|
|
|
|
|
by ChuckMcM
1220 days ago
|
|
I think you are largely correct. My observation is that "quality" as a discriminator in a market requires enough market share for quality in order to continue funding it. If you split the aggregate market into a standard distribution, the ability to sell quality products into that market seems to evaporate quickly once you get beyond 1.0 SD from the mean. The more interesting point (to me) is your second one, which is how do you educate the market to recognize the "cost" of low quality? It is understanding that cost that convinces the market to pay what is required to get the quality version of the product. |
|
Typically... pay them more. When I was broke quantity mattered more to me. Now that I have discretionary income I am far more selective.
See Also: 'Boots Theory' of Socioeconomic Unfairness