how-to block ads
|
|
Uniqs:
863 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
| mad:( Why do I have to pay for 100 channels anyway, at best I can watch two at one time?
It's really time for ala carte pricing.
Two bad I don't have the cash to start my own company. | |
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | said by imanogre:Why do I have to pay for 100 channels anyway, at best I can watch two at one time? It's really time for ala carte pricing. Two bad I don't have the cash to start my own company. I'm sorry to say.. but I think you'd find very quickly that your invested cash would go down the drain.
While ala cart sounds good, if you're the operator, you'd find way too many customers taking very few channels and you'd lose money hand over fist.. you still have a network to operate as you know. You can't do that when customers want to pay $1.00 per channel and usually would take about 10 channels.. network maintenance and staff is expensive. Not only that, you'd find that you'd have to charge a base rate on top of that of about $25 to cover your costs alone...
Bottom line, from the consumer's point, ala cart sounds nice.. from the standpoint of the operator, which you would like to become, you'd go broke and pull your hair out when you see your money dwindle. | |
| said by fiberguy:said by imanogre:Why do I have to pay for 100 channels anyway, at best I can watch two at one time? It's really time for ala carte pricing. Two bad I don't have the cash to start my own company. I'm sorry to say.. but I think you'd find very quickly that your invested cash would go down the drain. While ala cart sounds good, if you're the operator, you'd find way too many customers taking very few channels and you'd lose money hand over fist.. you still have a network to operate as you know. You can't do that when customers want to pay $1.00 per channel and usually would take about 10 channels.. network maintenance and staff is expensive. Not only that, you'd find that you'd have to charge a base rate on top of that of about $25 to cover your costs alone... Bottom line, from the consumer's point, ala cart sounds nice.. from the standpoint of the operator, which you would like to become, you'd go broke and pull your hair out when you see your money dwindle. I think you are missing the point of running a business.
In a business its not about squeezing each customer as much as possible, but its about actual number of customers.
Yes, you are right a lot of people would not pay as much, HOWEVER, more people would sign up which is where you could make some serious buck especially if the pay per channel required lets say a 2 year contract. See the huge profit potential there?
Also, the actual price per channel is not going to be arbitrary - some bean counter in the back room will have to figure out the popularity of a channel and figure out how much that is actually worth. So lets say scifi is $10/month where as E! is $5/month. See where this is going? And you can use the same tatic that many providers use today. Buy more channels and get a discount.
All my opinion of course. | |
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Yes, I know they are your opinions and I respect that.. and now for the "however".. 
I do run a business.. 2 as a matter of fact. In one of them, I went 100% completely customer centric.. and guess what.. it didn't work. Customers that are looking for low price, rock bottom, best offers don't want just that.. they want even more. That particular customer base is not loyal, nor do they spend the money. Look at BBR, for example.. the very customer here that wants what we're talking about also doesn't believe they need to pay for things that have been a mainstay for years... INSTALLATION FEES.
Now.. the more customer theory.. ie: quantity over quality.. that doesn't work the way you think. The more customers, the more work force you need to handle them. This isn't an online business, either, so trying to make everything e-care doesn't work. If your cable is having a problem and the customer wants support, they want it NOW.. not submit and email and wait.. or live chat. This is the type of expectation that customers don't want.. Support staff costs money.. trucks and techs cost money.. head end staff costs money.. marketing costs money and you still have all the other stuff too.. legal, administrative, etc. ALL costs money..
You bring up in an example of Scyfi costing, say $10 a month.. NO customer in this model is going to want to pay $10 a month for that channel. Further, contracts from the providers put a limit on what you can actually sell their channels for.. they also put a condition on where the channel can be placed in tiers.. so even getting past THAT is going to be hard. There is a satellite service that does ala cart pricing now.. they don't have a lot of subs.. then again, it's a full dish, not the mini dish service. Still, Fox news, last time I checked, was $5 a month. By the time you even get close to the 15-20 channels on average that people may want to have, as stated here on this site, the bill is already back up to $50 a month and more.
Contracts, that you speak of.. while they are good for large companies, a smaller company such as what we're talking about, it would be a nightmare. Let's add in the collections unit that has to deal with that part. When you work a contract into the deal, you're also hedging that you'll have that customer for that period of time into the budget. MANY customers, especially in these days, will drop for one reason or another. YOU as a business owner are going to want that customer to pay up - in fact, you NEED them to because you run your budget based on them being with you for 24 months. Those customers also tend to steal equipment which is also a big expense.
