Why Is Adobe discriminating their buyers?

[SashadalPonte]

Hello!

I'm in process of opening a small video production studio. Wanting to make everything legal, I went to check prices of Adobe software.

Here in Croatia, where I'm located, Adobe Production Premium 5.5 is priced at 15.000 Kuna, which is cca. $3.000.

Then I checked Adobe online store and found same package at price of $1.700. But when I wanted to buy it, it was available only to US.

So, can anyone explain me why I have to pay almost double the price for same piece of software? And why isn't it available online for me to buy at $1.700?

As I found out by little research, average salary in US in 2010/2011. is around $70.000 which comes out around $5.800 a month.

Do you know what is average monthly salary in Croatia? Aprox. 5.500 Kn which is $1.000.

So, while someone in US can buy three Adobe packages in one month, I have to work three months to buy one.

Also, when I contacted our BSA and asked if I could buy software in US, import it and pay taxes for it, they said "No!".

And that "No!" is because Adobe decided to put “Only for distribution in North America” on bottom of their US boxes so that software is not legal in Croatia.

Same piece of code, same DVD, same box. But because of that sign on bottom of the box, I have to pay double the price.

I find that unfair. And I find hard to start any bussines with expenses I meet before I even start my own bussines.

[PECourtejoie]

The price of Apple products also varies per country, and Horace Dediu from Asymco is building a big Mac index: http://www.asymco.com/2011/12/20/the-big-mac/

Also, keep in mind that most corporations in the US don't pay taxes, but receive some from the state, it is not often the case in Europe.

But I never understood why software is so cheap in the US compared to the rest of the world, when the average income is so high...

[PECourtejoie]

And about that stock price comparison, one should maybe just take what Apple makes in software it creates to compare to Adobe...

Apple is in so many markets, creates so many of them that few corporations could be compared fairly. But still, it stock is very undervaluated compared to Amazon or other companies.

[Tai_Lao]

Mon dieu, Pierre!  You fail 'Economics 101' in every respect.   

The growth of the value of a stock has nothing to do with revenue (sales) directly.  It is a reflection of the perception of investors as to its value.  It doesn't matter whether the company makes its money from the sales of hardware, software, enchiladas or crêpes.

If the investors think corporate executives are turkeys who don't know their own clients and their markets, the value of the stock goes to hell.

The comparison of the price of the stock of two corporations over the same time period is totally valid and absolutely fair.  The point is that Adobe executives are, at this time, pretty close to worthless or perceived as such.

If you invested in Adobe five years ago, you're hurting badly today.  If you invested in Apple five years ago, you're doing pretty damn well today.  It's that simple.

Read the last sentence in my post #36, just below the graphics:

"I don't think the Adobe bean counters get it."

That was the point of highlighting what has happened to Adobe stock.

[PECourtejoie]

I don't claim to be good at that, I've got some maybe distorted point of views on the topic...

I meant that to compare Adobe to Apple, we should look only at a subset of Apple.

I'd rather say that it is a reflection of the speculation over the possible speculation of speculators as to the possible quick change it might have and the immediate revenue it might bring to them. If Apple was valuated correctly, wouldn't its P/E ratio be higher?
I don't think that it is correct to speak about investements in regards to the stock market, but rather, say speculation. I don't think that many people invest nowadays over a long term period. (How many companies still give dividends? Retirement funds want quick money. Former workers putting their replacement out of the company for quick Gains. Hello, Kodak that started the trend? (and Adobe, recently, the beancounters got that right, stock went up in last quarter ))

Most of the stock exchange, erm exchanges are done by computers in miliseconds (and it costs billions when they go haywire); Ratings companies give bad notes to countries or banks that followed their AAA+++ ratings on rotten placements... Who rates S&P & co that did not forecast the Subprimes Scandal?

[Tai_Lao]

LOL !  You're hopeless, Pierre. 

____________

Wo Tai Lao Le

我太老了

[Tai_Lao]

The bottom line is that Adobe executives are pushing the value of their company down through sheer incompetence.  The comparison to Apple just shows that well run companies are capable of thriving during the same time period so it's not the whole economy suffering during those five years.  I could have easily cited many, many other examples.  Apple was simply convenient and the most humiliating for Adobe to be compared against.

____________

Wo Tai Lao Le

我太老了