Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
That usually happens when you are wrong, and try to force others to agree with your flawed opinion.APassionForCriminalJustic wrote:We are all wasting our time man. There are some people in this world who couldn't see a freaking fat cow if it was sitting on their face. We might as well speak to a wall.
He's asking if it IS worth the money, now. I'd say it isn't, now. Version 15 may change the status quo, but if it doesn't improve by at least 150 ELO, while maintaining uniqueness, I'll pass like I did the last two iterations.hgm wrote:That usually happens when you are wrong, and try to force others to agree with your flawed opinion.APassionForCriminalJustic wrote:We are all wasting our time man. There are some people in this world who couldn't see a freaking fat cow if it was sitting on their face. We might as well speak to a wall.
If you're asking "Whether Deep Hiarcs is Worth £69.95 / €83.95 / $99.99 ??", adding a "to you" clause, seems redundant. The fact that someone else pays the price, doesn't automatically mean it is worthy of that. Asking the question, in a specialized forum, may be a good way of finding out.hgm wrote:If enough people pay the money, it is obviously worth the money. That is what "being worth the money" means. It does not mean that all people in the wold should be interested to buy the product at that price, or even at all.
Insisting that just because you are not interested in the product, anyone that is would be a pigheaded fool just makes one look very silly, to put it mildly.
Yes. I saw a TV program the other day where they restored a classic Aston Martin and the end result was simply stunning. It went to auction. The previous world record price for that model was something like £90,000. In the end, two bidders got into a bidding war, and it sold for £150,000. Was it worth the price to the buyer ? Yes of course otherwise he wouldn't have paid it. Was it worth the money in a general sense - almost certainly not, but of course classic cars can appreciate in value over time.Ozymandias wrote:If you're asking "Whether Deep Hiarcs is Worth £69.95 / €83.95 / $99.99 ??", adding a "to you" clause, seems redundant. The fact that someone else pays the price, doesn't automatically mean it is worthy of that.
Actually it doen's only mean that, but it is sort of defined that way, in economics. My house is worth what the highest bidder is willing to pay for it. Not what the lowest bidder, or someone that doesn't want to buy a house at all is willing to pay for it. Or what the building costs were.Ozymandias wrote:If you're asking "Whether Deep Hiarcs is Worth £69.95 / €83.95 / $99.99 ??", adding a "to you" clause, seems redundant. The fact that someone else pays the price, doesn't automatically mean it is worthy of that.
You should go change Wikipedia's definition:hgm wrote:Actually it doen's only mean that, but it is sort of defined that way, in economics. My house is worth what the highest bidder is willing to pay for it. Not what the lowest bidder, or someone that doesn't want to buy a house at all is willing to pay for it. Or what the building costs were.Ozymandias wrote:If you're asking "Whether Deep Hiarcs is Worth £69.95 / €83.95 / $99.99 ??", adding a "to you" clause, seems redundant. The fact that someone else pays the price, doesn't automatically mean it is worthy of that.
There's no way of finding that equilibrium, by determining the price of the product by looking at what the highest bidder might be looking to pay. The example of auctioning your home isn't good, because you only look at the market price to get a reference, from there you may accept a lower bid, depending on a variety of factors that are market independent.In microeconomics, supply and demand is an economic model of price determination in a market. It concludes that in a competitive market, the unit price for a particular good will vary until it settles at a point where the quantity demanded by consumers (at current price) will equal the quantity supplied by producers (at current price), resulting in an economic equilibrium for price and quantity.
I don't know what his intentions are, regarding the presentation of the poll results, but I would answer "no" to both questions.hgm wrote:Far from being redundant, the addendum 'to you' makes it an entirely different question. The poll is just a trolling attempt to smear HIACS, and for this purpose it was intentionally phrased in a misleading way, in the hope people answering the poll would mistakenly imagine the 'to you' in order to have them vote 'no', and later presenting the result as if they answered the question as it was posed. You just fell for that ploy.
I will add to that: will there be an updated Hiarcs for the iPad?AdminX wrote:All I would like to know is will there be a Android version of the new Hiarcs?
royb wrote:I will add to that: will there be an updated Hiarcs for the iPad?AdminX wrote:All I would like to know is will there be a Android version of the new Hiarcs?
