First, I never mentioned that their price was, or is higher than the competition. If anything it's similar to the competition after its so called discounts.
I took your first sentence when you questioned the sale price as being the same as other competitors and asking if this one is better as meaning that since the normal (MSRP) price is $50 if must be better than the others that are normal priced at $30. Thus I assumed you didn't like that they are higher in their normal price. I believe my interpretation of your sentence is correct and that we have a misunderstanding on my use of normal price in my post.
Again, not sure where am I being ironic on but I did say if the glass was curved correct? I didn't say the glass WAS/IS curved... This would definitely fall in as me being ironic. But the fact that I said if, changes the meaning. It's pure speculation on my part, and I'm just taking both scenarios into consideration.
I fail to see how your first post takes into account both possibilities. It looks to me as you state your dislike of their pricing scheme in the first sentence (i.e. you dont like their higher normal (MSRP) price). Then in the second statement, which you separate by On topic ( which indicates to me you believe the first sentence is not on topic and rather a stand alone statement and unrelated to the second) you state your opinion that it isn't curved because the cost would be higher.
In my opinion it seems to me that you failed to connect the two sentences and completely overlook the possibility that the higher normal cost is because of the increase in production cost of the curved glass. I found it ironic that you made both statements in the same post, one right after another, but failed to connect the two which would have the potential to explain both statements.
As to your second post, I agree with most of what you said, however:
Second point, if we say that the glass is not curved /flat for example, (this is what has been in discussion in the previous pages...) then it would be valid to say that their marked up price is just a marketing strategy. Seems fair to me to say. If it is a marketing strategy, then could I go as far as question the difference in build and design of their product. Why buy their product if other similar products are featuring similar things?
Their are certainly differences between this product and others (I only know of xgear for the Nexus 4, please enlighten me if there are others as I would love to check them out). First Clarivue is clear throughout, no black border. No adhesive unlike xgear's. Supposed higher hardness rating (i find it unlikely or negligible but that is me), no shipping cost, earlier release date (now completely in question, but those that preordered are now getting it for $15 which is also certainly an advantage but only to those that have already preordered). I am sure there are others. Now it is up to the individual to weigh those differences to determine the value of the product or if there is any significant difference at all.
Personally I have tried Xgear on the galaxy nexus and mine came up in the middle because of the curved screen. Shouldn't be an issue on the Nexus 4 certainly, but I have already tried their product and am ready to try something else.
Lastly, yes if the glass is curved, then the tooling alone would make their price before coupon a more reasonable price. So then, why not point out this feature if it is truly curved? If it's really curved, wouldn't you want to promote that as an unique and main difference to get their product above the rest? You even pointed out this for me, only Clarivue knows. They should point this out if it's curved, and since it's not up there. Is there any reason for me to believe it is curved?
I also think they would want market it as such, but this has absolutely zero to do with your first post. Not really fair to bring up additional points when trying to validate your first post.
Your reason to believe it is curved would be the normal price being higher validating the higher cost to manufacture, the rep "ambiguously" saying that it would cover the edges with a small gap. Your evidence for not believing it is that none have been in the past, clarivue has not marketed it as such, the increased cost, and in my opinion the incredible difficulty with getting the curve right. You can believe one or the other, that is completely fine, but don't overlook the other side of the argument and claim there is nothing to it.
I'm not sure why you think it's ironic. I guess I need to break it down to the finest details for you to understand.
Obviously you took offense, otherwise I believe you wouldn't have attempted to insult me. I apologize as I didn't mean anything by my statement, I was just pointing out another possibility that I thought you had failed to identify. If it was the term ironic, I again apologize as I never even thought about being ironic as a bad thing. Shoot, I'm ironic all the time like how I think I need to lose some weight while I am eating a candy bar.
Sorry for the book
