brand pull I have mentioned before. Hearing that, i was prepared to buy two additional slots on each character I have (12 in total) which would have been roughly 7200-8400 in Crowns. Furthermore, if I needed another slot later, I would have no problem getting one for a 300-350 Crown price. Instead, seeing 1500 I bought NONE and will not ever either.
So, just from me, ZoS lost 7200-8400 Crowns in revenue. I know of two other people in my guild who took the same view and approach as I did. That being said, I bet there are more active customers who took my stance than purchased slots at 1500 Crowns each. That is a TON of lost revenue for ZoS.
My point has never been about saying ZoS shouldn't make as much money as possible on the Crown Store. I think they should because it is good for the game overall - and that is good for everyone. What I am trying to point out is if their objective is too make as much as possible, then they are making some pretty bad pricing errors that are preventing them from doing it.
Edited by Wayshuba on April 13, 2018 9:05AM3 -
anitajoneb17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭So, just from me, ZoS lost 7200-8400 Crowns in revenue. I know of two other people in my guild who took the same view and approach as I did. That being said, I bet there are more active customers who took my stance than purchased slots at 1500 Crowns each. That is a TON of lost revenue for ZoS.
I would buy a Porsche if it cost $20K instead of $100K. So would my neighbours. Porsche is losing a TON of revenue with their wrong pricing policy !
0 -
Wayshuba✭✭✭✭✭anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »So, just from me, ZoS lost 7200-8400 Crowns in revenue. I know of two other people in my guild who took the same view and approach as I did. That being said, I bet there are more active customers who took my stance than purchased slots at 1500 Crowns each. That is a TON of lost revenue for ZoS.
I would buy a Porsche if it cost $20K instead of $100K. So would my neighbours. Porsche is losing a TON of revenue with their wrong pricing policy !
See my post above. You are comparing variable asset pricing versus fixed asset pricing. A Porsche has a cost to make for each one, therefore the margins they need to obtain have to be figured into each unit. A fixed asset, like a digital good or movie, has a one time cost. Every unit sold after that adds to profit, therefore the idea is not to price it so high as to limit the profit you can make.
Plus your argument is backwards. If ZoS was pricing outfit slots at 25 Crowns (i.e., below market standard) then your comparison might have merit. But it is the other way around. Your example would be more valid if you said how many people would buy a Porsche at $1.7 million instead of $100k. Not many I think.
To give a comparison, it is like a Star Wars movie coming out and because it is Star Wars they decide movie ticket prices, normally $8, are going to be $136 each. How many people do you think would go see Star Wars at $136 a ticket? Well that happens to be the same price differential ZoS is trying to get with outfit slots.
I am trying to explain that the astronomically high pricing ZoS has put on this is "hurting" them not "helping" them. I would rather they make more money than less because it means they can keep up the content cadence in the game - which is good for everyone.
You absolutely refuse to listen to anyone who is trying to rationally explain why this pricing is not good for ZoS to you. So, at this point, I am completely done with this conversation.Edited by Wayshuba on April 13, 2018 10:33AM8 -
anitajoneb17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭You absolutely refuse to listen to anyone who is trying to rationally explain why this pricing is not good for ZoS to you. So, at this point, I am completely done with this conversation.
At last ! There is nothing rational in anything you say anyway. I've said it long ago : let's agree to disagree.
0 -
Morgha_Kul✭✭✭✭✭
✭anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »Not at all. People react totally differently if it's a matter of 20$ than if it is a matter of 500K$. Profit margins of fluff cheap products can be huge and consumers don't even notice. Because it's all "pocket money" and "small change", nothing decisive at the end of the month.
I haven't the foggiest clue what you just said here. You still haven't provided one example of a brand that charges 1800% off known market base line to disenfranchise the point that ZoS is whacked thinking they can get a premium that high from baseline.
I think I get this point. In the store where I work, we carry socks. The markup on socks is far greater than on other products, say a leather jacket. The jacket is $600, but only marked up 50%, but the socks are $20 and marked up %150. The profit margin is greater on the socks.Exploring Tamriel since 1994.0 -
OrdoHermetica✭✭✭✭✭
✭anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »You absolutely refuse to listen to anyone who is trying to rationally explain why this pricing is not good for ZoS to you. So, at this point, I am completely done with this conversation.
At last ! There is nothing rational in anything you say anyway. I've said it long ago : let's agree to disagree.
You've ignored several other people's points, disregarded clear explanations of where he's coming from, reused the same arguments even after flaws in those arguments have been pointed out without actually addressing those flaws, and finished by saying he's not rational.
Yeah... no. Personally, I'm not going to agree to disagree. I will agree that you forfeited this argument, and hey, that's cool - sometimes it's not worth continuing, and it's very possible this is one of those times. But this isn't some sort of stalemate.4 -
Morgul667✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭You wouldnt buy a porche if it was the same car as competitors but 180 times more expensive and more expensive than a private jet.
The prices here are ridiculous , in regards to both the value they provide and what the market is.
Seriously
Zos lost thousands crowns from me
Im never going to support such obvious ripp off.5 -
anitajoneb17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭OrdoHermetica wrote: »Yeah... no. Personally, I'm not going to agree to disagree. I will agree that you forfeited this argument, and hey, that's cool - sometimes it's not worth continuing, and it's very possible this is one of those times. But this isn't some sort of stalemate.
No, I haven't forfeited.
I'm just not going to believe someone who pretends to be a marketing professional while saying FALSE things. I won't list them over and over again, but the two main points are :
1/ Assuming that outfit slots for ESO should be priced in the same range as outfit slots for other MMOs. Since those products are not interchangeable, they're not in competition.
2/ Assuming that he doesn't need figures and data to know about player consumer behaviour in ESO.
That's enough for me to discredit the entire argumentation. And that's rational.
But I know why you agree with him. If you were running a business, every single one of your customers would try and convince you that you should sell cheaper. Every. Single. One. And explain to you that you'd make more money because blah blah blah.
Just because customers like it cheaper. Always.
Don't you see the bias here ?
Edited by anitajoneb17_ESO on April 14, 2018 11:15AM0