This practice is called third degree price discrimination. Basically it indicates that an economist working for the company has separated the market into two or more segments. Through studies, they have determined that the price elasticity of demand is different in each of these segments. (this means that a 1 percent change in price in each of these markets will produce different changes in demand for the product). Because of this, it is possible to maximize profits by selling the product in the two different markets for different prices. (since firms sell at the price where marginal revenue is equal to the marginal cost of producing one more unit of the good, it is to their benefit to separate this marginal revenue for the two different markets, as the market that will accept the higher price will increase profits significantly.) An example economists like to give is selling goods at an airport. People are willing to pay more for the equivalent good at an airport for the convenience of having that good now, while they wait for their plane.
"The player being most relaxed makes the ball roll over to the opponents goal, with his brain waves as only aid, and thereby wins the game."
This sounds like a ton of fun. So much for my afternoon plan to go outside and watch the grass grow
"Nobody reads anymore, huh? So all these giant Barnes and Nobles they're building are just for decoration?"
From the most recent issue of Newsweek:
from '93-'03 there was a "58%increase in titles published"
From '92-'02 there was a "12% decrease in fiction readers"
So that giant Barnes and Noble exists because there are more books bieng printed each year than ever before. Unfortunately, fewer people are reading them.
"This would seem to substantially increase the chance that life once existed on the red planet"
I think a more accurate statement would be that this increases the chances that we might find evidence of carbon based life forms having existed at some point on mars. It is theoretically possible for life to exist without water by using another liquid solvent as a substitute. One often proposed substitute is ammonia (see article http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/A/ammoni alife.html/ ). People seem to think narrowly about the possibilities of life, and often constrain their thought process to life that is, at a very basic level, similar to life on earth. Granted, since carbon is fairly prevalent throughout the universe there is certainly a good chance of it forming life in areas other than earth, but we should keep in mind that it is not (at least theoretically) the only option.
I wonder if this will have much effect on Nextel's service? Previous to this, Nextel had some of the best coverage around. I am obviously no expert (as someone here is bound to point out) but is it possible that a change in the spectrum Nextel will be using will result in a change in their service? Then we have the whining. It sounds to me like some rivals (verizon) are fuming because they see their company's fortunes as being more important than the greater good of society (i.e. the ability to use emergency channels without interference) Won't Nextel incur significant costs to facilitate this switch anyway, partially offsetting what other companies see as a "giveaway"?
Slashdot Mirror
This practice is called third degree price discrimination. Basically it indicates that an economist working for the company has separated the market into two or more segments. Through studies, they have determined that the price elasticity of demand is different in each of these segments. (this means that a 1 percent change in price in each of these markets will produce different changes in demand for the product). Because of this, it is possible to maximize profits by selling the product in the two different markets for different prices. (since firms sell at the price where marginal revenue is equal to the marginal cost of producing one more unit of the good, it is to their benefit to separate this marginal revenue for the two different markets, as the market that will accept the higher price will increase profits significantly.) An example economists like to give is selling goods at an airport. People are willing to pay more for the equivalent good at an airport for the convenience of having that good now, while they wait for their plane.
"The player being most relaxed makes the ball roll over to the opponents goal, with his brain waves as only aid, and thereby wins the game." This sounds like a ton of fun. So much for my afternoon plan to go outside and watch the grass grow
"Nobody reads anymore, huh? So all these giant Barnes and Nobles they're building are just for decoration?" From the most recent issue of Newsweek: from '93-'03 there was a "58%increase in titles published" From '92-'02 there was a "12% decrease in fiction readers" So that giant Barnes and Noble exists because there are more books bieng printed each year than ever before. Unfortunately, fewer people are reading them.
"This would seem to substantially increase the chance that life once existed on the red planet" I think a more accurate statement would be that this increases the chances that we might find evidence of carbon based life forms having existed at some point on mars. It is theoretically possible for life to exist without water by using another liquid solvent as a substitute. One often proposed substitute is ammonia (see article http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/A/ammoni alife.html/ ). People seem to think narrowly about the possibilities of life, and often constrain their thought process to life that is, at a very basic level, similar to life on earth. Granted, since carbon is fairly prevalent throughout the universe there is certainly a good chance of it forming life in areas other than earth, but we should keep in mind that it is not (at least theoretically) the only option.
I wonder if this will have much effect on Nextel's service? Previous to this, Nextel had some of the best coverage around. I am obviously no expert (as someone here is bound to point out) but is it possible that a change in the spectrum Nextel will be using will result in a change in their service? Then we have the whining. It sounds to me like some rivals (verizon) are fuming because they see their company's fortunes as being more important than the greater good of society (i.e. the ability to use emergency channels without interference) Won't Nextel incur significant costs to facilitate this switch anyway, partially offsetting what other companies see as a "giveaway"?