But this doesn't really explain it either, because, for instance, many branded goods are already trading on a name built up long before they hit the market; the marketing bill surely can't account for the 20-100% and beyond markup on each individual commodity; and it seems like the manufacturers (or the branded contractors and their retail partners) count on having to sell a good portion of the stock at a deep discount (now I guess I'm just talking about clothes) in which case the costs that are really important to recoup are the actual production costs, if that. In any case, the phrase "high value added" seems to be a much more ideological phrase than its mathematical pretensions would indicate, mostly justifying the international division of labor (and its consequent division of the payment through the "value chain".)
Just for reference, the place I have heard it most recently (and can't find a link) was in some economist talking about what Chinese firms wanted to do in the future, which was that they wanted to "move into more high value added labor" like marketing domestic Chinese brands, etc.
First, I am interested in how accurate my description above is. Is this what analysts mean when they talk about "high value added?" Is this a common and/or legitimate concept in economic literature/analysis?
Second, I am trying to find where it comes from, theoretically and colloquially; how long it has been used, etc.?
Any guidance on any of the above would be appreciated.
Thanks, s