To all the PV haters

[BottlesOf]

Because, insanely long threads are cumbersome. I'd rather have that one die, and a shorter, new one pop up. Easier to navigate and figure out who is replying to who.

[Tapin]

[ QUOTE ]
your idea of a fair price

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting that you read my post as having anything to do with a "fair" price. I'm not the least bit interested in what is or was "fair", I only mentioned what the price point would have to have been for me to consider sending Amir money. And then I gave my reasons for why I'd send money for something I don't (and wouldn't) use anyway.

I'd address the rest of your post (short version: yeah, I saw that, sounds cool I guess) but you stopped reading the last post two sentences in, so I'm sure you stopped reading this post before this sentence anyway.

[ShineOn]

I have been using PlayerView 1.0 for two days now and have had no problems/found no bugs with it so far. I had minor problems with previous versions, and Amir was very quick to respond and solve any problems I had.

If GT was a better product, this discussion definately would not have progressed as far as it has. If PV was way overpriced, people would simply stop using it and chose GT. However, I think that the mere fact that the $50 price tag has stirred so much debate proves that PV is priced just about right!

[Shoe]

[ QUOTE ]
If GT was a better product, this discussion definately would not have progressed as far as it has. If PV was way overpriced, people would simply stop using it and chose GT. However, I think that the mere fact that the $50 price tag has stirred so much debate proves that PV is priced just about right!


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. You know the saying... If no one is complaining about price, then you aren't charging enough. (For example, pokertracker is way underpriced).

[KowCiller]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
your idea of a fair price

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting that you read my post as having anything to do with a "fair" price. I'm not the least bit interested in what is or was "fair", I only mentioned what the price point would have to have been for me to consider sending Amir money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, what an egregious error I have made in assuming that a price you would consider paying would be synonymous with a price you consider fair.

I stand corrected.

KoW

[AAmaz0n]

I don't think that's its fair to characterize someone who disagrees with the $50 price tag on PV as a "PV hater."

I've liked the software, and certainly appreciate the hard work that was put into this product. It has always been my expectation that eventually I'd have to pay something for it once most of the bugs were worked out.

With PT priced at $55, GameTime still being free and PV just coming out of some buggy behavior, I guess I expected the price point of 1.0 to be around $20 to $25 and was startled to see an initial price of $50. Yes, I know, apples and oranges, what will the market bear, etc. and I'm not even saying that maybe it's not worth the price. I think that many of us had some "sticker shock."

This is far from saying that I hate PV, have any ill feeling s toward Amir, or don't value all the effort he put into this product. He worked hard and has every right to charge whatever he wants.

However, the fact that there is another similar product out there for free, and that there is so much discussion about it being currently overpriced clearly indicates that the $50 charge is not a slam dunk decision.

Have you ever seen a thread about PT not being worth $55? I got it at the previous price, I think that it was $30 or $35, but didn't blanch at all at the increase and don't hesitate to recommend PT @ $55 to folks and I haven't run across anyone on here who would.

For an add-on that displays the stats that PT has already compiled, and with a competitive product that is still at $0, I am surprised at this initial price and at this point haven't jumped at the opportunity to buy it. At $20 or so, I wouldn't have given it a second thought, he'd already have my money. I think that it's clear that others here feel the same way.

I don't think that this denigrates the product or Amir's work. He's made a decision on his price, and I'm not yet convinced that he's offering a product that I want to pay that much for when I'm using GT for free. Everyone has to make their own decisions about this price, but there should be no hard feelings about it.

my two cents, anyway,

Shauna

[waffle]

Playerview lets me do this:



Ugly, isn't it?

[spydog]

I'm amazed at how business unsavvy most of you are.

Your poker game is a business.

If this software will yield greater than the cost over a reasonable amount of time, then it's a solid business decision to make the purchase.

If you fail to purchase this software when its potential profit outweighs its cost then you have made a poor business decision.

This is simple stuff. Like Business 101.

BTW, I love the term 'weaksauce'.

[Derek in NYC]

Ok, Im a PV newb (used to used GT+), so I have to ask: how did you make your display look like that? My version of PV just shows ugly green numbers in an order that I have to remember

[SlyGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm amazed at how business unsavvy most of you are.

Your poker game is a business.

If this software will yield greater than the cost over a reasonable amount of time, then it's a solid business decision to make the purchase.

If you fail to purchase this software when its potential profit outweighs its cost then you have made a poor business decision.

This is simple stuff. Like Business 101.

BTW, I love the term 'weaksauce'.

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone here is playing professionally? That's news to me.
I won't pay $50. I play .5/1 and will invest my time in using and now probably altering the soon to be open source GT+ to suit my needs.

I can't imagine anyone using PV long term if GT+ is open source and mostly superior. ( minus a few missing features)

GT+ will have those features in short order if it's OSS, i guarantee that.