4 ms·
Nitpick here.... There seems to me be to be significant difference between "loss" in terms of something already tangibly owned and "loss" in terms of missing ou
by zebrafish 8y ago
Nitpick here.... There seems to me be to be significant difference between "loss" in terms of something already tangibly owned and "loss" in terms of missing out on an opportunity.
Of course marketing schemes for "act now or lose out" won't work. I don't currently experience the opportunity and therefore losing out exerts no power over me. However, losing a mug when I already own the mug would demand a higher price from me. I would agree with Dr. Thaler that the inertia thing is a minor point about terminology.
Call it loss aversion or call it inertia. Marketing schemes that include the word "loss" in their pitch are not using the same strategy that behavioral economists are talking about here.
- jonny_eh 8y agoBingo, this criticism of behavioural economics is a straw man.
- gowld 8y agoIf loss aversion exists but it's not inertia, then you should expect to see "win aversion" as much as "loss aversion". Do you?
- zebrafish 8y agoI'm not saying it isn't inertia. I'm saying that Thaler is right in saying that is a semantics issue. Call it what you want, the actual behavior is real.