This means that you're more likely to get a sale at a price you like than without price optimization. Take for example you and your MBA gadget hungry associate. Say both of you want a LCD screen and the company's cost is $500. If they have a single mark up it might be $700, which Mr. MBA would purchase one and you none, but if they can sell to him for $800 and you for $600, both of you buy a TV and the store makes more (even though they made less in your sale it was better than no sale at the single price).
The internet is a network that facilitates communication between any two points on the network as if they were near each other.
The problem with Sen Stephens' description is the claim that it's not a big truck (implying that the internet could easily get clogged by too much data flowing through it).
Lindt 70% bars aren't that hard to find here, too. But it seems like a pretty common US phenomenon is to brag about how difficult or exclusive a certain product is (it could be costly, or just difficult to acquire). There will always be tradeoffs between brands and price points (in every country not just the US), but here it seems the goal is apparent exclusivity (with less regard to the actual quality of the product).
My personal theory on this and more is, that if you have to mention something you're probably trying too hard to get people to notice it.
It's very complicated. There are generally several reasons:
Primarily, because 220 years ago, a group of dudes got together and decided they didn't like their governemnt any longer. They were big enough fans of what they'd done, that they sought to permanantly preserve that option for future generations. Essentially, the second law they passed for the nation was the government cannot restrict gun ownership.
Also, most people in the US are or their ancestors were self selected for individualistic traits (you had to leave family, home etc) to come in exchange for land (and later job opportunities). Many Americans find the societal structure of Japanese culture to be much too restrictive (although they also comment on the clean and safe cities there when enjoying short visits).
Finally, as the frontier was settled, in many of the places, people were spread very widely (much of the land in the Midwest and West is arid and huge amounts of it were required to grow enough food to support a family). Because of limited transportation, settlers relied on themselves and possibly their neighbors for protection.
That's true in the US and Japan, but in England, shares tend to shoot for a 1-5 GBP range (they split at lower levels) and prices are typically quoted in hundreds of pence. It's interesting how markets reach "favored levels" in the US it's $20-$100, in Japan it's typically tens or hundreds of thousands of yen.
Ambulances are still subject to the law with their lights on, the lights are supposed to clear the other drivers to minimize the difficulty they will have driving to their destination. Police are trained in high speed driving and are then allowed to exceed the traffic laws.
I think the GP's point is that if that 1920x1080 stream went through a lossy compression that cut it to 0.5-1 Mb/sec then the final resolution isn't going to matter as much.
Many trading floors (they spend whatever is desired on equipment) usually have no more than 4-6 screens usually deployed in an upside down T or 2x3 array. When you're spending a couple hundred thousand (bare minimum on the trader and at least $50,000 (Bloomberg alone is $20,000) on data services it pays to pay $600 on enough monitors to show all the data services.
It's been a while since I saw the show, but wasn't it a turbine engine? If so, then it could well have been designed to run on H2 or similar fuels but could burn gasoline in a pinch. That truck couldn't be everywhere you know.
You correctly point out that humans are unique in our attitudes toward risk, take for example women's concern with breast cancer vs heart desease. Several times a month I see a pink ribbon Avon run or some other breast cancer event, but in reality heart desease is far more likely to kill women than breast cancer (also lung cancer causes about 2x as many deaths as breast cancer). But many women worry more about breat cancer than heart desease. Also, how many violent crime statistics are inflated competition within the drug trade the majority of which is directed at other participants (murder is still murder but it cuts the odds of it happening to non participants sharply).
It's my job to think about risk and I find the whole subject exceedingly interesting (even though most of my work deals with a few basis points change in swap rates), and wonder why we tend to over worry about spectacular but unlikely risks while not worrying nearly as much about likely but mundane risks.
I don't understand their reasoning on this: If Apple is selling a $500-$700 phone and cingular discounts it to $200, why do they care if they loose a $200 Ipod sale. Presumably given the control they required from AT&T, the margins are quite similar on the phone and iPod.
In your defense, SAP about the same size as Oracle in terms of sales until Oracle acquired both Peoplesoft and Siebel, now Oracle sells more than SAP. Oracle does make more money per dollar of sales (by roughly a factor of 2) and since shareholders care mostly about earnings, Oracle as a company is substantially more valuable to investors. Oracle's stock has rallied pretty substantially in the past year while SAP has declined, so comparing on market value requires very frequent updates to remain correct.
Yeah I should have been more precise and said senryu or outlined more of the structure of a haiku (like the requirement that it reference the natural world). But once that structure is set, there is still ample room for creativity.
Why do you think the most highly regarded poems generally are in one of the stricter poetry families (haiku, sonnets). Lots of structure, but within the structures, complete freedom to exercise creativity.
It has to be worth more than $200k (or else the would have just written off the file). I agree that the info isn't worth the $38B though. The account would still be there even if those transactions weren't. That said I thought all the states learned the lesson of 9/11 of remote offsite backups especially in a state as geologically active as Alaska. Hope the warehouse with the paper isn't near the data center...
