Price discrimination comes to restaurants

Wednesday, April 20, 2011 10:04 AM

ApolloAndy said:

This is almost word for word the pro-pot smoking position we had during that discussion however long ago it was.

Ironic that Andy mentions that on 420? Somewhere, Jerry (Garcia) is smiling. ;)

Last edited by rollergator, Wednesday, April 20, 2011 10:05 AM
+0
Wednesday, April 20, 2011 2:34 PM

But with that said, what if the law sucks balls?

There is always civil disobedience. But, that harkens back to this:

I can at least respect someone who says, "You know what? I want something. I don't want to pay for it. There's no way for them to enforce it. So I steal it." That person might be a thief, but at least they are honest with themselves.

The difference between the thief and the activist practicing civil disobedience is the former does it in the privacy of his bedroom. The latter does it in the streets for all to see, and risks arrest because of it.

+0
Monday, April 25, 2011 5:16 PM

I always hop the fence when nobody is looking and help my kids over in the back entrances at amusement parks, in hopes of having a good day. If we find the lines are too long and the service is crappy within the first two hours, we just leave. If we stay for more than two hours then we go to the main gate and buy tickets. Win Win. I feel they deserve my business at some point.

// making a silly point that has already been done to death ;)

+0
Monday, April 25, 2011 6:41 PM

Just don't try to cut across under the B&M invert!

+0
Monday, April 25, 2011 9:15 PM

I get the point already. I don't visit certain parks because of that crappy day you speak of, mfivsdarienlake. Sometimes, if my experience is crappy where ever I spend my money, I might complain, in hopes that they fix the problem somehow. When you go to the store and purchase a crappy CD from a band that you trust, there is no money back guarantee. There is a way to fix that service issue, and millions are doing it. Some of them are abusing it. Not me. I'll gladly pay for the music if it is worth it, and I pay for the music all of the time. I pay for it all of the time. Did I mention that I pay for it all of the time?

And just in case you don't understand, I pay for it all of the time. I understand how hard it is to make a living off of record royalties. It's totally impossible for most musicians. Because of that, If the music release is any good, I'll gladly umm... pay for it all of the time.

(Get that?) :)

+0
Monday, April 25, 2011 11:08 PM

Anyone can preview 90 seconds of a song on iTunes now. That should be enough to know if the song is crappy or not.

I'm having a hard time understanding a world where qbots are wrong and immoral but theft isn't.

+0
Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:26 AM

Right. Itunes. I use the iTunes store a lot, but not always. I should use the iTunes store more, because I use iTunes on my computer exclusively. I do prefer CD's to iTunes downloads because I have more control over how I listen to it, and I like tangible artwork to hold between my fingers, but I buy a lot from Apple as well.

Sometimes a 90 second preview isn't enough. Sometimes I need to know if the music is going to grow on me or not. Sometimes the music I want isn't available on Itunes. Sometimes I don't get to Itunes before I decide to download it to listen to it, but not always; just sometimes.

I am not the only person in the world wide web who downloads music illegally. It came to this because of the rotten ways of the record companies. I even use the honor system and pay for it after I decide if I enjoy the music and if I am going to keep it, because I am a musician myself, and I understand how hard selling music is. I also understand how little money a musician will make from selling a CD after the everyone else gets their cut... pennies, if even that much.

What's really fun about this round and round conversation is that there are not many here who can honestly tell me that they have never illegally downloaded music before. There are even less who would honestly say that they pay for all of the music that they download after they decide to keep it. Ironically (because I have been labeled a "thief" in this topic), I am so honest that I admit to this part of my personal music downloading system. I don't even do it this way very often, because I can hear previews often. I don't even know why some of you guys keep on going with it.

I pay for music all of the time. It's not theft if I pay for it. My way of previewing is just another way to hear the entire song and decide if it is garbage, or if it is something that I want to add to my playlist.

I'm a picky music lover who doesn't want to get ripped off. I am extremely honest, just ask anyone who personally knows me. Everyone admires my integrity more than anything else about me. I am no thief. That implies that I am a very bad guy.

This is a stupid conversation. :p

Last edited by LostKause, Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:32 AM
+0
Tuesday, April 26, 2011 9:43 AM

This is a stupid conversation.

I believe the word you are looking for here is "uncomfortable."

+0
Tuesday, April 26, 2011 10:08 AM

The majority of my CD collection is musical theatre, and I've been burned too many times buying a CD I thought would be good, only to regret wasting the $18 (or on Amazon usually less). Especially with shows I'm not familiar with, it takes a good number of listens to decide if I like it; only a few cast albums have grabbed me right away, yet some of my current favorites I wasn't into upon first listen.

Back before iTunes had 90-second clips and before they had the large selection they do now, my solution to this was to wait until I could get it from the local library, listen to it for a week or so, then decide if I wanted to buy it. If I couldn't get into it, the record label earned zero dollars from me; If I liked it, they profited.

The end result is the same as what Travis is doing, yet my method is perfectly legal. I do the same thing with books before I buy them. And this is also why publishers' associations aren't too thrilled with libraries, and why movie studios are now selling "rental editions" of DVDs to Netflix that don't include extras/special features.

+0
Tuesday, April 26, 2011 12:32 PM

Brian Noble said:

This is a stupid conversation.

I believe the word you are looking for here is "uncomfortable."

Nope. The word I was looking for, and used, was stupid. Preaching morals to *me* is stupid, but you don't really know me in person, so you can't possibly understand that, so I just laugh. I am not uncomfortable being completely honest. I am not uncomfortable hearing that you think that your moral compass is supposedly better than mine. I laugh, because it is stupid to try to compare, Noble.

