Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac:30123 comp.windows.ms:455 comp.sys.ibm.pc:27408
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!uunet!microsoft!bruceb
From: bruceb@microsoft.UUCP (Bruce Burger)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.windows.ms,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Apple gets favorable ruling
Keywords: Apple vs. Microsoft
Message-ID: <5032@microsoft.UUCP>
Date: 14 Apr 89 02:16:48 GMT
References: <6271@bsu-cs.UUCP> <1068@Portia.Stanford.EDU> <25056@mirror.UUCP>
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 15

> Frankly, no.  If I had already made millions of dollars on my software,
> I would assume that the development costs had been covered and that 
> anything that I made over production costs (diskettes, shipping) was
> clear profit.  I would drop my retail price to cover production and
> a small profit margin, knowing that my competitors could not match or
> beat the price and still cover their (still outstanding) development
> costs.
> be the only producer of said software.

Actually diskettes and shipping are very small portions of the costs
for most software vendors.  Major costs include documentation and
packaging, marketing (which includes dealer relations, taking calls
from customers about all sorts of things, advertising, etc.), and 
product support.  Also profits have to fund future development, which
often pays back several years later if at all.