I know people here think that the world is wonderful and that all you have to do is offer a service at a price a customer wants to have it at and everything will be good.. but the honest truth is.. it doesn't work that way. There are businesses that have TRIED to do this before and guess what.. they've mostly all failed already - they wind up being eaten up by the bigger providers, or just go bankrupt all together.
The customer, in all honesty, may want better pricing - and this is going to hurt because the real world usually does, but, the customer needs to pull their head out of the clouds and put their own life into perspective.
If you can't afford cable or if you don't like the price of it, well, you can't really complain when you're an iPhone owner.. you can't complain when you have 3 flat screen TV's in your home.. you can't complain when you enjoy eating out more than twice a month.. you can't complain when you have an apple laptop.. you can't complain, in other words, when you want cable to be cheaper when you want to still have enough money left over for all the OTHER luxury items in life.. see my point? The consumer has to stop the notion that they CAN have it all.. ALL of the items, including cable/satellite, are all luxuries in life. Consumers need to LIVE WITH IN THEIR MEANS, while many don't - just look at the economy today.. it's LARGELY becuase consumers turned their homes into ATM's so they could "have it all" or even more than they need to have. It's all about priorities..
What I hear is that the consumer wants cheaper cable.. and that's fine.. but it also means that if the consumer WANTS a multi-channel TV service, then they need to budget for it and think about everything they want to buy in their own budget.
Still, with all this said, I do believe that premium TV service is a little higher and getting out of control. I ALSO believe, and always have, that hollywood is the culprit at large and needs to slow their roll.
EVERYONE in this country is taking a hit right now, except certain people. To be honest, ENTERTAINMENT in general is a luxury.. I think more people should spend less on it right now and more on their necessities.. TV isn't one of them. Hollywood, and a lot of the elite rich, believe they need to maintain their current lifestyle as they're somehow doing good for everyone else.. the bottom line is that they, too, can cut back. No one really cares to go see a $9 movie these days.. not many people are feeling good about premium cable tv service.. people ALL need to slow down and back off.
But, seriously, back to your post at large.. no matter what you expect or want from ala cart, the provider IS going to get a base amount from each customer to survive.
And, sorry to say, in business, it IS about squeezing as much money from each customer - are you nuts?? EVERY business wants the most $$ from their customer.. to think otherwise.. well.. that's a fool for a business owner. Quantity in a customer base, over quality, has it's own set of complications as I've stated above.. so my point remains.. if the OP wanted to open his own company and had the cash or capital to do so, I'd simply tell him he's nuts, and wait for the bankruptcy sale in order to buy him out at a discounted price. | |
| tl; dr
Cable should charge a fixed rate to support their infrastructure, and then charge a la carte for channels. Problem solved. | |
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | said by sonicmerlin:tl; dr Cable should charge a fixed rate to support their infrastructure, and then charge a la carte for channels. Problem solved. Uh huh!! and the ala cart charge would end up giving you less for about the same..
It IS a for profit business.. if you want less, maybe you should work for a muni cable operator instead.. and to be honest, they'd likely do the same thing. | | |
|
| reply to fiberguy
Movies are $11 bucks per in SoCal, $10.50 in DC., and $5.5 in Maine for the same title... 8-)
Thank you for the post. I don't always agree with what you post on here but at least I see where you're coming from and you've made many points that I agree with here. The problem here is that too many of the big corporations are going too far away from the consumer and they're going to kill of their revenue stream. People are going to just completely do without and change their way of life. All those years ($) of conditioning the customer to "want" are going to be flushed down the tubes. There simply needs to be some balance. The corporations need to figure it out for between themselves because A LOT of people are fed up. It's not not only about the TWCs and the Disneys. It's all the big corporations who are extracting too much at the same time. | |
Reviews:
 ·Mediacom
| reply to fiberguy
"Consumers need to LIVE WITH IN THEIR MEANS, while many don't - just look at the economy today.. it's LARGELY becuase consumers turned their homes into ATM's so they could "have it all" or even more than they need to have. It's all about priorities.."
