If customer A is paying more for a product than customer B, customer A is effectively subsidising customer B. Or to put it another way, the vendor is taking money from customer A and giving it to customer B. That is happening on a worldwide basis.
If customer A is paying more for a product than customer B, customer A is effectively subsidising customer B.
Or perhaps customer B lives where the laws are different, the taxes are different, the regulations are different, the cost of living is different, the imports are different, the building codes are different, the manufacturing regulations are different and all of this adds up to cost more.
Or perhaps customer B lives where the laws are different, the taxes are different, the regulations are different, the cost of living is different, the imports are different, the building codes are different, the manufacturing regulations are different and all of this adds up to cost more.
I agree. What I am saying is that after these factor are taken into account there is still a price difference in the base price. That is the truth I am trying to get at. Because these pricing structures are complex it means that price discrimination is hidden, and so it is too easy to make this argument that since there is extra tax, all the price difference is due only to tax, but there still is a markup on the base price. This does happen in many products. The US is being subsidised by the rest of the world. This is changing as people are becoming aware of this. It will actually be a healthy change and I'm sure companies like Apple will do even better.
Denial does not make it false. I'm not claiming to be an expert. In fact I only posed the questions to begin with. As I have said, it is complex to understand what is going on. As is typical with marketing they try to make things complex so that consumers are at a disadvantage. Denialists will hide behind this complexity.
This shows that Asian countries are (or were) at a major disadvantage compared to the US. Oil market experts may be able to say that this Saudi oil price discrimination has been stopped, but in effect it means the the rest of the world is or was subsidising cheap fuel in the USA.
I know what you are saying that compared to current prices it might be good to be only 50% more. But compared to what an average Indian earns, that makes Apple prohibitively expensive. Most of those who can afford this price are probably those that travel overseas anyway and can pick up cheaper deals in other countries. If anything, the price must be less in India.
Apple is already expensive. They are making premium products. Their market strategy is very different & meant to stay in premium segment. Let's look at the most popular, highly anticipated iPhone 5 in India. Currently it's available in US for $649 for contract-free 16 GB version. And with addition of tax $49 approx, let's say it costs $699. So that's almost 38k INR while 16 GB iPhone 5 is available in India at 45k INR contract-free.
So the difference you see comes from the factors which are already mentioned by other members. It's not a huge margin considering the licensing, taxes, shipping & whatever other additional cost we have to bear. In India especially for iPhone Apple's premium resellers do not provide warranty for units purchased outside of India. While for all other Apple products, no matter where they are purchased anywhere in the world fall under warranty & replacements.
Your logic of rich & poor country doesn't make sense. Apple's not there for charity but for business. And I like them for what they are. While Samsung & other android OEMs, I remember when they announced Galaxy S III worldwide, they announced it in India for 38k INR and as of now, not ever after a year they are offering 16 GB S III in 29k. It's always same for most of their products. At least Apple's not changing the price of the product from start to end cycle. Not often.
Apple is already expensive. They are making premium products. Their market strategy is very different & meant to stay in premium segment. Let's look at the most popular, highly anticipated iPhone 5 in India. Currently it's available in US for $649 for contract-free 16 GB version. And with addition of tax $49 approx, let's say it costs $699. So that's almost 38k INR while 16 GB iPhone 5 is available in India at 45k INR contract-free.
So the difference you see comes from the factors which are already mentioned by other members. It's not a huge margin considering the licensing, taxes, shipping & whatever other additional cost we have to bear. In India especially for iPhone Apple's premium resellers do not provide warranty for units purchased outside of India. While for all other Apple products, no matter where they are purchased anywhere in the world fall under warranty & replacements.
Your logic of rich & poor country doesn't make sense. Apple's not there for charity but for business. And I like them for what they are. While Samsung & other android OEMs, I remember when they announced Galaxy S III worldwide, they announced it in India for 38k INR and as of now, not ever after a year they are offering 16 GB S III in 29k. It's always same for most of their products. At least Apple's not changing the price of the product from start to end cycle. Not often.
Namaste Hari,
I agree with most of what you say. Certainly, Apple set a price and then keep it at that level and that is a good thing. It gives consumers some certainty, while others are giving "discounts" here there and everywhere (they're not really discounts are they!). That is typical marketing confusing the consumer. Yes, Apple certainly is better in that regard.
The original point of Salopsism was that only 50% more was a good price for India s/he had seen double the price. I don't think taxes would account for that, and as far as transport/distribution/support costs go, they would be significantly less in India - so that suggests that since these costs are less in a poor country, so should the price be.
