View Single Post
Old 12-03-15 | 05:09 PM
  #50  
rpenmanparker's Avatar
rpenmanparker
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 28,682
Likes: 63
From: Houston, TX

Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build

Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
But this statement proves my point. You have zero information other than past data. You use that past data to fit a statistical model which you use to predict the future. Nowhere does information about failure physics, or manufacturing methods, or factory technician skill, or any other tangible, physical property of these frames is being used to create your prediction of the future.

I have a model too. It is not statistical though. My model says humans generally look for monetary advantage; quality control costs money, paying a kid 50cents/hour to sand and bondo a frame prior to paint is a negligible cost compared to tossing a frame or actively controlling quality up and down the line. In an environment where legal recourse is not a consumer option, the transaction does not occur face-to-face and the buyer never sees the product prior to sale, sellers will tend to take advantage because this is the direction the incentives lie.
No, it disproves your point. You ignore that all of the factors that affect quality that you listed ARE NECESSARILY incorporated into the statistical results re: real life experience with the frames. You just can't see them at work in the result, but they must be there.
rpenmanparker is offline  
Reply