Right. It's entirely the fault of the customers. No greedy corporations with flawed, unsustainable products and faulty recording and reporting are at fault at all.
I'm starting to see you, fiberguy, as the type of business man that consumers hate.
Reliable and fast (not as in actual speed, but in 'I can read/watch the news now instead of the paper tomorrow) access to information is no longer a luxury. It is a necessity. People should not be forced to LIVE OUTSIDE OF THEIR MEANS in order to have access to this information.
--
»/im/82288374/5591.png | |
| I agree with the sentiment, but there are many, many people who didn't do what you're saying and we're still caught up in all of this B.S. Let's NOT blame EVERYONE for some people's mistake. | |
| reply to fiberguy
said by fiberguy:Yes, I know they are your opinions and I respect that.. and now for the "however".. I do run a business.. 2 as a matter of fact. In one of them, I went 100% completely customer centric.. and guess what.. it didn't work. Customers that are looking for low price, rock bottom, best offers don't want just that.. they want even more. That particular customer base is not loyal, nor do they spend the money. Look at BBR, for example.. the very customer here that wants what we're talking about also doesn't believe they need to pay for things that have been a mainstay for years... INSTALLATION FEES. Your logic is flawed, look at open source projects, esepically Linux. They are 100% customer centric and many seem to be doing fine. Of course many don't "make it" big, but hey its a risk. It makes me question what your prices were, not that I am saying that I know what your prices were - but I would stand to argue that if you had great service and great prices to boot I can't see how you could fail. I would certainly shop at a place that had good customer service and unbeatable prices.
To be honest I never got "installation fees". I think that if you got a customer to sign a 2 year agreement then you should be able to absorb that cost. I mean that is what cell phone providers do for their phones and they seem to be working out just fine.
To compare and contrast another company - Dell. Dell sucks for support for non-business customers if you don't buy their accidental damage warranty. I have seen the horror stories. However, Dell's support is a good chunck is self-service, at least for drivers. I don't have to stay on hold for 30minutes just for some CSR to give me a link. And if you have Accidental Damage coverage then the service is superb - usually next day service, a tech usually installs the parts and all at no cost to you.
said by fiberguy:Now.. the more customer theory.. ie: quantity over quality.. that doesn't work the way you think. The more customers, the more work force you need to handle them. This isn't an online business, either, so trying to make everything e-care doesn't work. If your cable is having a problem and the customer wants support, they want it NOW.. not submit and email and wait.. or live chat. This is the type of expectation that customers don't want.. Support staff costs money.. trucks and techs cost money.. head end staff costs money.. marketing costs money and you still have all the other stuff too.. legal, administrative, etc. ALL costs money.. No argument there. But, personally, I would rather email someone at the corperate office (like Comcast setup) than listen to hold music. Or even repeat troubleshooting steps that I already performed - thus wasting my time. And the people at corperate have more "power" than some CSR. And if the service is that "vital" then they should purchase business class or get a T1 put in. Yes, I have seen what you are talking about personally. An employee actually talked to me while I was migrating a user's email to a new email server and they go "What if something goes wrong? Is this safe?" I just bit my tounge and kindly explained that this is competely safe and if something does wrong we have backups. But, what I wanted to say is that "if you think you can do a better job, then why do you run your own email server and we will redirect email to you?" This is in relation to your comment of user expetation - user's always expect their service or equipment to work 100% of the time 365/24/7 for years to come. But the reality is that services will go down, devices will break. Another threotical example is web hosting - people expect their sites to have an uptime of 100% - but that can NEVER be reached. The webhost cannot control forces outside of their network and mother nature.
