8 People Buy "I Am Rich" iPhone App For $1,000

FsG writes "In the first 24 hours that it was available, eight people bought a completely useless iPhone app for $1,000 a pop. This app does nothing except alert onlookers that you have a lot of money. The developer priced it at $999.99, which is the most you can charge on Apple's store. Apple has since yanked the app (without explanation as usual), while the inventive programmer walked away with $5,600."

Reason why?

It's because it got so much publicity. If not for Digg or Fark, no one would have thought twice about it.

Because

Conspicuous Consumption [wikipedia.org]

Re:Because

I tended to prefer Asshole [wikipedia.org] to describe that practice....

Re:Because

And I preferred Conjunction Junction [youtube.com].

Re:Reason why?

You would be surprised at the lengths fools and their money will go to set themselves apart as having more money to burn than everyone else.

Just look at any rap star. Some stupid hick from the ghetto gets a 2-album contract and immediately spends it all on a gold plated house.

Re:Reason why?

They need to show they are rich they are compensating. It is a well known fact that the amount you spend on expensive, extravagant, utterly useless stuff is inversely proportionate to the size of your penis.

Re:Reason why?

Ah hah - found it in my history
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/07/poor_man_buys_i_am_rich_app/ [theregister.co.uk]

A wise investment

This app is only going to grow in value when there only 8 copies in the world.

well.

modern alchemy. turn crap into money.

One Guy Bought it Accidentally

He clicked on "Buy" thinking it was a joke. Maybe he needs an update that makes it say "I am retarded" instead...

Anyone here buy it?

If so, I'll give you $2000 for your iPhone. Email me your bank account info and I'll transfer the money asap.

Some people will buy anything

I used to be a micro-isv for BlackBerry apps, but gave up after getting completely frustrated by the stupidity of users. I have lost count of how many times someone would simply buy my app without even trying the trial version first. I even had a few people buy it and then email me asking what it is supposed to do! Then there were the people who would buy it sight unseen and then not be able to get it working for whatever reason. The support load from these kinds of users just became too much for a one-person shop, so I woke up one morning and said f-it and closed up.

The more expensive the device, the more likely you will encounter these wasteful consumers. I guess it is good if you are an ISV, and hats off to this developer for marketing a totally useless application to totally useless users.

CounterApp

Now selling the "I Am Poor" App. Pay me $0.99 and you will receive a cardboard sign to hold up while you use an iPhone. Lets see Apple take this one down! In retrospect, how did you get an iPhone if you're poor? On second thought I really don't want to know.

Next To Come

An "I've Got A Really Big Penis" app that user must purchase from the App Store without using their hands and standing 12" away from their iPhone.

If one person does this, others will follow

I guess that the problem Apple has with this is that when one person starts doing it, then others will follow.

Before you know it, the entire store is full of useless apps selling for ridiculous prices. This of course makes the entire store look ridiculous, thus lowering the value of the store in total.

Signaling wealth = 10% of biology

This app does nothing except alert onlookers that you have a lot of money.

And substance is nothing but the opposite of the void. Talk about understatement!

"Signaling wealth" is a major part of sexual selection [wikipedia.org], in which a common strategy is to show that you're so wealthy that you can afford various things (the "handicap principle"). It generalizes to other species, for example, how peacocks flash their extravagant feathers to show how fit they are in being able to survive despite being burdened by such ornamentation.

Signaling wealth is also vital in interspecies signaling, such as how gazelles demonstrate their "wealth" by stotting [wikipedia.org], i.e. showing how capable they are of fleeing predators.

It's also been argued to form the basis for some altruism, in that people show how much they give to the poor to show how wealthy they are.

So yes, signaling your wealth IS a useful product function. The problem with the app is not that it "merely" signals wealth, but that it ... doesn't, because it could easily be faked.

Re:Hilarious.

Completely! This is the future of application design, mark my words ladies and gentleman. It's kind of like paying thousands for a pair of shoes that are less useful or durable when you could buy a $20 pair at Pay-Less. Now if only I can figure out how to get in on the luxury app market...

Re:Well, you gotta hand it to the guy...

Why would you have to agree with Apple yanking it?

If the market will bare it, it should be allowed. The iPhone was once an exclusive item, so Apple did this same thing just with hardware.

This is just Apple being selfish and trying to remove something that mocks them. Stupid if you ask me, let the free market do it's thing.

Re:Well, you gotta hand it to the guy...

"but you have to agree with apple for yanking it.."

Why? If the developer fully and honestly explained what his app did and did not do, and if fully informed people were willing to buy it, why should it be yanked? Merely because you would not buy it? If that's the standard then nearly all the apps should be yanked.

Re:Well, you gotta hand it to the guy...

Why do I have to agree with Apple yanking it? I don't see any violation here. I fail to see how this is much different than cat shit coffee [wikipedia.org] being the most expensive coffee in the world. This isn't even fraud, he isn't even claiming the app does something that it doesn't. Just that it shows that you are rich, and quite frankly, if you are giong to blow $1k on an "app" that does nothing but show a glowing red thing then you just bought the first $1,000 piece of digital jewelry and probably can be considered "rich". Big deal.

In fact, I applaud this. There are a million ways the rich suck money out of the lower and middle classes. It is nice to see the reverse happen. The amusing part is that the lower and middle classes usually get their money sucked dry through neccesities like gas, water, food, etc. The rich tend to get their money sucked away through frivolous crap like this.

Re:Well, you gotta hand it to the guy...

Libertarians yank it too, they just don't agree with the government telling them to wash their hands afterwards.

Re:Well, you gotta hand it to the guy...

I you are a libertarian you will realize that apple is a privately owned business and has a right to control what software gets sold through their service. You might also realize that many apple users (like my elderly mother for example) use the product because of its stability, and service. If apple allowed just anyone to write anything for their systems they would take a big hit in that sphere of their product offering.

Re:Well, you gotta hand it to the guy...

but you have to agree with apple for yanking it..

What if you're a Libertarian?

It's got nothing to do with libertarian principles, it's just Apple defending their market niche. They can't exactly let just anyone start charging a huge markup for trendy, stylish crap.

Re:if I could, I would

Looking at the economics of enjoyment, if you get the same amount of enjoyment, relative, from your coffee as you do from an application that doesn't do a damned thing, you need to improve the quality of your coffee.

Re:One click buy

Is it a good thing that you can buy something literally with one click? I find it reassuring that I have to enter my credit card details, then the little code on the back, and finally the long password that is only stored in my head.

I prefer the one click purchase. I find it horribly inconvenient to enter all of my credit card information and password. Besides, I never click any buttons acci