Comment

Comment on We don’t need 75-inch TVs, we need 75% off basic survival. 💀

So in order for it to be real, everything must be merged together into a single source of revenue/profit?

I am in no way confused as to whether or not they could make a profit without selling TVs - it says to me that the more TVs they sell, the more the platform can make. The platform becomes the profit generator and the cost and sale price of the TV hardware then becomes a line item in the platform profit calculation.

I’m not a business major but I don’t understand how separating the services and hardware that delivers the services into two measures invalidates my assertion that the services are the profit driving force and the hardware is secondary to that. With the hardware being secondary, keeping its price low or at a loss makes economic sense if the platform generates that much more profit.

I’m arguing such logic has driven down the prices. What are you actually asserting that is relevant to my point?

source

Sort:hotnew top

Gladaed@feddit.org ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
Arguing for cost of production vs cost of service offerings in a vacuum is the issue since. And trying to argue that they make their profit just in ads and services is the thing you shouldn’t do, as they do not add the TV cost they “subsidize” to their cost. Since profits are very slim any small source of income with low cost suddenly becomes the source of profit if you fudge the math this way. Imagine that they would sell remotes separately at high cost compared to the materials cost e.g. for 20 bucks. Then they could reduce the TV price by 20/buyrate dollars, lowering TV profits but have a high margin item they can tout to investors. Even though almost nothing changed they reduced their tv manufacturing profits without changing their total profits.

source
- theparadox@lemmy.world ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  I understand what you are saying. If they reduce the price of their TV (and the profit that TVs sales generate) they are just removing the profit from one category into another.
  
  I honestly don’t have enough energy to write a better researched response - I spent more time than I wanted trying to find any numbers as it is.
  
  If you want to believe that the gigabytes of data your TVs regularly send to their manufacturers and their business partners aren’t a primary driver of lower prices… and that it is really because it has become markedly cheaper to mine precious metals and manufacture semiconductors than it has to run factory farms, then go ahead.
  
  source
  - Gladaed@feddit.org ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    Manufacturing semiconductors has rather low materials cost. The challenge is actually turning the raw metals into a functioning device. And that’s been getting cheaper and by a lot. We aren’t hitting physical limits. Even in fucking batteries we are getting more and more capacity out of the same raw materials through better manufacturing.
    
    Also as machines age their machine time tends to be valued less as compared to bleeding edge node machine time. Research has been paid.
    
    source