Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
@ first bold: You're still assuming that the businesses' customers are either too stupid to notice that their value is reduced or too loyal to search for other businesses' solutions.
No no not at all. I'm only saying that IF a company wants to increase profits and IF they decide to do it by raising prices and IF that actually works and they get more profits, it's basically free money, effortless and requires 0 investment. I'm saying nothing about when or how it would or would not work, just saying it's a theoretical option. It can work and if it does, sweeet free money! If it doesn't, time to try the other 3 strategies.

Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
@ second bold: The stipulation that "product does not decrease in quality" is a shift in position from your original stipulation.
If a business can cut costs while maintaining or improving product quality, then that's likely to be win-win. It's not a sure thing, though.
Just because something is an improvement, doesn't mean it's a move to optimal. Competition means that someone else may be able to achieve a more optimal solution than you, even though you've improved.
We agree this is generally a worse (considering cost, time, risk etc) option to increase profits than the first one, in cases where that one works? Yet, it's probably most of the time better than the following two options (marketing and improving product quality)? Then we're on the same page.

Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
I think we get what you're saying, but you've made too many or too strong of stipulations, which separate your thesis from realistic business scenarios.
Maybe they are strong stipulations. I can think of scenarios where marketing may be better than cutting costs, or even improving a product being a better one, but overall my gut seems to think that that's the order of preference for those 4 tactics.