David Schwartz
18/02/05, 03:45
> Ironically, you're talking about fast food companies buying "high
> quality" materials. Fast food companies are notorious for buying
> low-quality materials in order to keep prices low and, frankly, if they
> lowered the quality of their beef, no one would notice.
I disagree with this entirely. First of all, there is no incentive to buy
low-quality materials. It's obviously nonsensical. What they do try to do is
buy the highest quality materials they can for the cost they're willing to
spend. If they could lower the quality and no one would notice, why don't
they?
> Talk about picking a bad analogy.
Actually, it's really good, just not a good one to pick because most people
have serious prejudices about the food market, just as they do about the
medical market. Fast food restaurants provide an excellent product at a very
low price. Yes, it's not the best possible product, but nobody could produce
that at the same price point.
Quality is very much a concern.
DS
> quality" materials. Fast food companies are notorious for buying
> low-quality materials in order to keep prices low and, frankly, if they
> lowered the quality of their beef, no one would notice.
I disagree with this entirely. First of all, there is no incentive to buy
low-quality materials. It's obviously nonsensical. What they do try to do is
buy the highest quality materials they can for the cost they're willing to
spend. If they could lower the quality and no one would notice, why don't
they?
> Talk about picking a bad analogy.
Actually, it's really good, just not a good one to pick because most people
have serious prejudices about the food market, just as they do about the
medical market. Fast food restaurants provide an excellent product at a very
low price. Yes, it's not the best possible product, but nobody could produce
that at the same price point.
Quality is very much a concern.
DS