View Single Post
Old 09-09-2007, 07:02 PM   #35
Flames in 07
#1 Goaltender
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaramonLS View Post
Yeah, because ever since Nike started outsourcing labor to developing world countries, consumers have really felt the discount in their shoe prices.

No - the truth of the matter is that these companies are going to charge $100-$150 for a pair of shoes whether or not it costs $2 to make a pair or $50, because that is what supply/demand dictates. The discount isn't getting passed on to consumers.
Nike is a premium product that sells higher quality (wether real or precieved) than competition, customers select nike for their product not their price.

There's no need for a producer to pass on a discount if the customer doesn't demand it. Besides nike's cost base isn't around production, it's around advertising and spokespeople. Look at it this way, they need the cheaper production to pay for their marketing. You can choose to like it or not, but it won't change that its reality.

You cherry picked one premium brand, and twisted an arguement together, but it doesn't really make much sense. Rereading your post, are suggesting that the producer is obligated to pass on any cost advantage to the customers?
Flames in 07 is offline   Reply With Quote