I was surprised that substitutes, items that are bought used rather than new, were such a big problem for corporations. I thought that through the advancement in the technology of the company's product, the company would easily be able to sell their new products to their new customers.
I was a little confused when the author said that advanced technology is not enough to attract customers to the company's product. I thought that the more advanced the technology, the more attractive the product would be to customers. When I see a commercial on TV about a product that is "futuristic" per say, I want to buy that product more than I would want to buy a product that is on the same technological level as everybody else.
I would want to ask the author "Is it necessary for every company to have a lobbyist to communicate and help change policies in government?" I'm just curious if paying a lobbyist to get policies changed in the area of the product is always necessary no matter what field the product is in.
I would also want to ask the author "What is the best method of stimulating interest in the company's new products and making them more attractive then the company's much cheaper substitutes?" It seems that substitutes are a big problem for larger companies nowadays. I was just curious how a company can get its customers to buy their new products when there are so many of it's old products out in the market that are already very functional.
I don't agree with the author that if the item is perishable, it's cost is going to decrease. Fruits and vegetables are some of the most perishable products in the market but they are still relatively expensive versus other products in the grocery store. I don't think that an item being perishable will affect the price at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment