|
uniqs
32 |
|
 |
|
1 edit |
to J Alert
Re: Bullshitsaid by J Alert:Your link means absolutely nothing. Oh, OK. So the WikiPedia entry on Pricing Strategies 101 means absolutely nothing when we are talking about pricing strategies. Not sure what to do if you refuse information as the basis for discussion. I think this is pointless. I asked you to come up with a metric. You refused. I even showed you where to start. You claim it's meaningless. Well, now what? We are in a loop. I repeat: the marginal cost of the infrastructure to offer a service does not equal the cost of providing that service. Much less the price at which it will be offered. You are in a state of not understanding anything about marginal cost, total cost, or price, even at a definitional level, much less a business level understanding. I don't know how I can say this much more plainly. I ask you to learn so we can have an actual discussion and maybe you can educate yourself. Regardless of anything, you still haven't presented any argument or 'metric' that proves that $20 for 300MB is anywhere a reasonable deal. Also, when we're talking about their $20 per 300MB plan, that's the price point, not $10 per GB.
So lets get simple. Answer this ONE QUESTION.
How is $20 for 300MB a fair price??? We are in a loop again. Listen this time: (a) It's not $20 for 300MB. Their price point is $10/GB. The 300MB plan is just an entry level tier for low usage customers who don't want to pay $30/month. It makes no sense to analyze it on a cost per byte basis. edited to add: rereading this it strikes me you don't know what the term "price point" means. Please see here: » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pr ··· ce_point(b) Just saying something is "not fair" is not a statement that can be supported or refuted by business logic. Who decides what is "fair"? Is free fair? Half the current price? A 10% discount? How can you tell when it's "fair", when people like you stop complaining? When the company goes out of business? What? (c) I am not going to construct a business argument for you. I simply point out that yours is completely bogus. | |  J AlertMayhem til the AM
Premium Member
join:2003-03-15
Tuckahoe, NY |
J Alert
Premium Member
2012-Jan-24 5:14 pm
said by MyDogHsFleas:(c) I am not going to construct a business argument for you. I simply point out that yours is completely bogus.
So your argument is that you are not going to make an argument? Fine, I win. We're in a loop because you can't understand a simple question. Is AT&T overcharging for their service or not? The country is supposed to have laws against monopolies, collusion, and price gouging. If maybe you or someone else could show anywhere on the internet where a fair estimate of total cost of delivering wireless data over 3G or 4G (including upkeep, infrastructure, etc)... you can help prove that they aren't grossly overcharging for the service. You haven't, I feel, because you can't. Until you do, it's clear that providers are overcharging for their services. People are paying it, so go for them. And we'll even take your hard-on for $10 per GB ... which is also overpriced. You're probably going to go into some silly nonsense wiki-link, or some other circular reasoning diatribe, so if you're tempted to do that, just answer the following question: "How much does it cost for AT&T to deliver 1GB of data?" Don't say anything before you answer this first. | | 93388818 (banned)It's cool, I'm takin it back
join:2000-03-14
Dallas, TX |
93388818 (banned)
Member
2012-Jan-24 5:33 pm
said by J Alert:"How much does it cost for AT&T to deliver 1GB of data?" Don't say anything before you answer this first. You can't answer it either. Prove it's overcharged, (assuming you can even define what you feel is overcharging). What exactly is an acceptable profit margin for you? 5%? 10%? Are you like this about other things like Pizza or Chinese food delivery? | | | |
to J Alert
said by J Alert:We're in a loop because you can't understand a simple question. Is AT&T overcharging for their service or not? Define "overcharging". And don't just quote a price and say "that's overcharging". That's just your opinion. The country is supposed to have laws against monopolies, collusion, and price gouging. It does. Show me where AT&T's pricing violates any of those laws. Or again is this just your opinion of what the law should be, as opposed to what it is? If maybe you or someone else could show anywhere on the internet where a fair estimate of total cost of delivering wireless data over 3G or 4G (including upkeep, infrastructure, etc)... you can help prove that they aren't grossly overcharging for the service.