said by fiberguy:You bring up in an example of Scyfi costing, say $10 a month.. NO customer in this model is going to want to pay $10 a month for that channel. Further, contracts from the providers put a limit on what you can actually sell their channels for.. they also put a condition on where the channel can be placed in tiers.. so even getting past THAT is going to be hard. There is a satellite service that does ala cart pricing now.. they don't have a lot of subs.. then again, it's a full dish, not the mini dish service. Still, Fox news, last time I checked, was $5 a month. By the time you even get close to the 15-20 channels on average that people may want to have, as stated here on this site, the bill is already back up to $50 a month and more. I used that as a theoritical example. I know it probably won't even happen but I would purchase the scifi channel for $1-10/month. I just don't like the idea of paying for things I will never use; such as channels that come in cable channel packages. Back when my Dad had Dish we got the E! channel. You know how often I watched it? You seem to think that customers won't purchase it. My supervisor actually picked up the phone one day when he had Comcast and they moved the scifi channel to a higher tier and called Comcast and told them he would pay whatever it cost to have the scifi channel (it was the premier of Battlestar Gatalica). And I mean, wouldn't you agree that its stupid to have to purchase A WHOLE PACKAGE HIGHER just to get ONE CHANNEL? Perhaps we shouldn't make EVERY CHANNEL pay-per-channel, but it does stand to reason
said by fiberguy:Contracts, that you speak of.. while they are good for large companies, a smaller company such as what we're talking about, it would be a nightmare. Let's add in the collections unit that has to deal with that part. When you work a contract into the deal, you're also hedging that you'll have that customer for that period of time into the budget. MANY customers, especially in these days, will drop for one reason or another. YOU as a business owner are going to want that customer to pay up - in fact, you NEED them to because you run your budget based on them being with you for 24 months. Those customers also tend to steal equipment which is also a big expense. I have actually noticed that theft is a problem, especially in the software development business. I believe that companys should set aside a porition of their profits as "piracy".
As far as collections go - if you are a small business and have a managable number of customers all you need is a lawyer attack dog to sue the customer in small claims. It is true that lawyers are expensive, but for something like that you don't need a 50+ year lawyer. Of course if you are a company like Comcast serving millions of customers, then the issue is mute because you are making enough to offset the stupids.
said by fiberguy:I know people here think that the world is wonderful and that all you have to do is offer a service at a price a customer wants to have it at and everything will be good.. but the honest truth is.. it doesn't work that way. There are businesses that have TRIED to do this before and guess what.. they've mostly all failed already - they wind up being eaten up by the bigger providers, or just go bankrupt all together. Then I believe they haven't found the "niche". You just can't start a cable business that offers prices at what the customers wants and expect to make it out alive. They have to offer something that everyone else doesn't.
And again your logic is flawed, because I believe it was NIN or Raidiohead that offered fans to purchase their new album for whatever they wanted to. And they claim they made more profit by doing that then selling it on CD. I believe if you are in the right place at the right time with the right people, things will happen. For more examples look at the history of the dot com bust - many companies came and went but a few came out as services that we use still use today.
said by fiberguy:The customer, in all honesty, may want better pricing - and this is going to hurt because the real world usually does, but, the customer needs to pull their head out of the clouds and put their own life into perspective. And be educated on the products and services they use, would you not agree? 
said by fiberguy:If you can't afford cable or if you don't like the price of it, well, you can't really complain when you're an iPhone owner.. you can't complain when you have 3 flat screen TV's in your home.. you can't complain when you enjoy eating out more than twice a month.. you can't complain when you have an apple laptop.. you can't complain, in other words, when you want cable to be cheaper when you want to still have enough money left over for all the OTHER luxury items in life.. see my point? The consumer has to stop the notion that they CAN have it all.. ALL of the items, including cable/satellite, are all luxuries in life. Consumers need to LIVE WITH IN THEIR MEANS, while many don't - just look at the economy today.. it's LARGELY becuase consumers turned their homes into ATM's so they could "have it all" or even more than they need to have. It's all about priorities.. I think you are missing the important role of a consumer. A consumer molds the market into what they want. So, everyone wants cheap or free media? Look at what happened - services like hulu, fancast, and even some companies have uploaded full length movies to youtube. In fact right now the RIAA are complaining about a decline in CD sales, I wonder why.
said by fiberguy:What I hear is that the consumer wants cheaper cable.. and that's fine.. but it also means that if the consumer WANTS a multi-channel TV service, then they need to budget for it and think about everything they want to buy in their own budget. Zero argument there.
said by fiberguy:Still, with all this said, I do believe that premium TV service is a little higher and getting out of control. I ALSO believe, and always have, that hollywood is the culprit at large and needs to slow their roll. Argreed. I refuse to buy cable TV simply because the commericals have gotten out of hand. I can get up and make a meal in the time the commericals roll. And the commericals aren't even for products I want to see or care about! I'm a guy, I'm fairly certain I don't need to see commericals about tampons (unless you know something I don't).
said by fiberguy:EVERYONE in this country is taking a hit right now, except certain people. To be honest, ENTERTAINMENT in general is a luxury.. I think more people should spend less on it right now and more on their necessities.. TV isn't one of them. Hollywood, and a lot of the elite rich, believe they need to maintain their current lifestyle as they're somehow doing good for everyone else.. the bottom line is that they, too, can cut back. No one really cares to go see a $9 movie these days.. not many people are feeling good about premium cable tv service.. people ALL need to slow down and back off. No argument there. However, as long its avaiable people will go to and see movies.
