Bulge
So here's a question for anyone with all the Markets and Market Logic publication:
In chapter 7 it describes a scenario where there is a contract between the manufacturer and the customer. It says:
However, after many trade dates have passed and company has been transacted as agreed, the customer asks that the arrangement be changed so he can now pick up the exact same amount of merchandise sooner, in effect asking the manufacturer to boost the frequency of generation.
The net effect being that the manufacturer sees there is more need, so he increases prices. However, if we are speaking about precisely the exact same amount of merchandise, simply getting it sooner instead of later, how can this be construed as increased need, because the customer is not demanding , he is simply demanding it sooner and there may be a million and one reasons why the customer may want the product sooner, other than increased demand. Unless he means precisely the exact same amount (i.e. monthly quantity) at more regular intervals (i.e. biweekly), in effect doubling the need... but he doesn't say so from the publication.
Additionally the announcement It is obvious he has an economic benefit in asking a heightened delivery schedule doesn't look obvious to me unless we're discussing the consumer getting more merchandise than specified in the initial contract. Then he says that the manufacturer can recognize that (because the customer is shortening his span ) value is shing, and he will assume that demand has improved, the best possible result for the customer, and also the worst for the manufacturer - if price is held stagnant. I don't see how this would be awful for the manufacturer, okay so he thinks value may be increasing and he still has to meet his existing contract at the agreed upon price - he is not losing any money, and still making as much as before, hardly the worst result for the manufacturer.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by ;
