I'm sure glad you are not arguing with me, just pointing out.

Let me better define my terms, for the sake of pointing out.

"The price" in my usage means the final price I paid after discounts. I think that's common parlance. You are entitled to use the full retail price, not the street price after discounts, and I'm entitled to not understand why you would do this.

Maybe I misremembered what I paid or you got a better deal, but $119.97, whether including tax or not, is still more than $117.95 including sales tax, so my statement still stands as a true statement, given that my usage of "the price" is what was actually charged to my credit card. The price (I paid) was better than my previous upgrade.

I don't challenge your correctness on the full retail price but I mean no offense when I say I don't really care what it was. My subjective determination of value will be based on what I actually have to pay. As I'm sure you know, that's what the term, "price point" means in marketing, the price at which there is a propensity to purchase. $110 plus sales tax for 8.5 Pro was below my price point.

The full retail price for an upgrade to 8.5 Pro, without any PC or 8 Pro discount, was much too steep for me. I reacted with the same shock you did, although much less anger. But when I found out more about the actual price I could pay, $110 looked good. I'm not going to fret about the $285 sticker price, why bother?

Whether the hidden upgrade pricing is just an oversight by DAZ, or bad reverse psychology, I don't know. Personally, I would have headlined the marcom with something like, "Upgrades to 8,5 Pro as low as $110!"

Then we'd be pointing out, not arguing, about $110 being a fair price for what you get. The .5 numenclature means nothing to me, I consider the new features and add ons.

In the final analysis, though, I think we can agree that "fair pricing" is a highly subjective determination, and that $110 comes closer to it than $285. It passed the threshold for me, perhaps not for you.