Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (604683)	3/22/2011 6:09:20 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1574854

It all depends on whether your assuming the purchase as part of the baseline. If you assume the purchase is going to happen, that nothing can change that; your not analyzing if the spending should have happened, or if its a good thing, or what else might have been done, your just making it an integral and unchangeable part of the scenario, then spending less could be considered saving money. If the question is "should we spend the money", or about past decisions "was spending the money a good thing", if there is any sort of option, and you can compare not spending at all to spending less than you possibly might have spent, then you probably shouldn't consider the spending choice to be saving money. But if you don't see the situations as being different in a relevant way then fine, consider my statement to be corrected to "Its easy to think of customer A who spent 50% less on his purchase, and say "lower prices are a good thing", but that ignores potential customer B and C who wind up not getting any because the shelves are bare.