I quote:
" When I saw the subject line of this post I thought
to myself: finally, an economic analysis of the ATA
situation. Sadly, this was not to be. :-("
You are so full of dreck that I wonder if you are
related to a goose!
What part of my analysis did not strike you as
"economic"? The part where I point out that even if
you cannot put a crowbar into your wallet to buy an
ATA driver the fact is that the ATA driver exists
increases the value of all newton owners? Might want
to say "Thank you Mr. Guyot" or even "I apologize for
being churlish".
What else seemed "uneconomic?" The part where I
discuss sales / unit costs? Or that Paul can charge a
high price today and a lower one tomorrow?
Your nice illustration of a supply curve is straight
out of economics 101 "introduction to microeconomics".
Thank you for the lesson, I am sure no one on this
list has ever heard it before!
You think the point of maximum returns is the same as
what you are willing to pay. Is that objective and
scientific? I think you should always distrust
convenient intuitive hypotheses - and good science is
sceptical. Do you have any empirical studies to back
that up with? You certainly have not cited any!
Paul Guyot has a different opinion than you as to the
optimal price for his product. Tell me, who has more
interest in properly pricing his product you or Mr.
Guyot? SO who do you think is likely to make a better
decision?
Can you please explain why you ignore the very
economic points that I raised namely that:
1) Paul could charge 50 euros today and 30 tomorrow
thus capturing all markets since he is a monopoly
producers?
2) Why you ignore that Paul has increased the value of
your newton?
3) Why you ignore my point that even if Paul were
charging a price that is not optimal for his profit on
the ATA driver that that nevertheless is justifiable
as it subsidizes his free ware?
In sum: how do you justify your claim that my analyis
is not economic? Points one through three seem damned
well economical to me.
>>Understand that what I'm saying below has nothing to
do with what I think is the "appropriate" price for
the product -- only what my guess is<<
Well at least you admit to being unscientific - even
though you claim (again with no substantiation
whatsoever) that I am not giving you a "real" economic
analysis.
"Paul's betting that $50 is the maximum profit point
on the curve. I'm going to go out on a limb and bet
that this is too high; the maximum profit point is
probably around $30."
Yes - but he has something to lose: whereas you have
nothing to lose - except this argument. Which is why
his opinion is more valuable than yours.
"Shareware authors have generally settled on $25-$30
as the price to charge for very sophisticated
products. Whether or not this is an appropriate price
in the closed Newton economic situation, there is a
*perception* that this is the appropriate price by
the ordinary-citizen wing of the community."
Source?
You'll excuse me now, I am going to go publish
something. You are perhaps well meaning but are
certainly foolish - and the way a fool prooves his
folly is by arguing with another fool. So I will end
my post. I have said my piece and honestly
cannot take you seriously.
=====
My Web sites:
http://www.geocities.com/engleerica/ (law)
http://www.geocities.com/newtontechspecs (Newton!)
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com
-- Read the List FAQ/Etiquette: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html Read the Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/ This is the NewtonTalk mailing list - http://www.newtontalk.net/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Aug 01 2002 - 06:03:28 EDT