SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : Iomega Thread without Iomega
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Rocky Reid who wrote (3840)11/11/1998 10:56:00 AM
From: Jock Hutchinson  Read Replies (1) of 10072
 
Gillette does not sell their razors at a loss. I should know. I just paid $7 for the new Mach 3 razor outfit. Includes 2 blades.

The Mach 3 actually includes three blades Knucklehead. Dat's three da number after two, which is da number after one. That why it's called the Mach 3 as opposed to the Mach 2.

Actually, Gillette is currently selling the Mach 3 at a huge loss if one counts their R&D and pre-release promotion, which together totaled over two billion dollars. Gillette was able to do this because they executed on their razor blade strategy to the extent that they could afford to sell their razors at a loss to the OEM of the beards--i.e. the customer. This is precisely what Iomega has begun to do with considerable success.

I am genuinely surprised that you shave Elaine LaRockazelli. Would have thought by now that the waxing and electrolysis would have done the trick. Might I suggest estrogen supplements. Could be a way to spend the big time bucks you are making on your sophisticated spread.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News