3 ms·
I'm not going to dispute your point that the lottery would be less likely to favor people with more free time compared to the queue, but I don't see why a compa
by nybble41 7y ago
I'm not going to dispute your point that the lottery would be less likely to favor people with more free time compared to the queue, but I don't see why a company would care about that. Keep in mind that the context was "get the latest iPhone on launch day", not something with significant audience interaction like a concert. Keeping prices low to generate hype and make themselves look popular is one thing but the goal is still to attract people with money and connections in order to sell more product and build the brand.
I'm not convinced this is about equality, either. The time-intensive approach disfavors the lower-middle class the most; on the <em>very</em> low end of the income scale you have a lot of time on your hands on account of not having a job, but for that reason probably can't afford the latest iPhone even at a scarcity-inducing discount. Above a certain point you have enough money to determine your own working hours and can afford to spend time waiting in line for something you really want.
- mandelbrotwurst 7y agoYeah, sorry, I didn't follow the thread carefully enough and had the context wrong / thought you were discussing the concert situation. I may be wrong here, but I still think a middle income person is more likely to be willing to spend time in line than a high income person - maybe not as much because they actually _have_ more time available, but rather because they don't value their time as highly, see it as "cheaper" to spend it waiting in line, or are simply more accustomed to being made to wait in lines. Conversely, if I am very rich, I may very well be able to afford waiting in lines, but I may also be more averse to doing so.