BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

[email protected]

On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 01:22:18 -0400,
wrote:

On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 01:03:22 -0400, wrote:

That's not always the case Greg. Advertising can simply be to increase
market share ... or simply compete for business in the first place.

The idea that all business costs are "passed on" to the customer is
simply not true.

Who pays them? If you are not covering your expenses with your revenue
you are on the fast track to bankruptcy court. (or you are the
government)

===

Generally production efficiency goes up with higher production volumes
(economy of scale). So if you can grow your top line faster than the
bottom, profits increase as does the possibility of decreasing prices.

That assumes the ads generate enough more volume to bring on the extra
volume and that economy of scale but you are still passing on that
cost to the customer.
The ad fairy is not leaving the extra money under your pillow.

In an attempt to drag this back on point, how many times do I need to
see/hear this ad before it stops being informative and just becomes a
pain in the ass? I wasn't going to buy a magic pillow the first time I
saw the ad and I am even less likely to buy one the 100th time I see
it. (I feel the same way about politicians who call me on the phone or
interrupt my TV show).
If ads were so valuable to customers, why is there such a market for
"ad free" services like satellite radio, HBO and the various media
products like DVDs, streams and MP3s? I am sure Harry could see most
of the movies he stores on his server on "free" ad based TV but he
chooses to watch them without ads. Maybe that is how he got a legal
copy that he could copy freely. He recorded it from broadcast TV with
the ads.