Author: Mark Young
Date: 17:26:53 06/29/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 29, 1998 at 13:46:43, Fernando Villegas wrote: >On June 29, 1998 at 02:33:49, Mark Young wrote: > >>On June 28, 1998 at 17:19:27, Fernando Villegas wrote: >> >>>Hi all: >>>I am sure nobody of you guys is going to argue against my new "preliminary" >>>conclusion: probably I was in state on deep drukness when I wrote about my >>>preliminaty conclusions. Yes, it seems I forgot some simple maths to begin with. >>>But even so, on the wrong ground and with thewrong reasosn I still have the >>>feeling this industry is facing very hard times. Too much products, too little >>>the market. I would love to know -but I doubt they are goig to tell us nothing, >>>of course- what programmers thinks of this, whcih has been his results, hgow >>>good or bad the business they begun, how much they sold, etc. Sure, we'll never >>>know. >>>Fernando >> >>I don’t know why you look on this as a bad thing, if your conclusions are right. >>If there are too many products out, that’s because someone thinks they can make >>money in the current market place. This also has the effect of keeping prices >>low and the quality high. >>I can buy today a much better program then I could 5 years ago at the same or >>cheaper price. If this is the sad state of affaires the chess programming market >>place is in. I will take it. > > > >Hi Mark: >Well, in this issue I think I am right at least this time, not you. Let me >explain: in the first place, in this or in any industry there is a difference >between what the entepreneurs want to get or believe they will get and the >results they finnally get. So, the fact that a lot of people has begun a >business in chess programming does not means it is a healthy busines at all. The >economy of every country and in any area of economy is full of new adventures >that goes wrong. That's the core of free enterprise after all. In any time a lot >of people makes wrong calculations or does not calculate nothing or are badly >guided by changeable facts or just they push forward without too much >reasonning. And then there is people that begin a business because they hace >powerfull sychological reasons, such as the simple pleasure they get from his >craft or business, the reputation they seek, etc, and so they are willing to >riks a failure. The abundance of programmer trying his hand in this is not a >test of a healthy industry and so is not a refutation of my feeling. In the >second place, Mark, I cannot consider good thing to consummers the fact they can >take advantage because excesive competition keeps prices very low. And are they >so low? I think the real benefice is to get reasonable prices that also gives >the producer the oportunity to keep in business and keep himself being a >competitor inside the business, or they will disappear and then the guy that >survives wil take revenge. >The problem here is that prices are not low, but even not being low are not >enoguh to keep people in business. I insist that in this matter the only valid >opinion is from programmers dedicated to this business, but we are not going to >get it. Nevertheless, trhere are some facts that are contrary to yoiur idea we, >customers, are living in the best of the worlds. The case of Hirsch, Kittinger >-that it seem does not poduces his own software anymore, but as employee of >Sierra-, Martyn Bryant, Johan de Konning etc and the demise of one magazine >after other, one tournamebt after another, is a sample and sign that things are >are getting more difficult in the side of the suppliers of everything althought >not yet in the side of consummers. I suppose that in the end, as in any >industry, just a few will survive and so the great diversity of products you >mention, will disappear. Any case, I would like to be wrong in this as in may >other issues. I want the same than you, diversity and affordable prices. I don >want to see the commercial death on any of theses talented guys. >Happy week end >Fernando I find it hard to follow your logic. You may have based your conclusion too much on feelings. When you use the term excessive competition, I wonder do you mean excessive competition for the programmers you know or like, What do you mean? If Ed, or Amir, or Lang, you name the chess programmer, can not compete in the market for what ever reason, and have to fold up shop, that does not mean that the chess market place has fallen on hard times. As long as there are new people and new ideas and better products the market will grow. You seem to want to shield the more established chess programmers from the competition of the market place. This would not be a good idea. They need the competition. Without it they will be content to slow down their development and sit on their past products, because they do not fear that someone else may come out with a better product, and steal their market share. What you see as unhealthy, I see as a growing and healthy and dynamic market place. You do not look at a market place by looking at individual companies or programmers. You look at it as a whole. “Did the whole make more money last year?” “Has the pie grown?” Or even “Have more programs been sold?“ You can’t look at it as, “Has Ed’s or Amir’s or Lang’s piece of the pie gotten smaller?” As long as the pie is getting bigger we are all benefiting in some degree. You can’t be subjective when considering what’s good for the market place, but even if you are, overall growth of the market place is still good even for those that don’t benefit immediately. As long as the Programmers can maintain a viable business in the meantime, there will be more potential customers that can be won over in the future to make them stronger. And as for the rest, the nature of the market is survival of the fittest after all.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.