toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Chuck and Michael, you two bring up valid points.
However, my thought is, that no other custom keyboard, has it
subscription based. I've talked with several of my friends, whom I
have spoken to about regarding this app.
It is kind of a concensus, that paying a subscription for a keyboard
is a bit... off the cuff.
I'm not saying, that Kosta and Ashley shouldn't be rewarded for their
time effort and dedication. I've already stated in my previous post,
that they should be.
However, while I can see, how a subscription can generate a bit of
revenue, in the long run, a lot less people will end up getting it.
Just because people don't usually subscribe for a keyboard.
A one time fee of like ten dollars, would work, that's what other
keyboards, such as MBraille does.
Their classic app is free, but then to get the system wide keyboard,
you have to pay for it.
Okay sorry, doen rambling.
On 6/16/18, Michael Maslo <email@example.com> wrote:
Yes I agree with you. 1.99 is a reasonable price. I agree with you that
the developers need compensation. It should be a price which is within a
price range for the consumers being served. I do not want to drive the mind
community to be left out because of a price. I want to see the custom
keyboard developed and maintained.
Lets hope there is some tie of compromise.
On Jun 16, 2018 at 17:15, <Chuck Dean (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)>
I totally agree that Kosta and Ashley should be compensated for their fine
work. My concern is the two dollar and ninety nine cent subscription price
may drive away some who are on limited income. I would think a dollar
ninety nine cent price per month is more palatable, end also sounds like
the subscription is only a dollar a month. An old marketer's ploy.
I imagine Kosta and Ashley has done some type of study to see what the
demographic will go for.
Unfortunately, the App Store and its millions of ninety nine cent apps has
turned many into cheapskates, expecting everything to cost a buck, instead
of realizing that the limited market for this type of app will cause a
higher price point.
My suggestion that the price may be a little high is intended to get the
most cash for Kosta and Ashley, not vice versa.
On Jun 16, 2018, at 1:55 PM, Michael Maslo <email@example.com>
As you I have no money concerns. However for those who are unable to
pay for the monthly subscription, there is still the classic version
available to them. The developers have put a lot of time and energy into
this project and deserve to get something back from the hard work and
time they have already put into it. The reason for Fleksy going away was
because of costs for developing. Why should they not be compensated for
their work? We are talking about three dollars a month not ten dollars.
My opinion and my frustration with our community.
On Jun 16, 2018, at 14:50, Chuck Dean <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
I have had subscription based apps in the past, none at the present
time, so I am ok with the idea.
Obviously, a subscription will generates more revenue than a one time
purchase, so I understand why it is prefered by Kosta and Ashley. And I
think they deserve the money. I do wonder if the $3 a month charge may
scare off some people, remembering the visually impaired community has
about an 80% unemployment rate.
Personally, I have no money worries, and I will subscribe to the App
to support the App, if for no other reason. But being a huge fan of
FlickType classic, I wonder if others may be satisfied with the classic