Mikey is back. If he was good at one thing it was listening to customers, it essentially costs nothing to add Linux systems as an option, what perhaps 10-20 GB of image space so I'd be surprised if these didn't make an appearance, don't expect to save $99 off the price of a Windows PC though.
Most of the folks with any real money (the ones who can move markets when they start buying) are calcing the S&P themselves, because it's faster than waiting for the index to update. My first internship was writing stuff that did that, it was cool to see the S&P a few 10ths faster than it was on the television. Almost no one in the investment world looks at the DJIA except for sentimental value. It's a terrible index but really easy to calculate (compared to other more complex and useful indicies). Besides, it was obvious there was a problem the Dow was only down 2% but almost all stocks were down 3% or more by 2 in the afternoon.
That's partly because they shove the entire burden of the cost of researching new drugs on America. If not for single drug buyers (who don't pay enough over the cost of the pills to fund research), they wouldn't be as cheap.
Yeah, that will probably be the best way to get global output actually reduced. I know politically it was certainly seen (in the US) as the US (and Europe) cutting higher cost CO2 while China and India emit lower cost CO2.
I agree with ya on the greedy bastards, and that consumption based tariffs are likely to be the most efficient solution, but the key point is "doesn't go down enough." That is indirectly a pricing statement.
What's enough? Enough is when the price of abating/removing another ton of CO2 is worth less than the costs of dealing with it's impact on global temperature. One side of relationship (the cost of cleaning and/or abating Co2 output is pretty easy to find and estimate. The other side is far more difficult.
It's that difficulty that made why Kyoto was necessary (if we all agreed the solution would have been obvious years ago) and also why it failed (the US placed the value far below Kyoto, while other nations placed it far above).
The trick is figuring the cost of removing a ton of CO2 or estimating it's environmental damage is well neigh impossible (otherwise there would be no arguement about Kyoto).
That's funny, when my ATM gave me an extra $20 once, I tried to return it, but the branch manager told me to keep it, that it was subbed out and it wasn't worth looking into. I was pretty surprised (and more surprised that I didn't have a $40 debit on that transaction. After that, I considered it a fair fine for the time they asked if I wanted a mini statement and then charged me $3 for the service (there was not a word about it being a charge in the offer).
Slashdot Mirror
This means that you're more likely to get a sale at a price you like than without price optimization. Take for example you and your MBA gadget hungry associate. Say both of you want a LCD screen and the company's cost is $500. If they have a single mark up it might be $700, which Mr. MBA would purchase one and you none, but if they can sell to him for $800 and you for $600, both of you buy a TV and the store makes more (even though they made less in your sale it was better than no sale at the single price).
The internet is a network that facilitates communication between any two points on the network as if they were near each other.
The problem with Sen Stephens' description is the claim that it's not a big truck (implying that the internet could easily get clogged by too much data flowing through it).
Lindt 70% bars aren't that hard to find here, too. But it seems like a pretty common US phenomenon is to brag about how difficult or exclusive a certain product is (it could be costly, or just difficult to acquire). There will always be tradeoffs between brands and price points (in every country not just the US), but here it seems the goal is apparent exclusivity (with less regard to the actual quality of the product).
My personal theory on this and more is, that if you have to mention something you're probably trying too hard to get people to notice it.
It's very complicated. There are generally several reasons: Primarily, because 220 years ago, a group of dudes got together and decided they didn't like their governemnt any longer. They were big enough fans of what they'd done, that they sought to permanantly preserve that option for future generations. Essentially, the second law they passed for the nation was the government cannot restrict gun ownership. Also, most people in the US are or their ancestors were self selected for individualistic traits (you had to leave family, home etc) to come in exchange for land (and later job opportunities). Many Americans find the societal structure of Japanese culture to be much too restrictive (although they also comment on the clean and safe cities there when enjoying short visits). Finally, as the frontier was settled, in many of the places, people were spread very widely (much of the land in the Midwest and West is arid and huge amounts of it were required to grow enough food to support a family). Because of limited transportation, settlers relied on themselves and possibly their neighbors for protection.
That's true in the US and Japan, but in England, shares tend to shoot for a 1-5 GBP range (they split at lower levels) and prices are typically quoted in hundreds of pence. It's interesting how markets reach "favored levels" in the US it's $20-$100, in Japan it's typically tens or hundreds of thousands of yen.
Ambulances are still subject to the law with their lights on, the lights are supposed to clear the other drivers to minimize the difficulty they will have driving to their destination. Police are trained in high speed driving and are then allowed to exceed the traffic laws.
I think the GP's point is that if that 1920x1080 stream went through a lossy compression that cut it to 0.5-1 Mb/sec then the final resolution isn't going to matter as much.
