Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pro-nucleus.UUCP!hzink
From: hzink@pro-nucleus.UUCP (Harry Zink)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: RE: APDA Price reducations
Message-ID: <8905110837.AA23251@crash.cts.com>
Date: 10 May 89 20:30:46 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: pnet01!pro-sol!pro-nucleus!hzink@nosc.mil
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 25

Network Comment: to #345 by pnet01!crash!ucbvax.berkeley.edu!unmvax!indri!nic.MR.NET!shamash!nis!sialis!orbit!pnet51!shawn

The best joke of the whole 'press release' that APDA posted was their
statement that apple wants to run it as a 'break-even business', and that is
the reason they keep the suggested retail prices.  Now, correct me if I'm
wrong, but suggested retail prices DO include a significant mark-up for
dealers beyond the initial cost of the product (usually in the 30-40% range). 
Now, if APDA's intent were truly to break even, and not make profits, how
would they explain away this little issue ("We're not keeping the
money...really!").  I would be real curious to hear that one.

If APDA were really interested to operate on a break-even basis they could
offer their products at substantially reduced rates to their members (I
understand you still have to join and pay around $20/year - is that so?).  So,
I would see no reason they can't reduce most of their prices by 20% or more,
and still 'break-even' - unless, that is, they do want to be profitable and
their claim to be 'break-even' was just another marketing ploy (a lie, in
other words).

What do you think...?

+
        hzink@pro-nucleus
        crash!pnet01!pro-nucleus!hzink : UUCP
                                                +