From engaged enthusiasts to plain gullible.

Started Dec 1, 2012 | Discussions thread
jayrandomer
Contributing MemberPosts: 626
Like?
Re: Why do people get upset with critcism?
In reply to scarbo, Dec 6, 2012

scarbo wrote:

jayrandomer wrote:

scarbo wrote:

jayrandomer wrote:

scarbo wrote:

Why do people get so upset if someone criticises Canon or any company for that matter? You're not a troll simply because you criticize Canon.

Yes, Canon are not a charity, but there's nothing wrong with blowing off a little steam and expressing irritation at the quality and/or pricing of some of their products. The fact is that Canon does ride on its name a lot of the time and charge above what their products might be worth in terms of quality and performance. I mean, you see it in the little things they sell such as lens caps, tripod collars, cable releases etc. They're not going to stop that practice when selling the more expensive items. The people who run Canon know the name sells and they exploit it as far as they can, as most companies in the business of making money would. The fact that it's standard practice does not mean we shouldn't call them on it.

I think it's good that people voice criticism if they dislike a company's practices, otherwise company's would feel they had carte blanche to exploit their position even more if they felt everyone was as happy as pie. There would be less motivation for them to up their game and improve. We've already seen plenty of firmware updates and price reductions as a result of consumer response and we wouldn't want that to stop.

I'm not upset that he's criticizing Canon. They very well may be overcharging for the new lens; it's also possible they designed themselves into a corner by producing too costly a lens. My problem is saying that charging something he doesn't want to pay is greedy. Expensive, sure; overpriced, probably; not worth buying, not for me, at least. Greedy, though?

I feel like greedy has become simply charging more than you want to pay and stingy is wanting to pay less than you charge.

Well of course Canon are greedy, which major corporation isn't? As you say, they are not charities. It is in the nature of corporations to be greedy. They exist to make profit, continually grow those profits and expand their empire. I'm sure if Canon had a monopoly on the market, they would inflate their prices even more. Their prices are a reflection of what they can get away with and what will make them the most money, not what is reasonable or fair. That's the nature of the beast.

How exactly is their pricing unfair? You either pay it or you don't and by all accounts nothing bad happens if you don't. If you went to jail if you didn't have the latest standard zoom I could see the fairness of the price being under question, but since that's not the case I don't quite see the problem. Or do you consider fair simply to be as little as they can sell it for without losing money? Do you consider it equally unfair to pay less than you can afford for something?

I didn't mention anything about their prices being fair or unfair, I would never make such an assertion about a private enterprise such as this. I was referring to what motivates them. I said that they base their pricing on what will make them the most money, not on what is reasonable or fair. That's to say it's about profit maximisation, which necessarily entails greed, not charity or generosity or fairness or any other motivating factor that would eat into those profits. You said as much yourself, but had a problem with the word 'greed'. I'm not squeamish about calling a spade a spade.

I  like to reserve greed for doing something immoral in exchange for money, so I think that's where we get our disagreement.  If charging more than I'd like for a lens classifies as greed, what do we call shooting pictures of a man as he dies instead of trying to save him so that you can sell those pictures to a newspaper?  I can accept that you think anything that isn't explicitly charitable is greed, however.

I do disagree that they don't consider what is reasonable or fair, because they've likely done enough market research to determine expected demand at various prices.  Clearly some people think the price is reasonable and fair or otherwise they wouldn't have sold any.  How else is a reasonable price ultimately even determined?  Not only is that how almost all companies do thing, it's how almost all people do things.  Do you think it's greedy when someone sells a house for more than 20% of what they paid for it?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow