I don't like this sentence from the wikipedia page [1]: > The price of the full direct to consumer testing service in the United States has reduced from $999 in 2007 to $99 in 2012, and it is effectively being sold as a loss leader in order to build a valuable customer database . First, why can't companies these days just sell me a product for the cost price plus a margin? This seems like a fair way of doing business…
You misunderstand. The point is that the more data they have, the more valuable and "accurate" their analysis is -- it's like crowdsourcing genetics by building one large database. So your complaint of "why don't they just sell it at the cost plus a margin" doesn't work here. They're dropping the price because they're paying you for your information to make their service better. It's like Tumblr not having ads (for a…
This is covered by my comment that participating in research should be voluntary.
> So your complaint of "why don't they just sell it at the cost plus a margin" doesn't work here.
Yes, my complaint makes perfect sense here. They are selling below cost price to build themselves a bigger market. This is not a fair way of doing business, in my opinion. The fact that you are framing this as "we are paying you to help us build a bigger market share" does not make a difference.
In my opinion, everything that is being built by crowdsourcing belongs in the public domain. It is not fair to have one company keeping that information hostage.