green_sky said:
fatslob-:O said:
A_C_E said:
I bought an Xbox One and a PS4. I spent $650 on the Xbox One and $540 on the PS4. According to your logic I, as a consumer, value them both the same since I bought one of each. Or you could say that since I spent $110 more on Xbox One I automatically 'value' the Xbox One more, right? Wrong! I'd take the PS4 over Xbox One. Both got a sale from me and the one I spent less on is the one I value more. Totally goes against your logic of "because it got a sale it is more valuable than the next gadget".
I buy more American chocolate bars than I do belgium chocolate so I guess I automatically value American chocolate bars...even though I don't. I'm sorry I don't get your logic.
|
Except it is a collection of consumers that determine the value of the said product, not just one person.
Price has nothing to do with value.
|
Sorry to butt in the conversation but price does have something to do with the value. If those "collection of consumers" didn't value the product at its original price. That gives the business a strong incentive to cut the price and offer a hypothetically better value to the consumer.
Also there is a famous quote by a guy who knows a bit about price and value of things.
OT: Good bunduru. Even better for those who value kinect at $100-$150.
|
The only thing price and value have in common is that they are both considered when buying a product. If they were both the same thing then you could theoretically switch the saying around, "Value is what you pay. Price is what you get". Doesn't make any sense because they are not the same thing.
