Paintball is too cheap . . ?

[Buddha 3]

tournament ballers will use alot more paint at current price therfore providing more profit to the paintball company. What you basically written above does nothing to help the industry but just trying to balance profits because you got rid of the tournament ballers. Surely it would be alot of hassle for what i can see as no benefit

By this statement you prove that you really have no idea of the profits made per case of paint. Which is fine, but it gives you a handicap in a discussion like this. I do know the amount of money that's made on a case of paint. The profits made on the cases of paint sold to the discount crew are usually in the single digits. Upping the prices would most definitely help the industry.
The biggest problem is getting everybody that sells paint on board.

 

[Tartan Blaster]

The average US wage is substantially lower than there European equivalent. Even though Gas prices might be lower, that doesn't mean they have a larger disposable income. Throw in an extremely weak economy (in recession), their insurance / welfare system and then the problems in the housing market and the average US person is definetly feeling the pinch.

I've played in the US on a number of occasions, and whilst paint may appear cheaper, it really isn't.


Oh and Pringle, stop dragging down the collective P8ntballer IQ. Do you actually believe You-Tube is representative of the US? Do you know how many boxes of paint are sold to Tournament Players compared to sites? Do you actually know anyone in the wholesale side of paint?


Anyway, the idea here (I think), is not to start charging people 70/80 quid a case, but a more sensible level of 40-45 for novice teams and players. At that price there's juice in it for everyone, without fcuking over the retailer.

sorry but just saying you have played in the US is not evidence of your comments on their economic state.
Firstly the USA despite their currently weak market growth (though not yet recessive as you incorrectly claim) is still the largest economy in the world with GDP and income levels ranking between 2nd to 6th in world rankings (depending on source) far outstripping any large european nation thus again proving you statement that their incomes are lower to be completely false.
Therefore regardless of what you claim, paint is cheaper in the US both in real terms and relatively to average income.

Yet though I couldn't bear to see incorrect information being taken as fact, I don't necessarily disagree with your arguement. This is because paint is only cheaper in America because they have a much larger market, allowing greater production = lower overheads etc. etc. Therefore to argue that our prices are not too low or even too high because americans pay less is retarded when our market is so much smaller.

However though there may or may not be a problem with UK paintball prices I don't think there is anything that can be done about it. If paintball companies are too stupid to set paintball prices on which they can make a profit on then they don't deserve to make a profit. If you say this effects paintbal developement well frankly I wouldn't want the sport to be developed by people making those kinds of business decisions anyway. Basically if paintball prices are set incorrectly competition will either drive them lower to a correct level or badly managed companies will go out of business leaving room for better companies to take their place. Any involvement by the consumers or paintball community though probably well intentioned would only serve to skew competition resulting in artificially high prices or the entrenchment of poor business either way the consumer is screwed.

So in conclusion paintball IS cheaper in America but only due to its bigger market therefore paint should be more expensive in the UK. Yet any arguing on this topic is pointless anyway as any intervention would more harm than good. So all we can do is hope that paintball businesses are competent or start creating our own companies to put them out of business.


Disclaimer: no offence to any party intended, I admit that I didn't read all of the 2nd and 3rd pages of this thread so if there are any overlaps etc apologies, Stongle I agree with your arguements but my only problem was with your evidence.
references to my rebuttal of stongles claims http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita (sorry its wikipedia but I don't have time to get better sources information looks correct)

 

[stongle]

sorry but just saying you have played in the US is not evidence of your comments on their economic state.
Firstly the USA despite their currently weak market growth (though not yet recessive as you incorrectly claim) is still the largest economy in the world with GDP and income levels ranking between 2nd to 6th in world rankings (depending on source) far outstripping any large european nation thus again proving you statement that their incomes are lower to be completely false.
Therefore regardless of what you claim, paint is cheaper in the US both in real terms and relatively to average income.

Yet though I couldn't bear to see incorrect information being taken as fact, I don't necessarily disagree with your arguement. This is because paint is only cheaper in America because they have a much larger market, allowing greater production = lower overheads etc. etc. Therefore to argue that our prices are not too low or even too high because americans pay less is retarded when our market is so much smaller.