You haven't, I feel, because you can't. Until you do, it's clear that providers are overcharging for their services. People are paying it, so go for them. And we'll even take your hard-on for $10 per GB ... which is also overpriced. define "fair" and "overcharging". And what the hell is this "hard-on" nonsense? Do you think I'm trying to bias the discussion? No, I'm just trying to make it rational and make you think about what you are saying. It makes no sense to take an entry level offering of $20 for 300MB and pretend that's the only one to consider in your analysis. It's an entry level offering for chrissake! No one who uses more than 300MB is going to take that plan. They are going to take a higher plan, whose price point is $10/GB. The 300MB plan is only for people who want to not pay $30/month. You're probably going to go into some silly nonsense wiki-link, Sorry for providing information to try to help you get educated. or some other circular reasoning diatribe, Show me anywhere where I've committed circular reasoning. so if you're tempted to do that, just answer the following question:
"How much does it cost for AT&T to deliver 1GB of data?" Don't say anything before you answer this first. Well that's a good question. I don't know. You could start by examining their annual report and 10-K filings and their quarterly investor calls. I'm not going to do your work for you. The real information is probably confidential within AT&T because it's competition sensitive. But you could probably build up a guesstimate. This is the kind of thing that investment analysts do. Personally I don't care that much, it's not a burning question for me. Because I'm not on some crusade to prove that AT&T's prices (or Verizon's for that matter... they are on the same price point) is "unfair". You are. I'm just shooting down your logic because it's easy. A couple of study notes: a) Trying to look at the cost of some undersea cable or something then extrapolate does not take into account anything close to the actual total cost of delivering a service. That article you linked to is wildly non-applicable to the question. b) I know I've said this like 50 times but you keep ignoring it. The marginal cost of providing the next increment of a service is nowhere close to the total cost of providing a service. c) You also have to consider different kinds of costs: the ongoing cost of operating the service, the initial investment cost which is capitalized and depreciated, and incremental investments to improve the service. There's also all kinds of costs not associated directly with operating the service. d) Price does not derive directly from cost. That's only one factor. There's pricing strategy involved. See the link I posted a while ago which you called "meaningless". | | J AlertMayhem til the AM
Premium Member
join:2003-03-15
Tuckahoe, NY |
J Alert
Premium Member
2012-Jan-24 6:21 pm
said by MyDogHsFleas:said by J Alert:We're in a loop because you can't understand a simple question. Is AT&T overcharging for their service or not? Define "overcharging". And don't just quote a price and say "that's overcharging". That's just your opinion. Marking up something hundreds of percent (and all your "competitors" doing the same) is overcharging. We're getting into a moral discussion here if they are right to do it. I've said already, they're getting away with it, so good for them. said by MyDogHsFleas:said by J Alert:The country is supposed to have laws against monopolies, collusion, and price gouging. It does. Show me where AT&T's pricing violates any of those laws. Or again is this just your opinion of what the law should be, as opposed to what it is? Well if I could show you were the laws are being violated then AT&T would be charged. But does it really look to you like there's competition between AT&T, Verizon, et.al. or just like they're charging as much as they think they can? Considering how honest AT&T and Verizon have been with their fees [/sarcasm], I am so sure they are above doing anything as questionable. said by MyDogHsFleas:said by J Alert:If maybe you or someone else could show anywhere on the internet where a fair estimate of total cost of delivering wireless data over 3G or 4G (including upkeep, infrastructure, etc)... you can help prove that they aren't grossly overcharging for the service.