If you knew how honest I am, and how people who know me look up to me, almost heroically, as a mentor and a very kind and loyal person, trying to make the world a better place by just being nice, you would understand that calling me a thief on a public discussion forum is stupid. My honesty is the reason why I pay for it if I like it. My honesty is why I admit what I do. I am honest to a fault; it get's me in trouble sometimes. Ask anyone who knows me.

If I had more friends living close to me who listened to the same kind of music I listen to, than maybe I could just borrow a CD from them every once in a while. That's how I look at this. I am borrowing someone's copy of a piece of music for a while to see if I enjoy it, and if I do, I buy it.

And around and around we go...

+0
Tuesday, April 26, 2011 12:40 PM

I'm telling you, Travis - for $5/month, the new Napster is the way to go. (I pay $10, but I use the mobile app on my phone). I downloaded tons of music the "old" Napster way back in the day, but I haven't for the last 8 or more years. It's just not worth the risk to me. If you find songs/albums that you're really digging, you can go buy them from the store, or buy them directly from Napster, which removes the DRM, and they're yours to keep.

I completely understand why you do it, but I've found a legal way to go. The best part is, you get artist recommendations based on the stuff you listen to the most. I'm serious, check it out. Maybe I'll have to "gift" you a month.

Last edited by Raven-Phile, Tuesday, April 26, 2011 12:41 PM
+0
Tuesday, April 26, 2011 12:41 PM

LostKause said:
My honesty is why I admit what I do.

It's like some great philosophical paradox or something.

If you're honest about being dishonest are you honest or dishonest?

And why does 'honest' not look like a real word when you type it so many times?

+0
Tuesday, April 26, 2011 12:52 PM

Well if the RIAA ever finds his IP address, at least we know that's one case they'll win, since he's running around the Internet admitting it.

+0
Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:07 PM

I figured out that my real issue here is that I haven't found another way to find music that I like. I'm still doing it the old way. I haven't downloaded or bought any new music in a while now.

---

Gonch, that reminded me of a paradoxical phrase that someone once had in their CoasterBuzz signature...

The above statement is true.

The below statement is false.

And my honesty forces me to delete any illegally downloaded music if I decide it's garbage, and buy it if I decide that I like it. I can't stand to listen to the songs I like in low quality, which is what a lot of downloaded music is if you don't pay for it.

---

But what about those restaurants and their price discrimination again? Hey, the local pizza chain here where I live gives two pizzas for the price of one on Tuesdays. It's called "Two For Tuesday". That's kind of an example of what we were talking about a few days ago in this topic. It is a success too, because instead of Tuesday being their slowest day, it is their busiest, so they make up what they would lose by getting more customers.

---


Edited to add - Jeff, I don't have any illegally obtained music on my computer right now, because I buy everything I like, and delete everything I don't. I'd admit to them that I did it that way though.

Last edited by LostKause, Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:11 PM
+0
Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:12 PM

Preaching morals to *me* is stupid

I'm not taking a stand on whether it is "right" or "wrong". I'm telling you it is illegal. That's not a matter of opinion, or up for debate. It simply is*. Most people equate "breaking the law" with "wrong", but there are times when that is not true (c.f. civil disobedience, above.)

(*: that is, unless you could convince a jury that you were not guilty, and in a jury trial I suppose anything is possible.)

And, there is a shorter version of your paradox: "This statement is false."

Edited: if pressed, I would tell you that, in this case, I also think it is wrong. As in, immoral. But, moral frameworks are necessarily relativistic, and in yours, it apparently is not wrong. But, it's still agains the law.

Last edited by Brian Noble, Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:13 PM
+0
Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:30 PM

Well we have finally come to some kind of agreement, Noble. Not a perfect agreement, because I don't find borrowing someone's music to see if I like it to be immoral, even if it is illegal the way I have done it, but it's still some kind of agreement.

It was illegal for homosexual partners to do private things together in certain states prior to 2003. Guilty (PA and FL).

I ran a red light a few days ago, because it hadn't changed in about 5 minutes of me sitting there, and I could plainly see that no traffic or pedestrians were coming. It may have been broken or something. Guilty.

I'm sure there is at least one more... ???

And I am sure that some people here have done a lot worse.

And by definition, honesty is really not about following laws. It's about being truthful or being frank.

Last edited by LostKause, Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:53 PM
+0
Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:58 PM

It's not "borrowing". It's "downloading without the consent of the copyright holder." How long you keep it is immaterial.

And don't for a second try to tell me that copyright law is even remotely on the same plane as anti-sodomy law. Don't. Go. There.

+0
Tuesday, April 26, 2011 2:14 PM

Back to price discrimination for a second. While booking an upcoming Kalahari stay, I decided to browse the whole site, including the day passes, just for kicks. What I found was, they asked for the date you were planning on going. Here's what I found:

Weekday prices are $39/day
Friday prices are $42/day
and the kicker -
Saturday/Sunday shoots up another $3 to $45/day

It all goes along with their room rates. Shouldn't be a shock to anyone.

Now, another thing I found interesting - resort guests can buy a pass to the adventure park (with the sip lines and things) for $19.99, where everyone else pays $29.99.

It all makes sense to me. They'll either get it out of you, or get it out of you. Businesses have to make money to survive, and that seems to be the way to do it.

+0
Wednesday, April 27, 2011 7:11 AM

It's discussions like this that make me glad I only listen to classic rock. I never have to worry about obtaining new music at this point. :)

+0
Wednesday, April 27, 2011 8:05 AM

I listen to bands that allow their fans to tape their shows and distribute them freely amongst themselves. :)

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2019, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...