For those who are using paiement systems with "Customer Download Insurance" , i just made a little calculation. ( my research shows that people who tried it saw their convertion rate drop down more than significantly when this option was enabled, i don't know exactly how much though )


2 'normal' sales at 20$ = 40$
40$ split in : 36$ for you 4$ for Merchant ( 10% commission )

If your conversion ratio is halved ( just guessing here ) because of the Download insurance thingie...

you'd get 1 sale at 20$ + 5$ Insurance

18$+1$ for you and... 2+4$ = 6$ for Merchant. ( which also now only gets the cost of 1 online transaction instead of 2 )

Merchant gets more money selling less. ( this also reduces the amount of traffic on their servers, less customers to support etc.. )

*Vendor gets way less money selling less*

It's basically not in their interest that you sell more products or am i missing something !?

[x] remove this option if it's on in your systems!

pat.

Yes, seems really a bad move from them!!

Of course the first one to start was Regnow (the BIG GREEDY ONE), and after a popular riot in the forums now it's disabled by default.

Plimus added it too, and I KNOW I lost some sales because I was also offering the possibility to pay with Paypal (WITHOUT the download warranty service) and in that period I got more sales with it than with Plimus.

A customer said "I paid with Paypal because I really didn't understad what I was paying for. Extended Download Warranty?"

Now I have them completely REMOVED from my order pages, thanks to Plimus quick support :)

I don't know why esellerate made that move. Maybe they want to lose even more customers.
They still need to put included VAT for european users, and instead they add this useless feature (not really useless, I'd say dangerous!).

Some companies should realize that's better to earn 10000$ less/year than lose reputation...

Yes, this option sucks completely, I really don't see why the customer would have to pay extra to be able to redownload/reinstall the game they purchased.
Perhaps it makes more sense for more expensive software ($100+) where it doesn't make a big difference on the price and the developer may choose to eat up the costs.