I don't know the reasons the warranty for Apple products purchased outside India is invalid and thus forcing people to buy locally at inflated prices (although not much goes wrong with Apple products, so it might be worth the risk).
I think we are on the same wavelength that we would like to see Apple do well. I think they will find a balance, probably better than any other company. Markets like India and China are coming up and rivalling the US in size which means the US does not have the bargaining power to get lower prices, disadvantaging the rest of the world. This idea seems to scare Americans - some posting here. But we need to get rid of this notion that for one to win the other must lose - we do best when everyone wins.
You obviously didn't bother to read those pages. You are denying the evidence…
That's right; because they don't have any.
"We can't find any reason; it's obviously price discrimination." They didn't explain squat about what they DID research, if anything, what they DID discount and why, if anything, and why the valid, known reasons for having the price higher were also discounted.
"We can't find any reason; it's obviously price discrimination." They didn't explain squat about what they DID research, if anything, what they DID discount and why, if anything, and why the valid, known reasons for having the price higher were also discounted.
Show me an analysis like that.
He failed to acknowledge any potential regulation combined with changes in supply and demand, economies of scale and volume discounts, regulated versus unregulated markets, variations in demand and supply, the degree of competition in the local area, varying production costs, differences in transportation costs, differences in distribution costs, differences in transportation costs, and potential excise taxes on foreign goods.
I learned about this stuff in my HS economics class as I thought most people did.
I learned about this stuff in my HS economics class as I thought most people did.
Mine was an elective class and called 'Entrepreneurship'. It was full, sure, but I don't remember many people having interest therein. That might be why.
Mine was an elective class and called 'Entrepreneurship'. It was full, sure, but I don't remember many people having interest therein. That might be why.
That's a good point. Mine was mandatory but it's not accurate for me to assume that all school systems operate the same way. That said, it's also not accurate for someone to have absolutely no knowledge of economics to claim that Apple is raping Indians so they can give discounts to Americans. The fact is if Apple pulled out of India completely the price of the iPhone would not change in the US. Simply put, prices are determined by costs to sell, which is higher in India, and what the market will bear.
When I was there I remember the Nokia and Sony stores (they had official stores, or at least official looking stores) the products converted to nearly double the US price and UK prices. In fact, despite how inexpensive most of India is everything I wanted as an American was considerably more expensive than the US. Brazil is even worse when it comes to electronics but at least food and lodging wasn't outrageous for satisfying my American tastes.
That said, it's also not accurate for someone to have absolutely no knowledge of economics to claim that Apple is raping Indians so they can give discounts to Americans.
So who said that? Not me. You and Mr Skil seemed to have been misreading my position and arguing against that. And 'raping' Indians? You should steer clear of emotive language. I didn't say that's what Apple is doing, but pointing out there has been a practice of the US getting lower prices on things like oil from Saudi Arabia. The economics is that money therefore flows from the third world to the US. This was done by the British empire before hand. And who here has 'no knowledge of economics'. Although economics is a notoriously imprecise practise, but they probably didn't teach you that in your high school economics class. Economics has many assumptions that can be challenged. And usually an HS level understanding of any subject (subjects that are more solid than economics) has to be taken to pieces at a tertiary level because things taught as fact usually aren't so.
When people are told that their school understandings of subjects are at best simplistic or often wrong, they usually react with strong protestations.
The original point of SolipsismX* was that only 50% more was a good price for India s/he had seen double the price. I don't think taxes would account for that, and as far as transport/distribution/support costs go, they would be significantly less in India - so that suggests that since these costs are less in a poor country, so should the price be.
Namaste
Sorry but I don't agree at all with your reasoning. Back in 2012 I remember reading the similar article regarding Tim's thoughts on smartphone market dynamics in India & difficulties Apple was facing in distribution. So I googled the article.
He accentuated fairly on business structure & multi-layered distribution channels of India and it should answer all your arguments.
*I edited your quote because guy's a legend here. And I just didn't like the wrong spell of his name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ijoyner
I don't know the reasons the warranty for Apple products purchased outside India is invalid and thus forcing people to buy locally at inflated prices (although not much goes wrong with Apple products, so it might be worth the risk).
You misunderstood this portion of my post. Pardon my English. In India there's no warranty only for iPhone purchased out of India while all other products such as MAC, iPod, iPad etc fall under Apple limited warranty in India regardless of where they are purchased. I had bought 4th gen iPod touch from Apple online store on 2010's Black Friday. Received it in SF, CA. Then had some problem with dock connector. I went to Apple authorized service center in Ahmedabad & they replaced my unit without a fuss.
