Had thought about this for awhile Sup Forums and would like to hear thoughts and criticism on how this idea would work

Had thought about this for awhile Sup Forums and would like to hear thoughts and criticism on how this idea would work.

Businesses want to be able to charge a price for people that is low so more people could afford it and then more would be inclined to buy and also open up new and/or massive central demographics. The only problem is it is not very sustainable and could not be considered consistent or permanent and they need to be able to return to, or near to, former price levels or hold the same prices simultaneously for other people.

The government passes a new law allowing businesses to sign up for a website which allows people with verified income levels to access discounts from businesses based upon what they could afford and allows businesses to sign up for it and negotiate their own discounts.

Different types of businesses for different types of income levels. It could be that some businesses allow a certain amount of discounts for a few new DVD's for only 5$ for people only of a certain income level and then others have to pay the regular price.

And also for an example if you were a solid middle class income with two kids but can't afford a yoga class that costs $50 a week for two sessions, you could get a discount of $20 and only have to pay $15 per session. And things like a real fancy restaurant will probably only offer discounts to middle class or upper middle class because of their desire to only want people that are mostly relevant to the most common demographic in their clientele and also to not overcrowd their business.

And other services or products might only be offered to middle or upper income at a discount if the business feels that it is a premium service that people of lower income shouldn't be spending their limited money on or if it effects their business and business model negatively.

It would allow a massive growth for almost all businesses and would allow many people to afford many things that they need or that would benefit them.

This exists but its not digital. People simply go and buy whatevers cheap. Chinese knock offs, dollar stores and so on.
Buying clothing, from 5 dollars to 300 dollars a shirt.
If your yoga place felt like its lacking customers itd make its own discount.

And businesses already research their demographics dont be fooled, well a decent amount of them.

No response?

Also my friends mother works at a toy store, pretty big one, shes a manager of her own store, and she told us that even when her store does a 60% discount they still profit.

Store chain that is, shes a manager of one shop whatever.

It doesn't already exist because every business can't afford to offer a discount to everyone and want more customers, so allowing people to afford it while charging what the company needs still would allow sustainability and also a large opportunity for growth.

and the issue is this type of this universal discount that you mention doesn't work for every type of business and even though many massive businesses are doing well, they could do a lot better if they acquired some of the most common and central demographics and it would improve many things in the economy and with technology.

It would also allow businesses to lower their original base price.

What i am saying is that this chain can affort a 60% discount, profit off of it, and they still dont do it anyway.
Just because a business can help you doesnt mean that they will.

>Allow lower prices
Thats already possible and ALOT of businesses can lower prices, there is a type of beer thats no different than any other( ive tried plenty ) made in my country and its about 50% more expensive for no reason, they could fix that in no time but they dont give A FUCK.

And i find it highly unlikely that so many businesses dont know how to manage their own prices that you would need to do it for them.
Also do you know how difficult it would be to do the legal part of people getting individual discounts?

people with access to the poor goods would buy them and sell them to people with no access.

>Businesses want to be able to charge a price for people that is low so more people could afford it
Businesses don't inherently want lower prices for their products. It's the market forces between all players in the economy (not just businesses) that are behind the drive toward commoditization.

Most of business strategy involves attempting to fight against this force, by "building moats" and "competitive advantage". Fancy terms for trying to get to or maintain monopolies. Most of their strategies don't involve lowering prices, and half as many involve rasing prices.

It is a legal gray area but it would be similar to saying that is it illegal to allow people who can't afford a product to be able to afford it because a businesses chooses to allow it only because the customers didn't have enough money, which is not exclusionary in any way to other people but actually allowing a businesses to grow where and when it can, and sustainably and reasonably, and allowing more people to have or participate with their product and service which is also inclusionary.

And it doesn't matter if businesses could charge less but don't, they would want to if it means they could get more business while being able to provide consistent growth.

For modest profit and similar things do happen already, pirated products and IT, but businesses would acquire much more business and it would only cause a small decrease. And also they would be able to factor this in their discounts.

Actually lowering prices is one of the main strategies, it is called efficiency. And the amount of growth from being able to sustainably allow a lot of people to afford their product is one of the main priorities in determining development and direction in a business.

It wouldn't change much for competition as most companies in the same fields would all offer similar discounts, so I am not sure what you are saying. They would all see an increase in sales and customer base.

It would only remove many very cheap products that don't offer enough of a value for the discount, but people would still want to save $.50 at a low income level if they could and would still buy some cheap products if it is needed.

I meant
*businesses would acquire much more growth

Its quite simply not only about the money.
Not only is it not everyones goal to make your product cheaper, sometimes the goal is to make it even harder to get ( specialised stores ).

I paid my phone around 300 dollars, my friend bought some chinese phone for 200 and its specs are 2x in every possible area.
Quite simply if the products price does not have to be lowered it wont be lowered. Also there is a saying in my country "If you dont know what to buy buy whats expensive" Something costing a little bit more, depending on the market, could even interest the buyer into getting it. For fucks sake there was an app called "im rich" and it costed like a thousand dollars and a great group of people bought it.
A free game was preordered by about 150 people that paid a thousand dollars for it even though there was a payment option as cheap as 25.

that for a different type of business, which doesn't benefit from what I am suggesting. Why would this matter when most businesses don't benefit from your model and when it isn't relevant to my situation at all?

Most businesses want to have more customers and sustainable growth.

Are you saying that a phone company doesnt want to establish its demographic, attract more, and have growth?
Isnt this what EVERY single company wants?
This game wanted everyone to play it, they released it for free for christ sake, but people still wanted to pay a thousand dollars for it cause why not.

