----- Original Message -----
From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 4:35 PM
Subject: Re: Wake up
> Nope. The US have the higest percentage of poor in western world.
So Pål, do you actually have statistics to back this up or did you
get this info from your famous unnamed sources?
According to World Fact Book here are some statistics:
US Household income or consumption by percentage share:
lowest 10%: 1.5%
highest 10%: 28.5% (1994)
Norway Household income or consumption by percentage share:
lowest 10%: 4.1%
highest 10%: 21.2% (1991)
So, if we compare United States to your own country, taking into
consideration the fact that US has much higher per capita income and
GDP growth rate, a picture emerges. For all of Norway's income
redistribution, it has much higher proportion of poor people and
fewer rich people. Considering that Norway is fairly well endowed
with natural resources, it looks like it has failed miserably on
this fairness score.
Before you decide that I'm picking on Norway, consider that:
US Population below poverty line: 12.7%
UK Population below poverty line: 17%
> Doesn't matter. The whole point is that theres is a significant
percentage of population thats excluded from the buying feast. This
percentage is far larger in the US than comparable western nations.
Hence, the market isn't as large as seems from pure population
number and income statistics. This is because the money is less
evenly distrubuted in the US than probably anywhere else. Theres far
smaller percentage of poor in, say, Sweden than in the US. Hence,
an average population of 8 million Swedes will consist of larger
market than 8 million average americans. This is because this
average american groups will contain more people unable to consume
Pentax cameras than the similar Swedish group. The american group
will on the other include far more onscenely rich people but that
does not create more consumers. This is illustrated also by the
density of typical consumer goods like computers and cellular phones
where the US isn't on top because a large number of people fall out.
!
Since your data is faulty, your conclusions are faulty as well. You
are flat out wrong about computer ownership and misinterpreting cell
phone numbers. The fact is that US has the most sophisticated land
phone network and cell phones are not as necessary. I myself can
well afford a cell phone, but simply don't need one.
> My point isn't to bash the americans (although its sometimes
tempting), but to illustrate that the number of people don't have
linear relation to the number of consumers even when comparing
within the western world. I know the third world have it far worse
but this was about Pentax markets and third world isn't an important
market.
Pål, I think you protest too much. Of course your point is to bash
americans. I'd have no problem with that. It's just that your
argument would carry a bit of weight if you actually had some facts
behind it.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
