Please Put A Minimum Sale Price On Every WSO

PPC-Coach:

I don't understand your rationale for thinking a minimum price is going to lead to higher quality.

I've purchased WSOs from $1 to $49 and I see no relationship between price and WSO quality.

Maybe higher prices will be seen as a good thing by sellers, but by the same token, a higher price in the eyes of the buyer may limit some sales.

I'm guessing there are a lot more buyers than sellers, so I don't understand how you come to the conclusions you do.

Steve

Ahh, Shania!!!

You forgot the 'with breakfast in bed' part... :rolleyes:

LOL, good one.

Well, if you require a minimum price on WSOs, that would effectively eliminate free WSOs, no? Is that really desirable?

Fair. I dont think its anybody's right to tell someone what to price their product.

I am not a big supporter of the "low ball" pricepoint, but i dont plan to force it down anybody's throat. Its a fair and free market, and it should be let to be to take its course.

Yes... so true!! $10 is like $100 in Indonesia, I can pay my rent, internet bills, college (if I have to but for now my parents pay it for me because they love(?) doing it), foods, vacation with only $280 per month.

Thanks to aweber's and getresponse's recurring commission, I manage to achieve it quite easily. And their great service doesn't hurt either.

Um... we don't need super duper top-notch stuff to learn how to make money I think, at least for me....

While it's a good thing to learn super duper top-notch stuff, but most of us come to WSO section, pay WSO for $10, mainly to find out how to enhance our business and make more money, not to pay high price for the sake of learning.

Like someone in this forum whose I can't remember his name said "All technique in WSO work..." I think all we need is goal, simple plan, money to invest, action to take, and some common sense...

Putting a minimum price on WSOs would absolutely accomplish two things.

> Cheap crappy WSOs would be more expensive crappy WSOs.

> Cheap high-value WSOs would be more expensive high-value WSOs.

I think that about covers it...

So am I....price fixing...or something along those lines.

I agree.

The point, in theory, of the WSO section is that you are giving a quality product for a very affordable price.

At least that's just how I look at it.

First things first: Y'all need to think before throwing around legal terms. I am not a lawyer, but I rather seriously doubt that saying "You can't sell anything here below $XYZ price" would qualify as price-fixing in any legal sense.

Second: I don't set policy here, but I'd be more than a little surprised to see Allen change the rules to put a minimum price in place. On top of being waaaay too intrusive, it goes against the "encourage the best deals possible for the members" philosophy.

Third: This is not a political issue, and anyone who used the word "socialist" or any derivative of it in this thread should be glad I didn't give you a month's vacation certificate. It was a near thing. Not a one of you, by the way, seem to have the faintest notion of what the word or philosophy means: Government ownership or control of the means of production and distribution of goods.

Not exactly analogous to the proposed concept of "We don't want people selling cheap-assed crap here."

Note that the previous comment is not meant to start this off on a political discussion. Just to show that too many people here talk out of their... hats. Mama should have warned you about using words when you don't know what they mean.

Which reminds me... I need to go feed the cat.


Paul

The proper sequence for discussion in an open forum: Read first. Think about what you've read. THEN comment.


Paul

There are SO many things wrong with this proposition, I don't even know where to start... Grrrr!

There are a LOT of excellent points in this thread.

NO, I DON'T think there should be a minimum price for ANYTHING! It goes against every principle of free enterprise.

I majored in marketing, but I have a deep interest in economics and have read a lot of books on the subject. (I even considered changing my major to economics at one point and applying to the London School of Economics. But after investigating further, decided that was a little out of my league. :p)

The argument that a higher price ensures higher quality doesn't hold water. A higher price does NOT equate to higher quality, period. Minimum prices only ensure that we'll be charged more for those WSOs that ARE junk.

As Alexa said, the real issue is that Warriors have trained their customers to expect bargain-basement prices. (And hence we have more complaints from those who want everything for nothing -- or at least only $5 -- and complain louder than anyone else. It nurtures the entitlement mentality.) That's not necessarily bad ALL the time, but if it's the norm (as it's become), then that IS a bad thing.

In a free economy, the price is dictated by the market -- what others are willing to pay -- for the product or service. A governing authority arbitrarily setting artificial minimums destroys the entire process.

And a governing authority should NOT have the right to tell sellers what to charge. That's outrageous -- and also detrimental to a free economy. (And as Suthan said, why should I pay more???) (The need for governmental regulation of price-fixing, fair trade, consumer protection, etc. is completely valid though, but those are completely separate issues.)

As Alexa said, minimum price also prohibits ethical sellers from using loss leaders -- giving good value for a ridiculously low price (like the free or $1 WSOs for listbuilding) -- to attract new customers.

I won't go on, but there are a lot more points AGAINST setting minimum prices.

An EXCELLENT -- and very readable -- book on this subject is Money, Greed and God: Why Capitalism is the Solution and Not the Problem. You can see it here: Amazon.com: Money, Greed, and God: Why Capitalism... I can't recommend this book highly enough. It's very thoughtful and logical -- and could be title In Defense of Capitalism. I LOVE this book as it articulates what I can't.

A lot of people, in frustration with the problems of capitalism, like to suggest different forms communism or socialism. After all, they SEEM a logical solution to the problems of capitalism and free enterprise. (Like your suggestion, which has shades of socialism.) At least on the surface. But they're not.

The author has a quote in the book (I don't remember from who): "Capitalism is the worst system ever devised -- except for all the others." Very true! It's certainly not perfect -- but it's still the best.

Michelle