Windows 7 / Software Piracy thread split

[Agent]

There's nothing to support the (bolded) view though - more reasonable would be to assume more non-pirates think that a product of greater value for money is worth buying when they wouldn't buy it before - as that's the behaviour that has been demonstrated to be followed in trials. As far as I know the increase in sales for a pirated product is not significantly higher than the increase in sales for a non-pirated product (soft toys for example) when the price is reduced.

I disagree, mainly because of some of the game devs I've spoke to see that price is a key factor in preventing piracy in the first place. This mainly applies to different market areas in the industry.
For example, a mum buying a game for little Jimmy from GAME need to be targeted differently in terms of both price and distribution of the product.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2...s-on-steam.ars

It's not just Valve games that see benefits from discounting games on Steam, as Newell also explained that an undisclosed third-party title saw a 36,000 percent jump in sales over a similar weekend. Here are some of the figures that Newell revealed:

* 10 percent sale = 35 percent increase in sales
* 25 percent sale = 245 percent increase in sales
* 50 percent sale = 320 percent increase in sales
* 75 sale sale = 1470 percent increase in sales

There's nothing to support the (bolded) view though

I find it difficult to imagine that all 1470 percent of those sales had not played / used / install a pirated version of the game previously. But you're right, I can't prove that every single one of them were not previously using a pirated version of it, no more than you can prove that they are all new, legitimate customers.
As I said, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that some of these sales may be pirate converts.

[aidanjt]

if the increase in sales for lowering price is no more than the increase in sales for a non-pirated product then it's reasonable to assume that the increase is due to non-pirates buying it when they wouldn't otherwise.

Nonsense. To say that Widget A == Widget B is completely false.

Software piracy doesn't fit any economic models for traditional black market effects.

Of course it does. How is copyright theft any different from other black market goods? Sure, it's significantly more distributed, but that only drives down black market pricing.

[Blastuk]

Very important fact here, being a pirate(ugh, stupid word) is not black and white, there are those who will both pay for things and at the same time not pay for other things..

Then those who believe that they have every right to have everything for free (yes these people exist)

[kalniel]

I disagree, mainly because of some of the game devs I've spoke to see that price is a key factor in preventing piracy in the first place. This mainly applies to different market areas in the industry.
For example, a mum buying a game for little Jimmy from GAME need to be targeted differently in terms of both price and distribution of the product.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2...s-on-steam.ars


I find it difficult to imagine that all 1470 percent of those sales had not played / used / install a pirated version of the game previously. But you're right, I can't prove that every single one of them were not previously using a pirated version of it, no more than you can prove that they are all new, legitimate customers.
As I said, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that some of these sales may be pirate converts.

I think you've picked a bad example to prove the point though - Steam is a very successful anti-piracy measure and they'd argue (and I think the point gabe was trying to make in that piece) that it shows the effects of pricing are dramatic, even in a infrequently pirated situation.

Perhaps there's different opinion in the industry as well - game devs/publishers I speak to say piracy isn't affected by pricing - pricing has a huge effect on the legitimate market, but the vast majority of pirates will still pirate a game regardless of pricing.

[j.o.s.h.1408]

Very important fact here, being a pirate(ugh, stupid word) is not black and white, there are those who will both pay for things and at the same time not pay for other things..

Then those who believe that they have every right to have everything for free (yes these people exist)

plus where in a recession so if people can save a couple of £100 simply by obtaining it free via the internet with 99% chance of getting away with it providing you know where to look then they will take that risk

[Blastuk]

Let's forget for a moment whether prices affect piracy rates or not.
There's an argument that goes along the lines of: people who pirate your software were never your customers and they never will be.
which basically means they wouldn't have paid you a single penny anyways.

now consider that lowering prices increases sales and profits, what have they got to lose from that? (as long as they don't lower the price so much that they don't turn any profit at all)

there are charts and graphs floating around the interwebs that shows the relation between sales and price if you really wanna find them.

[kalniel]

now consider that lowering prices increases sales

Yes.

and profits

WOAH! Steady boy! That bit isn't so clear.

there are charts and graphs floating around the interwebs that shows the relation between sales and price if you really wanna find them.

Yes, and most people will set their prices to maximise profit.. lowering further would impact on profit in general, otherwise they'd be the worse businesses in the world.

[Blastuk]

Yes.

WOAH! Steady boy! That bit isn't so clear.

