I went swimming with my ipod and couldnt believe how much they still cost.

I was actually baffled.

but i was able to simply dry off the ipod and it still works. I did like that about it.

 

Youre not a very good economist.

They are not overcharging because people are very willing to pay those prices for their products. Selling them at a lower price would decrease their profits and give the appearance of a lower quality product.
There are lots of companies making MP3 plays, smart phones, and tablets. All of those companies wish they could charge s much for their products, but they cant because they dont have the brand and they dont have the products.

The difference in qualitative, not quantitative. People extract a lot of hedonistic value from iProducts, and are willing to pay accordingly.

 

**** you taking credit for my hard work to fix your ipod!!

 

 

fak u

I still have a palm treo pro.

 

 

Funny, I've had the same experience.

"*GASP!* You've got an iphone?!?!" "no, I don't." "Oh. You should get one, it's much better than that thing.."

Really? You don't even know what the **** I've got, in fact, you're brain dead enough to not have the cognitive abilities to even identify if it IS infact one of your fanboy pieces of **** but you can tell me the iphone is better? Some people shouldn't be allowed to live.


Or maybe YOU'RE not a very good economist??


I've argued this until I'm blue in the face. What's better, sell 10 million units at $599 or sell 40 million units at $399?

Other companies which make an equal or greater product don't NEED to overcharge for their products, and they're not even made in child labor Chinese sweatshops, yet still turn ground breaking sales/profits. Apple gets away with it because they've got brilliant marketing brainwashing abilities and the retarded sheep willing to follow.

 

Lucky for I products we live in a world of... rather stupid people

Back when my 2nd gen Nano died and i was told i'm on my own by the customer service i searched for an alternative. I purchased a Sansa Fuze.

In comparison the only thing the Nano had going for it was the touch screen turn wheel. The fuze had expandable memory slot, better sound quality, smaller package, full color screen, bigger screen, video play, and my 3rd fav after the cheaper price and better sound quality, it didnt use that garbage Itunes of a software.. it's simple as plugging in a usb flash drive and dragging the songs in there.

At the time new 8 gig fuze was 96 bucks, An 8 gig Nano was 349.
To this day my fuze still works.

 

 

No, Its you.

The value of something is what people are willing to pay for it. A person who is more tech avy than the average person may see that a cheaper android phone is just as good if not better than an iPhone, but thats doesnt mean its more valuable.
People pay for the brand, the image, the stylish stainless steel, etc.

As for the bit about "chinese sweat shops", thats just plain retarded. I bet youre one of these people that talk about how China is taking American jobs and ****.
You would be a fool to not take advantage of that cheap, skilled labor. Oh, and wrap your head around this. By outsourcing **** jobs to China, the prices on our goods are less, which is good for us and our economy.

Too use the language of Frederic Bastiat, Its all about the seen and the unseen. The seen is talked about in the news, the unseen is what really drives the economy.

 

Kind of want to buy this and go vintage racing.

! Triumph GT6 Race like MG mgb Austin Healey cobra Spitfire tr6 VIDEO!

 

I want a 240z.

 

I want a bugeye sprite

 

To qoute my buddy, who used to race a TR3 (when I was looking to buy a Tiumph): "The only good Triumph is called a Miata".

 

 

found this in my snugglybuddy Faeflora's personal care bag

 

The following is not a sarcastic reply:

It depends on a number of different factors.

Some are obvious, such as what were your net revenues for the product line. If the total burdened cost to produce and sell one unit is $390, then obviously it's better to sell 10m at $599 than to sell 40m at $399.

Another would involve an analysis of one's market demographics relative to one's corporate strategy. I'd wager, for example, that Fendi probably sells fewer shoes in a year than JC Penny, and they probably captured less total revenue in doing so. But Fendi's brand is built upon an image of exclusivity, and so doing a lower volume of business than JC Penny is entirely appropriate for them.

Then you start to get into the really intriguing stuff which may sound entirely outlandish to those who have never had the pleasure of working within the infrastructure of a giant holding company. For instance, what was the margin on the device in question? Depending on who is doing the analysis, it is in fact sometimes "better" to sell a small number of units *AND* collect a small amount of revenue, provided that you maintain a very high margin in doing so. I know it sounds ludicrous, and from a macroeconomic point of view it is, but within Harris Broadcast, for instance, I've seen whole product lines get shitcanned because they were only operating at 10-15% margin, despite the fact that they were moving such enormous volumes of product that their net revenues far outstripped other departments with 1/10th the total receipts but 3x the gross margin.


Long story short: in business, especially at the corporate level, it's important to understand that sometimes there really ARE five lights, even if you can only see four of them from where you're standing.

 

star trek reference. nerd.

 

I hate Apple more because of the douchy group of people that buy up their products at the drop of a hat, over the fact that they make sub par quality junk, in my experience. I have owned 3 products from Apple, and all were of lower build quality and all failed far more quickly than similar products from other brands.

 

In 2002, GM had a profit margin of 0.7% per unit sold, whereas Porsche's margin was 15%.
Look how things unfolded since then.