>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/123510
--- In [email protected], "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], new.morning no_reply@ > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 17, 2006, at 2:26 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: > > > > > > > > > I wasn't thinking. My apologies to all of those > > > > > whose daily cheap thrill comes from FFL. :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And what is so bad about a cheap thrill? > > > > > > > > In TM there is no such thing as a cheap thrill, it's all pricey. > > I > > > > strongly suspect cheap thrills may therefore be a violation of > > > > natural law. > > > > > > > > If you don't pay a lot for it, you'll never appreciate it fully! > > If > > > > you can't appreciate it fully how can you ever expect to live > > life 200%? > > > > > > > > It's your karma dude! ;-) > > > > > > > > -TB Vaj > > > > > > > The view (somewhat) inhernet in comments like yours, and views more > > > manifest in other recent posts, appear a bit stuck some past TMO > > > strategies, and reveals a limited view of the TMO's current > > > organizational objectives and its resulting well considered and > > > appropriate business and pricing strategies to meet those > > objectives. > > > > > > Some appear to assume (not you explcity here) that, recasting their > > > views in the language of economics and business strategy > > disciplines, > > > all organizations should and must follow a profit maximization > > > objective, and that the only appropriate business strategy is to be > > > the low cost producer. And to price accordingly, price must be > > > minimized. That is a wonderful strategy for for some organizations. > > > But hardly the totality of possibilities. Depending on the > > > organizations objectives, and the "competitive" and economic > > landscape > > > it faces -- there are many other business and pricing strategies > > that > > > may be appropriate. > > > > > > The TMO has changed its objectives from being a mass market service > > > (60's and 70's), where in that era it priced aggresssively and > > > appropriately for that objective, to currently focusing on a > > specific > > > much smaller market niche. They have abondoned the mass market, and > > > its sole focus is on the top 1% or so of education, career, income, > > > influence and wealth parameters. This group is quite price > > inelastic. > > > If they want something, they will obtain it -- and that demand is > > > fairly constant whether priced at $500 or $2500. (Quite distinct > > from > > > the mass market.) > > > > > > And despite the false assumptions of some, the organizational > > > objectives of the TMO have never been "profit" maximization (which > > in > > > a "non-profit" org has a somewhat different slant than a for profit > > > business, but still focusses on similar parallel parameters.). In > > the > > > the earlier days, the TM's organization objectives were somewhat > > > parallel to a for profit's market-share maximization objective. > > > Maximize the number of meditators. And support strucure: teachers, > > > centers, etc. > > > > > > Now the organizational objective is to mazimize the number of YF in > > > peace palaces and domes, and the number of pundits in such regional > > > centers. Quite different objectives from the past. Calling for > > quite > > > different strategies. You may not care for the current objectives, > > > that though in no way diminishes them as valid objectives. With > > this > > > objective, the TMO approppriately is purusuing a high > > > "differentiation" business strategy, and pricing quite > > approriately to > > > fuel the high costs of that differentiation strategy -- and pricing > > > appropriately to the highly inelastic (price insensitive) demand of > > > its target market. > > > > > > As a note of clarification, the above strategy applies to new > > > meditators and YFs via its envisioned best-of-breed, world class > > peace > > > palace facilities. Filling the domes, right now, is a parallel > > effort, > > > with its own distinct strategy, based on the "residual" customers > > from > > > the TMO's "old market". Thus, during its transition of > > organizational > > > objectives, the TMO is expansively supporting the old market via > > > generous price supports and incentives to participate in the domes. > > > > > Good points. I agree that the goal of the TMO is no longer to > > provide cheap meditation for everyone, but more in line of what you > > mention, like it or not. > > The 'goal' is difficult to fathom - real estate is mentioned in the PR > more often than anything else. Along with 'millions' as the second most > often mentioned topic. Oh, and there's a passing reference to stress > relief and TM, sometimes. > > JohnY > Yes, evident longterm strategy of gathering & converting captial, moving it offshore and disappearing it offshore. You can have a sophisticated marketing analysis language which seems inpressive but underneath it (TM) all along has been the very specific business strategy to transfer captial from the West to their coffers in the East. All the market differentiation is towards this gathering & converting capital (other people's money) from earnest goodwill cultivated from good people for seeming good reasons. 'Non-profit' and passes muster on paper. What has been done with even a fraction of it towards world peas you can hardly show inspite of all this fancy academic business marketing talk. They have bled everything they have put their hands on including MUM and MSAE in front of our eyes. Produce the numbers and show them otherwise. They certainly do not and the chronic lack of a forthrightness in their accounting transparency says a whole lot about the underlying integrity of the family business & the people who work for them. "A house so corrupted cannot long live", after the death of its Guru. Doug in FF
