Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!pacbell!att!chinet!mcdchg!clyde!watmath!watdragon!rose!cbbrowne
From: cbbrowne@rose.waterloo.edu (Christopher Browne)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.misc
Subject: Re: Packard Bell Clones
Message-ID: <6862@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Date: 16 May 88 15:19:43 GMT
References: <8805090905.aa07461@FHP2.HUACHUCA-EM.ARPA> <1010@bellboy.UUCP> <5071@ecsvax.UUCP>
Sender: daemon@watdragon.waterloo.edu
Reply-To: cbbrowne@rose.waterloo.edu (Christopher Browne)
Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 16

In article <5071@ecsvax.UUCP> dfile@ecsvax.UUCP (Dean File) writes:
>However, the ad says that the PB AT-compatible (w/o monitor or disk)
>retails for $4399!  The retail for the whole shebang as offered by
>DAK is $6637!  So the $1999 price, probably not the cheapest possible,
>is at least within the general AT range.  But the prices quoted
>as retail seem totally ludicrous.

When have advertisements ever shown sensible "retail prices?"  I remember during
the Home Computer Wars seeing ads which said "Atari 800XL - Suggested Retail
Price - $500" (or $499.95 :-) ) when the current price was under $200 (Canadian
dollars, no less - Probably $150 US at a store, less by mail order).  I think
IBM PCjr was one of the big offenders in this...  Using introduction prices for
the other products (which might be a legitimate comparison if the PCjr price
was going to drop in a similar fashion, but considering IBM...).

				Christopher Browne
				University of Waterloo