The difference between Apple App Store and Android Google Play is that Apple had a history of payments with iTunes which they leveraged - so they have a basic revenue model in place with payments. The AppWalls and advertising as supposedly the business shifts from paid to in-app payments (and recurring payments as in social games etc.) is interesting - however I suspect for a whole class of app, the one-time payment model STILL works (has Apple done analysis on this ?).
On Android the payment model was non-existent because Google never pushed that earlier, the demographic was poorer or more worldwide without access to credit cards.
Now Google maybe placing it’s bets on the Android market scaling hugely (and covering for lower payouts per download for developers), or the much hyped recurring payments in social games - HOWEVER, it has a gaping hole for the payment models. That is, the appearance of successful social game stories DOES NOT compensate for the ABSENCE of a payment model for paid apps like tools apps etc.
So Google is ignoring a foundational aspect of it’s developer base - while being bedazzled by the media hype surrounding the recurrent in-app billing models.
Now one way one COULD compensate for this - and as I said GetJar etc. are just not going to cut it for extracting $5 type payments from users (that would be 50-100 app downloads required to earn that). And that may be with possibly adopting a pay-as-you-go model (though for tools apps this will rapidly get irritating to users - as said in an earlier post it is FAR easier for people to pay $5 for something than download 50 apps - and the paying $5 for tools category of user may not have the time to download 50 apps even though their kids might).
So one way this would work is for your app to show a “health meter” for your app - and user has to “feed” the app occasionally to keep it’s health above zero.
So they use your app - and require a single app download on GetJar (or such methods) - and this charges to full - and lasts maybe 10 days.
Since most users would be leaving your app and never coming back after 7 days - this allows you to charge them a small increment. Longer term users would be paying you continually (you could have the need for health rejuvenation stop - when your app achieves nirvana i.e. doesn’t have need for eating anymore - say after 10 such GetJar app downloads).
A variation on that may have user charge as many GetJar coins as they want (which inevitably they will go overboard if your app is good) - and that stays in the health meter for longer.
So anyway … maybe something like this will work.
HOWEVER, again here Google stumbles onto the path of developers by PREVENTING blocking of apps - though it seems free trial apps are ok (?) if they are advertised so ?
The apps that GetJar is now distributing - they will take your app and put a “pay to proceed” wrapper around your app - are clearly non-working apps - yet are surviving on Google Play.
So I think the lack of Google Play engagement (compare that to the effort done by Meg Whitman at Ebay in early days to get things working smoothly with buyers/sellers) - is that it has raised questions in the minds of developers about just how knee-jerk Google is with account disablements etc.
And I think that itself creates a “high risk” environment in which developers are operating - those who are willing to buy new accounts as a strategy may be immune to this - but it is terrorizing the average developer with fears of “unknown consequences” - because Google Play reps are not available to answer any and all questions - i.e. there is no free-for-all message board where some Google evangelists answer questions etc. (part of the reason they cannot do so is perhaps because Google relies excessively on “secret” recipes in their algorithms - so they probably fear their evangelists revealing things inadvertently to developers on such forums).
While it may seem all is ok for Google - but their lack of feedback to developers creates a “terror” environment (where the fears of account disablement, loss of livelihood with all apps associated with the account being disabled are being perceived as all likely possibilities).
While such stories are circulated by developers who may have truly been egregious in their behavior - however the impact of it is quite real. It keeps developers scared and unwilling to do anything remotely exceeding the Google ToS. However, it goes further when developers air stories of disablement without any evident violations that they could see.
That Google chooses to stay quiet when such info is traded between developers suggests that Google is secretly wanting to developer such notoriety of the “capricious axe that can fall at any time on developers’ heads”. This maybe enjoyable for Google execs reveling in the power this may give them, but it is not healthy for the long term development of the developer ecosystem.
What it will do is scare away the serious developers of tools and apps - while leaving the Google app environment open either to “I did this for free just for the enjoyment” crowd or the recurrent in-app billing for social games. Leaving a big gap for the “middle class” of apps.
In effect what Google is fostering is a scorched earth environment - similar to third world countries or like countries facing crisis - where there is no middle class and there is only the very rich, very willing to do anything top echelon.
Sure, this will work for the short run - but when the payment environment DOES gel for Android (or Android-like systems as under development in China), the payment environment may no longer be in the control of Google anymore.