CPAPtalk.com

Stom wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 7:50 am

ChicagoGranny wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 6:14 am

Actually, supply creates demand.

If that were true, then these boxes and boxes of VHS tapes I have are going to be worth a fortune!!!

Supply, on its own, does not create demand.

Trade you floppy 5 1/4" disks for them! Jim

I usually have two eggs, but today, only one--nested in a thick slice of sweet Hawaiian bread.
(Yes, the old toad in a hole)
That, and two slices of crispy bacon.
That hit the spot right nicely!
Washed it down with a diet Dew.

Fetou wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:40 am

Sleep apnea as a condition creates demand for treatment. The medical device developers have responded with research and product development to supply the demand.

That is not at all the case for CPAP. There was no demand. Sufferers didn't even know what sleep apnea was. The supply side (doctors and medical researchers) developed a diagnosis. Then medical researchers (Sullivan et al) developed CPAP. At this point, there was no demand for CPAP. The supply side had to create it.

I think you may be thinking about the replacement market for CPAP. But, the replacement market would not be there if the supply side had not created the original market.

Fetou wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:40 am

Without any announcement or instructions, you have buyers and sellers learning how to form and interact within grey/black markets through a third party listing service, using certain key words and methods to avoid outside interference. It's a beautiful thing!

Now, you are talking! Your first paragraph scared me that you were a follower of Keynes or that scalawag Krugman.

Stom wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 8:18 am

ChicagoGranny wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 8:07 am

Your example actually is an example of supply creating demand. None of us were sitting around in the early seventies wishing for VHS tapes. But, the Victor Company of Japan was busy developing VHS. They introduced (supplied) them to the market in 76/77 and created a huge demand.

It think you are using a definition of supply that includes a successful **marketing** campaign.

Do you get a fizzy feeling deep inside when you start to argue with someone? cuz you seem to really get off on doing so.

palerider wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:03 am

Do you get a fizzy feeling deep inside when you start to argue with someone? cuz you seem to really get off on doing so.

Possibly similar to the feeling you get when you post a terse statement telling someone they are wrong rather than being positive and providing the additional information they need. It's something you do pretty often.

Like I said earlier, it can sometimes easier to spot your flaws in others than to admit them in yourself.

Stom wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:14 am

palerider wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:03 am

Do you get a fizzy feeling deep inside when you start to argue with someone? cuz you seem to really get off on doing so.

Possibly similar to the feeling you get when you post a terse statement telling someone they are wrong rather than being positive and providing the additional information they need. It's something you do pretty often.

Like I said earlier, it can sometimes easier to spot your flaws in others than to admit them in yourself.

Oh, I know my flaws. But, at least I tend to know what I'm talking about when I post on technical matters.

palerider wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:24 am

Oh, I know my flaws. But, at least I tend to know what I'm talking about when I post on technical matters.

Indeed you do. Yet here you aren't calling me out on a technical matter. You are calling me out for being argumentative. You are argumentative, but because you consider yourself right you don't seem to think of it that way. Note that you haven't even claimed I was wrong about the supply drives demand topic -- it's actually something **economists** disagree about. So I'd say you are just calling me out for the sake of it -- argumentatively calling me out for being argumentative.

In the past, you called me out for speculating about what you know based on what you wrote, calling it arrogant, yet that is exactly what you were doing in this speculation: "Do you get a fizzy feeling deep inside when you start to argue with someone? cuz you seem to really get off on doing so. "

So, please, if I get a factual detail wrong, correct me. But don't be a hypocrite. Don't call me out for being like you.

Stom wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:44 am

So, please, if I get a factual detail wrong, correct me. But don't be a hypocrite. Don't call me out for being like you.

I'm suppose I should be honored to think that you consider yourself "like me", after all, imitation is said to be the sincerest form of flattery... But, unlike you, I generally know when *not* to comment on something.

palerider wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 1:01 pm

But, unlike you, I generally know when *not* to comment on something.

He says, continuing to comment on something.

Two items which had insane demand, but very limited supply:
Beanie Babies and Miatas.
Supply did indeed drive demand--not by ample supply--but by SHORTAGES.
It is suspected that in both cases the shortage was INTENTIONAL.
Usually, marketing is the active factor, keyed by an oversupply.
I guess the shortages could have been a marketing gimmick.

chunkyfrog wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 1:26 pm

Two items which had insane demand, but very limited supply:
Beanie Babies and Miatas.
Supply did indeed drive demand--not by ample supply--but by SHORTAGES.
It is suspected that in both cases the shortage was INTENTIONAL.
Usually, marketing is the active factor, keyed by an oversupply.
I guess the shortages could have been a marketing gimmick.

Humans are hardwired to respond to scarcity, whether or not it's rational to respond that way. Marketers know this and try to manipulate us based on this psychology. I mean it makes sense to respond to scarce resources we need like water, but Beanie Babies, not so much... Remember the fist fights over Cabbage Patch dolls? :-O

A lot of people thought they would make their fortunes hoarding Beanie Babies...

Actually, I was thinking about CPK's, but had a senior moment.

chunkyfrog wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 1:26 pm

Two items which had insane demand, but very limited supply:
Beanie Babies and Miatas.
Supply did indeed drive demand--not by ample supply--but by SHORTAGES.
It is suspected that in both cases the shortage was INTENTIONAL.
Usually, marketing is the active factor, keyed by an oversupply.
I guess the shortages could have been a marketing gimmick.

Smart, Honest Politicians, Lawyers, Judges, no shortage of the other kind, you get what you put up with! Jim

ChicagoGranny wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:08 am

That is not at all the case for CPAP. There was no demand. Sufferers didn't even know what sleep apnea was. The supply side (doctors and medical researchers) developed a diagnosis. Then medical researchers (Sullivan et al) developed CPAP. At this point, there was no demand for CPAP. The supply side had to create it.

I think you may be thinking about the replacement market for CPAP. But, the replacement market would not be there if the supply side had not created the original market.

Indeed, my focus was definitely on secondary markets, which are derivative of the primary market and the innovation/product development itself. I also did not know that the development of the CPAP was so recent. 1980, that's crazy. To be fair, it seems the diagnosis existed for about 15 years prior to the treatment. It is true that people would not even have known what they wanted/needed to do about it. That is the glory of innovation.

ChicagoGranny wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:08 am

Fetou wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:40 am

Without any announcement or instructions, you have buyers and sellers learning how to form and interact within grey/black markets through a third party listing service, using certain key words and methods to avoid outside interference. It's a beautiful thing!

Now, you are talking! Your first paragraph scared me that you were a follower of Keynes or that scalawag Krugman.

I always preferred the logic and intuitiveness of microeconomics, particularly when presuming the use of a currency of relatively fixed supply with more than a fiat standing behind it. More logical real interest rates, more logical savings rates, etc.

chunkyfrog wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 03, 2018 1:43 pm

Actually, I was thinking about CPK's, but had a senior moment.

Chunky frog....thanks for keeping it light and making me snicker!