View Single Post
Old 11-13-2012, 07:44 AM   #398
PatNY
Zennist
PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
PatNY's Avatar
 
Posts: 916
Karma: 46025978
Join Date: Jul 2010
Device: iPod Touch, Sony PRS-350, Nook HD+ & HD
Quote:
Originally Posted by holymadness View Post
My guess is that there is something fishy about this story. If Apple and Samsung have a contract that is valid until 2014, there is no way Samsung can unilaterally impose a 20% price increase after its signing to get revenge for patent wars, or what have you. Either the price increase (or a clause permitting it under certain conditions) was already stipulated in the contract, or this is simply untrue.
Don't see anything fishy at all. Contracts don't always specify fixed pricing for goods. Manufacturing costs are all too frequently impacted by fluctuations in prices for raw materials and labor, not to mention natural disasters, that specifying a fixed hard price often makes little sense.

--Pat

Last edited by PatNY; 11-13-2012 at 07:49 AM.
PatNY is offline