- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NS: Man refuses to switch seats with Scam for $1,500
Posted on 6/25/19 at 11:25 am to chRxis
Posted on 6/25/19 at 11:25 am to chRxis
quote:
you've lost the opportune cost, sure..
No you’ve lost real money. Real actual dollars.
quote:
but what i'm saying is that if he was already out of pocket 2700, which at the point of the offer is already willingly paid, he still has at least the 1500 that Cam gives him if he takes the offer... at THAT point, he's not losing any MONEY... he's lost the opportunity he paid for, with the extra room that he willing paid 2700, but he's gaining 1500 from the real time transaction...
The 2700 dollars is in addition to the seat cost. If he accepts less for the switch than he is paying for nothing. He is losing money.
quote:
he's not being made whole, as the opportunity cost he paid was 2700 and he's only getting 1500, but in terms of, at that point of Cam giving him 1500, he's not "losing" anything.... he's in the hole 2700, either way... taking the 1500 lessens that burden, so again, he's not "losing" money...
You have the financial understanding of a 5th grader congrats.
1
Posted on 6/25/19 at 12:25 pm to wildtigercat93
quote:
No you’ve lost real money. Real actual dollars
he's losing 2700 regardless of what Cam gives him... the 1500 will drop that to 1200... that's what i'm saying... so overall he's not "losing" as much.... that's what i'm trying to say... that 1500 comes out of nowhere and decreases, when add to the 2700 he's already spent, to a lower out of pocket total... do you not see what i'm saying?
i know he's still down 1200, but without the 1500, he's down even more, at 2700... that's what i'm trying to say....
but i guess if you are willing to spend 2700 for extra leg room, 1500 doesn't really move the needle or do anything for you anyway...
Posted on 6/25/19 at 1:01 pm to chRxis
quote:
chRxis
you really are the worst poster on this board. thanks for the lulz!
Posted on 6/25/19 at 1:03 pm to chRxis
quote:
he's down even more, at 2700
That he willingly paid for in order to get what he wouldn't be getting anymore.
What don't you understand about this?
Posted on 6/25/19 at 1:34 pm to RJL2
Would have told him he had to take a picture with me holding a sign saying Brees is the GOAT and he could keep his money.
Posted on 6/25/19 at 1:42 pm to chRxis
quote:
Cam offered 1500, so if he takes it, then he's only down 1200... if not, he's still down the entire 2700... therefore, in no way does taking the 1500 result in him "losing" money... he can't go any lower than the 2700 he willingly paid... taking the 1500 offsets that amount, so he'd only be down 1200.. that's my point.... the statement is incorrect... he can't "lose" money by taking it... he may lose what he orignially paid, but the amount Cam offers will only go towards offsetting the orignial "loss"...
That’s so altruistic of him.
quote:
ChRxis
Cam is that you?
Posted on 6/25/19 at 1:58 pm to Weekend Warrior79
quote:
Not worth $1,500 to lose your business class seat and go back to coach with your knees on the back of the seat in front of you for 10 hours.
Didn't look like business class, the guy just had the bulkhead seat in coach with the extra leg room.
Posted on 6/25/19 at 2:03 pm to CarrolltonTiger
quote:
Didn't look like business class, the guy just had the bulkhead seat in coach with the extra leg room.
Which he paid extra for.
Posted on 6/25/19 at 2:53 pm to redneck
quote:
frick that. I'd be $1500 richer
Seriously. I’d have done it just out of courtesy.
If offered $1,500.00, he could have my in-flight meal too.
Posted on 6/25/19 at 3:21 pm to chRxis
quote:
chRxis
I get what you are saying. No human would apply this economic logic to the situation, but I get it.
You have to remove the $2,700 from the equation completely. Pretend that was a different version of this guy that made that decision to pay $2,700 extra. Now, the "on the plane" version of the guy is in the seat. He has to decide if $1,500 is worth it to give up his leg room. For the earlier version of the guy, it was worth $2,700. Maybe "on the plane version" of this guy decided to take an ambian and couldn't give a shite where his legs will be while he is passed out. That guy might think $1,500 is worth it.
This post was edited on 6/25/19 at 3:23 pm
Posted on 6/25/19 at 4:07 pm to DestrehanTiger
That doesn't make any sense in any universe.
Posted on 6/25/19 at 4:18 pm to Fun Bunch
Right.