If the business can get enough cash from a product without doing anything to it, theyll keep it that way.
Lets put a 300 phone and a 200 phone in your thing.
How low would a company that charges a SHIT phone 300 go in price? 250? 200?
Unless it goes to a 100 its still more worth it to buy the 200 one up front.

You are trying to resolve a non issue.
Your biggest issue is things costing money and im sorry bud but people arent gonna make em cheaper to make to make it convenient for you.

There are incredible advancements in, for example, computers ready to be released right now, but people that have those items dont release them so they can get more cash out of their past technology.

branding is very important but most companies would benefit if more customers could buy their product.

A large majority of businesses and fields would certainly want to offer discounts to people if it is sustainable and to allow a significant growth and they only charge more, even if there is products that are better for less, because lowering their price would not allow enough growth and they couldn't lower it too much to allow it to be sustainable and to afford the brand presence (advertising and aisle space.)

Brands don't charge more to be exclusive, that is only for those who have a certain reputation or presence, or offer a premium product or service in a premium field. A brand is for recognition, not for a higher price. It is highly important to what a brand is, to be able to charge a higher price for the brand, but it is not the actual central purpose, essential, or position of a brand.

Most brands that charge more for the brand, and not just because they are exclusionary, would certainly be in favor of allowing more people to buy their brand if it means they could allow sustainable growth.

And those that profit from being an exclusive premium business, and I don't mean brands that charge more for the brand like I was describing, would simply not offer a discount and they have nothing to do with most businesses or brands and they have nothing to do with any of this conversation.

Other businesses, other than those that benefit from exclusionary premium markets as they would still maintain growth most likely in their fields, would sustainably offer a discount ( or a close competitor that also benefits from overcharging for the brand) and they would either overtake or force a change with that business.

and who thinks that most businesses wouldn't benefit from having more customers and more wide demographics and that allowing sustainable growth wouldn't work?

Who thinks that a brand wouldn't want to lower their prices because they have a brand that has enough of a popularity and presence to maintain a price to include a large significant growth?

Who thinks that most brands rely on brand and higher prices and provide less durability or utility than cheaper brands? Though many top brands charge more and are less effective, their products often are also are more effective or useful in many ways and also they come with things such as; valid or manufactured trust (for an example from studies they payed for, only when paying for a third party of course in this scenario), a customer service line, a return policy, etc.

My scenario would only allow smaller companies to grow and if they have a better product than the most popular brands, they would be able to sell more product and surpass or influence the popular or big brands.

>You are trying to resolve a non issue.
Your biggest issue is things costing money and im sorry bud but people arent gonna make em cheaper to make to make it convenient for you.

>There are incredible advancements in, for example, computers ready to be released right now, but people that have those items dont release them so they can get more cash out of their past technology.

Also who said that coming up with an idea for allowing businesses a large amount of growth and allowing people to afford and have more is because I want more in my life and that I am poor or somehow your lapdog?

Money, and growth, is a necessity and a requirement, not a dog treat.

You have not contributed anything even relevant to this conversation let alone an argument.

If simply lowering prices is the BEST SOLUTION EVER TO MAKING MOENY, then everyone would already be doing it.
You are not some economics, entrepreneur, management, pr genius that figured 1 simple easy step to fixing every problem ever.
If this was that simple, people that have been studying theory of every concept involved with your idea, would come to that conclusion.

Sometimes even the cheaper version of the same product is not bought as often.

I meant
"Your biggest issue is things costing money and im sorry bud but people arent gonna make em cheaper to make to make it convenient for you."
to be greentexted

and I meant to also reply to you

Also if they want to lower the price they can do that without any program.

no they wouldn't lower prices because it isn't sustainable, meaning to allow growth to continue for a significant projected amount of time. How could you think that most companies would be able to afford lowering their prices?

They only lower prices if they can.

Then those that can lower their prices would already do that without any program?
I do not understand your need to have a program be included in all of this.
Of course that if production costs 100 dollars they wont make their product cost 80 or 110, there are limits to what is the lowest possible , we agree on that. But what i am saying is that no company needs a program of this sort purely to organise cost of their product.
All of what youre thinking of is already being done.

I'm done. You seem to think that people can lower their prices at will and be able to maintain a business or that the amount of growth from lowering their price to only those who can't afford their product or service, to allow a lot more people to be able to buy their product at a profit, is similar to lowering their price universally, which means you are lacking any sense of reason.

I legitimately dont think that and you are too stupid to read what im writing. Half of my previous post was denying that fact and you are too incapable of reading it.
If a company wanted middle class and up to buy their product this wouldnt be an issue what so ever.

I do get that you want companies to give specific discounts to people based on their income but thats not something that your program can enforce in any way.
And how is lowering your price to a 100 people not the same as lowering it to 200 people?

Your logic seems to be: cheaper product > more people buying it.
If you want more people buying it then only lowering the price to the specific group is exact opposite. If you are going to lower your price for a certain % it doesnt matter to whom are you lowering it to. And if this statement is true please do explain why you think otherwise?

Are you trying to advocate that the rich pay more for the same product?
I doubt that capitalists will agree with this.

Just STFU your idea is shit
you are an idiot give up

It is like a person at a garage sale offering to give a discount to a person because says "that is all I have."

It is still capitalist and it is actually a very pure part of a free market.

Also it isn't really making the rich pay more, just allowing more people to be able to afford it and allowing a business to offer discounts to only those it could afford to.

And instead of being exclusionary, as it is only allowing discounts to certain types of people, it is mainly inclusionary because it is allowing more people to use their product or service and allowing their business to grow simply by giving people an ability to afford it, with a profit, and while doing it being able to remain sustainable by maintaining their required base price for those that can afford it.