Roj, if I may add just a few points to the discussion…
I understand Corona needs to get more revenue and Corona ads is probably (one) step in the right direction, but it’s way too early to force its adoption (I appreciate you backtracking on that for now).
You guys tried with the revenue share model on some ads platforms but it’s not really fair and I’m not sure it can possibly work in the long run. We may argue that since you give Corona and the ad-plugin away for free, the revenue share on ads should be justified… but taking a perpetual share on a third-party ads platform feels more like a “tax” on a solution built by somebody else than paying for something with a tangible added value.
Different types of developers are using Corona (from people just starting to code to devs making hundreds of thousands of dollars), but basically the main distinction is:
A ) Those who are just starting developing apps, and
B ) Those who already call it a “job”.
The A) type surely appreciate that Corona is free. Probably they don’t mind the revenue share on ads. And Corona Ads could be the best way for them to start monetizing, but there should be a clear added value (to justify Corona taking a percentage of ads revenue) compared to other platforms; in case of new developers could be super easy implementation, the ability to use multiple ads platform without having to sign up with all of them, smooth, fast and easy payments and so on…
Corona Marketplace is also another good step for this typology of developers (one thing I must point out though: many assets sold on Corona Marketplace are also available, often quite cheaper, on other websites… I recently purchased a set of tiles for a game prototype and found it was $18 on Corona Marketplace but $10 on Envato Market… a Google search of any asset title is enough to find out).
For the B ) type however, any revenue share model on third-party ad platform, or being forced to use Corona Ads, well, that can’t work. Those are the devs that used to have a Corona Pro license, or an Enterprise. They have no problem with paying a monthly fee to use Corona as their main dev tool. Any revenue share for them would mean a really variable and considerable loss of revenue compared to a regular fixed fee.
The possible advantages of Corona Ads (at least for now) aren’t that attractive for this kind of devs, since they are experienced developers and know how to handle different ad platforms… also, they may prefer to stick with a certain platform because it’s reliable and consistent (and AdMob is unbeatable on that). Maybe in the future, when Corona Ads is mature enough, solve some issues (for example, the only payment method is Paypal?) and offer clear advantages they will be open to trying it.
That kind of devs are surely already paying for the SplashScreen plugin (99usd), will buy the AdMob plugin, and probably even future pro plugins you’re going to introduce them…
BTW, if those kinds of devs will be required to pay hundreds of dollars per year to have the tool they need… wouldn’t then be more logic to just re-introduce the Pro license then?
My advice… focus on those ( A ) and ( B ) types of users distinctively, find different ways to get revenue from them, but don’t force a single solution on both.
What you’re doing recently (giving Corona away for free, the revenue share model, discontinuing AdMob, forbidding using third-party monetization platform on Enterprise, the marketplace), are good solutions for new devs but not so much for experienced ones…
Anyway, hope you can find the right compromise, because I really enjoy using Corona and appreciate your work guys… I started using it 6 years ago and I like so much how easy and powerful it can be…