How would you respond to this post?

Provided by the scenario description, Bulls Eye offers products very similar to that of both Walmart and Target. While they enjoy geographical advantage to the town of Show Low, I would also argue that it is a geographical disadvantage to be primarily limited to customers in Show Low. Naturally, the more money a company makes would imply increased success. As a result, an analyst suggests they raise prices. The unrealistic assumption is that current demand will be unaffected by a price increase. From the sounds of it, the primary advantage Bulls Eye enjoys is its prices. If they raise their prices, depending on how much they raise, demand for their products would fall and customers would be more likely to make a longer drive at a cost they were previously unwilling to make based upon Bulls Eye's reasonable prices. It is important to find the 'sweet spot' in pricing as unreasonable prices can result in a loss of a business or a loss in profit. Revenue minus cost equates to profit. Driving down costs always helps, assuming quality isn't sacrificed. However, if they drop prices and demand increases, the cost stays the same and revenue drops, leaving the profit to suffer (Douglas, 2012). Neither of these are sustainable business models. I believe there are several variables to consider in the improvement of a company. To default to "raise the prices and we'll be successful" is foolish and unrealistic. If I were a manager for Bulls Eye, I would reflect on why I would or wouldn't shop there myself. Environment, cleanliness, customer service, selection, stock, quality, organization, and price all play into a store. I would also consider asking random customers why they shop at Bulls Eye as that could tell you what you should keep and lead you to what needs to change. Numbers always tell a story but not necessarily the entire story.