Subject:
|
Re: McDonald's, LEGO and Ethics
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 13 Sep 1999 17:03:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
275 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> Well, there's merit in your analysis, but I was referring to the cost to
> the producer of the good rather than the consumer. Lowering producer
> costs benefits the consumer in a free market. Not that we're entirely
> free but we're freer than most.
Forgive me, I don't know much about economic theory, how does cross-promotion
lowers costs to the producer?
> Oh, just tempted to draw sweeping generalizations from insufficient
> data, that's all.
Government scientists are good at that. :)
Actually, most government scientists are great. The project I am working on
today has some problems stemming from insufficent data. 10 months - 3 days:)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: McDonald's, LEGO and Ethics
|
| (...) Two relatively weak reasons... - economies of scale in media buys reduces ad cost which is a producer cost - increased volume of the underlying product reduces cost per unit produced, typically and one that's not usually in play - shifting (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: McDonald's, LEGO and Ethics
|
| (...) THANKS!!! I appreciate the praise. :-) I'm not sure if cross promotion necessarily (...) Well, there's merit in your analysis, but I was referring to the cost to the producer of the good rather than the consumer. Lowering producer costs (...) (25 years ago, 10-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
