• 0 Posts
  • 48 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 9th, 2023

help-circle






  • I disagree. Absolute profits would be the realistic option. The supplier is not adding to their profits due to the tariffs or whatever caused this, and the customer are surely as fuck also not getting more money.

    She’s the only one in the chain that gets paid more when increasing her margin by percentages.

    Of course there’s more to it than an example, and yes, someone else will be able to outbid her. The larger chains can easily do that while still maintaining their profits.


  • Yeah, it wouldn’t make sense even if they drop shipped beans directly to customers, as in, let’s forget about costs to staff, shops and other services.

    The purchase price and sales price are not directly related like that.

    She’s effectively increasing her own revenue and profit by more than the increase in cost price.

    I’m sure you already know this, but let’s break it down, because apparently a lot of people don’t seem to grasp this.

    Let’s say a bean used to cost 100 and she’d sell it for 200 making 100 in profit.

    Now let’s add 15% to both, so a bean costs 115 and she sells it for 230, making her profits 115. The extra 15 in profit simply appeared out of nowhere, because she made the wrong calculation.

    If she wanted to fairly increase the sales price by the change in cost price, she should’ve maintained her profits at 100 and made the sales price 215. The sales price should only rise by 7.5% in this example.

    This is exactly what’s causing inflation, and doubling the effects of the tariffs and other costs price increases.

    So sure, she could argue that because of inflation, everything is increasing so she needs more profits to cover her base costs, but please keep focused here: Those things should already be in the calculation of sales price. The profit is the excess and thereby not required to cover any of the costs any more than they already do. The same calculation can be done on each of them and none of it would justify adding the same percentage to her own mark up.

    It’s pure greed.




  • Honestly, the bamboo “forest” isn’t worth a visit. I wonder if they post this news just to attract more tourists. The same story has been posted year after year.

    It’s just a place where someone once planted a lot of bamboo thinking they’d need it as a ressource. They didn’t need it so they just left it there.

    It dates back about a thousand years, so I guess it’s “natural” now, but it’s basically the remains of a human made plantation, albeit old.

    The famous path through it is about a hundred meters long and a great spot to take that photo. I didn’t feel immersed in the forest at all, because the entry and exit is visible through the entire “attraction”.

    There’s a nice temple with an impressive garden close by and some random rich rock star dude also build a mansion with a garden on top of the mountain next to the forest, and that’s it.

    The whole thing felt like the kind of place that you only want to go if you’re a tourist with nothing better to do.

    Kyoto is still worth visiting as a whole. The thousand gates on mt. Inari is a much better use of your time.