Reading this thread I always seem to get a funny feeling of deja vu.
Little bit like back in the good old 70's when lots of people believed in communism. When you had a look in the SSSR there were lines in front of grocery stores whenever they had tomatos, people couldn't open their mouths, get cars, passports, hard currency or decent clothes. You could get a nice girl for 2$, though (which is now more like 200$, which shows capitalism does not improve everything). And yet there were hordes of intelligent students marching, debating, arguing and promoting communism.
On this thread I see a similar child-like belief. There is the dogma that has to be followed, no matter what is the circumstantial evidence around you. There's even the official opposition. Tsk, tsk.
Does no one else realize that if there's no room for I* in the market, there definitely is no room for both I* and G*? Very mystifying is that people even rejoice because I* is having problems. It's like celebrating the fact that the other guy stuck in the same lift is suffocating to death because of the lack of air.
Somebody presented odd price advantages for G* based on larger capacity (I won't say who it was because it was my friend Mqurice). Does someone believe that I* got stuffed because of their too low capacity? Has no one noticed that the lack of capacity was the smallest of their problems, right after the color of the toilet paper in the executive WC?
Someone else claimed I* can't match the price of G*. I can't see what would prevent I* offering exactly that price they see fit. Making losses? Hello? Does someone out there believe they would not make losses?
There is this biblical marketing plan of G* that everybody swears by. OK, its probably good - but how 'bout the marketing plan of I*, why would it necessary be any worse than that of G*? And if it was proven to be, why wouldn't it be changed over one weekend by a group of MBAs? How many enthusiastic MBAs you get for, say, 5% of $5 bn?
- rajala
|