Apple India has never confirmed but I think the reason behind providing no warranty for iPhone purchased out of India is simply because many people are buying jailbroken/unlocked iPhones from other countries on reduced cost & using it in India.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ijoyner
I think we are on the same wavelength that we would like to see Apple do well. I think they will find a balance, probably better than any other company. Markets like India and China are coming up and rivalling the US in size which means the US does not have the bargaining power to get lower prices, disadvantaging the rest of the world. This idea seems to scare Americans - some posting here. But we need to get rid of this notion that for one to win the other must lose - we do best when everyone wins.
Again wrong. There's no such notion in the minds of any Americans posting here. Nobody's scared. You have the false impression. The below is an interesting article. Please have a look.
It's regarding the BB10 launches in India as Apple's making aggressive push in our country for smartphone market share. Here's a snippet.
Quote:
Apple Inc is now aggressively pushing the iconic device through instalment payment plans that make it more affordable, a new distribution model and heavy marketing blitz.
“Now your dream phone” at 5,056 rupees ($93 U.S.), read a recent full front-page ad for an iPhone 5 in the Times of India, referring to the initial payment on a phone priced at $840, or almost two months’ wages for an entry-level software engineer.
Apple expanded its India sales effort in the latter half of 2012 by adding two distributors. Previously it sold iPhones only through a few carriers and stores it calls premium resellers.
The result: iPhone shipments to India between October and December nearly tripled to 250,000 units from 90,000 in the previous quarter, according to an estimate by Jessica Kwee, a Singapore-based analyst at consultancy Canalys.
Until last year, BlackBerry was the No. 3 smartphone brand in India with market share of more than 10 per cent, thanks to a push into the consumer segment with lower-priced phones. Last quarter its share fell to about 5 per cent, putting it in fifth place, according to Canalys. Apple was sixth.
So who said that? Not me. You and Mr Skil seemed to have been misreading my position and arguing against that.
Your position is that the United States gets a "discount" on products, and that the various costs of doing business internationally combined with the costs to do business in a specific country should either be disregarded or cannot result in the prices seen.
Unfortunately, you've not said why these costs should be disregarded or discounted as the reason for the discrepancy. You have, however, said this:
Originally Posted by ijoyner
The original point of Salopsism was that only 50% more was a good price for India s/he had seen double the price. I don't think taxes would account for that…
And yet they do, for example, in Brazil. So why would this not be the case elsewhere?
Your position is that the United States gets a "discount" on products and that the various costs of doing business internationally combined with the costs to do business in a specific country should either be disregarded or cannot result in the prices seen.
Unfortunately, you've not said why these costs should be disregarded or discounted as the reason for the discrepancy. You have, however, said this:
And yet they do, for example, in Brazil. So why would this not be the case elsewhere?
I'm not really saying a 'conscious' discount, but where the US is able to negotiate lower prices because of the size of the market, it effectively means money flows from smaller markets to the larger market. Thus Thailand can't match the bargaining power of the US. This has happened in the oil industry. It is an effective subsidy to the US market at the cost of other markets. I'm not saying this is happening in the case of Apple, but raising the question in general.
You cite the case of Brazil, but one example does not prove the case (whereas a counterexample can be used to disprove a case). The mechanisms are of course complex - and I think we agree on that taxes, exchange rates, etc. I'm not trying to prove the case - only alert people to the fact that this does happen, probably unconsciously (except for oil). As the markets of India and China grow, more price parity will be had and I don't think that is a bad thing or that it disadvantages the US, rather it improves products and the global market. Things are becoming more balanced, but we should not forget the lesson from history that markets have been distorted in the favour of richer countries against the third world. In a global market, we must learn to be more cooperative, rather than have a winners and losers mentality.
i think that in context to the Indian market, i found the esycast media streaming device to be better than aapple or chromecast, or to roku for that matter.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Again, no.
What don't you understand about the concept?
If customer A is paying more for a product than customer B, customer A is effectively subsidising customer B. Or to put it another way, the vendor is taking money from customer A and giving it to customer B. That is happening on a worldwide basis.
Originally Posted by ijoyner
What matters is the truth.
Good! Then maybe tell some?
Originally Posted by ijoyner
If customer A is paying more for a product than customer B, customer A is effectively subsidising customer B.
Or perhaps customer B lives where the laws are different, the taxes are different, the regulations are different, the cost of living is different, the imports are different, the building codes are different, the manufacturing regulations are different and all of this adds up to cost more.
