>> "Chinese now consume more Guccis and Bulgaris and Louis Vuittons than the rest of the world combined."
> He wants you to think Chinese consumers have a lot of buying power. They don't. They just happen to like those specific brands. Even Japan spends more than the U.S. on those specific brands, with half the population.
I read somewhere (now forgotten where) that the U.S. is notoriously disinterested in premium/luxury brands.
That is why Apple charges ~170 USD more for the base iPad Air in Denmark than it does in the US (3699 DKR ~= 671 USD; 499 USD in US); some places, people are simply willing to pay more for a premium/luxury product. Same goes for the debate over Adobe product pricing in Australia (it was cheaper to fly to the US, buy Photoshop and fly back, than it was buying it locally).
While I have no idea about how China works in this regard, the US is clearly the outsider when it comes to comparing luxury goods consumption.
Does the 3699DKR price include Denmark's 25% VAT? Prices in the USA are quoted before sales tax. In Europe, advertised consumer prices generally include VAT.
Also, I think you meant 'uninterested' (not interested) rather than 'disinterested' (free of bias).
> He wants you to think Chinese consumers have a lot of buying power. They don't. They just happen to like those specific brands. Even Japan spends more than the U.S. on those specific brands, with half the population.
I read somewhere (now forgotten where) that the U.S. is notoriously disinterested in premium/luxury brands.
That is why Apple charges ~170 USD more for the base iPad Air in Denmark than it does in the US (3699 DKR ~= 671 USD; 499 USD in US); some places, people are simply willing to pay more for a premium/luxury product. Same goes for the debate over Adobe product pricing in Australia (it was cheaper to fly to the US, buy Photoshop and fly back, than it was buying it locally).
While I have no idea about how China works in this regard, the US is clearly the outsider when it comes to comparing luxury goods consumption.