|
Guys AW is sinking. :(!!!!! (Community)
Guys AW is sinking. :(!!!!! // Community
Apr 2, 2002, 7:49pm
AWLDW Dropped 60%
Apr 2, 2002, 7:51pm
It's because Tom hasn't been in the office as much. He must have been the
mastermind of any good things in AW.
Apr 2, 2002, 7:52pm
AW never had a strong stock, ever. I don't think it ever jumped past $5.
--Bowen--
[View Quote]"carlbanks" <virtualcarlbanks at hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3caa2766$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> AWLDW Dropped 60%
>
>
|
Apr 2, 2002, 7:53pm
So AW is safe? *dancin*
[View Quote]"silenced" <nospam at privacy.com> wrote in message
news:3caa2809$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> AW never had a strong stock, ever. I don't think it ever jumped past $5.
>
> --Bowen--
>
> "carlbanks" <virtualcarlbanks at hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3caa2766$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
>
>
|
Apr 2, 2002, 8:07pm
Depends on what you mean by "safe." Finacially? No. Community? Kinda,
but it's deminishing due to the bad business choices of the executives.
Just don't invest too much money into it, you'll be safe until they go
under.. and there's no doubt in my mind that they won't. Bad business
choices means a plunder in users.. which means no business.
Come on AW management. Lower prices to $20-30 a year and advertise. You'll
soon have a great flow of users and money coming in if you do that. I
remember when there used to be 30-40 new cits dialy, now it's done to 5-10.
--Bowen--
[View Quote]"carlbanks" <virtualcarlbanks at hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3caa2865$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> So AW is safe? *dancin*
>
> "silenced" <nospam at privacy.com> wrote in message
> news:3caa2809$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
$5.
>
>
|
Apr 3, 2002, 12:08am
It is a big gamble though, Bowen. But I believe based on past business
decisions of others that I know that this gamble will pay off very well.
Advertising and lowering prices increases demand for the product. Raising
them increases demand for a substitute product. Economics, you gotta love
it.
AWC will have far more to lose if they go this path, but they have a greater
percentage of surviving. Playing it safe never got us to the moon, you
know.
SW Chris
[View Quote]"silenced" <nospam at privacy.com> wrote in message
news:3caa2b99$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Depends on what you mean by "safe." Finacially? No. Community? Kinda,
> but it's deminishing due to the bad business choices of the executives.
>
> Just don't invest too much money into it, you'll be safe until they go
> under.. and there's no doubt in my mind that they won't. Bad business
> choices means a plunder in users.. which means no business.
>
> Come on AW management. Lower prices to $20-30 a year and advertise.
You'll
> soon have a great flow of users and money coming in if you do that. I
> remember when there used to be 30-40 new cits dialy, now it's done to
5-10.
>
> --Bowen--
>
> "carlbanks" <virtualcarlbanks at hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3caa2865$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> $5.
>
>
|
Apr 3, 2002, 12:25am
That is very true. Economics is a game. :) You have to have skill, but
you also have to rely on luck to get you through it. There is no safe way,
but there's a better chance if you try to bring in more people, instead of
alienating those that are already present and are the lifeline of the
community.
I'm not sure that their economics expert is even an expert. Rather just a
friend of theirs, that's just my theory. I think they need to think about
things more carefully, and really examine the effects of what will happen if
they implement something else. Look at past company mistakes, that should
be quite a clear example. From what I've seen, you're very correct Chris.
Lowering prices while advertising increases demand, and increasing prices
increases demand for substitue goods.
Economics was a fun class to take though. :)
--Bowen--
[View Quote]"sw chris" <chrisw10 at nckcn.com> wrote in message
news:3caa6417 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> It is a big gamble though, Bowen. But I believe based on past business
> decisions of others that I know that this gamble will pay off very well.
> Advertising and lowering prices increases demand for the product. Raising
> them increases demand for a substitute product. Economics, you gotta love
> it.
>
> AWC will have far more to lose if they go this path, but they have a
greater
> percentage of surviving. Playing it safe never got us to the moon, you
> know.
>
> SW Chris
>
> "silenced" <nospam at privacy.com> wrote in message
> news:3caa2b99$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
Kinda,
> You'll
> 5-10.
past
>
>
|
Apr 3, 2002, 2:20am
Speaking of economics... can anyone loan me five bucks for lunch tomorrow?
;¬P
Voice of Reason: "Don't give it to him! He'll just blow it on candy!
:¬)
subDelta
[View Quote]"silenced" <nospam at privacy.com> wrote in message
news:3caa67fd$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
That is very true. Economics is a game. :) You have to have skill, but
you also have to rely on luck to get you through it. There is no safe way,
but there's a better chance if you try to bring in more people, instead of
alienating those that are already present and are the lifeline of the
community.
|
I'm not sure that their economics expert is even an expert. Rather just a
friend of theirs, that's just my theory. I think they need to think about
things more carefully, and really examine the effects of what will happen if
they implement something else. Look at past company mistakes, that should
be quite a clear example. From what I've seen, you're very correct Chris.
Lowering prices while advertising increases demand, and increasing prices
increases demand for substitue goods.
Economics was a fun class to take though. :)
--Bowen--
[View Quote]"sw chris" <chrisw10 at nckcn.com> wrote in message
news:3caa6417 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> It is a big gamble though, Bowen. But I believe based on past business
> decisions of others that I know that this gamble will pay off very well.
> Advertising and lowering prices increases demand for the product. Raising
> them increases demand for a substitute product. Economics, you gotta love
> it.
>
> AWC will have far more to lose if they go this path, but they have a
greater
> percentage of surviving. Playing it safe never got us to the moon, you
> know.
>
> SW Chris
>
> "silenced" <nospam at privacy.com> wrote in message
> news:3caa2b99$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
Kinda,
> You'll
> 5-10.
past
>
>
|
Apr 3, 2002, 8:32pm
Smarties!!!! :D
SW Chris
[View Quote]"subdelta" <daniel at att.net> wrote in message
news:3caa8326 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Speaking of economics... can anyone loan me five bucks for lunch tomorrow?
> ;¬P
> Voice of Reason: "Don't give it to him! He'll just blow it on candy!
>
> :¬)
>
> subDelta
>
>
> "silenced" <nospam at privacy.com> wrote in message
> news:3caa67fd$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> That is very true. Economics is a game. :) You have to have skill, but
> you also have to rely on luck to get you through it. There is no safe
way,
> but there's a better chance if you try to bring in more people, instead of
> alienating those that are already present and are the lifeline of the
> community.
>
> I'm not sure that their economics expert is even an expert. Rather just a
> friend of theirs, that's just my theory. I think they need to think about
> things more carefully, and really examine the effects of what will happen
if
> they implement something else. Look at past company mistakes, that should
> be quite a clear example. From what I've seen, you're very correct Chris.
> Lowering prices while advertising increases demand, and increasing prices
> increases demand for substitue goods.
>
> Economics was a fun class to take though. :)
>
> --Bowen--
>
> "sw chris" <chrisw10 at nckcn.com> wrote in message
> news:3caa6417 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
Raising
love
> greater
> Kinda,
executives.
> past
>
>
>
>
|
|