Quote:
Originally Posted by strombad
But that's not how it works. You can't take the pay portion out of it and still speak to satellite radio. It's imbedded as part of it.
The question is(and it is only THIS question:
Is commercial free radio with more channels at a monthly fee objectively better than free radio with commercials and a smaller selection?
That's it, you can't take out one element and still say you're comparing them equally. If you're taking out the financial part of the equation, you should also take out the commercial-free and higher selection part of the equation.
Plus, you've got it backwards. If you put two identical playlists on Satellite and FM, everyone would listen to FM. Why? Because it's the exact same thing for FREE.
You know what, it GMG that people don't understand the objective value of things or how to compare them properly. You can't just change the makeup of something and say "Well everyone would like it if it didn't have this one thing!" A. You're no longer comparing the actual product, and B. Your still only considering subjective value. Just enjoy your stupid radio like a normal human being.
What's wrong with me? I'm debating radio on the Internet. What kind of backwards world is this?
|
To your question, the answer is No but in no post did I state that, my statement always qualified that I was not comparing price.
So Like I said we are arguing semantics. Do you evaluate the value proposition of something as part of evaluating which is better or do you compare which is better first and than asign a value to it.
Is which is better and which has more value two separate things or is it the same thing?
Maybe its work related that I assess things like this but when we buy a product one group evaluates whether it meets spec and the other group evaluates comercial terms. So you go through and determine which is better or meets spec first then you assign a value to the differences to make the products equal and then you buy the cheaper one. But the key thing here is that the comparison of which is better is done in a price free enviroment first.
So I disagree that you can't compare which thing is better by ignoring price. The whole purpose of ignoring price is so that you can make an objective as comparison as possible. Price does funny things to the human brain. It is emotional, we see 9.99 as cheaper than $10 and change buying habits based on a penny when it is near round numbers.
Anyway I have derailed this thread enough