First, I understand that it's not 35% of nothing (but in many cases it is or is close). My point is that if we can effectively get more revenue for a
Posted by
pmb (aka pmb)
Nov 19 '14, 08:48
|
lower rate then I don't really care if we have a lower rate. The revenue is more important than the rate. On your other point I am not arguing that we have to meet the lowest rate. There are operational advantages to not having to pay musical chairs with money. There are PR advantages to bringing money back here. We don't have to be the lowest available rate, but we can't be multiples higher than the rates in other countries and expect to compete. What the "right rate" is I don't really know. That would require research. My point is I'm open to lowering the rate if that results in higher revenue.
|