Evans 2-man manual

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by Ump153

But I have to admit, I am entertained by your willingness to go on and on and continue to demonstrate that you are clueless at the same time. So, please, feel free to go on and on some more.

Please don't encourage him.

[DG]

Originally Posted by Ump153

When lowering a price by 50%, expense are not lowered and sales must double to avoid a drop in revenue.

I have been involved in marketing in the entertainment and industrial fields for over 20 years. I have my MBA. I am not guessing.

I don't have an MBA but I have a calculator. Let's say the book costs $20 to produce and sells for $70. If 1000 are sold the "profit" is $50,000. Revenue is $70,000, but revenue is not the goal, profit is the goal.

Let's say we cut the price in half, the book still costs $20 to produce and if twice as many people buy it due to half off price the Revenue is $70,000 and profit is $30,000. Sales would have to more than triple (3.3333 to be exact) to get the same profit for a price cut in half.

I also expect that the more books are produced the production costs are lowered, but production costs would have to be cut in half for half price reduction in purchase cost and corresponding doubling of purchases to result in same profit.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by Ump153

Either you can't read, or simply refuse to accept the fact there are others who know more than you do. No one is guessing but you.

Your knowledge of pricing is apparently based on what you see in commercials. Be sure to order now and get the paring knife for no extra charge.

No one said anything about "what the market would bear." A price study is far more than that and takes expenses, including production, promotion, distribution and other factors such as size of the target population and their demonstrated willingness to choose product over money into account. It is more than, "Gee, I bet if we lower the price thousands more would buy the product."

Umpires who visit sites such as this are not the norm in amateur umpiring. The majority of amateur umpires do not go to clinics, do not purchase study materials and do not post at umpire sites.

Lowering the price does not lower expenses and most, yes, most, products do not realize the significant increase in sales you estimate when prices are lowered.

When lowering a price by 50%, expense are not lowered and sales must double to avoid a drop in revenue. This manual is in its first and most expensive run. It is totally illogical and unreasonable to expect a deep discount of any publication in its first run.

I have been involved in marketing in the entertainment and industrial fields for over 20 years. I have my MBA. I am not guessing.

But I have to admit, I am entertained by your willingness to go on and on and continue to demonstrate that you are clueless at the same time. So, please, feel free to go on and on some more.

All these lessons in business and publishing ... why thank you! Now I know a lot!

... You often result to projecting and crude name-calling. This is no exception. Clueless? Me? Really?

Have you even seen this book? Can you honestly claim that it's a costly production? The stock; the printing; the editing; the illustrating? Really?

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by DG

I don't have an MBA but I have a calculator. Let's say the book costs $20 to produce and sells for $70. If 1000 are sold the "profit" is $50,000. Revenue is $70,000, but revenue is not the goal, profit is the goal.

Let's say we cut the price in half, the book still costs $20 to produce and if twice as many people buy it due to half off price the Revenue is $70,000 and profit is $30,000. Sales would have to more than triple (3.3333 to be exact) to get the same profit for a price cut in half.

I also expect that the more books are produced the production costs are lowered, but production costs would have to be cut in half for half price reduction in purchase cost and corresponding doubling of purchases to result in same profit.

I fully understand your standpoint, because it's mine. But have you seen this book? The production was somewhat cut-rate. It did NOT cost $20.00 to produce. Not close, really. That's the initial reasoning behind my contending that it should be sold at a lower price---it's not a very high quality (or costly) publication.

I guess we should all be glad it's cheaply made or we'd all be paying $120.00 or so.

[DG]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

I fully understand your standpoint, because it's mine. But have you seen this book? The production was somewhat cut-rate. It did NOT cost $20.00 to produce. Not close, really. That's the initial reasoning behind my contending that it should be sold at a lower price---it's not a very high quality (or costly) publication.

I guess we should all be glad it's cheaply made or we'd all be paying $120.00 or so.

It was math lesson and a point about difference between revenue and profit, nothing more. I have not seen it.

[Ump153]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

... You often result to projecting and crude name-calling. This is no exception. Clueless? Me? Really?

Clueless = crude name calling?


And on and on and on he goes, when he stops, nobody knows.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Ooooohhhh, so it's not crude.

Okay.

[TussAgee11]

I'll note that mine was shipped sans any problems...

If we want a math lesson, its 50/50 right now whether or not you had problems with the shipping. So u can just factor that in with what you would pay for it I suppose.

[bob jenkins]

I think we'll just end this here.

The book is $80. You might or might not find $80 of value for what might or might not arrive in good or bad condition.