Secondary market for paid apps

[cabbie]

This just occurred to me today and it would be really nice. I've bought a few apps I no longer want/need and would be willing to sell them to someone else at a discount to recoup some of my loss.

Any thoughts on this? I think it would need to be an update to the android market to have an option to 'transfer' to another user so updates for the app would show up in the market. You could keep the developers happy by giving them an option to make their apps eligible for this or not.

I suppose this would only be feasible for apps that are also the type that are private and can't be backed up to the SD card with something like Astro File Manager.

 

[(G)]

Wow, great idea.

And if it was done through the Android Market, maybe the programmer could get a small cut. In other words, if I bought a $4.99 app, it could be sold for $2.99 and the developer could get $1 of that... so he makes money on that same app twice, and you recoup part of your purchase price.

 

[cableguynoe]

Sounds great.
But wouldn't it be the equivalent of buying a song on iTunes.. then trying to sell it because your tired of it?

 

[milrtime83]

In theory it sounds like a good idea, but it will never happen. Digital goods are infinite and don't need a secondary market. It's the main reason that they should be priced far lower than physical goods.

 

[(G)]

In theory it sounds like a good idea, but it will never happen. Digital goods are infinite and don't need a secondary market. It's the main reason that they should be priced far lower than physical goods.

Doesn't make sense to me. It can take just as long to create digital goods as it does physical goods. So are you saying that digital goods just aren't worth as much?

 

[milrtime83]

Doesn't make sense to me. It can take just as long to create digital goods as it does physical goods. So are you saying that digital goods just aren't worth as much?

I'm Kinda saying they aren't worth as much, but probably not in the same way you are thinking.

I'm saying they are infinitely reproducible. If I sell you a physical book, I no longer have it. If I sell you my kindle book that I no longer use, I can just make a copy of it and keep it. That is why there can't be a secondhand market for infinite goods.

I buy physical goods knowing that I will be able to sell it at some point in the future. I'm willing to pay more for a hard cover book because I know I will be able to sell it for 70% (hypothetically) of it's original value at some point. There is no logical way to sell a digital book once I purchase it so I am not willing to pay as much for it originally.

 

[tiredhiker]

Very Interesting... If I pay for something I should have the right to sell it.
Wish I could sell my X wife, God knows the money that was wasted on her!

 

[TheBiles]

Then people could easily pirate things and resell them. Bad idea.

 

[cableguynoe]

Very Interesting... If I pay for something I should have the right to sell it.

I went to Universal Studios recently, got a 2 day tickey (second day was free), and thought, GREAT!, I'll sell the second day for $20 bucks or so. Not so much for the money, but to make someones day that's trying to get in at full price.
To my surprise they took my finger print and name... so i wasn't selling anything lol.

Although logically we would all think we could do whatever we want with something after we buy it,
If rules were set as to how to use the product, and we agreed to them, then we should obide by them. (By buying we are agreeing)
It's always easy enough not to buy if we dont like the rules.

 

[tigrr07]

Who's to say that you can't just copy and sell it, just like DVD's or Cd's.

 

[drowe]

Most apps cost less than a cup of coffee, if you need to recover some of that cost, should you have a $500 phone?

Software re-selling has always been a gray area at best.

 

[Pitamakan]

Most apps cost less than a cup of coffee, if you need to recover some of that cost, should you have a $500 phone?

Software re-selling has always been a gray area at best.

+1

It amazes me how so many people with expensive smartphones and $30 data plans can get all worked up about paying a buck or two for an app.

 

[cableguynoe]

+1

It amazes me how so many people with expensive smartphones and $30 data plans can get all worked up about paying a buck or two for an app.

Yup.

Even for those that justify stealing music or software by saying that their stealing from multi million dollar companies...

The developers of these apps are NOT getting filthy rich off of these apps.
So why not support them so they will continue to develop great apps for us.

On a side note: When you frequent a free site that asks for donation via Paypal... throw them a bone

 

[Squiggy]

In theory it sounds like a good idea, but it will never happen. Digital goods are infinite and don't need a secondary market. It's the main reason that they should be priced far lower than physical goods.

Actually, that's the main reason they should be priced high. The developer knows that tons of people are going to copy the product and pass it on to others for free. That makes a whole lot of people that get the benefit of the dev's work without the dev getting a cent besides the original purchase. I'm surprised some of these apps don't cost a lot more.

 

[milrtime83]

Actually, that's the main reason they should be priced high. The developer knows that tons of people are going to copy the product and pass it on to others for free. That makes a whole lot of people that get the benefit of the dev's work without the dev getting a cent besides the original purchase. I'm surprised some of these apps don't cost a lot more.

Except that goes against basic economics of supply and demand. Higher supply (infinite in this case) means most people won't be willing to pay as much for it. Raising the price is just going to make fewer people want to buy it and more go to alternate methods.

Though I will agree that some apps could be priced higher. That's up to the dev's to figure out how much higher they can price their apps before the number of people willing to pay for it drops off.

 

[cabbie]

Google is currently trying to figure out how to encrypt apps for SD storage. Someone could potentially pirate but the average joe won't, and the market could have a record of what apps were downloaded from it and not allow more than one sale of an app, taking a potential scammer out of the equation.

 

[Squiggy]

Except that goes against basic economics of supply and demand. Higher supply (infinite in this case) means most people won't be willing to pay as much for it. Raising the price is just going to make fewer people want to buy it and more go to alternate methods.

There's more to be said for the demand portion of supply & demand. If I were a dev, I would assume that much of my work is going to be ripped off. If my work is good and original (doesn't exist elsewhere), then people are going to be beating down my door to get it. I'm going to charge up the wazoo for it so that I can recoup some of the losses resulting from piracy. It's like that kid in the Jack in the Box commercial who is selling a burger for a million dollars. Jack is incredulous, but the kid goes "I only have to sell one..."

Anyone who steals is not going to worry about $1 vs $5. They're going to steal it either way.

 

[Pitamakan]

Anyone who steals is not going to worry about $1 vs $5. They're going to steal it either way.

Definitely true ... but that probably not the case across the price spectrum. Certainly, there are lots of people who would be offended by the notion of stealing a $1 app from a small-business developer, but wouldn't disapprove of someone stealing a $500 app from Adobe or M$.

 

[milrtime83]

Anyone who steals is not going to worry about $1 vs $5. They're going to steal it either way.

I disagree, I think there would be some people who would be willing to pay for it if it were $1 but would pirate it if it cost $5. The question is would it be 5 times as many? or would the overall profit still be higher with the price at $5.


Also, copying/pirating is not the same as stealing.

 

[cableguynoe]

Also, copying/pirating is not the same as stealing.

Only difference is your not taking a tangible item. Your making a copy of it.

The proper term would be "unauthorized use"... but in the end, it's stealing.

 

[cabbie]

Most apps cost less than a cup of coffee, if you need to recover some of that cost, should you have a $500 phone?

I'll be the one to determine how to spend my limited amount of dollars. I dislike waste and if I can recoup some losses, no matter where it may be, I'd like to do so instead of throwing money down a well. If there were a secondary market, the purchase I've made could be transferred to someone else who actually values it and everyone wins.

Also, copying/pirating is not the same as stealing.

Absolutely disagree. Theft is theft is theft.