On 07/12/06, Ronald W. Frazier wrote:
>> We flew to the moon in hardware produced by the lowest bidder who met
>> the specifications. A modern, efficient production facility may
>> provide better quality at lower cost than one which is poorly
>> maintained. No one here is recommending flea-market media, but
>> excellent manufacturers make high-quality discs at reasonable prices.
> My main point was that some of the name brands, maybe even my Maxell's
> (don't know for sure), are manufactured by different facilities at
> different times in a contract manufacturing style. This makes it very
> difficult to control the quality of the production process. Not only
> that, if the manufacturing facility changes, the quality may change,
> so you don't have dependability for the brand. Also, the lowest bidder
> usually means the crummiest product. There is no possible way that a
> product with a substantially lower price can meet the same standards
> as one with a mid to upper price, assuming the higher priced ones put
> the extra money into R&D and production facilities.
That is not a reasonable assumption in this market.
A facility can be producing disks which are technically identical, but
by the time packaging, warehousing, advertising and distribution costs
are taken into account, one CD could be sold retail at four times the
price of another.
[log in to unmask]