As I said, i'm fine with throwing them money if it adds features via a DLC more cosmetics or whatever.
I will not reward FD for EA on a ship that is fully functioning in game but being deliberately withheld from the community for 3 months in order to make money. I think its a business practice that should not be rewarded.
I think that is a fine position to take. I don't mind the early access part myself but that is coming from a different direction, and is dependent on Elite being a game that I'm willing to spend some extra cash on every now and then.
I will not reward FD for selling premade ships either. Not that i personally need those ships, but its giving FD real world money for in-game assets that should cost in-game money. Its way too close to selling credits for real money. Don't want to spend 20 million credits on a base Challenger? Sure, just give FD some money and you will get one. For us veterans, 20 million is peanuts, but for a newbie its a leg up achieved with real world money.
20 million credits in the early game these days is easy to achieve. I'm not saying that to justify the ships being sold but as a matter of pertinence to the conversation. The value of the ships would be where it bypasses the engineering, this may also be moot depending on how much Frontier tweak the process of engineering, which I would not be surprised if the grind is reduced substantially as it seems that someone at Frontier is making some sweeping decisions and changes.
And how long before FD start selling G5 engineered ships if they see money come in from this? How much money could they make if they sold top tier upgraded ships?
The concern is there, I fully concede, but this is a slippery slope argument that only time will reveal if it is correct. It's interesting to see those who lambast Frontier for offering ships in the first place are now lambasting them for the fact that these starter ships are actually that, and for a late game player not worth their time. Maybe the truth lies in the middle that when Frontier said they're releasing some starter ships that they were serious about that rather than offering the winning ship in any given situation. The problem lies if these initial ships aren't successful and Frontier's reaction is to keep upping the specs to the point where they do offer the best of the best for cash. I would also hope that doesn't happen.
Some might say "FD wouldn't do this", to which is say, LOL, they are a company, one apparently needing a cash injection. When push comes to shove, they will do what the need to, and the board, beancounters, and shareholders will be looking at the results with interest.
I disagree with this on the principal that the economics of the situation will also dictate restraint given the appropriate assessment. The saying is that the correct price of something is as much as the market will bear, this also holds true for this situation too. Now, to be fair, if Frontier go all out and doing what you say brings in the most money then that would suck for those who don't wish to see it, but I don't think that will be the case, if one looks at other examples of companies doing the same thing and how that went for them.
But we also have to come to terms with the fact that our dreams.txt requires funding and it seems that Frontier are exploring other avenues to get more of that. I've said before that if you gave Frontier the money that CIG got we would be a hell of a lot further than where we are now and light years ahead of where Star Citizen is now. That wasn't a wish for Frontier to embrace the CIG funding model but at the same time premium perks for those who are willing to spend a bit extra is not uncommon these days and at the moment the early access part comes across like that to me. The ship selling is a bit different but maybe could be looked at in the same way as when I paid extra to have a better starting condition when I back the game on Kickstarter, it's not like that broke the game back then and I think these won't break the game as it stands now either.
Don't get me wrong though, in many areas I do agree with you and your suggestions for better ways to raise money (especially naming systems/stations), I guess the difference is that I'm a little more accepting of the scenario given the circumstances.
