No, it does not. It's what the application DOES that sells the app. I can almost guarantee you that you would sell more if you didn't have such an ugly (in my opinion) UI. I bought MotionX because it was only $0.99. A few weeks later I stopped using it because I could not stand to look at the UI any longer. Now I'm just back to using the Maps app that comes with the iPhone despite it not having turn-by-turn directions.
Sorry, but I just can't take one person's armchair quarterback opinion over hundreds of thousands of paying customers. If you have actual sales data to back up your theory I'm all ears but your opinion seems to be an untested hypothesis. I've A/B tested my UI many times and I have 16 months of sales data to back up my argument that app store customers love "overdesigned" UIs. This is not mutually exclusive with good UX btw.
EDIT: I realize there are less "overdesigned" fantasy apps that rank higher but one is sold by the NFL and the other by MSNBC (I think I actually outrank Rotoworld on iPad). Hardly a fair comparison from a marketing muscle point of view. I can only make judgments based on my own sales data. And all of it points to the fact that all else being equal, users are more willing to buy apps with interesting looking UIs.
The two fantasy football apps above yours in the iTunes store (Rotoworld and NFL Fantasy Cheat Sheet) are less "overdesigned" than your app. Doesn't this suggest that you're making a spurious correlation between the level of an app's sales and its level of "overdesigned-ness"?
The app store doesn't do demos so it is certainly not what your app does that sells it. How could it be, no one who buys your app has ever run it before. The only thing that sells your app is the advertising.
