[LINK] RFID seminar (long response)

[Deus Ex Machina]

rchirgwin at ozemail.com.au [rchirgwin at ozemail.com.au] wrote:
> 
> Well: first, I think it's high time that we started adding pinches of 
> salt to Wal-Mart statements, partly because they rest on assumptions 
> which don't easily transport overseas. A counter example: Neilsen says 
> the most important profit driver in Australian supermarkets in recent 
> years has been to "ditch" small manufacturers. Diversity is costly...
> 
> The other lie in the Wal-Mart example is that Wal-Mart's $6 billion 
> saving = $6 billion worth of economic benefit. A large chunk of that $6 
> billion is merely shifting costs from Wal-Mart to other companies 
> (manufacturers). A less-viable small manufacturing sector is definitely 
> not a benefit to the broad economy.

you are clutching at straws now. the cost savings from rfid are
virtually indisputable. aside from the tiny cost of embeding the rfid
chip there is virtually no cost to manufacturers. in fact manufacturers
save money by using rfid themselves.

> That's just silly. Going from 95% accurate to 99% accurate doesn't 
> eliminate out-of-stock, and probably doesn't justify the spend ...

surely that is a decision for a company to make. not outside observers.

stick to the consumer privacy issues and keep your nose out of companies private
business.

Vic