Philosophy Now Forum

Philosophy Explorer wrote: ↑Thu Jun 07, 2018 5:54 pm Do you believe in Price's Law where, e.g., at least half of the sales is generated by less than half of the workplace?

At one time I believed in it, that some people have sales talent. Now I don't and the law is fallacious. What would it take to convince you that Price's Law isn't a law? How would you explore it? (to get you started, google Price's Law).

PhilX

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Jun 08, 2018 6:03 pm

Philosophy Explorer wrote: ↑Thu Jun 07, 2018 5:54 pm Do you believe in Price's Law where, e.g., at least half of the sales is generated by less than half of the workplace?

At one time I believed in it, that some people have sales talent. Now I don't and the law is fallacious. What would it take to convince you that Price's Law isn't a law? How would you explore it? (to get you started, google Price's Law).

PhilX

If I wanted to find out if Price’s law can be applied to sales and salespeople, I would begin by researching the data. If half of the total sales were made by a number (I.e. the square root of the total number) of salespeople, implied by a sufficiently large amount of data, I would have to conclude that Price’s law is true in the case of sales and salespeople. If the data failed to significantly support that conclusion, I’d be convinced that Price’s law is a fallacy.

However, I think your question was asking more than that.

Philosophy Explorer wrote: ↑Fri Jun 08, 2018 6:08 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Jun 08, 2018 6:03 pm

Philosophy Explorer wrote: ↑Thu Jun 07, 2018 5:54 pm Do you believe in Price's Law where, e.g., at least half of the sales is generated by less than half of the workplace?

At one time I believed in it, that some people have sales talent. Now I don't and the law is fallacious. What would it take to convince you that Price's Law isn't a law? How would you explore it? (to get you started, google Price's Law).

PhilX

If I wanted to find out if Price’s law can be applied to sales and salespeople, I would begin by researching the data. If half of the total sales were made by a number (I.e. the square root of the total number) of salespeople, implied by a sufficiently large amount of data, I would have to conclude that Price’s law is true in the case of sales and salespeople. If the data failed to significantly support that conclusion, I’d be convinced that Price’s law is a fallacy.

However, I think your question was asking more than that.

What if I were to say that I can change those numbers where everyone in the workplace contributed equally to sales? What would you think of Price's Law then?

PhilX

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 08, 2018 6:15 pm

Philosophy Explorer wrote: ↑Fri Jun 08, 2018 6:08 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Jun 08, 2018 6:03 pm


If I wanted to find out if Price’s law can be applied to sales and salespeople, I would begin by researching the data. If half of the total sales were made by a number (I.e. the square root of the total number) of salespeople, implied by a sufficiently large amount of data, I would have to conclude that Price’s law is true in the case of sales and salespeople. If the data failed to significantly support that conclusion, I’d be convinced that Price’s law is a fallacy.

However, I think your question was asking more than that.

What if I were to say that I can change those numbers where everyone in the workplace contributed equally to sales? What would you think of Price's Law then?

PhilX

Prices Law would then apply to when "x" variables are present...this is a little abstract and those well verse in economic could give better input. When an equality of sales is observed under "y" variables it would be "A" law. Laws are a framework of variables...nothing more or less.

I would argue, from an outside perspective, Price's law is legitimate however it may need to be redefined by what variables it exists under.