I want a list of those "loss leader" companies to ensure I don't buy their stock.
Sony and Microsoft come to mind. Both were selling their latest generation consoles at a considerable loss. Last I checked, they're extremely profitable companies.
|
|
|
aprilia rsv4
- Thread starter imported_superhawk996
- Start date
Sony and Microsoft come to mind. Both were selling their latest generation consoles at a considerable loss. Last I checked, they're extremely profitable companies.
SF is losing money on bike policies, but obviously believe they are making it up with profitable home and auto policies.QUOTE]
I can get liability insurance for a bike in California for $187 a year. From State Farm. Tell me again how they're losing money in Ontario because I'm really confused now.
Motorcyclists in Ontario (and other provinces) need to pull their heads out of their ***** and see the rest of the world.
And mmmnaked, as far as loss leaders is concerned, please, don't insult my (or your) intelligence. A one-time clearance of product is not remotely related to a policy of continual no-profit pricing.
Last edited:
Frankly I'm in disbelief that you've never heard of the concept.
Sony and Microsoft, my examples, were well publicized to be selling their Xbox and playstation products at a loss AT LAUNCH, and for many years afterwards. It has nothing to do with a sale or clearance. The simple fact was that these devices were incredibly costly to produce and both companies made the choice to sell at a loss, knowing that the real money will come from publishing, licensing, and subscriptions.
You're insulting yourself.
Sony and Microsoft, my examples, were well publicized to be selling their Xbox and playstation products at a loss AT LAUNCH, and for many years afterwards. It has nothing to do with a sale or clearance. The simple fact was that these devices were incredibly costly to produce and both companies made the choice to sell at a loss, knowing that the real money will come from publishing, licensing, and subscriptions.
You're insulting yourself.
1. My name isn't Frankly.
2. Your example cites a marketing strategy which has been referred to as the Gillette Marketing Plan. Give away the razors - we'll make money on the blades. Getting back to the subject at hand, are you seriously saying that this is the operating plan of insurance companies? Really?
3. Stop taking yourself too seriously. This is the internet. For all you know, you could be talking to Ed Rust.
4. Please explain to me my price quote by State Farm for motorcycle insurance in California.
SF is losing money on bike policies, but obviously believe they are making it up with profitable home and auto policies.QUOTE]
I can get liability insurance for a bike in California for $187 a year. From State Farm. Tell me again how they're losing money in Ontario because I'm really confused now.
Motorcyclists in Ontario (and other provinces) need to pull their heads out of their ***** and see the rest of the world.
And mmmnaked, as far as loss leaders is concerned, please, don't insult my (or your) intelligence. A one-time clearance of product is not remotely related to a policy of continual no-profit pricing.
$187 seems a bit low, I had full coverage similar to what I got in Canada for $650 ish in Michigan. $187 must get you the minimum which I wouldn't recommend.
Its really low. Over 40, licence for 25 years, no tickets, minimum liability is apparently worthy of a low rate. You're right, I wouldn't recommend it either. I brought it up for discussion purposes.
Now, about that Aprilia RSV4....has it been bought yet?
Cdn Z06 Mike
Active member
OK I was at the store this afternoon and the bike is there. Call and ask for Tim. That's who I was dealing with.
Griffin
Well-known member
What did the original owner do, ride it around the block, it frightened him and he parked it for two years? Wow.
Seems a good price for a nice bike.
Shaman
Well-known member
Probably not. But I don't claim to have that information.
|
|
|
|
|