[extropy-chat] Futurist priorities was ex-tropical

David Lubkin extropy at unreasonable.com
Wed Mar 3 03:44:03 UTC 2004


Harvey wrote:

>Then we are agreed.  This was my point all along.  Markets don't choose the
>best product.  They choose the best price.

This has been a surreal thread.

Free markets optimize whatever qualities consumers want, who vote with 
their wallets or their feet.

Cost to consumer is occasionally the primary quality optimized but usually 
it's something else, or a balance between several qualities -- cost, 
safety, reliability, ease of use, age, weight, anticipated resale value, 
prestige, size, supplier's reputation, options for later upgrade or 
trade-in, quality of vendor maintenance or support, capacity, required 
customer maintenance, availability, compatibility with existing constraints 
on the consumer (such as earlier purchases or regulatory requirements), 
product's useful lifetime, temperament, location, noise level, air quality, 
etc.

And since priorities will likely differ from consumer to consumer, any free 
market will subdivide into niche submarkets for substantial clusters of 
quality rankings.

Given a product that appeals to a large enough group of consumers, a vendor 
will usually attempt to minimize the cost to provide that product. But even 
here, there are other considerations.

In software, a vendor might want to be successful but not enough so as to 
attract Microsoft's attention. A studio might be more concerned about the 
long-term value of retaining Big Star than about cost over-runs on her 
latest flick. In dating, electoral politics, child custody disputes, or 
warfare, the cost to a vendor might be a negligible consideration compared 
to the overriding goal of being selected by the consumer.


-- David Lubkin.





More information about the extropy-chat mailing list