Not to you apparently as you keep ignoring the truth and then making false claims.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Good! Then maybe tell some?
Or perhaps customer B lives where the laws are different, the taxes are different, the regulations are different, the cost of living is different, the imports are different, the building codes are different, the manufacturing regulations are different and all of this adds up to cost more.
I agree. What I am saying is that after these factor are taken into account there is still a price difference in the base price. That is the truth I am trying to get at. Because these pricing structures are complex it means that price discrimination is hidden, and so it is too easy to make this argument that since there is extra tax, all the price difference is due only to tax, but there still is a markup on the base price. This does happen in many products. The US is being subsidised by the rest of the world. This is changing as people are becoming aware of this. It will actually be a healthy change and I'm sure companies like Apple will do even better.
Originally Posted by ijoyner
What I am saying is that after these factor are taken into account there is still a price difference in the base price.
Okay, how can you possibly know that?
The US is being subsidised by the rest of the world.
No, repeating it doesn't make it true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Okay, how can you possibly know that?
No, repeating it doesn't make it true.
Denial does not make it false. I'm not claiming to be an expert. In fact I only posed the questions to begin with. As I have said, it is complex to understand what is going on. As is typical with marketing they try to make things complex so that consumers are at a disadvantage. Denialists will hide behind this complexity.
How it works
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination#International_price_discrimination
Examples in software:
http://www.smartcompany.com.au/start-up/050983-revealed-how-it-price-discrimination-costs-australian-smes.html
http://www.choice.com.au/media-and-news/media-releases/2012-media-releases/time-for-tech-giants-to-face-the-music-on-international-price-discrimination.aspx
Oil discrimination:
http://www.iaee.org/documents/washington/Ron_Soligo.pdf
This shows that Asian countries are (or were) at a major disadvantage compared to the US. Oil market experts may be able to say that this Saudi oil price discrimination has been stopped, but in effect it means the the rest of the world is or was subsidising cheap fuel in the USA.
Originally Posted by ijoyner
Denial does not make it false.
"Innocent until proven guilty". You don't have any evidence. It isn't the case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ijoyner
I know what you are saying that compared to current prices it might be good to be only 50% more. But compared to what an average Indian earns, that makes Apple prohibitively expensive. Most of those who can afford this price are probably those that travel overseas anyway and can pick up cheaper deals in other countries. If anything, the price must be less in India.
Apple is already expensive. They are making premium products. Their market strategy is very different & meant to stay in premium segment. Let's look at the most popular, highly anticipated iPhone 5 in India. Currently it's available in US for $649 for contract-free 16 GB version. And with addition of tax $49 approx, let's say it costs $699. So that's almost 38k INR while 16 GB iPhone 5 is available in India at 45k INR contract-free.
So the difference you see comes from the factors which are already mentioned by other members. It's not a huge margin considering the licensing, taxes, shipping & whatever other additional cost we have to bear. In India especially for iPhone Apple's premium resellers do not provide warranty for units purchased outside of India. While for all other Apple products, no matter where they are purchased anywhere in the world fall under warranty & replacements.
Your logic of rich & poor country doesn't make sense. Apple's not there for charity but for business. And I like them for what they are. While Samsung & other android OEMs, I remember when they announced Galaxy S III worldwide, they announced it in India for 38k INR and as of now, not ever after a year they are offering 16 GB S III in 29k. It's always same for most of their products. At least Apple's not changing the price of the product from start to end cycle. Not often.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
"Innocent until proven guilty". You don't have any evidence. It isn't the case.
You obviously didn't bother to read those pages. You are denying the evidence with providing no fresh evidence of your own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hari5
Apple is already expensive. They are making premium products. Their market strategy is very different & meant to stay in premium segment. Let's look at the most popular, highly anticipated iPhone 5 in India. Currently it's available in US for $649 for contract-free 16 GB version. And with addition of tax $49 approx, let's say it costs $699. So that's almost 38k INR while 16 GB iPhone 5 is available in India at 45k INR contract-free.
So the difference you see comes from the factors which are already mentioned by other members. It's not a huge margin considering the licensing, taxes, shipping & whatever other additional cost we have to bear. In India especially for iPhone Apple's premium resellers do not provide warranty for units purchased outside of India. While for all other Apple products, no matter where they are purchased anywhere in the world fall under warranty & replacements.
