4 ms·

It would be really great if they sold these such that one purchase could cover the cost of one for charity. It would be even better if there was enough demand t

by ics 12y ago

It would be really great if they sold these such that one purchase could cover the cost of one for charity. It would be even better if there was enough demand to drive the production cost down further.

keithpeter 12y ago
Yup - I was thinking just that. I could use one of these in the yard as a writing/craft space and would be happy to pay enough for one to be donated to UNHCR.
justin66 12y ago
> It would be really great if they sold these such that one purchase could cover the cost of one for charity. No, absolutely not. This is the same mistake the one laptop per child people made. Just sell the shit out of them to everyone who can use one. Economies of scale will bring the price down. The "buy two, get one!" approach deters people from buying them and shoots economies of scale in the head.
- ics 12y ago
  Depending on how much they cost as well as how much IKEA wants to profit from their sale, it could be well within their reach to charge (for example) Americans what one would expect for an IKEA garden shed, writer's shed, whatever you want to call it. If you search prefab outdoor sheds on Sears, you'll see that prices vary from around $300 to $2000 depending on size and materials and taking sale prices into account. One advantage IKEA has is that they thrive on people buying in to their systems, even when it's not necessarily cheaper than the alternative. That can be attributed to better design, integration/continuity (i.e. "everything just goes well together"), or just shopper's fatigue after a day of wandering through an IKEA store. How much would you be willing to pay for it? That's the only question IKEA needs an answer. If the can sell it for cost x 2 without an average IKEA shopper batting an eye then they're golden. Whether they want to try squeezing a profit in there is up to them but by no means necessary. They get publicity and a new product line. To address what you've said about OLPC, I don't think it's a good comparison at all. Problems with the OLPC in this case: huge restructuring due to the economy, never intended for consumers, and in an already massive product field (PCs > Laptops > Netbooks). Still, the Give 1 Get 1 campaign netted 83,500 sales. That's pretty good, considering the cost was $400 in the same year that the MacBook Air became available for $1800 (which people thought was pretty high then). How many of those people expected to actually use their OLPC? How many people do you think would buy an IKEA shed just for it to sit around and make them feel charitable or something?
- neindanke 12y ago
  > No, absolutely not. This is the same mistake the one laptop per child people made. No absolutely not. The mistake the OLPC people made was trying to make people believe that throwing underpowered overdesigned overpriced laptops at kids would solve any problem other than providing employment to Nicky Negroponte and his gang.

by ics 12y ago

keithpeter 12y ago

Yup - I was thinking just that. I could use one of these in the yard as a writing/craft space and would be happy to pay enough for one to be donated to UNHCR.

justin66 12y ago

> It would be really great if they sold these such that one purchase could cover the cost of one for charity. No, absolutely not. This is the same mistake the one laptop per child people made. Just sell the shit out of them to everyone who can use one. Economies of scale will bring the price down. The "buy two, get one!" approach deters people from buying them and shoots economies of scale in the head.

ics 12y ago
Depending on how much they cost as well as how much IKEA wants to profit from their sale, it could be well within their reach to charge (for example) Americans what one would expect for an IKEA garden shed, writer's shed, whatever you want to call it. If you search prefab outdoor sheds on Sears, you'll see that prices vary from around $300 to $2000 depending on size and materials and taking sale prices into account. One advantage IKEA has is that they thrive on people buying in to their systems, even when it's not necessarily cheaper than the alternative. That can be attributed to better design, integration/continuity (i.e. "everything just goes well together"), or just shopper's fatigue after a day of wandering through an IKEA store. How much would you be willing to pay for it? That's the only question IKEA needs an answer. If the can sell it for cost x 2 without an average IKEA shopper batting an eye then they're golden. Whether they want to try squeezing a profit in there is up to them but by no means necessary. They get publicity and a new product line. To address what you've said about OLPC, I don't think it's a good comparison at all. Problems with the OLPC in this case: huge restructuring due to the economy, never intended for consumers, and in an already massive product field (PCs > Laptops > Netbooks). Still, the Give 1 Get 1 campaign netted 83,500 sales. That's pretty good, considering the cost was $400 in the same year that the MacBook Air became available for $1800 (which people thought was pretty high then). How many of those people expected to actually use their OLPC? How many people do you think would buy an IKEA shed just for it to sit around and make them feel charitable or something?
neindanke 12y ago
> No, absolutely not. This is the same mistake the one laptop per child people made. No absolutely not. The mistake the OLPC people made was trying to make people believe that throwing underpowered overdesigned overpriced laptops at kids would solve any problem other than providing employment to Nicky Negroponte and his gang.