On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 07:06:24 +0200, Sandy wrote:
> Dans le message de
> news:[email protected],
> Michael Press <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Dans le message de
>>> news:[email protected],
>>> Ozark Bicycle <[email protected]> a réfléchi,
>>> et puis a déclaré :
>>>> On Jun 27, 1:16 pm, "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Dans le message
>>>>> denews:[email protected], Ozark
>>>>> Bicycle <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et
>>>>> puis a déclaré :
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jun 27, 12:21 pm, "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> Dans le message
>>>>>>> denews:[email protected],
>>>>>>> Ozark Bicycle <[email protected]> a
>>>>>>> réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 9:18 am, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> kwalters wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>>>>>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>>>>>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>>>>>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>>>>>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>>>>>>>>> time.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck
>>>>>>>>>> with Open Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too
>>>>>>>>>> have been forced to re-rim with Mavic just to save the
>>>>>>>>>> spokes. I don't think there's any reason to re-spoke, since
>>>>>>>>>> spokes should last through many rims. FWIW, the MA-3 was
>>>>>>>>>> known to have problems.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> overpriced ?
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, they're "priced", period.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Quite. And "priced" higher than comparable rims from other rim
>>>>>> makers. Taking a wild-ass guess, I would say that is what Mr. Cole
>>>>>> meant when he wrote "I think they're ["they" being Mavic rims]
>>>>>> overpriced.".
>>>>>
>>>>> Still not right. Your first sentence leaves one with the logical
>>>>> conclusion that they are higher priced, only. Something like
>>>>> hamburger, where 20% fat is cheaper than 10% fat. Value judgments
>>>>> come in when you personally decide that the higher price is not
>>>>> justifiable for your budget. Reality shows that prices will
>>>>> decline when the price asked is higher than what people are
>>>>> willing to pay (or when they are compelled to pay, as in a
>>>>> monopoly situation). That is when they are overpriced, and remain
>>>>> in inventory until adjusted downwards to a level where there is a
>>>>> parallel substitute. It's economics, not evangelism.-
>>>>
>>>> Lesseee....Peter Cole opined that Mavic rims are "overpriced". I
>>>> explain the idea to another poster (IOW, that they are "overpriced"
>>>> relative to the competition) and *you* get your chamois all in a
>>>> wad. Why is that? Do you hold stock in Salomon? Just trying to
>>>> justify you own purchases? Feeling the need to defend French
>>>> interests? Something else?
>>>
>>> Silly to accuse me of having a background interest. But you still
>>> miss the difference. Calling something overpriced, when that
>>> product sells satisfactorily to the seller's expectations, amounts
>>> to an opinion, _poorly_ based on available facts. It's like saying
>>> that a Corvette is an overpriced automobile. The narrow,
>>> retrenched, pseudo-popular "wisdom" in this forum fails constantly
>>> to meet up with the world. Every sort of grouch, retro- or not,
>>> gets to spout off, but pointing out facts to those who inquire seems
>>> a fair thing to do. For my experience, this forum regales in
>>> touting cliquish opinions as facts and building a whole "myth and
>>> lore" from them. Like about connecting links. I think there's a
>>> new bit of whole cloth being spun there....
>>
>> Yarn is spun, cloth is woven.
>>
>> By the numbers:
>> Mavic rims are not superior to all rims out there.
>> Many rims are superior to Mavic rims.
>> Many rims superior to Mavic rims cost less. (perhaps all)
>> By this definition of over-priced, Mavis rims are over-priced.
>
> OK, so you're yet another evangelist. Your last and crowning sentence just
> had a logical hernia - inoperable - fatal.
Your argument seems to be couched in the language of economics -- if a
product clears the market, then by definition it is not overpriced.
Frankly, I'm not sure that even an economist would agree with you. It
seems to me that economists regularly talk about things like whether we're
in the middle of a housing bubble, whether the stock market is overvalued,
and so on and so forth. Those sorts of discussions wouldn't make any sense
if economists always believed that the market price was the best measure
of an asset's value. Furthermore, economists often talk about
externalities -- costs that aren't adequately reflected in the market
price.
But let's leave behind economics. This is a forum about bicycle
technology. When someone says that something is overpriced, they usually
mean that it's price is not in keeping with the product's technological
merits. Whether consumers would pay a premium because it's the same
product that Lance used is generally not our concern. If you use a little
common sense, instead of an a priori definition of "overpriced" that few
people share with you, then you probably won't have such trouble
understanding what people mean.
