or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by timgriff84

Great that they've decided to pay people during the 3 month trial period rather than give away there work for free, but I'd still be pretty pissed to be getting a "percentage" of revenue. How about just pay them for what your customers actually used! If a customer ends up using more than you charged them for that's a failure of your business model, not an artists work suddenly becoming less valuable. While maintaining your own profit margin as well is also pretty...
Going by her statement in this instance she doesn't seem to have an issue with streaming, particularly Apple Music as people actually pay for it. Its more the idea that Apple want to offer a free trial to users to get people to sign up, but don't want to pay any of the music owners for there stuff during that time.Its like opening a shop and telling your suppliers your just going to give there stuff away and not pay them for it either. Because you want to gain popularity...
You might not be fools, but I bet your a smaller market than people just wanting a fashionable device. Which also seems to be a market strategy that's working very very well for Apple.
Whoever wrote the apple policies and engage there brain though. The rest of the tech world does exist and Apples customers do have other people products.
I don't think kids having a watch bought for them makes them a spoiled brat.If a parent would buy one for themselves why not there own child?Its also not like the cheapest apple watch is completely out of range on what parents spend in there kids. Right from birth you spend hundreds if not thousands on things like prams, wendy houses, climbing frames, games consoles, games for the games console, mp3 players, clothes, trips to theme parks, phones, ipads, baby versions of...
People have multiple watches they only had one feature phone.Battery life didn't matter so much on phones as you use it every day and therefore charge every night. If a watch only lasts 18 hours you have to plan to wear it the day before.Won't be a problem for a lot of people, but for others it will turn into the watch that's always flat.
 Alcohol vs Milk isn't a great example. Effects of Alcohol costs the country millions and is a profitable industry. Milk on the other hand doesn't have as costly effects and is a struggling industry that is economically better to support than loose. To protect the poor the 20% VAT is not charged on everything. Food, children's clothes, medicine are all exempt. Do you think if tax on fuel was abolished, fuel would be cheaper? When fuel duty has been cut in the past it's...
Tax and government isn't about whats best for you, its about whats best for a group of millions of people. You have your own money to spend on yourself. Tax is about collecting money to spend on things that benefit everyone, even if it isn't a direct benefit. And where do consumers get there money? That's right businesses who employ them. I agree, but even more importantly than what corporates use is the market that they are given. If they didn't have the UK market then...
Assuming prices would go up if more tax from profits were to be paid also implies that if taxs went down then so would prices. But why would Apple or any company drop prices when consumers are willing to pay that price, and if they could still sell the same with higher prices why wouldn't they do that too.Prices wouldn't go up as companies already sell at a price that they think will make the most profit. Not so low that the extra sales doesn't make up for the lower profit...
Maybe not home consumers, but IT departments with enough users would normally fix machines rather than sending them away. For most people I would expect the battery would last longer than the user wants the device for. Not great for people buying second hand devices on eBay though.
New Posts  All Forums: