<p>it’s my second try after taking a testmasters class, i want to know how much (or not) i’ve improved.</p>
<p>i know some of the facts and figures are off, but if you had 90 seconds to grade this, what would you give it?</p>
<p>thanks for doing this! :)</p>
<p>oh and osrry about my typing, i just got a new mac and i’m getting used to the keyboard.</p>
<hr>
<p>question: Value is frequently understood as a synonym for low price, but it more accurately describes te relationship between the beneifts the customer receives from a product and its price: the greater the value, the higher the rprice. Therefore, an expensive produt should yield proportional benefits. It is too often the case, hwever that an expensive produt is also the least beneficial, while a beneficial product may be too expensive to be useful to the majority of customers.</p>
<p>therefore, is price necessarily the refleciton of value?</p>
<hr>
<p>The question, “Is price necessarily a reflection of value?” suggests that a product is priced fairly and in accordance to the benefits it provides. IN other words, more expensive product has more to offer than a cheaper product. In my opinion, price is in fact a true reflection of value, value given by either the buyer, the seller, or society. Throughout the course of history, the evidence to support my position is pervasive.</p>
<p>Take for example the case of the auction of one of Adolf Hitler’s pieces of art in 2009. Hitler was the man behind the massacre of more than 6 million Jews, homosexuals, and other “undesirables” in World War 2 in the name of ethnic cleansing. However, before this time in his life, Hiter aspired to be an artist at an European art institution and made several seemingly innocent pieces. The auction of a piece of his art in 2009 sold for more than $120,000, proving my point that the historical value of Hitler’s art was set by society and therefore was priced accordingly to its value.</p>
<p>Also consider the case of Oprah Winfrey’s purchase of her Hollywood home in 2004. Winfrey, one of the most successful and powerful people in the world, first saw this house while browsing through the neighborhood, according to a VH1 episode. But ecasue the peope who lived in the house were reluctant to relinquish the home and all of the memories that came with it, Winfrey offered the family $4 million dollars more than the house’s real property value. As it can be seen, Winfrey’s purchase price tag on this home was directly proportional not necessarily to the monetary value of the home but was undoubtedly proportional to the sentimental value attached to it.</p>
<p>As a final vivid example, consider the famous red slippers worn by Dorothy in the original “The Wizard of Oz”'s first Broadway tour that sold for several million dollars in the 1990s. The Wizard of Oz is one of America’s most well-known stories about a girl from Kansas who travels to Oz in her red ruby slippers. Although the slippers worn by the actress in the play was made with real rubies, the monetary value still only added up to a fraction of its million dollar selling price. Evidently, it can be seen the historical and sentimental value placed upon the slippers by society was well in accordance to the difference in price.</p>
<p>So in conclusion, it is obvious that price is, in fact, a reflection of value. As the buyer of Hitler’s artwork knew, the historicla value of the art added well enough to the price of the work. Oprah also understood that the sentimental value was more important to compensate for than property value. Only by understanding the story behind the story, the value behind the price, can we make decisions that are beneficial to both ourselves and society.</p>