However though there may or may not be a problem with UK paintball prices I don't think there is anything that can be done about it. If paintball companies are too stupid to set paintball prices on which they can make a profit on then they don't deserve to make a profit. If you say this effects paintbal developement well frankly I wouldn't want the sport to be developed by people making those kinds of business decisions anyway. Basically if paintball prices are set incorrectly competition will either drive them lower to a correct level or badly managed companies will go out of business leaving room for better companies to take their place. Any involvement by the consumers or paintball community though probably well intentioned would only serve to skew competition resulting in artificially high prices or the entrenchment of poor business either way the consumer is screwed.

So in conclusion paintball IS cheaper in America but only due to its bigger market therefore paint should be more expensive in the UK. Yet any arguing on this topic is pointless anyway as any intervention would more harm than good. So all we can do is hope that paintball businesses are competent or start creating our own companies to put them out of business.


Disclaimer: no offence to any party intended, I admit that I didn't read all of the 2nd and 3rd pages of this thread so if there are any overlaps etc apologies, Stongle I agree with your arguements but my only problem was with your evidence.
references to my rebuttal of stongles claims http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita (sorry its wikipedia but I don't have time to get better sources information looks correct)

GDP / PPP is not necessarily a reference to disposable income as it makes the assumption that similar baskets of goods have the same or equal value in each country. I should have been more explicit in my post, especially when you take into account the demograph of the average player....but ho hum. Well done Wiki-genius.

 

[Tartan Blaster]

I made my apologies for using wikipedia as a source but at least I gave one. I do relize the difference in GDP and disposable income and I only used GDP as that was the only error in your evidence. GDP is an indication of income which was what you claimed incorrectly to be lower in the US. I was hoping that with this one correction people would be able to calculate from general knowledge that since tax levels are lower in the US and disposable income = income - tax that the US average disposable income is higher than that in europe.
But then maybe I should have been explicit instead of taking it for granted that people knew the definition of disposable income. Which by the way (since we seem to have strayed into personal attacks remarkably quickly) neither do you as gas prices and insurance payments have no connection to disposable income as you seem to imply

Even though Gas prices might be lower, that doesn't mean they have a larger disposable income

but with Discretionary income.

 

[stongle]

I made my apologies for using wikipedia as a source but at least I gave one. I do relize the difference in GDP and disposable income and I only used GDP as that was the only error in your evidence. GDP is an indication of income which was what you claimed incorrectly to be lower in the US. I was hoping that with this one correction people would be able to calculate from general knowledge that since tax levels are lower in the US and disposable income = income - tax that the US average disposable income is higher than that in europe.
But then maybe I should have been explicit instead of taking it for granted that people knew the definition of disposable income. Which by the way (since we seem to have strayed into personal attacks remarkably quickly) neither do you as gas prices and insurance payments have no connection to disposable income as you seem to imply

but with Discretionary income.

I wasn't insulting you, nor was it meant. I realise that I had not explanied fully enough (so appreciate your candor as my defination was slightly errr shall we say "Daily Mail"), lest we enter into an economic debate (not necessarily relevent to the price of panitballs). The fact it is, "discretionary" income is a much more complicaed number to define, than GDP and the tax levels etc.

My reason to draw a parallel with the US and cost of paint is that to the recreational player, paint is often £80-$100 a box. Thats even to walk-on players.

This will get extremely complicated quickly, and I'd happily debate my intepretation of the US economy (or discretionary income level of the average US baller) with you all day long, but I think we should get back to the point in hand.

All good??

 

[Tartan Blaster]

thats fine by me

 

[pringle]

I just asking the questions or pointing out my points of view from my opinions i not trying to say anyone is right or wrong and in somthing like this it very hard too make a decision between 2 people never mind 90 paintballers.

 

[Devrij]

Any involvement by the consumers or paintball community though probably well intentioned would only serve to skew competition resulting in artificially high prices or the entrenchment of poor business either way the consumer is screwed.

Best point I've seen so far. It's a complex system, and we can't fix it by just changing one variable. It's like trying to cure cancer with a monkey wrench