Uh oh, Tiered Wars again:

>Using the logic presented if I own a grocery store and know that
>customer A has a family of X number of people I should be able to
>charge them price AX for thier purchases and for customer B that
>has Y number of people in their family I should be able to charge
>them price BY for those same groceries.

Perhaps:

I own a phone company. I charge you a certain base amount for your
ability to use the phone. But, I also know that there are others
that don't have your ability to pay. So, I charge you a "lifeline
access fee" in order for me to reduce what I charge the lower income
group.

Or,

I'm the government. I tax you on your ability to pay. The more you
make, the more of the load you carry.

Point is ... there are certain types of transactions where one group
will underwrite another group.

Look - we can go on and on about tiered vs. flat pricing. There are
arguments in favor of both, and we've done this to death in the
past. We live in a free market society. For each transaction, there
must be two participants that agree to the terms. If you're not
happy with the terms, don't enter into the transaction. But understand
that in some instances, there is justification for one format over the
other.

Regards,


M.