• Deceptichum
    link
    fedilink
    61 year ago

    ?

    Are you deliberately being thick?

    Valve doesn’t set the prices.

    And more importantly no business is going to charge everyone the low price instead of charging everyone the high price if forced to pick one or the other.

    • @grue
      link
      English
      -41 year ago

      🤷 Still not the regulator’s fault.

        • @grue
          link
          English
          0
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Sure, in the same way it’s the government’s “fault” for removing your option to, say, run a protection racket, or agree to a contract of indentured servitude, or sell baby formula with melamine in it. There are lots of abusive or exploitative business models that the government removes your option to engage in! And the government is right to do it.

          • oo1
            link
            fedilink
            21 year ago

            go price discrimination!

            we should give more companies more market power so they can do it more.

            fucking competetive markets suck - i cant believe all these fucking laws trying to limit monopoly power.

            /s

          • Deceptichum
            link
            fedilink
            01 year ago

            Not at all.

            Offering those less capable of paying, a reduced price isn’t abusive or exploitative.

            There is a huge difference between the things you’ve mentioned and this. You’re being intentionally dishonest at this point and there’s no further point in this discussion.

            • @grue
              link
              English
              01 year ago

              The cost of producing something doesn’t change depending on who you sell it to. Charging anything beyond cost + some reasonable profit margin is unethical profiteering.