Parnassah Expo 2014 March 25th-26th

[notanonymous]

Just to add...of course there is chochma, my tayna is that the chochma plus tircha...$1000 sounds like a lot.

[Saver2000]

I disagree.  If you are/were not in IT then I cannot explain.  But if you work, think of the industry that you are in.  Sometimes there is 'chochma' needed.  Here, I think the chochma is minimal. The 'cost' is mostly tircha (applying, huca, mr, finding a broker, etc).

You're getting there. 

I was breaking it down for you. 

Like I said earlier,  some business are knowledge based,  some are skill based,  etc etc. 

Now put that in perspective,  and reread what you wrote.

[Saver2000]

Just to add...of course there is chochma, my tayna is that the chochma plus tircha...$1000 sounds like a lot.

And I think $150 for IT chochma is overpriced.

(But as pg said earlier,  market principles disagree with me. )

[churnbabychurn]

You can't compare $150 an hour of skilled labor to applying for a credit card.
Credit card applications are designed to be exceptionally user friendly. There is no skill involved.
I am not weighing in on whether or not charging 1k to do something on behalf of unsuspecting clients, (that they would probably not be ethically, morally or legally inclined to do on their own,) is right. I'm just saying that you can't compare it to an hour of honest skiled labor.

[notanonymous]

My definition (granted I very well could be wrong) of market principles of supply and demand, is when an informed consumer knows he is being overcharged, but either willingly (or even unwillingly - e.g. gas shortage) makes the purchase. 

eta (in case someone is coming to this discussion late) - and I do not think that is what is occuring here.  Just because they have customers (i.e. demand), that does not, IMO make it right.

[PlatinumGuy]

My definition (granted I very well could be wrong) of market principles of supply and demand

Supply/Demand is objective. If the price was higher than the value there would be competitors offering the same service for a lower price.

Perhaps the explanation is that it's a sketchy business, and thus people aren't interested in competing. That's why garbage collectors get paid more than minimum wage.

[Saver2000]

You can't compare $150 an hour of skilled labor to applying for a credit card.
Credit card applications are designed to be exceptionally user friendly. There is no skill involved.
I am not weighing in on whether or not charging 1k to do something on behalf of unsuspecting clients, (that they would probably not be ethically, morally or legally inclined to do on their own,) is right. I'm just saying that you can't compare it to an hour of honest skiled labor.

Lol. 

And I repeat -  some business are skill based (IT tech) ,  and some are knowledge based (getting 175k MR/$1500 for a credit pull)

[notanonymous]

Supply/Demand is objective. If the price was higher than the value there would be competitors offering the same service for a lower price.

 Perhaps the explanation is that it's a sketchy business, and thus people aren't interested in competing.That's why garbage collectors get paid more than minimum wage.

That I agree with!

How are we disagreeing?

[mow]

Do you know how much money was spent on the booth , I was there it was a double booth which costs 3500 bucks , they had 3 people by the booth which is 13 hours times 3 is 39 which is another 600 bucks , they were giving out coffee for free ehich must have been another 500 dollars for both days so thats 4600 bucks which would take 5 people to just cover the cost of this event
I dont think they made as much money as you guys think they did
I was also told  that they were offering 1.45 for buying amex so they did tell people how much it was worth
and imo anybody that does sign up for this wont and cannot do it themselves so I agree with pg

[yitzf]

You can't compare $150 an hour of skilled labor to applying for a credit card.
Credit card applications are designed to be exceptionally user friendly. There is no skill involved.
I am not weighing in on whether or not charging 1k to do something on behalf of unsuspecting clients, (that they would probably not be ethically, morally or legally inclined to do on their own,) is right. I'm just saying that you can't compare it to an hour of honest skiled labor.

Supply/Demand is objective. If the price was higher than the value there would be competitors offering the same service for a lower price.

Perhaps the explanation is that it's a sketchy business, and thus people aren't interested in competing. That's why garbage collectors get paid more than minimum wage.

The skill here is having access to the 100k and 75k links. AFAIK they aren't generally available. So in essence he has a monopoly because the market is not open.

On one hand there is a skill/knowledge involved and it's not just firing up a laptop and applying, but on the other hand he is charging monopoly rates. If the market were truly competitive then there would be other entrants who would offer higher prices to gain customers and the amount given to the customer would be a lot higher, even to the unsuspecting one who doesn't know better. The reason this unsuspecting customer is getting such a low rate is not because he doesn't know better, rather because there is no competition.

The skill argument is IMO wrong because even in a competitive market people get compensated for their skill. Competition can only drive prices to a point where there is still some profit, and if they weren't getting compensated for their skill they wouldn't be in the business.  Now, in our scenario if there were competitors I would think that they would offer a higher rate of return.

[Saver2000]

@yitzf
This is a cc forum.  So every person here knows how/what/when/where to apply for cc's.

The average person is clueless. 

The business model here isn't just the "skill"  of 100k apps.  It's the basic knowledge of applying for cc's. 

You guys gotta get out more. 

[Saver2000]

@ notanonymous
Can you please explain why IT can't "just be explained to anyone"?

[yitzf]

@yitzf
This is a cc forum.  So every person here knows how/what/when/where to apply for cc's.

