Bottom line is still marketing, if people stop paying more, they will lower the price.
Gear review review...seriously?
- Thread starter JohnE
- Start date
-
- Tags
- mental masturbation
I also already mentioned in my last price the product manager is doing his job right if the market will accept it. On the other hand they could be too greedy as bizutch mentions and their pricing is sub-optimal - not maximizing the bottom line, but fetching lower numbers at higher prices.
Also artificial segmentation of the technology means you care more about profits than actually making the best product to fit your customer's needs. TBI for the poor as long as you make big bucks...your company sucks.
Last edited:
you're assuming the segmentation is in fact artificial. and it's not like there aren't low priced options that meet the required standards.
that's like saying tesla's higher pricing is just marketing, because it is just a car after all.
I was talking in general, not helmets. It depends on the industry and product for how products are segmented and how much of the pricing is marketing derived.
Last edited:
I am still laughing, still completely missed the point overall from both sides.
Your both right, your both wrong. You are both just sticklers for your thoughts on this one, and still boils down to marketing and that is it.
Look, I go buy a 6.1 Madone, I go buy a 5.2 Madone. Will I really notice the couple thousand dollar difference in price when I ride? No. Yet both will do the same, there is a market for the many thousand dollar higher bike so it is still produced.
Michelin vs Goodyear, both top tier tires, yet Michelin is considerably more cost, while the tech in the goodyears is superior, Marketing is to blame for that...
Your both right, your both wrong. You are both just sticklers for your thoughts on this one, and still boils down to marketing and that is it.
Look, I go buy a 6.1 Madone, I go buy a 5.2 Madone. Will I really notice the couple thousand dollar difference in price when I ride? No. Yet both will do the same, there is a market for the many thousand dollar higher bike so it is still produced.
Michelin vs Goodyear, both top tier tires, yet Michelin is considerably more cost, while the tech in the goodyears is superior, Marketing is to blame for that...
It's great when drug companies try to use excuses like some people are for helmet makers on this thread. Yeah, it's so justified to gouge the US market compared to the rest of the world, lobbying to stop generics, etc. They deserve those extra billions for helping make drugs less accessible and killing people as a result of those actions.
Last edited:
Speaking of Bike mag reviews and marketing... did anyone notice that Mike Ferrentino penned a review of his "dream build"? And his "dream build" is based on an Ibis Ripley? Isn't he the director of marketing for Santa Cruz bikes? I'm confused.
re the Kitsbow, I think someone said somewhere that perhaps use of technology warrants the price. I don't see anything in that short, other than tailoring, that is different from any other garment. I have a pair of pants made of the same fabric from MEC, our discount outdoor apparel company here. It's great fabric, but I can get a whole pant made from it for $100.
I'm guessing Kitsbow will keep their prices high as long as they sell enough product to stay in business.
In the mean time I will laugh at any of my riding buddies if they show up in a pair they actually paid for (bit it will never happen given that we all have families, mortgages, car payments and more brains than money)
re the Kitsbow, I think someone said somewhere that perhaps use of technology warrants the price. I don't see anything in that short, other than tailoring, that is different from any other garment. I have a pair of pants made of the same fabric from MEC, our discount outdoor apparel company here. It's great fabric, but I can get a whole pant made from it for $100.
I'm guessing Kitsbow will keep their prices high as long as they sell enough product to stay in business.
In the mean time I will laugh at any of my riding buddies if they show up in a pair they actually paid for (bit it will never happen given that we all have families, mortgages, car payments and more brains than money)
Last edited:
i just dropped by to say poc helmets are UGLY.
I rock a white one, and from the front it looks like a smurf hat.
I´ll concede its very, very comfy (at least compared to my previous flux) though; and thats mainly the reason why i bought it.
I rock a white one, and from the front it looks like a smurf hat.
I´ll concede its very, very comfy (at least compared to my previous flux) though; and thats mainly the reason why i bought it.
Last edited:
Didn't he leave SC in 2012?
ugly helmet > pimp wheelchair.
remind me again how much it costs to get a new drug to market?
Regardless of price, those things certainly aren't the "Aston Martin of cycling shorts". They look like clam diggers!
Last edited:
you're referring to price as sale price to consumers. because that creates a bit of an apples to oranges comparison; in the US sale of pharmaceuticals are handled fundamentally different than other nations. OUS a country's entire medical system is funded by tax-payers, and the drug prices are subsidized by the gov't via these tax dollars. i agree it's absurd, but here in freedom land it would be called socialism.
i was referring to cost of development for a new drug.
R&D costs for new products are not an accepted legal defense for anti-competitive practices like pay for delay. And how many people on here get up in arms when Specialized sue a little guy for their patent/trademark but we're supposed to say it's AOK when Big Pharma does it to stop generics in poor countries that save the lives of those who can't afford the brand name products?
Last edited:
what's your understanding of pay for delay
also, i'm just talking sheer R&D costs.
