1. Why do people pay exorbitant amounts of money to see a guest speaker at a conference when they could see them on TV or read their book for significantly less?
Similarly, people are willing to pay a lot more to see someone speak live than a videotape of a speech. Tyler Cowen suggests that it is a signalling problem: "The quality of the speaker signals the quality of the event, and most of all the quality of the other attendees. Wealthy people and successful people don't want to go to an event full of losers, why should they? So the organizers seek quality speakers, so as to attract quality participants."
2. You can buy mp3's or CDs of economics lectures by talented economics professors here for a few dollars per lecture. On the other hand, tuition at highly-ranked private universities is about $30,000 a year, which works out to a lot more than a few dollars per lecture. Why is there such a discrepancy? Why not just pay for the lectures and save thousands? (Note: this is not a suggestion, just a question for thought)
What are your thoughts on either of these questions? Why are live performances worth so much more?
8 comments:
Though there are large discrepancies in the prices, there is also a difference in quality. People would rather pay $10,000 a year to say that they got to learn Economics from the Georgia Economics Teacher of the Year than pay nearly nothing to join Mr. Arjona’s blog. The marginal benefit of seeing the speaker live obviously outweighs the marginal cost of having to pay for it. I think it has a lot to do with public opinion. Most people would be proud to say that they saw Oprah in person instead of reading her biography. I think Cowen is partially right because taking the extra step to see something in person will set you apart from the “common people”. I believe the same theory goes for the whole college thing. Sure, you could just listen to online lectures of different subjects, but when you go into a job interview and they ask you about your college background, saying that you listened to Timothy Taylor’s online Economics lectures probably won’t get you the job. People take pride in bragging about what they have seen/bought. It might be petty, but people will continue to pay large amounts of money just so they can be a little extra-ordinary. The quality of both experiences might be about the same, but to the consumer, the perception of the event is what makes it worth paying extra for.
~Natalie~
In many ways, i think the main argument for people's obsession with "live" performances or conferences is because it is an "experience." Actually going to college and taking college classes over the internet are completely different! Lets he honest, everyone at Walker could go to The University of Phoenix Online, so why dont we? College, overall, is an experience. Interacting with top-notch, highly intellectual professors and teachers is so much more stimulating than listening to a lecture over the internet. Also, not much accredidation is given to online classes in comparsion with attending a well-respected unversity. This same idea goes for concerts--you buy a cd, listen constantly to a band's music, but you still insist on going to the concert. why? Going and experiencing a live proformance is more exciting and entertaining than listening to a cd in the car with your mom. I also think, that like Natalie said, you just feel so much cooler! When anyone goes to a concert, they go home and brag to their friends. Being able to see Kenny Chesney live is, in my opinion, a life-altering experience. Sometimes, live letures and such can be so memorble--much more so than simply reading the book. Also, tickets are going to be harder to get if the better the event. Lastly, tickets to many events are very low in supply and not that many people get them. On the other hand, you can almost always buy a pre-recorded version.
--Alena
I agree with Natalie in that people are willing to pay for the live experience because it may set them apart from the crowd better and because the experience actuaklly is different. Mrs. Timm, the old librarian, said that when she saw Maya Angelou speak live, she started he speech by singing a song, and you can't get that just from reading one of her books (even though they are really good). And that would probably make someone sound more educated or more cultured to say "Oh, well when I heard George Bush speak live...", than if you just watched the State of the Union address on TV.
And to tie in with the second question, I even put on my "pro" list for Wake Forest the fact that Maya Angelou teaches there, even though she probably only teaches one or two classes a year (even though the tuition seemed like a pretty big con). -Carrie
Adding on what Carrie had to say, I also agree that experiencing the event live is much better than experiencing it on television. This past October, I had the privilege of hearing President Bush speak live. I was an intern with Congressman Phil Gingrey, and he paid for me to meet the President and hear his speech. When you are at the speech, you feel as if the speaker is talking directly to you. You feel more involved in the discussion. You come away from the experience with memories that can last a lifetime. Meeting President Bush and hearing him speak is definitely an experience I will never forget.
Oops! The previous comment was Bryan West.
I think that the scarcity of tickets to live events and the high costs of going to college or going to see the event, is why people are willing to pay high amounts of money to go. It is an experience that not everyone is able to have, so people enjoy attending live events even more because they are able to brag about going to those who have not had the opportunity or could not afford to go. Also, people enjoy and learn more by going to a concert or an actual college class. When an entire group has paid the high cost, everyone is much more into the experience and people gain more. It is going to be much harder to focus and you won't be motivated to learn as much by taking an online college course than if you were actually in class, and going to a concert gives you better bragging rights than just saying you own the cd. So, it is scarcity and the quality of the experience that cause people to pay such high prices for live events.
-Emily Spurlock
I think the discrepancy in prices between recorded lectures and taking the actual classes at a University has less to do with the experience of seeing it live than it does with the ability of a diploma saying you attended these lectures to make you a lot of money in the long run. The investment made on college tuition is a way to boost your future productivity, thus increasing your earning potential. Employers can actually look at a dipoloma and know that you not only heard a lecture but also understood it (proved by your passing grade). Neither of these can be proven by simply owning a taped lecture. A diploma serves as a much more reliable indicator of a potential employee's MRP.
Oh, that was Jordan by the way.
Post a Comment