>>The profit margin should be approx. 30 percent of the price for you? It is an expensive tool, so the margin per sold copy is quite high. I guess, you are saying here that it is not sold often times and that totalled margins are therefore low. Tip: Perhaps a version can be created that decompiles only one time, for a lower price. Having given this advice, I of course still plea for a free utility that enables us to make an application insensitieve to decompilation with Refox.
>
>
>Sorry, I cannot discuss profit margins with you here, but 30% is not right and too high.
>
>>>>I of course still plea for a free utility that enables us to make an application insensitieve to decompilation with Refox.
>
>I cannot help you there either. Free does not exist in my dictionary and I will not bring this request to Jan, so if you are up to it sending him a message, but I will not support a move in that direction.

Mike,
Free does exist in everybody's dictionary. In yours too. But I think I understand why you wrote it in this way. You seem to be of opinion that I try to get something for free for which we of course should have to pay. Here we fundamentally differ. I feel strongly that Jan tries to get money for something that should be provided to us for free, because Refox has created a problem for us that we have not asked for and providing a utility for free is the solution to that problem. To be consistent, the only requirement for that free utility is that it can be used to make a vfp-application insensitive to decompilation with Refox. What I am missing up till now is a clear statement, with arguments, by you or Refox about this point of view.