Originally Posted By: Zoomie13

How much revenue do you think they might lose if they allowed potential new customers to come upon a forum where a small number of people constantly post that the product is no good and the developer is "incompetent"?

Whether there is truth or not, the extremely vocal minority seem to try to skew the narrative in favour of their "opinion" instead of actually trying to participate in constructive discussion. A potential new customer would probably just quit and not bother instead of wading through all that chaff...

How much revenue do you think they'd gain if they weren't so incompetent?
Whether you like it or not, some folk are unhappy with the products they've purchased. They're unhappy with the rate of development of those products. For those folk they have not received value for money. The debacles of the hawk and c101 have been allowed to continue for too long. A potential new customer is going to be very disappointed if they purchase those 2 aircraft. We all know theyre "beta" products but seriously! Anyone reading those forums is going to think the products have small teething problems. Do you think that is fair to existing customers and potential customers?
The P40 was pulled and sits gathering dust on a hard drive somewhere while the "early access money" paid for it does what? How about refunding those customers? They've paid for a product that to all intents and purposes is at this moment no longer in development.

Last edited by Johnny_Redd; 06/23/16 12:07 PM.

DCS Kickstarter
Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable."
Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."