Your logic of rich & poor country doesn't make sense. Apple's not there for charity but for business. And I like them for what they are. While Samsung & other android OEMs, I remember when they announced Galaxy S III worldwide, they announced it in India for 38k INR and as of now, not ever after a year they are offering 16 GB S III in 29k. It's always same for most of their products. At least Apple's not changing the price of the product from start to end cycle. Not often.
Namaste Hari,
I agree with most of what you say. Certainly, Apple set a price and then keep it at that level and that is a good thing. It gives consumers some certainty, while others are giving "discounts" here there and everywhere (they're not really discounts are they!). That is typical marketing confusing the consumer. Yes, Apple certainly is better in that regard.
The original point of Salopsism was that only 50% more was a good price for India s/he had seen double the price. I don't think taxes would account for that, and as far as transport/distribution/support costs go, they would be significantly less in India - so that suggests that since these costs are less in a poor country, so should the price be.
I don't know the reasons the warranty for Apple products purchased outside India is invalid and thus forcing people to buy locally at inflated prices (although not much goes wrong with Apple products, so it might be worth the risk).
I think we are on the same wavelength that we would like to see Apple do well. I think they will find a balance, probably better than any other company. Markets like India and China are coming up and rivalling the US in size which means the US does not have the bargaining power to get lower prices, disadvantaging the rest of the world. This idea seems to scare Americans - some posting here. But we need to get rid of this notion that for one to win the other must lose - we do best when everyone wins.
Originally Posted by ijoyner
You obviously didn't bother to read those pages. You are denying the evidence…
That's right; because they don't have any.
"We can't find any reason; it's obviously price discrimination." They didn't explain squat about what they DID research, if anything, what they DID discount and why, if anything, and why the valid, known reasons for having the price higher were also discounted.
Show me an analysis like that.
He failed to acknowledge any potential regulation combined with changes in supply and demand, economies of scale and volume discounts, regulated versus unregulated markets, variations in demand and supply, the degree of competition in the local area, varying production costs, differences in transportation costs, differences in distribution costs, differences in transportation costs, and potential excise taxes on foreign goods.
I learned about this stuff in my HS economics class as I thought most people did.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I learned about this stuff in my HS economics class as I thought most people did.
Mine was an elective class and called 'Entrepreneurship'. It was full, sure, but I don't remember many people having interest therein. That might be why.
That's a good point. Mine was mandatory but it's not accurate for me to assume that all school systems operate the same way. That said, it's also not accurate for someone to have absolutely no knowledge of economics to claim that Apple is raping Indians so they can give discounts to Americans. The fact is if Apple pulled out of India completely the price of the iPhone would not change in the US. Simply put, prices are determined by costs to sell, which is higher in India, and what the market will bear.
When I was there I remember the Nokia and Sony stores (they had official stores, or at least official looking stores) the products converted to nearly double the US price and UK prices. In fact, despite how inexpensive most of India is everything I wanted as an American was considerably more expensive than the US. Brazil is even worse when it comes to electronics but at least food and lodging wasn't outrageous for satisfying my American tastes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
That said, it's also not accurate for someone to have absolutely no knowledge of economics to claim that Apple is raping Indians so they can give discounts to Americans.
So who said that? Not me. You and Mr Skil seemed to have been misreading my position and arguing against that. And 'raping' Indians? You should steer clear of emotive language. I didn't say that's what Apple is doing, but pointing out there has been a practice of the US getting lower prices on things like oil from Saudi Arabia. The economics is that money therefore flows from the third world to the US. This was done by the British empire before hand. And who here has 'no knowledge of economics'. Although economics is a notoriously imprecise practise, but they probably didn't teach you that in your high school economics class. Economics has many assumptions that can be challenged. And usually an HS level understanding of any subject (subjects that are more solid than economics) has to be taken to pieces at a tertiary level because things taught as fact usually aren't so.
When people are told that their school understandings of subjects are at best simplistic or often wrong, they usually react with strong protestations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ijoyner
The original point of SolipsismX* was that only 50% more was a good price for India s/he had seen double the price. I don't think taxes would account for that, and as far as transport/distribution/support costs go, they would be significantly less in India - so that suggests that since these costs are less in a poor country, so should the price be.
Namaste
Sorry but I don't agree at all with your reasoning. Back in 2012 I remember reading the similar article regarding Tim's thoughts on smartphone market dynamics in India & difficulties Apple was facing in distribution. So I googled the article.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-26/strategy/32868313_1_india-apple-ceo-tim-cook-smartphone-market
He accentuated fairly on business structure & multi-layered distribution channels of India and it should answer all your arguments.
