By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
reidlosdog on 29 October 2010
Edit Thread
cory.ok said:
reidlosdog said:

Yes!!! With this logic, I can do anything!!!

I could easily sell anything I want at half the cost because my product is better!!!

Microsoft doesn't "have" to spend that money.  They already make bank on the existing sales.  You put in money to get money, and you invest in things that show a lot of possibilities for growth.  If you believe the product will do well, then you invest in it.  Show me a product that has made more money than it's competitors and didn't have as much commercial time as it's competitiors in it's infancy.

What comes to mind?  Minecraft?  That's about it.  When something actually makes it to a commercial (or into commercialization), it means that it has gone under rigorous analyzing and has been seen as well worth the cost (when speaking of commercializaiton on a national scale, local economy's differ when it comes to this idea).

I have a feeling your going to understand this as much as euphoria.  So, to make it more simple, let's wait 1 week, yeah, 1 week, and tell me what you think about kinect sales.

minecraft is a very recent example, but to goto an older one, we could look at google.  google beat out all its competitors and had very limited advertising.  one of the reason that on of their top competitor (yahoo) even survived was because they owned a lot of google stock, before its ipo, which skyrocketed afterwards

another company that doesnt advertise much (if at all) is berkshire hathoway and theyve been doing pretty darn well.  theres a saying that good product doesnt need to be advertised, and i think google points that out the most.  im not going to argue that advertisement cant help a product, but it certainly isnt necessary for success

i also dont think facebook advertised much either, but im not sure

So would the logic go, if google had any advertisement (which it never will) and it was the same product, recieving the same support from it's personal customer advertisement, would google be more successful?

And google is free I might add.  They recieve funds from companies purely, which in effect has only to do with personal consumers using the product.  I have personally never given google money.  Google has commercialized to investors, showing how they bring forth more consumer awareness, and this is why we do not see this "advertisement" because we are not personally recieving it.

berkshire hathoway?  What the heck is that?  I just checked out the official web page for it, and I have no idea what this is.  It looks like a hackers paradise.

Move is a product.  It is not something that can be slip passed as a software phenomenon.



V:  And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. Last night I sought to end that silence.