3 ms·

They should raise their prices. A lot. So the people who value it the most get tickets. This is not an ideal solution but it's much better than the current one

They should raise their prices. A lot. So the people who value it the most get tickets. This is not an ideal solution but it's much better than the current one.

lutusp 14y ago
> They should raise their prices. A lot. So the people who value it the most get tickets. The problem with raising prices should be obvious -- it preferentially selects wealthier attendees, not necessarily those who "value it the most". > This is not an ideal solution but it's much better than the current one. I don't think you've thought your position through. All raising prices achieves is to limit attendance to those who didn't care about the high price.
- derefr 14y ago
  How about pricing it at "two months' salary", like the diamond industry? ;)
- xenophanes 14y ago
  You "don't think you've thought your position through" despite me predicting the complaint you made and pre-including an acknowledgement of the problem? The fact is -- contrary to your claims, compatible with mine -- raising prices does both. It slants things towards people who value it more in dollars. People get a higher score for this both by valuing WWDC more and by valuing dollars less. That is better than random. Next time leave out the meta discussion insults. Note also that, "if demand exceeds supply, raise prices" is basic economics and standard advice on HN for many other things. e.g. if you're a freelancer with too many people trying to hire you, patio11 would say to raise prices. you would not then reply saying he didn't think things through because all that is going to accomplish is having price-insensitive clients rather than good clients. EDIT and how many people go to WWDC as a hobby? how many are really price insensitive? a lot of them, even if they have money, want to get business value exceeding the ticket price, or they will not go. filtering by who can get the most business value by attending would not please certain people with certain egalitarian mindsets, but would still actually be way better than random. lots of people look price insensitive because the business value for them attending is $25,000 or whatever -- far more than the ticket price. but that isn't actually price insensitivity and it's a good thing to use a system that makes sure those people get to attend.
  - lutusp 14y ago
    > Note also that, "if demand exceeds supply, raise prices" is basic economics and standard advice on HN for many other things. Yes, if the point is to maximize profit. If you have any other goal in mind, then maybe it's not the best strategy. For example, if you want diverse attendance at a conference, raising the prices to what the market will bear may not be the best approach. > ... you would not then reply saying he didn't think things through because all that is going to accomplish is having price-insensitive clients rather than good clients. And? Where's the counterargument? > and how many people go to WWDC as a hobby? Feel free to change the topic. > Next time leave out the meta discussion insults. It's only insulting if you've thought your position through. Clearly you haven't.
    - xenophanes 14y ago
      So you repeat the same insult. You're a troll and should be banned. Flagged.
  - rdouble 14y ago
    how many people go to WWDC as a hobby? how many are really price insensitive? A lot of indie developers go to WWDC. I would go so far as to say they are the mainstay audience for the conference. Raising the prices significantly would mean the conference would lose most of their main audience.

They should raise their prices. A lot. So the people who value it the most get tickets. This is not an ideal solution but it's much better than the current one.

lutusp 14y ago

> They should raise their prices. A lot. So the people who value it the most get tickets. The problem with raising prices should be obvious -- it preferentially selects wealthier attendees, not necessarily those who "value it the most". > This is not an ideal solution but it's much better than the current one. I don't think you've thought your position through. All raising prices achieves is to limit attendance to those who didn't care about the high price.

derefr 14y ago
How about pricing it at "two months' salary", like the diamond industry? ;)
xenophanes 14y ago
You "don't think you've thought your position through" despite me predicting the complaint you made and pre-including an acknowledgement of the problem? The fact is -- contrary to your claims, compatible with mine -- raising prices does both. It slants things towards people who value it more in dollars. People get a higher score for this both by valuing WWDC more and by valuing dollars less. That is better than random. Next time leave out the meta discussion insults. Note also that, "if demand exceeds supply, raise prices" is basic economics and standard advice on HN for many other things. e.g. if you're a freelancer with too many people trying to hire you, patio11 would say to raise prices. you would not then reply saying he didn't think things through because all that is going to accomplish is having price-insensitive clients rather than good clients. EDIT and how many people go to WWDC as a hobby? how many are really price insensitive? a lot of them, even if they have money, want to get business value exceeding the ticket price, or they will not go. filtering by who can get the most business value by attending would not please certain people with certain egalitarian mindsets, but would still actually be way better than random. lots of people look price insensitive because the business value for them attending is $25,000 or whatever -- far more than the ticket price. but that isn't actually price insensitivity and it's a good thing to use a system that makes sure those people get to attend.
- lutusp 14y ago
  > Note also that, "if demand exceeds supply, raise prices" is basic economics and standard advice on HN for many other things. Yes, if the point is to maximize profit. If you have any other goal in mind, then maybe it's not the best strategy. For example, if you want diverse attendance at a conference, raising the prices to what the market will bear may not be the best approach. > ... you would not then reply saying he didn't think things through because all that is going to accomplish is having price-insensitive clients rather than good clients. And? Where's the counterargument? > and how many people go to WWDC as a hobby? Feel free to change the topic. > Next time leave out the meta discussion insults. It's only insulting if you've thought your position through. Clearly you haven't.
  - xenophanes 14y ago
    So you repeat the same insult. You're a troll and should be banned. Flagged.
- rdouble 14y ago
  how many people go to WWDC as a hobby? how many are really price insensitive? A lot of indie developers go to WWDC. I would go so far as to say they are the mainstay audience for the conference. Raising the prices significantly would mean the conference would lose most of their main audience.