To be honest, and somewhat off topic, I think internet access shouldn't be a luxury but a necessaity like food/water. Why? So facebook addicts can get their fix? No. Almost everything is digtial now a days - jobs, bills, banking, credit cards ect and internet access can be expensive for many people.
said by fiberguy:But, seriously, back to your post at large.. no matter what you expect or want from ala cart, the provider IS going to get a base amount from each customer to survive. No argument there. I never said they should give out the channels for free, but if a bean counter in the back room can figure out a dollar amount per channel, but yet have a "bundle" be chaper than ordering the channels seperate - I think it could work. Especially since you wouldn't have to get a WHOLE OTHER TIER of channels just to get the one you want.
said by fiberguy:And, sorry to say, in business, it IS about squeezing as much money from each customer - are you nuts?? EVERY business wants the most $$ from their customer.. to think otherwise.. well.. that's a fool for a business owner. Quantity in a customer base, over quality, has it's own set of complications as I've stated above.. so my point remains.. if the OP wanted to open his own company and had the cash or capital to do so, I'd simply tell him he's nuts, and wait for the bankruptcy sale in order to buy him out at a discounted price. I believe nickle and diming the customer to death is the Geek Squad philosophy and I cannot subscribe to it nor endorse it. Of course it seems we have clashing ideologies, however, I believe that making the customer feel like he isn't breaking the bank with you is an important factor - "A happy customer is a returning customer". It's like squeezing the money out of the customer - I would like to think you can squeeze him for more money over a period of time rather than at once.
To give an example - there is a watch shop in Darien, IL (can't remember the name to save my live, however, it is right across the street from the Home Run Inn) and let me tell you I am taken aback by their services. My supervisor once brought his watch in because it needed a new battery (this is an expensive watch by the way), we dropped it off, picked up at lunch and it was no cost to him. They didn't even charge him for the battery. Now, that the fact he did that implants into my brain that anything dealing with watches I take to this guy because I know he won't try to rip me off and he is very professional. Now, you do raise an important point that if he never charges for battery replacements then he can't possibly make enough to stay in business right? Well, he does sell watches and other repair work, so I am sure he makes enough to get by.
I have actually heard of companies start raising the rates when they are about to go under to see if they can save themselves - and to me I think this is the wrong way to finish the business. You should always put customer service and your customer views above all else.
Thank you, this was a refreshing argument that some of the other DSLR members who have a single sentence to argue with "Your wrong, X sucks". | |
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to TheRogueX
Umm... You're an apologist.. only, it's for bad behavior.
People don't have to live out of their means for "access to this information".. You're talking about Internet, I assume,... new is available on TV... News in on the Internet - and to be honest, the internet is affordable especially considering all that you can get from the internet for such a price.
People do NOT live in their means.. MANY don't. I don't agree with what (as you call) greedy corporations did.. however, the CONSUMERS were the ones who went and signed on the line. I don't care about the terms of the loans they took out on their houses.. I don't care about the terms they agreed to on their credit cards - that's VERY much a moot point!! The PROBLEM always begins when the consumer signs on the receipt when they charge something at the store.. The PROBLEM is when the consumer purchases a vehicle they can't really afford thinking they can take from one credit line to subsidize another. The PROBLEM is when the consumer sought out to take money out of their home TO BUY THINGS they didn't really need in the first place.
Americans use "things" to establish their status.. they see material objects as shiny nickels and drug fixes... PEOPLE have to restrain THEMSELVES..
Again, I could care less what corps do as long as they aren't breaking the law.. and yes, there were some that did.. however, it STILL doesn't negate the fact that the CONSUMER or the average person took money, for what ever reason, AND MADE PURCHASES.. ie: wrote checks their finances couldn't cash..
