HP3000-L Archives

May 1999, Week 3

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jeff Woods <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Jeff Woods <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 17 May 1999 22:58:02 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
At 5/17/99 01:45 PM , Wirt Atmar wrote:
>Gavin writes:
>
>> Getting back to the product/customer thing, many times people don't
>>  realize exactly what the product is in a transaction.  For example:
>>
>>  In a pay-per-view TV operation, the product is the movie/television
>>  program, and you would be the customer, paying to watch that program.
>>
>>  In a commercial television operation however, you are not the customer.
>>  The customer is the advertiser, and the product is your attention which
>>  the television station is selling to the advertiser.
>>
>>  This leads to a fundamental law:  In any transaction, if you are not a
>>  paying customer then beware, for *you* may be the product that is being
>>  sold :-)
>
>That's actually a very clear, very cogent, very sage explanation -- that
>should be read enough times to let it fully sink in.

I agree totally!  I think that's the point of "TANSTAAFL."  ;)

P.S.  Ordinarily, I'd snip most of the quote, but I think it's significant
enough that it's worth seeing and reading another time.
--
Jeff Woods
[log in to unmask]  [PGP key available here via finger]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2