Helmet strap fraying

You're entitled to your opinion, even when it's wrong.

JL

 

Indeed. Except I'm not wrong, not on this one at least!

The only problem here is that Nev is a fuckwit, but then that hardly
counts as news any more, does it?

 

priceless ;-)

 

You're entitled to that opinion despite it being wrong as well...

JL
"No man is happy without a delusion of some kind. Delusions are as
necessary to our happiness as realities."
Christian Nestell Bovee

 

Well, if your claim that there is no such thing as differential pricing
is correct (which it would have to be if I were wrong, since that is
what Nev had a go at me over, and in which you are supporting him), then
you'd better get on to the economics experts who developed the theory in
the first place and who have written countless books and other articles
on the subject over the years...seems you know something they don't!

 

how to fish maybe?

mh

 

If he wants to make himself look stupid by denying the incontrovertible,
then trying to salvage the tatters of his credibility by claiming to
be 'fishing' is not really going to do the job...

 

It looked like fishing from this side of the river Damien.

Theo

 

There we go with the anonymous 'experts' again. You've almost convinced
me now. You say they "developed the theory"? What theory? Just a
theory is it? I'd be more inclined to believe a practical expert, say,
a [local] supermarket marketing department manager who has all the
metrics. They must run these large manufacturing companies that package
goods under multiple brand labels then do they? How do they ever find
the time to develop new and uninteresting packages for 'cheap' brands if
they're always busy writing books?

Nev..
'07 XB12X

 

No no no. You have it all wrong Damien. I never disputed that there
was no such thing as differential pricing at all.

I disputed your blanket theory as to why people buy brand name over home
brand.
I questioned the existence of the 'experts' you mentioned.
I very correctly predicted that in your 4th post on the matter you would
begin name calling.
I patted myself on the back for being spot on with the above prediction.
I disputed your belief that a company cannot use local and imported
ingredients on the same production line making two seemingly identical
products.
I disputed your idea that the main factor in determining shelf prices is
packaging.
I disputed your idea that packaging for home brand products is
determined by the manufacturer, rather than the 'home brand' themselves.

Nev..
'07 XB12X

 

Point out where I said that.

No it isn't, faulty logic (as usual)

I'm very familiar with the economics (and marketing) academic studies
on the subject, you however seem to be less than familiar with the
microeconomic context in which you are making inaccurate conclusions
based on erroneous assumptions.

Or to put it simply, in words you can understand, you're wrong again,
as usual.

JL

 

Invest in a mirror.

I'm not, I'm pointing out that as per usual you miss the point by
being incapable of reading what is actually written as opposed to what
you want to see.

I didn't make that claim, don't attribute statements to me that I
didn't make.

JL

 

All true and correct, but you're assuming that facts and logic will
sway delusions based on emotion and an inability to read and think.

I'd suggest you win on a TKO (but he'll continue with the "Black
Knight" tactics (1))

JL
(1) "A mere flesh wound" etc ie delusion

 

I think you're being too kind and/or attributing far too much good
will to my msg - I actually meant the statement quite literally - he's
factually incorrect in his assertions because he's failed to actually
read what he's trying to rebut and doesn't seem to understand the
boundaries of the marketing and economics theories he's attempting to
use to buttress his argument.

To draw a parallel he's like a guy trying to argue that we don't have
inflation in the economy at the moment because he can now buy a 32"
flat screen TV for half what it would have cost last year, therefore
as that price decreased it can't possibly be true that prices overall
have increased.

Among other logical failures he's drawing an erroneous conclusion from
an accurate "fact" (1), Nev's already posted the full list so I shan't
belabour the point by listing them again.

JL
(1) or more accurately taken a proven economic principle and failed to
understand the context in which it is and isn't valid and hence drawn
inaccurate and unreasonable conclusions.

 

All that list proves is that you set up a straw man and then knocked it
down, since your assertions as per above do not in fact match up with
anything I actually said - the only thing it does match with is what you
*assumed* I said, but did not. Big difference.

 

You asserting someone is wrong, and that person actually being wrong,
are not always as closely related as you seem to believe. Very rarely
so, in fact, going by your record.

That's not to say I'm always right, just that I'm not wrong merely
because you and Nev say I am.

 

On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 22:20:33 +1000, Damien wrote:

[...]

s/always/ever

 

With an unbaited hook as well.

 

With an unbaited hook as well.

 

Yeah we know, in order to be wrong "the experts" have to say you are.

Nev..
'07 XB12X