You haven't, I feel, because you can't. Until you do, it's clear that providers are overcharging for their services. People are paying it, so go for them. And we'll even take your hard-on for $10 per GB ... which is also overpriced. define "fair" and "overcharging". And what the hell is this "hard-on" nonsense? Do you think I'm trying to bias the discussion? No, I'm just trying to make it rational and make you think about what you are saying. It makes no sense to take an entry level offering of $20 for 300MB and pretend that's the only one to consider in your analysis. It's an entry level offering for chrissake! No one who uses more than 300MB is going to take that plan. They are going to take a higher plan, whose price point is $10/GB. The 300MB plan is only for people who want to not pay $30/month. Fair would be an unbiased party providing actual data of how much wireless data transfer actually costs (taking into account all factors). For overcharging, see above. Regardless if $10 for 1GB is the price point, does that change the fact that they are charging $20 for 300MB? I'm sure you've noticed there is no $10 for 1GB option that would probably be most attractive to most users. Heaven forbid AT&T do something nice for their customers that wouldn't lose them money. So because people don't want to pay $30 a month it's cool to raise the "price point" on them from "$10 per GB "to "$68 per GB"? said by MyDogHsFleas:said by J Alert:You're probably going to go into some silly nonsense wiki-link, Sorry for providing information to try to help you get educated. It didn't educate, it diluted. It wasn't relevant to the argument. I'm not asking for profit strategies. said by MyDogHsFleas:said by J Alert:or some other circular reasoning diatribe, Show me anywhere where I've committed circular reasoning. Fine. Retracted. said by MyDogHsFleas:said by J Alert:so if you're tempted to do that, just answer the following question:
"How much does it cost for AT&T to deliver 1GB of data?" Don't say anything before you answer this first. Well that's a good question. I don't know. You could start by examining their annual report and 10-K filings and their quarterly investor calls. I'm not going to do your work for you. The real information is probably confidential within AT&T because it's competition sensitive. But you could probably build up a guesstimate. This is the kind of thing that investment analysts do. I'm not the fed, I'm not going into (nor do I have access to) AT&T's books. But what about all the government subsidies, tax breaks, etc. The meaningless fees that are basically monies to be pocketed. That with reported profits shows something about AT&T's pricing. said by MyDogHsFleas:Personally I don't care that much, it's not a burning question for me. Because I'm not on some crusade to prove that AT&T's prices (or Verizon's for that matter... they are on the same price point) is "unfair". You are. I'm just shooting down your logic because it's easy. It's "easy"? Hmm, you've given an opinion to counter mine? Sounds hypocritical. And you haven't shot down anything. Take a look around and find me someone who thinks that AT&T's new pricing plans are a good deal. Otherwise, do the work you don't want to do and prove that there is anywhere close to less than a 500% markup of total cost to consumer price. (And yes, I made that 500% figure up, but I'm sure it's even higher.) said by MyDogHsFleas:A couple of study notes:
a) Trying to look at the cost of some undersea cable or something then extrapolate does not take into account anything close to the actual total cost of delivering a service. That article you linked to is wildly non-applicable to the question. You don't think AT&T or whoever has recouped, dozens of times, any money they've put into infrastructure? Plus they aren't footing 100% of the bill. said by MyDogHsFleas:b) I know I've said this like 50 times but you keep ignoring it. The marginal cost of providing the next increment of a service is nowhere close to the total cost of providing a service. And I'm telling you that even taking into account those costs, the prices don't compute. said by MyDogHsFleas:c) You also have to consider different kinds of costs: the ongoing cost of operating the service, the initial investment cost which is capitalized and depreciated, and incremental investments to improve the service. There's also all kinds of costs not associated directly with operating the service. Yet they profited 2.4 billion last quarter. Hmm, really sounds like they are scraping by to cover their costs. Now I'm not saying they should have a not-for-profit business model, but considering their overall service and prices, something here doesn't work out. said by MyDogHsFleas:d) Price does not derive directly from cost. That's only one factor. There's pricing strategy involved. See the link I posted a while ago which you called "meaningless".
Still meaningless without actual data for how much it actually costs. Which no one seems to be able to provide. And like I said, I could care less about AT&T .. never used them. And again, good for them with getting away with it. I just call a spade a spade. Sorry. | | | J Alert |
to 93388818
said by 93388818:said by J Alert:"How much does it cost for AT&T to deliver 1GB of data?" Don't say anything before you answer this first. You can't answer it either. Prove it's overcharged, (assuming you can even define what you feel is overcharging). What exactly is an acceptable profit margin for you? 5%? 10%? Are you like this about other things like Pizza or Chinese food delivery? Um, I know that if someplace was charging $100 for a pizza pie, I wouldn't be eating there. When you have what's basically become a necessity for many people, keeping consumer prices way higher than their actual costs is unfair, immoral, and technically illegal. The problem is that fair competition is supposed to solve this problem, but it clearly hasn't. | | | |
to J Alert
