High demand for useful Paul phillips comments

[Deorum]

[ QUOTE ]
And he has a monopole.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was wondering if I was going to get to laugh this week.
Thank you.

[Rushmore]

I don not believe anyone said they are not "interrelated."

I believe the statement was that supply does not effect demand.

An arguable point, and certainly defensible.

The point is obviously that the need for a thing is not dictated by how much of the thing exists.

Again, in this modern world of mass hysteria, one might make the argument that there is a need for more copies of Deepak Chopra's new book or more chicken fingers from Chik-Fil-A, but that would be more a question of what the market will bear, not supply and demand.

[BarronVangorToth]

First, let me preface myself by stating I'm not looking to start the next big online fight that will lead to me challenging you to Scrabble and then backing out of the deal via explaining that my wagering will only come from one lone source of money.

As far as demand not being affected by supply, I'll give you another example, again, from my own industry. Let's say we have 100 people looking for New Product X. They all desire to buy 1 copy. We know this and, even though we know we'll sell more than 100 copies, we print 100 copies and advertise it as such.

"100 copies?" one of those 100 people thinks. "I only wanted one before... but that's just 1 for every person that wants it, I shall buy extra now since it's a Limited Edition item."

Another person, not really interested before, thinks, "Wow, only 100 copies ... I wasn't going to get it before if everyone and their sister would have one, but now, I think I'll grab one since it's so rare."


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com

[37offsuit]

So if we can organize about 10 - 15 people to constantly impersonate you on 2+2 you'll go away?

[SpiderMnkE]

Barron,

What you have been saying makes sense, but it seems that you have not taken an economics class. You are being logical, but you just don't seem to be familiar with the definitions of supply and demand that are taught in an economics class.

Your examples are crystal clear. But until you and some other people agree on a definition of supply and demand then this fight is just going to go nowhere.

[BarronVangorToth]

Nowhere in the discussion was it stated what definitions were being utilized, so, when in doubt, you always go with the John Q. Sixpack version of the words. Regardless, as I stated in my first post, it's not even something I care about, but, since you did reference actual economics classes, EVEN utilizing scholarly definitions, you'd have arguments (albeit different ones) about how supply and demand are related to each other.

I merely was trying to provide as simple of an example as possible to show a point as I certainly won't assume that most people on this board are well-versed in economic theories and definitions, even if most of us seem to be mathematically minded.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com

[Rushmore]

Very true.

Barron is talking about marketing (creating demand) by way of limiting the supply. This is the manipulation of the market, and is another topic altogether.

Anyway, I think we're really talking apples and oranges here.

[SpiderMnkE]

Agreed

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
i would be a lot more enraged over your blatent ignorance of basic economics if you werent a dodger fan. in that case ignorance is to be expected.

rj

[/ QUOTE ]

enraged? really?
Don't worry, I hear the Giants are cutting payroll again next year....hey, whatever happened to Rob Nen?

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here is a link to his complete listing of posts (1390 total)

[/ QUOTE ]

Plus various lowlifes impersonating me, which might have some relevance as to why I don't post on rgp anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I forgot about those problems during your last few months. Obviously "Paul Phillips LV" is one impersonator and his posts are concentrated near the top of my link. For the link I simply searched using author: "Paul Phillips" (along with the newsgroup) so I unfortunately got the real Paul Phillips with the impersonator(s) (I'm not sure there were more than the one mentioned above).

One could search on your email address, but in your later posts you broke them up into a series such as rgp-12@improving.org, rgp-11@improving.org and so on. Earlier email addresses were completely different. Since I doubt you were impersonated in your early postings, I would think using these search strings would be an effective way to eliminate false hits for a serious researcher.

Anyway, a reasonable person who starts with your earlier posts and works through to the later posts would quickly spot an impersonator. Or one would hope [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img].

I'm not sure protection against impersonation is much better here but let's hope for the best. And hopefully I won't be labeled a sycophant by others on the forum for posting these links.

~ Rick