Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 22nd Aug 2011 21:19 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 486652
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 11:39 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 11:32 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 19:39 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-01
Ok, first of all, you said 10-20x previously and now, in your example, it's 4x which is more realistic cost of manufacturing.
However, that's totally irrelevant, because someone has to actually design the thing, test it, have it built, manage QA, package it, ship it, market it, ,sell it, support it (and I've not even mentioned the software involved).
Just saying 'x costs 1/4 to build and so it should be cheaper' is meaningless because 'building' something ignores all the costs of getting the thing to a consumer.