Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Anglo Cup Returns
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="el_tk" data-source="post: 39612"><p></p><p></p><p>I understand it. Inferior goods versus normal goods always, or mostly, have a higher price attached to them (in terms of rugby, contract). However, although this is fact, the quality of the goods in comparision can't be set in stone. This is becasue of opinion, since people have different opinions on what makes a good apple pie (or inside centre). Therefore, althoug most normal goods will be higher in quality than inferior in most people views, it is not clear-cut, and there are some exceptions where inferior goods are of a higher quality in the majority of minds, and also a lower price, although not in this case. So although Cox is a Tesco value good, he is only definitely cheaper than a Henson or BOD, and not definitley in quality.</p><p></p><p>It has been a good arguement with you el_tk, but I think it is coming to an end soon. [/b]</p></blockquote><p>I would be very suprised if the Scottish management were not aware of Cox, purely because he is qualified and plays in the GP. Most international teams monitor huge amounts of players before picking a select few. They picked Hinshelwood when he was playing ND1, and Andy Craig.</p><p></p><p>When is an inferior good of higher quality? Seriously.</p><p></p><p>Although I am talking on a Macroeconomical (if that's a word) scale. You can't legislate for each individual's actions but you can predict with a large degree of accuracy how the majority will re-act (i.e. who they will choose out of Cox and BOD)</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
[QUOTE="el_tk, post: 39612"] [b][/b] I understand it. Inferior goods versus normal goods always, or mostly, have a higher price attached to them (in terms of rugby, contract). However, although this is fact, the quality of the goods in comparision can't be set in stone. This is becasue of opinion, since people have different opinions on what makes a good apple pie (or inside centre). Therefore, althoug most normal goods will be higher in quality than inferior in most people views, it is not clear-cut, and there are some exceptions where inferior goods are of a higher quality in the majority of minds, and also a lower price, although not in this case. So although Cox is a Tesco value good, he is only definitely cheaper than a Henson or BOD, and not definitley in quality. It has been a good arguement with you el_tk, but I think it is coming to an end soon. [/b][/quote] I would be very suprised if the Scottish management were not aware of Cox, purely because he is qualified and plays in the GP. Most international teams monitor huge amounts of players before picking a select few. They picked Hinshelwood when he was playing ND1, and Andy Craig. When is an inferior good of higher quality? Seriously. Although I am talking on a Macroeconomical (if that's a word) scale. You can't legislate for each individual's actions but you can predict with a large degree of accuracy how the majority will re-act (i.e. who they will choose out of Cox and BOD) [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Anglo Cup Returns
Top