*I edited your quote because guy's a legend here. And I just didn't like the wrong spell of his name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ijoyner
I don't know the reasons the warranty for Apple products purchased outside India is invalid and thus forcing people to buy locally at inflated prices (although not much goes wrong with Apple products, so it might be worth the risk).
You misunderstood this portion of my post. Pardon my English. In India there's no warranty only for iPhone purchased out of India while all other products such as MAC, iPod, iPad etc fall under Apple limited warranty in India regardless of where they are purchased. I had bought 4th gen iPod touch from Apple online store on 2010's Black Friday. Received it in SF, CA. Then had some problem with dock connector. I went to Apple authorized service center in Ahmedabad & they replaced my unit without a fuss.
Apple India has never confirmed but I think the reason behind providing no warranty for iPhone purchased out of India is simply because many people are buying jailbroken/unlocked iPhones from other countries on reduced cost & using it in India.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ijoyner
I think we are on the same wavelength that we would like to see Apple do well. I think they will find a balance, probably better than any other company. Markets like India and China are coming up and rivalling the US in size which means the US does not have the bargaining power to get lower prices, disadvantaging the rest of the world. This idea seems to scare Americans - some posting here. But we need to get rid of this notion that for one to win the other must lose - we do best when everyone wins.
Again wrong. There's no such notion in the minds of any Americans posting here. Nobody's scared. You have the false impression. The below is an interesting article. Please have a look.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/bb10-launches-in-india-as-apple-makes-aggressive-push/article9017910/
It's regarding the BB10 launches in India as Apple's making aggressive push in our country for smartphone market share. Here's a snippet.
Quote:
Apple Inc is now aggressively pushing the iconic device through instalment payment plans that make it more affordable, a new distribution model and heavy marketing blitz.
“Now your dream phone” at 5,056 rupees ($93 U.S.), read a recent full front-page ad for an iPhone 5 in the Times of India, referring to the initial payment on a phone priced at $840, or almost two months’ wages for an entry-level software engineer.
Apple expanded its India sales effort in the latter half of 2012 by adding two distributors. Previously it sold iPhones only through a few carriers and stores it calls premium resellers.
The result: iPhone shipments to India between October and December nearly tripled to 250,000 units from 90,000 in the previous quarter, according to an estimate by Jessica Kwee, a Singapore-based analyst at consultancy Canalys.
Until last year, BlackBerry was the No. 3 smartphone brand in India with market share of more than 10 per cent, thanks to a push into the consumer segment with lower-priced phones. Last quarter its share fell to about 5 per cent, putting it in fifth place, according to Canalys. Apple was sixth.
Originally Posted by ijoyner
So who said that? Not me. You and Mr Skil seemed to have been misreading my position and arguing against that.
Your position is that the United States gets a "discount" on products, and that the various costs of doing business internationally combined with the costs to do business in a specific country should either be disregarded or cannot result in the prices seen.
Unfortunately, you've not said why these costs should be disregarded or discounted as the reason for the discrepancy. You have, however, said this:
Originally Posted by ijoyner
The original point of Salopsism was that only 50% more was a good price for India s/he had seen double the price. I don't think taxes would account for that…
And yet they do, for example, in Brazil. So why would this not be the case elsewhere?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Your position is that the United States gets a "discount" on products and that the various costs of doing business internationally combined with the costs to do business in a specific country should either be disregarded or cannot result in the prices seen.
Unfortunately, you've not said why these costs should be disregarded or discounted as the reason for the discrepancy. You have, however, said this:
And yet they do, for example, in Brazil. So why would this not be the case elsewhere?
I'm not really saying a 'conscious' discount, but where the US is able to negotiate lower prices because of the size of the market, it effectively means money flows from smaller markets to the larger market. Thus Thailand can't match the bargaining power of the US. This has happened in the oil industry. It is an effective subsidy to the US market at the cost of other markets. I'm not saying this is happening in the case of Apple, but raising the question in general.
You cite the case of Brazil, but one example does not prove the case (whereas a counterexample can be used to disprove a case). The mechanisms are of course complex - and I think we agree on that taxes, exchange rates, etc. I'm not trying to prove the case - only alert people to the fact that this does happen, probably unconsciously (except for oil). As the markets of India and China grow, more price parity will be had and I don't think that is a bad thing or that it disadvantages the US, rather it improves products and the global market. Things are becoming more balanced, but we should not forget the lesson from history that markets have been distorted in the favour of richer countries against the third world. In a global market, we must learn to be more cooperative, rather than have a winners and losers mentality.