The only actual data you provided in that response was: Yet they profited 2.4 billion last quarter. So now do something real which is easy since you refuse to spend any time being educated. Take AT&T's profit for some period of time, divide it into the revenue for that period. Do this for a few periods so you're not cherry picking some good or bad quarter. That is their profit margin. Now tell me if you think that's too much, too little, or just right. And tell me what you think it SHOULD be. | | J AlertMayhem til the AM
Premium Member
join:2003-03-15
Tuckahoe, NY
1 edit |
J Alert
Premium Member
2012-Jan-25 1:16 pm
said by MyDogHsFleas:The only actual data you provided in that response was: Yet they profited 2.4 billion last quarter. So now do something real which is easy since you refuse to spend any time being educated. Take AT&T's profit for some period of time, divide it into the revenue for that period. Do this for a few periods so you're not cherry picking some good or bad quarter. That is their profit margin. Now tell me if you think that's too much, too little, or just right. And tell me what you think it SHOULD be. Educate yourself. Are you an AT&T sympathist? Their profit margin is consistently positive over the past decade. I'm not getting through to you and I can accept that. Just as I am sure that you feel you are not getting through to me. Their profits/profit margin should be what it is. They are getting away with charging what they charge and people are paying it. Good for them. Doesn't change the fact that their prices isn't the worth of the product. It's not as clear cut as something traded like gold. Where you can get the going rate for the item. It's too bad too, because if they did have something like that, it's be clear they were charging more than the worth. Although, looking at the price of a barrel of oil, you can concede that these prices too can be "fixed". Edit: Added "over the past decade" | | | |
said by J Alert:said by MyDogHsFleas:The only actual data you provided in that response was: Yet they profited 2.4 billion last quarter. So now do something real which is easy since you refuse to spend any time being educated. Take AT&T's profit for some period of time, divide it into the revenue for that period. Do this for a few periods so you're not cherry picking some good or bad quarter. That is their profit margin. Now tell me if you think that's too much, too little, or just right. And tell me what you think it SHOULD be. Educate yourself. Are you an AT&T sympathist? OK! I give up! You are the most hard-headed person I've ever met on these forums. I've tried to lead you into simpler and simpler tasks to move you along the path to understanding. The last one was dirt easy. If you want to continue as a know-nothing and not learn anything fine. Have a good life. What the hell is "an AT&T sympathist"? What have I ever said that indicated that? I try to view things as they are, and learn when I realize I'm not viewing them correctly or with the right depth of analysis. I would suggest that maybe you're an "AT&T hater" and thus anyone who probes your assertions is, to your mind, an "AT&T sympathizer". Their profit margin is consistently positive. You say that like it's a bad thing. I'm not getting through to you and I can accept that. Just as I am sure that you feel you are not getting through to me. First, you are absolutely getting through to me. I completely understand everything you are saying and I am getting a good idea about where you are coming from. Second, my goal is not to "get through" to you, I don't view this as a debate, rather as a learning exercise. Their profits/profit margin should be what it is. They are getting away with charging what they charge and people are paying it. Good for them. Doesn't change the fact that their prices isn't the worth of the product. Obviously many people do think it's worth the price. If you don't think so, don't buy it. That's how capitalism works. To move further and assert that not only does their price not meet YOUR expectations, but it is TOO HIGH FOR EVERYBODY, is pretty arrogant. Especially when you can't back it up. It's not as clear cut as something traded like gold. Where you can get the going rate for the item. It's too bad too, because if they did have something like that, it's be clear they were charging more than the worth.
Although, looking at the price of a barrel of oil, you can concede that these prices too can be "fixed". Really? You think gold prices are "clear cut"? Take a look at the swings in the market for gold. Now oil, there actually is a cartel that to some extent fixes prices. But even they are eventually required to listen to supply and demand. | | J AlertMayhem til the AM
Premium Member
join:2003-03-15
Tuckahoe, NY |
J Alert
Premium Member
2012-Jan-25 10:44 pm
Wasn't. Just showing that the one quarter's profits I mentioned wasn't handpicked. Just was the most recent. said by MyDogHsFleas:Obviously many people do think it's worth the price. If you don't think so, don't buy it. That's how capitalism works. To move further and assert that not only does their price not meet YOUR expectations, but it is TOO HIGH FOR EVERYBODY, is pretty arrogant. Especially when you can't back it up.
I guess many people also think that gas prices are a good deal because they keep buying gas. Kinda hard to not use it when it's the only game in town, since all the other providers are doing the same thing. said by MyDogHsFleas:Really? You think gold prices are "clear cut"? Take a look at the swings in the market for gold. Now oil, there actually is a cartel that to some extent fixes prices. But even they are eventually required to listen to supply and demand.
My comment about the price of gold was just basically making a comparison to something that has a "set price". Not claiming that gold prices aren't volatile, just that at the very least they say "this is worth this". Let's not get into the problems of commodities and futures though. Just would be nice if some honest, 3rd party out there could come up with statistics on the true worth of things. However, when you hear things like the top 30 companies spent more money on lobbying than on taxes, there's not really much hope for fair play. | |
|
