In article <01eb01c39e71$8f7d1c20$7604c518@gollum>, James Fischer
<[log in to unmask]> writes
>Murray McGregor expressed a quaint, almost
>Keynesian view of modern international
>markets:

Suit yourself. I have no wish to get into the relative merits of various
modern and historical economic models. I'm just a beekeeper and not a
powerful intellect. I only raised the dangers of protectionism by
whatever means it arises. Not, in my opinion, a great move for one of
the great exporting nations to say that you have to buy ours but we
won't buy yours. Happens from many directions too, so not particularly
taking a pot shot at the US. I live in the EU which is just as bad. As
for quaint? Well if someone tells me I cant sell my product to them I'm
damn sure I wont buy theirs either. ( Always tinged with the need for
pragmatism.)

>I don't think there was ever any actual "demand"
>for a cheap plastic 2-frame tangential extractor!  :)

Firstly, I was really talking about the cheap metal ones, which if you
sneeze they dent. (Well almost). You may doubt the existence of a market
for the plastic ones, but obviously someone, at least at the outset,
disagreed with you. Perhaps they still do, or perhaps they have a
warehouse full of the things and they are trying to get them sold before
they admit to agreeing with you.
>
>Demand does NOT always drive supply.
>Supply (availability) often creates the "demand".

The vendors must have spotted what they saw as a niche in the market not
being served elsewhere. Otherwise they would not have done it. This is
without any judgement on my part as to the quality of their market
research and the validity of the decision they made. They thought they
spotted a gap in the market so moved to fill it. Right or wrong? I don't
pretend to have the answer.
>
>In this case, I'd guess that a customer base that
>is doomed to suffer from universal buyer's remorse
>will make for a very short period of "demand",
>followed by complaints, demands for free replacement
>parts and refunds, and an eventual withdrawal of the
>product from the retailer's catalog.

Me too.

>Competition among makers of legitimate products
>drives prices down to a "minimum".  In order to
>undercut everyone else, the new market entrant
>is forced to offer a deliberately shoddy product.

Not necessarily so. They could come in on an innovation or point of
difference. I just bought an expensive extractor from NZ, a decision
entirely based on a point of difference, from a relatively new maker who
had never sent one to Europe before. It is not a type exactly as
available in the mainstream market. Niche market for sure, but adequate
for this new manufacturer. The quality is impeccable.

>While it is true that everyone would like to pay less
>for everything, one need go no further than the nearest
>Wal-Mart to see the end result of seeking the "lowest
>price" as one's sole goal.  The result is "landfill merchandise"
>shoddy crap that barely works, breaks with ease, and has
>a lifespan that can be measured in weeks or months.

Which is precisely why, when I turn something, say like an interesting
looking electrical product, upside down, and see the 'Made in China'
sticker on the base I generally return it to the shelf and dismiss the
idea. It has to be something not available elsewhere AND look robust
enough before I will take it.

>Pool your money, and set up a shared honey house.
>Better yet, join a local beekeeping association,
>and never lack for places to extract your honey
>and friends to help you do it.

My main reason for suggesting the best extractor your money could buy
(and in this I am also addressing Robin Dartington's post) is that you
can often find that what looks adequate today is not so tomorrow.

Main reasons are:

1. Lack of robustness can lead to an early need for replacement.
2. It can be almost worthless if you decide you have had enough and want
to sell up. Not normally the case with quality.
3. Beekeeping does tend to be a bit like Topsy. It grows and grows. 2
hives today........but how many in 5 years,...... 10 years? Getting
something barely adequate today to save 100 bucks is likely to prove a
false economy. (Been there, got the tee-shirt and the shed full of crap
to vouch for it!)
Point 3 is the most important, unless you are utterly sure your
hobby/trade is not going to grow.

The pooling is indeed a good idea, but it would require a good set of
group rules to prevent ill feeling arising through some thinking they do
not get a fair crack of the whip. Associations often suffer from having
'inner circles' who favour themselves over others, and may hog the use
of a pooled machine before the 'outer circle' get access to it.

Make the decision based on the best information at the time. Don't cut
any corners you do not need to cut. Keep one eye on the long view of
just where this may be leading.

Murray
--
Murray McGregor

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::