People don't have to live outside their means to afford cable or satellite.. or internet.. there's a HUGE difference between "having it all" and "having what you need"... and if cable IS a necessity, then those other things, like iPhones, flat screen TV's... laptops... MP3 players.. etc.. no longer are reachable..
If you can't agree with this - then you're hopeless.
It's honestly people like YOU, Sir, that are the problem in this country.. stop apologizing for reckless behavior NO MATTER WHO it is.. and STOP pointing the fingers at these so-called "evil corporations".. the average citizen has PLENTY of blame for their OWN DECISIONS they make every day.. this IS, after all, the land of the free.. a place where you're allowed to make your own choices.. right or wrong.. and with that comes, in the end, your right to also deal with your OWN mistakes.. stop passing the blame. | |
| said by fiberguy:Umm... You're an apologist.. only, it's for bad behavior. An apologist for bad behavior?
said by fiberguy:People don't have to live out of their means for "access to this information".. You're talking about Internet, I assume,... new is available on TV... News in on the Internet - and to be honest, the internet is affordable especially considering all that you can get from the internet for such a price. I would like to disagree. Look at what Frontier did and what all the ISPs are trying to move to, won't mention any names *cough* Time Warner *cough*. So, on top of that $60/month, you could be slapped with high overage fees (depending on your ISP, where you live, ect). Am I arguing that the internet ever become a pay per commodity? No, and I don't think it will ever be. Even though I think it was DSLR that posted that a survey found that the ineternet was usually the last "luxury" to be canceled, but that still doesn't mean a lot of people can afford it today. Lets argue DSL, its cheap and fast enough to get you on the internet...but you have to be within X miles of the CO and your available speeds depends on your distance. In fact a lot of people can't even get DSL. Now, I don't know the inner parts to my CO, but I would say after I "fought" to get DSL available, I would venture to say it filled up.
I know a person who had to give up their 401k just to pay their mortage. I really doubt that internet access is the last thing on their minds; and it is a shame that they can't afford get access. Perhpas there should be a program for struggling people to be able to afford internet access?
In fact I had dail-up for 18 years of my life because my parents couldn't afford it. But, that is a different story in itself.
said by fiberguy:People do NOT live in their means.. MANY don't. I don't agree with what (as you call) greedy corporations did.. however, the CONSUMERS were the ones who went and signed on the line. I don't care about the terms of the loans they took out on their houses.. I don't care about the terms they agreed to on their credit cards - that's VERY much a moot point!! The PROBLEM always begins when the consumer signs on the receipt when they charge something at the store.. The PROBLEM is when the consumer purchases a vehicle they can't really afford thinking they can take from one credit line to subsidize another. The PROBLEM is when the consumer sought out to take money out of their home TO BUY THINGS they didn't really need in the first place. Agreed. A lot of people don't have a sense of financial responsiblity. I can't think of any, but I am sure at least 50% of the people I know have "tighten their belts" so to speak.
In fact, I know someone who is out of work and I went to the AT&T store to fix up some issues with my device and he was thinking about switching to AT&T but the rep told him that he could save money, he said not today.
said by fiberguy:Americans use "things" to establish their status.. they see material objects as shiny nickels and drug fixes... PEOPLE have to restrain THEMSELVES.. Agreed but won't happen. I like to bring up the average person theorm a lot because well I believe there is good evidence to support it. Now, I don't know about other shops, but it seems like whenever I walk into a tech shop there is employee almost always trying to upsell the customer. Yes, this is how the business survivies, but it goes back to my previous point of how businesses should milk customers over time and not break the bank at once. But, my point is the person will almost always buy into the upsell because the general impression is that the employee is trustworthy. I'm sure you can imagine Best Buy employess aimlessly walking around the store trying to sell people stuff, because well...people will eat it up and buy stuff.
Employee: "Hey you need this useless pices of crap!"
Customer: "Oooo OK I'll take it!"
The average person is not dumb, I guess you could say they are just "uninformed".
In fact I did overhear a girl that said they spent I wanna say $60-70 on a pair of jeans. To be honest I spend about $10-15 and sometimes $20 on a pair of jeans. And $20 is the most I would spend. But, should I have gotten up and said "you are a stupid spolied b$%^& go kill yourself you are hurting our economy?", one could argue yes but I didn't.
