On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 17:34:45 +0000 (UTC), Chaya Eve
wrote:

On Sun, 09 Jul 2017 09:04:46 -0700, Bill Vanek
wrote:

If tires were a commodity to you and to me, then buying on price would be
fine - but neither of us thinks that tires are a commodity.

Outside of specialty tires, they are a commodity.

I am quite aware of exactly what you're saying, so I welcome that you are a
logical thinker when you say that passenger car tires are a commodity.

To the manufacturer, passenger tires are commodities (almost certainly).
To most consumers, passenger tires "should" be a commodity too!

I knew that would come up so you may note that I crafted the sentences when
I was talking about commodities to indicate that the buyer decides whether
something is a commodity (to them) or not.

I used the example of propane gas since it's one of the definitions of a
commodity (as are pork bellies) but to any one person, if the marketing
organization can convince them that their propane is better than someone
else's propane, or that their pork bellies are somehow better, then they
can charge more, which is really the name of the game.

So, yes, tires are a commodity.
But if I said that here, they'd kill me.

Tires ARE a Commodity in some ways - but not like Propane or Pork
Bellies, or Soy Beans.
There are SIGNIFICANT differences between one tire and another - not
necessarilly "brand to brand" but definitely "model to model" There is
(can be) a lot of difference between 2 tires of the same speed,
weight, and traction rating of the same size.

One distributor's propane is virtually identical to anothers if it
meets the same sulpher specs etc.(and likely comes out of the same
pipeline "slug", the ame railcar, and the same distribution tank.