I don't buy the ''lower prices = more people buying = more money'' argument. Don't you think if that was the case, ZOS would have followed this rule? I mean what's the point in them putting the prices high on things if it annoys the community AND makes them less money?
I don't buy the ''lower prices = more people buying = more money'' argument. Don't you think if that was the case, ZOS would have followed this rule? I mean what's the point in them putting the prices high on things if it annoys the community AND makes them less money?
WarMasterCyp wrote: »I don't buy the ''lower prices = more people buying = more money'' argument. Don't you think if that was the case, ZOS would have followed this rule? I mean what's the point in them putting the prices high on things if it annoys the community AND makes them less money?
As a person who has been in the business world I can tell you that lower prices = higher sales.
High prices = niche market meaning only a small percentage can afford to buy them which in return means lower profit
Come on dude, its common knowledge.
WarMasterCyp wrote: »I don't buy the ''lower prices = more people buying = more money'' argument. Don't you think if that was the case, ZOS would have followed this rule? I mean what's the point in them putting the prices high on things if it annoys the community AND makes them less money?
As a person who has been in the business world I can tell you that lower prices = higher sales.
High prices = niche market meaning only a small percentage can afford to buy them which in return means lower profit
Come on dude, its common knowledge.
DaveMoeDee wrote: »WarMasterCyp wrote: »I don't buy the ''lower prices = more people buying = more money'' argument. Don't you think if that was the case, ZOS would have followed this rule? I mean what's the point in them putting the prices high on things if it annoys the community AND makes them less money?
As a person who has been in the business world I can tell you that lower prices = higher sales.
High prices = niche market meaning only a small percentage can afford to buy them which in return means lower profit
Come on dude, its common knowledge.
Sure. They are just idiots and you have figured out how they should run their business. No chance of Dunning-Kruger.
You assume a very elastic market. You have no idea how elastic the market is. You also say nothing about the effect of commonness on desirability of cosmetics. You say nothing about the fact that each mount is, to a degree, competing with each other mount.
One thing about "common knowledge" -- it is often very naive and inaccurate.
I don't buy the ''lower prices = more people buying = more money'' argument. Don't you think if that was the case, ZOS would have followed this rule? I mean what's the point in them putting the prices high on things if it annoys the community AND makes them less money?