Will people ever restain themselves? Do you have chains and a pad lock? I think that is the only way to make it happen.
said by fiberguy:Again, I could care less what corps do as long as they aren't breaking the law.. and yes, there were some that did.. however, it STILL doesn't negate the fact that the CONSUMER or the average person took money, for what ever reason, AND MADE PURCHASES.. ie: wrote checks their finances couldn't cash.. True. And I don't know why they would try to do this either. It does back to my point that people don't know how to manage money. If I had to I am sure I could name the people who I know personally that is more concerned about going to the next concert than trying to educate themselves in their field. Personally, if I had to give up everything I had for one thing; that would be having the ability to educate my self further...unfortunately my fellow peers don't seem to share that opinion (not saying you, but there are some other computer scientists that I really wonder about).
said by fiberguy:People don't have to live outside their means to afford cable or satellite.. or internet.. there's a HUGE difference between "having it all" and "having what you need"... and if cable IS a necessity, then those other things, like iPhones, flat screen TV's... laptops... MP3 players.. etc.. no longer are reachable.. Agreed, however, expanding on the argument up there - people have to have everything...advertisng helps with that. Look at the Droid sales figures:
»www.readwriteweb.com/archives/dr···date.php
They advertised the hell out of it and people ate it up.
I believe this is another argument about the "system", as I describe below.
said by fiberguy:If you can't agree with this - then you're hopeless. I'm hopeless? Let's keep personal attacks outside eh?
said by fiberguy:It's honestly people like YOU, Sir, that are the problem in this country.. stop apologizing for reckless behavior NO MATTER WHO it is.. and STOP pointing the fingers at these so-called "evil corporations".. the average citizen has PLENTY of blame for their OWN DECISIONS they make every day.. this IS, after all, the land of the free.. a place where you're allowed to make your own choices.. right or wrong.. and with that comes, in the end, your right to also deal with your OWN mistakes.. stop passing the blame. Wait, but I agreed with you on most of your points? I'm confused now.
I am not "apologizing" for reckless behavoir. I agreed with you that people can't keep track of their own finances? However, I do believe that corporations did play a hand, you are right most of the blame is on the consumer....however the consumer is what pushes the corporations. It's a vicious cycle really.
I would argue there are two types of people, those who outside of the "system" and those who are inside the "system".
Those outside are those people who know how to take care of themselves and actually understand what is going on around them. Those who subscribe to those morals and ideals that logicaly make sense; and not directly accpeting those same ideals of society.
Those that are inside, rely on the system, the ideals that the systems provide, and simply can't take care of themsleves. These are also the people who will buy something based on an advertisement. And of course do and purchase whatever society says they need -
I actually asked a girl one time:
"Why do you exercise all the time? You do know you would be pretty either way?"
"Society says I have to."
I'm dead serious, I couldn't make that up. This is also the same person who is more concerned about getting the next concert ticket than educating themselves. It's sad really, but you can't help these people...they have to find their own way out of the "system"; at least you hope they do.
Personally, I own 3 Windows Mobile phones, and now an Android device. I didn't buy them because I wanted to blow some cash or that Windows Mobile is a "gaming" OS, I bought them because I use them as a tool to improve my daily life (calander, email, Google Maps for GPS ect). In order to cut those expenses I have personally thought about buying a Peek ( »www.getpeek.com/ ) but having Google Maps for GPS is very useful (among other things that internet access on my device will obviously provide). Many people I know buy an iPhone simply because it has some interesting games on it. Don't get me wrong, the iPhone has its place and uses, however I only see it as the 21st century version of the "gameboy". And then I see people with Macbooks running Windows.
One person who I know (vagueness doesn't help, I know but work with me) even went so far as to defend a purchase of a Macbook stating that Windows will run faster on a Mac than a PC. I simply can't find any actual evidence to support his claims because they both have the same hardware. But, I would venture to say his defense was just so that he could buy something that "looked good". Which goes back to my point of people want it all, can you stop them? Can I stop them? Nope. I wish we could educate people on what is and isn't good spending. But, like cyber security training, there will be many people that still "won't get it". There will, of course, be people that would find themselves out of the "system", but what about those who are "stuck" in the system? | |
|
