Awesome! I organised a KTV outing, and I think it was a success! Most importantly, economics theory helped me in some analysis sense! Let me talk about the KTV first.
It was GREAT!!! 9 people, including me, showed up, and although some needed to leave early, everything went very smooth. Those that usually sang sang a lot, those first-timers were also very sporty, sang quite a few songs!!! Thanks all those that came, do not want to put names and bore other people, haha.. and it was cheap for a night singing session. To prevent people from calculating the actual per person cost, I will not disclose the total cost, hehe.. I will upload the photos soon, when I get them from the main holder.
On to my economics theories.
1) Free market not always that efficient. Most of us like to sing, and most like to go out together. If we leave it to the market forces, with the lack of information, we wouldn't meet up and sing KTV together. Singing together increases the overall utility for everyone, as compared to being stuck at home. With no organised 'contract', the mis-informed free market will not be able to land itself at the optimal utility level. Next comes me, the deprived one. My incentive to make the outing work has escalated so much that the effort for working the outing out is less than the perceived benefits I will get.
Benefit Cliff gets from outing > cost for Cliff in creating outing
Thus, I (in general sense could be the government, but I'm not saying I'm the government) created this 'contract' to get everyone to follow, and ensure, with the word of promise that they will follow. Eventually, everyone came, enjoyed (increase utility), and 'economy' is better off. Something like multi-prisoners dilemma? I hope I applied it correctly.
2) Information, and this will bring on to the 2nd part, the proposed (but failed) stayover. But before that, the singing. No one asked me who was going when I first suggested the singing. Initially, the idea was good enough for them to not care first about who was going. However, only I and another person or 2 were free, the singing most likely will not occur. In fact, I guess people held the assumption that since singing is such a common thing, most people would come. Of course, everyone have their minimum no. of people before they are willing to come. For me, at least 3 more persons. Of course, some less, some more, and some completely independent of the attendance, because they are not interested in singing. Thus, when they clarified how many are coming, I was able to give them more than 5 names that were at least truly coming. Thus, this ensured the attendance of each other, and assumption that others will come, and that their basic no. of people will be there. Critical mass, turning point – that idea. Next, I draw upon the proposed stayover. The same situation, but a stayover demands more commitment, more of the correct people (not necessarily more people). 2 girls and 2 guys expressed interested in staying over. However, one of the girls did not get approval of their parents, and could not stayover. Tipping point tipped. The other girl depended on this girl to stay for her to stay. Thus, she did not stay as well. With 3 people only, we realised its not worth the stayover either. All out tipping points were tipped, and stayover cancelled.
Sorry, bad attempt at trying to make economic sense of daily lives. Hope what I say make economics sense =)
It was GREAT!!! 9 people, including me, showed up, and although some needed to leave early, everything went very smooth. Those that usually sang sang a lot, those first-timers were also very sporty, sang quite a few songs!!! Thanks all those that came, do not want to put names and bore other people, haha.. and it was cheap for a night singing session. To prevent people from calculating the actual per person cost, I will not disclose the total cost, hehe.. I will upload the photos soon, when I get them from the main holder.
On to my economics theories.
1) Free market not always that efficient. Most of us like to sing, and most like to go out together. If we leave it to the market forces, with the lack of information, we wouldn't meet up and sing KTV together. Singing together increases the overall utility for everyone, as compared to being stuck at home. With no organised 'contract', the mis-informed free market will not be able to land itself at the optimal utility level. Next comes me, the deprived one. My incentive to make the outing work has escalated so much that the effort for working the outing out is less than the perceived benefits I will get.
Benefit Cliff gets from outing > cost for Cliff in creating outing
Thus, I (in general sense could be the government, but I'm not saying I'm the government) created this 'contract' to get everyone to follow, and ensure, with the word of promise that they will follow. Eventually, everyone came, enjoyed (increase utility), and 'economy' is better off. Something like multi-prisoners dilemma? I hope I applied it correctly.
2) Information, and this will bring on to the 2nd part, the proposed (but failed) stayover. But before that, the singing. No one asked me who was going when I first suggested the singing. Initially, the idea was good enough for them to not care first about who was going. However, only I and another person or 2 were free, the singing most likely will not occur. In fact, I guess people held the assumption that since singing is such a common thing, most people would come. Of course, everyone have their minimum no. of people before they are willing to come. For me, at least 3 more persons. Of course, some less, some more, and some completely independent of the attendance, because they are not interested in singing. Thus, when they clarified how many are coming, I was able to give them more than 5 names that were at least truly coming. Thus, this ensured the attendance of each other, and assumption that others will come, and that their basic no. of people will be there. Critical mass, turning point – that idea. Next, I draw upon the proposed stayover. The same situation, but a stayover demands more commitment, more of the correct people (not necessarily more people). 2 girls and 2 guys expressed interested in staying over. However, one of the girls did not get approval of their parents, and could not stayover. Tipping point tipped. The other girl depended on this girl to stay for her to stay. Thus, she did not stay as well. With 3 people only, we realised its not worth the stayover either. All out tipping points were tipped, and stayover cancelled.
Sorry, bad attempt at trying to make economic sense of daily lives. Hope what I say make economics sense =)
No comments:
Post a Comment