The average person is clueless. 

The business model here isn't just the "skill"  of 100k apps.  It's the basic knowledge of applying for cc's. 

You guys gotta get out more.

You are clueless on how to make laundry detergent, does that mean that Wal-Mart could charge you $100 a bottle? They can't because you'll go to another store. You don't have to know how tho make detergent in order to know that it's cheaper in Target.
If there were other people offering this service then the price would be lower, and it isn't, because there is a monopoly and the monopolist is charging monopolist prices. Whether that is wrong or not is a different story, all I'm saying is that the price had very little to do with the actual skill of knowing the CC game.

[Saver2000]

You are clueless on how to make laundry detergent, does that mean that Wal-Mart could charge you $100 a bottle? They can't because you'll go to another store. You don't have to know how tho make detergent in order to know that it's cheaper in Target.
If there were other people offering this service then the price would be lower, and it isn't, because there is a monopoly and the monopolist is charging monopolist prices. Whether that is wrong or not is a different story, all I'm saying is that the price had very little to do with the actual skill of knowing the CC game.

And I disagree. 

The "clients"  have no idea that you're using a 100k app that is very hard to get ahold of. 

Before I ccontinue -  are we on the same page? Are you disagreeing with the fact that signing for cc's is a "knowledge" tthat many people are lacking?
 Or you're just arguing about the monopoly part of it?

[Deal Guy]

To clarify a bit, the girl/woman working there yesterday, (who was a bit unsure of the exact details), told me its 2 amex cards for a total of 175k (but she was clueless which cards they were, and the exact breakdown of the 175k points.) She said they were then buying the points for $1500 at a rate of about 1.45 and keeping 30% while giving back 70%. Apparently see was a bit off, since on a 70/30 ratio, they are giving a rate of 1.22.

[yitzf]

And I disagree. 

The "clients"  have no idea that you're using a 100k app that is very hard to get ahold of. 

Before I ccontinue -  are we on the same page? Are you disagreeing with the fact that signing for cc's is a "knowledge" tthat many people are lacking?
 Or you're just arguing about the monopoly part of it?

I agree that there is skill/knowledge involved, but the question is what price does that skill grant him? Can an IT guy charge $500/hr just because he has some skill? No, but some lawyers can, and you wouldn't say that they are ripping anyone off. The "decider" (as W. would say) is a competitive market. The market won't allow an IT guy to charge $500/hr but will allow some lawyers to. If the CC app market was competitive there is no way he would be getting this much money, he's only getting that because it's a monopoly, not because his skill demands such a price.

[mow]

To clarify a bit, the girl/woman working there yesterday, (who was a bit unsure of the exact details), told me its 2 amex cards for a total of 175k (but she was clueless which cards they were, and the exact breakdown of the 175k points.) She said they were then buying the points for $1500 at a rate of about 1.45 and keeping 30% while giving back 70%. Apparently see was a bit off, since on a 70/30 ratio, they are giving a rate of 1.22.

I asked them and I think there were 2 offers if u just get Amex it was 1500 if u got chase also it was 70/30 something like that

[Saver2000]

I agrethhat there is knowledge involved, but the question is what price does that skill grant him? Can an IT guy charge $500/hr just because he has some skill? No, but some lawyers can, and you wouldn't say that they are ripping anyone off. The "decider" (as W. would say) is a competitive market. The market won't allow an IT guy to charge $500/hr but will allow some lawyers to. If the CC app market was competitive there is no way he would be getting this much money, he's only getting that because it's a monopoly, not because his skill demands such a price.

Correct.  He has a monopoly on the skill.  If you can "aquire"  the skill,  then he won't have a monopoly. 

Part of his skill is being able to apply for 100k apps which are unavailable to the public.

[notanonymous]

@ notanonymous
Can you please explain why IT can't "just be explained to anyone"?

Maybe my words were not so m'duyak.  Of course, anything can be explained.  I feel confident that I can do brain surgery if a doctor would walk me through it.

Al regel achas, I can easily help someone install a simple piece of software.  I would gladly do so for free (while multi-tasking and still making money).  If they do not want to spend their own time doing it (and likely would take them at least a little longer than it would me), then I will do it for them, and charge them.  But I was upfront on them (over)paying me for a simple task.

To configure a Windows Active Directory with DNS, DHCP, Exchange; as well as their Sonic Wall, or Cisco with NAT, VPN to another branch office; to run network cables to 30 home-runs, patch them all down on a patch panel, make it look nice and pretty (and made even within code)....now, can I explain all of that?  Absolutely, I've trained many people.  But I won't tell someone that I'll tell them how to do it, so they can do it themselves.  Not because I was trying to protect my income (i.e. afraid that they will never need me again).  Rather, 1) It would take me longer to explain it, than just do it myself; 2) I can do it much better (i.e. practice makes perfect).

Not necesarrily trying to shtel zich tzu what we were talking about before, just answering your question. 

[yitzf]

Correct.  He has a monopoly on the skill.  If you can "aquire"  the skill,  then he won't have a monopoly. 

Part of his skill is being able to apply for 100k apps which are unavailable to the public.

100%, but you're agreeing that he can charge those prices only because of his monopoly.