Slashdot Mirror
How Much Are You Paying For Electronics Labels?
An anonymous reader writes "Interesting article on CNET about different consumer electronics brands selling identical OEM products, often at wildly different price points. The author also examines the phenomenon of manufacturers releasing "consumer" and "industrial" versions of the same product -- with the cheaper version aimed at businesses. Probably old news for the slashdot crowd, but it's worth reading to see how much Middle America is overpaying. Caveat emptor, indeed." And there are also product lines where the expensive version is aimed at business buyers, because a higher price implies greater credibility.
The price difference might be caused by the different level of services attached to a product.
On the other hand, businesses are more likely to buy in bigger quantity, or at least buying more regularly.
Uselessful technology (Air-Charged
... but this is not a big deal. The example cited in the article should come as no surprise to anyone: a "business class" plasma TV without speakers or a tuner would naturally be cheaper than the "consumer" version which has these features.
The extra $330 dollars is the value to the consumer for not having to go and buy a separate tuner and sound system.
This is one of those "filler" stories you see on websites when there isn't enough real news for real journalism.
about the same as those Nike trainers,starbucks coffee,Gap Shirt,Armani Trousers
its called branding, the selling of dreams
For example, the Panasonic 42" plasma had a "consumer" and an "industrial" version. However, the article pointed out that the industrial version was $350 lower than the consumer version while glossing over the fact that the industrial version lacked an HDTV tuner, and built-in speakers. Clearly, the addition of those items justifies some increase, and 2-400 is reasonable given the cost of HDTV tuners as separate components.
In addition, he neglected to mention the difference in warranty duration (and the difference in customer service you might expect between a "name" brand such as RCA and a "generic" such as Coby).
No, really! I'm one of the *good* lawyers!
What's interesting is that something can be uneconomic at all single price points but profitable to all with discriminatory pricing.
When marginal cost is considerably lower than average cost it is possible to consrtuct scenarios with counter-intuitive properties, including competition being bad for consumer prices.
The lack of contrast in the design elements is rather difficult on the eyes. On the default scheme, my eyes can easily track through each individual comment. Now they have to hunt more to find the comments and subjects.
This theme is pretty (good job with the gradient logo!) but it's too low-contrast. White text on light brown/gold and light brown/gold text on white are both tough to read. Slashbots: please fix!
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
This is essentially the #1 reason why you won't see me out shopping, expect on very rare occasions... Shopping, comparing specs and prices is difficult enough without having to look-up the circuit diagrams for each product to make sure you're not getting crap from someone else.
I bought a Sony CD-RW that turned out to be a Lite-On... If I had wanted a Lite-On, I would have got one, for less... Instead, I try to go with a halfway decent brand, and get screwed. Not just because it's rebranded, but I avoid no-name junk because it typically has problems. Without going into details, Audio-CDs have to be burned at 4X, and you can't get it to burn at any speed other than 4X or 40X.
So, what's the end result of rebranding???
I'm not buying ANYTHING from Sony EVER AGAIN. I don't trust any name brands, so if I'm going to get crap, might as well be the cheapest, from a no-name. I don't have any way to know I'm not getting crap, so I buy nothing from anyone until I REALLY need it. I don't have a DVD-RW yet because of this.
Basically, I'm avoiding buying anything until I find some way I can know I'm not getting junk. I would go on a shopping-spree if there was a store around here that made sure they don't carry junk. Instead, absolutely every store has given-in to the Made-in-China junk market, and sells whatever is cheapest, even if it doesn't work as advertised. I would stick to a certain brand if they were consistently good, and reasonably priced (not necessarily cheap, just not insanely expensive).
Okay, I'm more or less ranting now, but it's true. Companies are all to happy to sell-out their long-term future in exchange for a short-term jump in revenue, just long enough that they can sell-off their stock, or find a job at another company they can pump and dump.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Price Discrimination is fairly common in almost all industries. But it is extremely common in industries where there are large initial capital requirements in R&D, compared to the marginal cost of production (such as microprocessors, automobiles, and pharmaceuticals).
Before 200 years ago or so, price discrimination was standard operating procedure, as most products were haggled for. The seller would haggle to determine the highest price the buyer is willing to pay.
The industrial revolution, telecommunications advances, and the rise of the catalog store (such as Sears) made it less advantageous to haggle with every customer, and the standard price became popular. Imagine haggling with your checkout clerk at the local grocery store.
But price discrimination never went away. "Price skimming," charging higher prices to early adopters, is standard with consumer electronics. Brand and off-branding is another means of price discrimination, as is pricing by region or country.