Yes, and most people will set their prices to maximise profit.. lowering further would impact on profit in general, otherwise they'd be the worse businesses in the world.

not always, more often than not they set their prices for a large profit margin and suffer poor/mediocre sales..
there is a sweet spot where you lower the price and profit margin to a point where sales will jump; people who previously wouldn't have bought your product will start buying it.
The end effect of this is that your overall profits are much greater than when your profit margin was larger.

[aidanjt]

..lowering further would impact on profit in general, otherwise they'd be the worse businesses in the world.

But which is better?.. 100 sales at £100 (plus rampant piracy draining support), or 1000 sales at £50 (with lower levels of piracy)?

[kalniel]

But which is better?.. 100 sales at £100 (plus rampant piracy draining support), or 1000 sales at £50 (with lower levels of piracy)?

Piracy is irrelevant - 1000 sales at £50 is better to a company than 100 sales at £100 regardless.

But 110 sales at £50 is far worse than 100 sales at £100.

If you know your sales projections vs price better than the experts at MS then I'd run for their job rather than wasting your expertise on tech forums

[Blastuk]

Piracy is irrelevant - 1000 sales at £50 is better to a company than 100 sales at £100 regardless.

But 110 sales at £50 is far worse than 100 sales at £100.

If you know your sales projections vs price better than the experts at MS then I'd run for their job rather than wasting your expertise on tech forums

this is coming from a company who released the awesome Windows ME xD

[aidanjt]

Piracy is irrelevant

It's not irrelevant at all, each user of your software represents an average cost figure. Some may not bother contacting your with problems, but you will inevitably get users who illegitimately acquired your software, find a problem, and go calling you in an attempt to resolve the problem they're having.

To think that piracy isn't a factor in cost, sales, and profit margins is naive at best.

[Agent]

I think you've picked a bad example to prove the point though - Steam is a very successful anti-piracy measure

Steam is a great anti-piracy measure to stop additional distribution from the people that have already brought the game. You can't download a game from Steam without paying for it - the servers simply won't let you, so in terms of being an anti-piracy measure this simply doesn't apply to those that plan on getting it illegally anyway - They'll just grab a torrent.

Also what defines successful in this context though? Stopping people that have paid for it redistributing it? Sure...Stop it from appearing on piracy sites? Nope.

A quick scout of some major torrent sites (no links for obvious reasons ) shows some high numbers in terms of downloads for games that are on Steam.

So lets just assume you're right: Steam is a 'very successful anti-piracy measure' in either context, the link I posted showed a 1470% increase with a price reduction.

What is the reason you can't attribute them together? Is it not inconceivable that with such a huge number of sales, Steam may be a good 'anti-piracy measure' because of the deals they have?

and they'd argue (and I think the point gabe was trying to make in that piece) that it shows the effects of pricing are dramatic, even in a infrequently pirated situation.

Yes, it undoubtedly shows a difference between cost vs sales, a very reliable one at that, but I don't think it illustrates any piracy effects on the market. There is just not enough verifiable data published by anyone to call Steam a 'infrequently pirated situation'. More so that when the people that use Steam are primarily buying games from it.
In addition, many of the games on Steam are available on many of the pirate sites, some with large Seed/Leech ratios.

Sure it sounds a great line to sell to people wanting to publish on Steam, but the nature of illegal downloads means that getting any sort of proof to back this up is next to impossible.

Also Steam is only a distribution service for games.
It's hard to tie it into any sort of anti-piracy measure other than additional redistribution from a legal sale, as there are far easier ways to get pirates games, such as torrent sites.

To make any sort of judgement of how successful Steam is in this context, we need solid numbers of the people that have downloaded the game illegally, only then to go and purchase it on Steam at a later date.
Numbers that I'm sure you'll agree, will be next to impossible to obtain reliably

So as you said, There's nothing to support the (bolded) view

Perhaps there's different opinion in the industry as well - game devs/publishers I speak to say piracy isn't affected by pricing - pricing has a huge effect on the legitimate market, but the vast majority of pirates will still pirate a game regardless of pricing.

Undoubtedly differing opinions across the board, but the games market is huge and different market targets should be treated differently.

[Agent]

Gents, I'm going to split this off from the Windows 7 thread as it's going way off topic but an interesting discussion

[kalniel]

Kalniel is not going crazy*

That's debatable too

[webman]

Thing is, it all depends on the final cost of win7 surely? how many would actually consider getting hold of a pirate version if MS hike the price up? i for one will stick with vista if the price is too high or even go back to xp!