They're illegal and cost us billions of dollars a year, I posted to the linked from the FTC above. Again:
http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/media-resources/mergers-and-competition/pay-delay
Last edited:
i know exactly what it is, having worked for both name brand and generic pharma companies previously. i've seen the FTC stuff on it, and it's not a complete picture. i can tell you for a fact that generic companies have no moral high ground to stand on. the generic companies are questionably flopping. i'm not saying this excuses name brand makers for their actions, but generic companies aren't exactly the victims they're making themselves out to be.
again, you still haven't answered my question on R&D costs.
I may have missed it, with all the back and forth between JK and syadasti, but do these shorts have belt loops? Cause I've heard that's really important.
winner.
Some of you sound like there is some fundamental right to fairness in pricing. There isn't, as long as you play by the rules of competition.
If something is too expensive for too many people, not enough people will buy it and either the price will come down or the product will disappear. If you decide for yourself that a product isn't worth the asking price, don't buy it. It's really pretty simple. Sometimes the things you want in life are too expensive. Get used to it.
Sure, marketing can create perceived value. If you take price out of the equation, most reasonable folks will say that XTR is better than XT. But is it worth the extra cost? Some say yes, some say no. Some who say yes base that decision at least in part on the cachet of having the best available, regardless of the actual differences. That's their choice - having "the best" has some value to them, and they decide it's worth the cost. There isn't anything wrong with that, nor is there anything wrong with disagreeing and making a different choice.
If something is too expensive for too many people, not enough people will buy it and either the price will come down or the product will disappear. If you decide for yourself that a product isn't worth the asking price, don't buy it. It's really pretty simple. Sometimes the things you want in life are too expensive. Get used to it.
Sure, marketing can create perceived value. If you take price out of the equation, most reasonable folks will say that XTR is better than XT. But is it worth the extra cost? Some say yes, some say no. Some who say yes base that decision at least in part on the cachet of having the best available, regardless of the actual differences. That's their choice - having "the best" has some value to them, and they decide it's worth the cost. There isn't anything wrong with that, nor is there anything wrong with disagreeing and making a different choice.
I love it, we have gone full swing. Now we are comparing what someone wants to charge for a helmet<a price people are willing to pay> to laws and ethics of pharma companies. Just awesome.
Quoted for righteousness. And I will not buy these shorts. Ever.
Last edited:
yes but how many of those shorts can fit in a wok?
Medical and safety equipment have similar faulty arguments to justify their inflated cost because they're a need rather than a luxury.
Edit: And many people know JK has worked for the evil empire...
Last edited:
*Edit: Not directed at any one particular party.
Last edited:
hey if you want to go back to an unregulated medical industry i hear the congo is a great place for it
I wonder how many people complaining about the price of those shorts rock 600$ North Face jackets on their way to the mall...
Just saying.
Just saying.
Last edited:
well I just splurged and dropped $49 on a pair of lycra shorts for those cold must wear tights days. should last me another few years.
and on edit
Its made in America
and on edit
Its made in America
Last edited:
Expensive products like that aren't sold at the mall, they're sold at specialty dealers - low volume niche products. I wait until they're available from an specialty outlet which is why my $180 helmet was $70.
Also BFD if it's not this or last year's style (see here), what kind of fool/tool would spend $600 on a jacket or buy those shorts.
and you still have yet to provide any opinions (yet alone facts) to back up your assertions
NDAs?
Goods and services follow similar economic principles but vary by industry/corporate culture (sure there's a different mix of R&D, marketing, certifications, etc. by not with huge outliers unless you have anti-competition/collusion)
Modern trends in effective marketing/psychology and a focus on short-term financials has driven these obscene product segments JohnE highlighted.
Last edited:
I don't see any other way to end this argument than for these two guys to have a wedgie off! Filmed live for Ridemonkey. Just don't get too carried away.......
http://www.aol.com/article/2014/01/09/oklahoma-man-charged-with-atomic-wedgie-murder-of-stepfather/20804382/?ncid=webmail1
http://www.aol.com/article/2014/01/09/oklahoma-man-charged-with-atomic-wedgie-murder-of-stepfather/20804382/?ncid=webmail1
Really? You just laid it out how pharma is trying to push the little guy making generics off the shelf so to speak, and you want to compare that to different safety equipment manufactures with different pricing?
Dude your a different kind of special sometimes, The hi end protective companies are not trying to put the little guys out of business, they just cater to the hi end.
Spending 300 on a helmet when the 100 dollar version is just as good is still simply marketing. Your medical refence does nto compare in the slightest.. Nice try though, come back when you put in 15 years of retail work at the ground level and you will understand so much more......
What the hel, one last example, why is gas in socal 4 bucks a gallon and here its less than three...... Because people pay for it, the market allows for the suppliers to charge for it so they do.
Price is still being pushed because someone, the end use, is willing to pay for it. Bottom line
It bugs me that this is the direction many sports have headed, but on the other end of the spectrum there is still affordable-ish stuff that works great. I'm to the point I'd rather just save money and have "heavy" and "ugly" gear. It is (mostly) possible to avoid looking like a muppet without paying golfer prices.
there's enough information in the public domain that i won't violate any nda's.