ARC Ref 5se inferior to LS28?

"

There are not a few people that will buy something that costs 50K who would not touch exact same  item were it priced at 25K

Do you have anything that supports this claim?"

I do.  There are many examples but the most famous is the price of BMWs during the 1980s.  In the 1970s and earlier they used ot cost about the same as a Buick; but sales actually increased greatly as prices rose steeply.

I forget what this phenomenon is called ("Inverse something or other") but the BMW example is frequently cited in econ texts.

You could also read Veblin's Theory of the Leisure Class

randy-1104-05-2017 4:18pm

...  the most famous is the price of BMWs during the 1980s.  In the 1970s and earlier they used ot cost about the same as a Buick; but sales actually increased greatly as prices rose steeply.

This isn't scientific, because you have multiple variables, including the infamous decline in quality of American cars during this same period. In fact, just as the sales of BMWs went up, almost all foreign auto manufacturers gained US market share during the same period, and for the same reason.

You could also read Veblin's Theory of the Leisure Class

That's a pretty old text, but still valid. What Robert J. Stanley did was develop current data on wealth. I encourage you to read some of it. A lot changed during the 20th century.

But, we are drifting far OT here.

A pretty smart scientist said," what you can measure doesn't matter, what matters you can't measure' .
Science is as much a religion as religion is . 

randy-11 , When Mercedes came here in late 50's they couldn't give them away, sold them as same price as in Germany. Only G.I's knew them and that as German taxis .

In sixties came back and sold them for over twice German price and the rest is history . Of course we all know Consumer Reports is a liberal rag who lies about how unreliable they are .

schubert04-05-2017 5:28pm

A pretty smart scientist said," what you can measure doesn't matter, what matters you can't measure' .
Science is as much a religion as religion is

Sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about. You're not quoting a famous scientist; you're quoting Robert McNamara, a businessman. Worse, your "quote" is a paraphrased misquote of what he said, which ended with: " The fourth step is to say that what can't be easily measured really doesn't exist. This is suicide."

To suggest that religion is as inherently valid as science is absurd. Scientific facts can be repeated. Religion is based on faith.

But we are way OT here and, as you already stated:

You need not take me seriously