Here is a personal experience on what it can be like as a customer of a product available both in the MAS and outside it.
A while ago, I tried the Fantastical trial, and when I used the purchase link, I was immediately prompted to a credit card payment screen. I paid and bought the software, and all was fine and well.
But later on, I learn that the software was also available in the MAS - something Fantastical didn't really bother explaining to me. When I contacted them for any kind of refund (to be used to purchase the app in MAS), I was told that they couldn't accommodate that since a lot of other users have requested the same thing - which already seems like a weird way of thinking.
They price the software in both places the same - meaning they earn more money, if people don't by it in the MAS, and I felt the entire experience to be very deceptive.
All in all, a really bad experience that I can't recommend any developer to imitate, as it does nothing to inspire customer loyalty. Especially when the developer has a financial incentive to not addressing the issue. At least from my limited perception as a non-Mac developer.
Again, this is the impression you get as a customer. I'm not saying this is the intent, but perception is reality in the real of customer experience.
Consider this another con to double-dipping, if you intend to do something similar.
So, you wanted them to refund you so you could buy it again in the MAS and they would end up with 30% less money? Why would any business agree to that?
You still get the same software, you paid the same amount, and they probably have an update mechanism (the only real difference between the versions is keeping your license key).
I can't see how you can be annoyed about this. If you really cared you could have spent a few minutes extra on the site to check if they supported the Mac App Store.
I assume the OP wanted the added value of MAS account association. Which is actually and interesting issue also, because he would gain that benefit on top of the software and the retailer would loose (30%-%otherpayementprogram) + service charge from previous vendor in revenue. That is an expensive customer service call.
While I have no clue whether it applies to the mac app store, the ios app store has rules that you can't sell subscriptions for a lower price outside the appstore compared to the prices inside (where apple takes 30% of a cut). So that might be a reason why they're not undercutting the mac app store?
When buying other items, do you expect to pay less when you pay in cash? After all, the retailer is making more money by avoiding credit card handling fees.
Many merchants offer a discount for paying in cash or charge a fee for using a credit card for small purchases. The only reason such practices are not ubiquitous is that they violate the merchant agreement.
Many do, yes. For those that don't – the majority – I'm curious if pessimism finds their actions as distasteful as he found Flexibits', the authors of Fantastical.
Personally, I find nothing wrong with their actions. pessimism was never purposefully mislead about how Fantastical was being sold, and it's perfectly reasonable for Flexibits to charge the same price in both venues even though they have larger margins in one.
As a developer in the same boat, I can say I'd love to give users the ability to migrate licenses, even if it means losing a little bit of money for their happiness. Unfortunately Apple only provides 50 promo codes per version, and they aren't intended to be used for this purpose. I'd send feedback to Apple asking that they change their App Store/policies to support this.
A while ago, I tried the Fantastical trial, and when I used the purchase link, I was immediately prompted to a credit card payment screen. I paid and bought the software, and all was fine and well.
But later on, I learn that the software was also available in the MAS - something Fantastical didn't really bother explaining to me. When I contacted them for any kind of refund (to be used to purchase the app in MAS), I was told that they couldn't accommodate that since a lot of other users have requested the same thing - which already seems like a weird way of thinking.
They price the software in both places the same - meaning they earn more money, if people don't by it in the MAS, and I felt the entire experience to be very deceptive.
All in all, a really bad experience that I can't recommend any developer to imitate, as it does nothing to inspire customer loyalty. Especially when the developer has a financial incentive to not addressing the issue. At least from my limited perception as a non-Mac developer.
Again, this is the impression you get as a customer. I'm not saying this is the intent, but perception is reality in the real of customer experience.
Consider this another con to double-dipping, if you intend to do something similar.