Many trading floors (they spend whatever is desired on equipment) usually have no more than 4-6 screens usually deployed in an upside down T or 2x3 array. When you're spending a couple hundred thousand (bare minimum on the trader and at least $50,000 (Bloomberg alone is $20,000) on data services it pays to pay $600 on enough monitors to show all the data services.
It's been a while since I saw the show, but wasn't it a turbine engine? If so, then it could well have been designed to run on H2 or similar fuels but could burn gasoline in a pinch. That truck couldn't be everywhere you know.
You correctly point out that humans are unique in our attitudes toward risk, take for example women's concern with breast cancer vs heart desease. Several times a month I see a pink ribbon Avon run or some other breast cancer event, but in reality heart desease is far more likely to kill women than breast cancer (also lung cancer causes about 2x as many deaths as breast cancer). But many women worry more about breat cancer than heart desease. Also, how many violent crime statistics are inflated competition within the drug trade the majority of which is directed at other participants (murder is still murder but it cuts the odds of it happening to non participants sharply). It's my job to think about risk and I find the whole subject exceedingly interesting (even though most of my work deals with a few basis points change in swap rates), and wonder why we tend to over worry about spectacular but unlikely risks while not worrying nearly as much about likely but mundane risks.
I don't understand their reasoning on this: If Apple is selling a $500-$700 phone and cingular discounts it to $200, why do they care if they loose a $200 Ipod sale. Presumably given the control they required from AT&T, the margins are quite similar on the phone and iPod.
In your defense, SAP about the same size as Oracle in terms of sales until Oracle acquired both Peoplesoft and Siebel, now Oracle sells more than SAP. Oracle does make more money per dollar of sales (by roughly a factor of 2) and since shareholders care mostly about earnings, Oracle as a company is substantially more valuable to investors. Oracle's stock has rallied pretty substantially in the past year while SAP has declined, so comparing on market value requires very frequent updates to remain correct.
Yeah I should have been more precise and said senryu or outlined more of the structure of a haiku (like the requirement that it reference the natural world). But once that structure is set, there is still ample room for creativity.
Why do you think the most highly regarded poems generally are in one of the stricter poetry families (haiku, sonnets). Lots of structure, but within the structures, complete freedom to exercise creativity.
It has to be worth more than $200k (or else the would have just written off the file). I agree that the info isn't worth the $38B though. The account would still be there even if those transactions weren't. That said I thought all the states learned the lesson of 9/11 of remote offsite backups especially in a state as geologically active as Alaska. Hope the warehouse with the paper isn't near the data center...
Mikey is back. If he was good at one thing it was listening to customers, it essentially costs nothing to add Linux systems as an option, what perhaps 10-20 GB of image space so I'd be surprised if these didn't make an appearance, don't expect to save $99 off the price of a Windows PC though.
I'm not a lawyer, but these guys are. Hope that gives you some useful tips about what's worth fighting over.
Most of the folks with any real money (the ones who can move markets when they start buying) are calcing the S&P themselves, because it's faster than waiting for the index to update. My first internship was writing stuff that did that, it was cool to see the S&P a few 10ths faster than it was on the television. Almost no one in the investment world looks at the DJIA except for sentimental value. It's a terrible index but really easy to calculate (compared to other more complex and useful indicies). Besides, it was obvious there was a problem the Dow was only down 2% but almost all stocks were down 3% or more by 2 in the afternoon.
That's partly because they shove the entire burden of the cost of researching new drugs on America. If not for single drug buyers (who don't pay enough over the cost of the pills to fund research), they wouldn't be as cheap.
Yeah, that will probably be the best way to get global output actually reduced. I know politically it was certainly seen (in the US) as the US (and Europe) cutting higher cost CO2 while China and India emit lower cost CO2.
I agree with ya on the greedy bastards, and that consumption based tariffs are likely to be the most efficient solution, but the key point is "doesn't go down enough." That is indirectly a pricing statement.
What's enough? Enough is when the price of abating/removing another ton of CO2 is worth less than the costs of dealing with it's impact on global temperature. One side of relationship (the cost of cleaning and/or abating Co2 output is pretty easy to find and estimate. The other side is far more difficult.
It's that difficulty that made why Kyoto was necessary (if we all agreed the solution would have been obvious years ago) and also why it failed (the US placed the value far below Kyoto, while other nations placed it far above).
The trick is figuring the cost of removing a ton of CO2 or estimating it's environmental damage is well neigh impossible (otherwise there would be no arguement about Kyoto).
Hmmm, Bowfinger much?
That's funny, when my ATM gave me an extra $20 once, I tried to return it, but the branch manager told me to keep it, that it was subbed out and it wasn't worth looking into. I was pretty surprised (and more surprised that I didn't have a $40 debit on that transaction.
After that, I considered it a fair fine for the time they asked if I wanted a mini statement and then charged me $3 for the service (there was not a word about it being a charge in the offer).
Legally the only thing they are allowed to vary price on is volume of licenses shipped. That was one of the clauses in the DoJ agreement.