[–] gambiting 20 hours ago
[–] Taek 20 hours ago
Let's say there are 10 companies that need 1 GB of RAM each in a life-or-death scenario. They would be willing to pay $100,000,000 per GB to get 1 GB of RAM.
At the same time, there are 90 more companies that need 1 GB of RAM each to make certain quarterly targets. They are willing to pay $10,000 per GB to get 1 GB of RAM.
If you make 9 GB of RAM, you can sell it for $900,000,000. If you make 99 GB of RAM, you can only sell it for $990,000, because the 10 life-or-death companies only need to bid high enough to push out a quarterly-target company.
It's a bit of a contrived example, but it shows you how restricting supply can boost total revenue if there is a segment of the market that has inelastic demand. (this is why medicine pricing has to be regulated - in the medical industry, there are lots of inelastic demand scenarios that can lead to predatory pricing)
[–] matkoniecz 20 hours ago
Also, it is not likely to happen any time soon.
We have less rich gamers deciding to not upgrade their PCs at most.
[–] galbar 17 hours ago
Evidence: a friend of mine this month decided that he can't justify dropping $1.6k on a gaming computer.
As a PC gamer since I have memory, this whole situation makes me sad.
[–] IshKebab 20 hours ago
[–] brainwad 20 hours ago
[–] gambiting 19 hours ago
[–] raincole 20 hours ago
[–] matkoniecz 20 hours ago
[–] greggsy 20 hours ago
[–] chmod775 20 hours ago
Truly an unimaginable and ludicrous suggestion in a time where regulators are less likely than ever to pursue it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAM_industry_price_fixing#200...
[–] greggsy 20 hours ago