If I paid $2,000 for a drum set and decided a week later I didn't want them anymore and sold them for $1,500 I'm still out $500.
If the guy on the plane paid $2,000 for the extra leg room but once he got to his seat and decided he didn't need it, if he accepted $1,500 to switch to a regular seat, he's still out $500.
That's called minimizing losses, but it's still a loss. He didn't gain money as he could have gotten a regular seat for $2,000 less to start.
Edit:
Then there's a thing called intrinsic value. The guy wanted the extra leg room and paid $2,000 (or more) for it. In order for him to want to give it up, he would want more than what he paid for it, not less (that is if he still wanted the leg room once seated, which it seems he did).
And how much more would be up to that guy.
If I paid $2,000 for a drum set and decided a week later I didn't want them anymore and sold them for $1,500 I'm still out $500.
If the guy on the plane paid $2,000 for the extra leg room but once he got to his seat and decided he didn't need it, if he accepted $1,500 to switch to a regular seat, he's still out $500.
That's called minimizing losses, but it's still a loss. He didn't gain money as he could have gotten a regular seat for $2,000 less to start.
Edit:
Then there's a thing called intrinsic value. The guy wanted the extra leg room and paid $2,000 (or more) for it. In order for him to want to give it up, he would want more than what he paid for it, not less (that is if he still wanted the leg room once seated, which it seems he did).
And how much more would be up to that guy.
This post was edited on 6/25/19 at 4:25 pm
Posted on 6/25/19 at 4:25 pm to Fun Bunch
This thread is full of common core retards.
He would net 300 bucks to switch. Not enough imo offered from a millionaire. Plus, frick Can Newton. I'd maybe say throw in wearing a saints shirt at your press conference after we skull drag y'all's arse this season and it's a deal.
He would net 300 bucks to switch. Not enough imo offered from a millionaire. Plus, frick Can Newton. I'd maybe say throw in wearing a saints shirt at your press conference after we skull drag y'all's arse this season and it's a deal.
Posted on 6/25/19 at 4:38 pm to whodatfan
How does he "net" $300?
He spent x amount on the ticket PLUS $2,000-2,700 for extra leg room.
Cam offers $1,500 for a regular seat. If he switches he's out $500-1,200, not up $300 or whatever.
Edit:
Let's say before he bought the ticket he had $10,000. A regular ticket cost $3,000, and one with extra leg room cost $5,000.
He buys the one with extra leg room and now has $5,000 left over. Cam gives him $1,500 for the seat and he now has $6,500.
If he instead just bought a regular ticket for $3,000 to begin with, he'd have $7,000 left over.
So he'd be out at least $500.
He spent x amount on the ticket PLUS $2,000-2,700 for extra leg room.
Cam offers $1,500 for a regular seat. If he switches he's out $500-1,200, not up $300 or whatever.
Edit:
Let's say before he bought the ticket he had $10,000. A regular ticket cost $3,000, and one with extra leg room cost $5,000.
He buys the one with extra leg room and now has $5,000 left over. Cam gives him $1,500 for the seat and he now has $6,500.
If he instead just bought a regular ticket for $3,000 to begin with, he'd have $7,000 left over.
So he'd be out at least $500.
This post was edited on 6/25/19 at 4:44 pm
Posted on 6/25/19 at 4:43 pm to chRxis
quote:
chRxis
watching you triple down on your take was pure gold
Posted on 6/25/19 at 5:12 pm to chRxis
quote:
how? you say he paid an extra 2700, so he's already out of pocket at least that amount... taking the 1500, he recoups that amount, at least, so now he's only out of pocket 1200... how would he "lose" money? now, if you say he wouldn't have come out ahead by taking 1500, bc he paid 2700 for the seat, that i can agree with, but he most certainly, by taking the 1500, would not have been "losing" money...
Humble yourself man. You just proved his point while trying to sound smart, but making yourself look dumb.
Posted on 6/25/19 at 5:53 pm to wildtigercat93
quote:
he paid an extra 2700 dollars to sit with extra leg room, then took 1500 to sit another seat without the leg room then he paid 1200 dollars more than a regular seat would’ve cost without the added benefit of the extra leg room
That’s actually not how economics work. The premium price he paid for the extra leg room is already a sunk cost, so it all depends what his goal is at this point in time.
If he wants to maximize profit/ minimize his losses, the appropriate action is to accept the deal from Cam. It might seem counterintuitive, but it’s true.
Otherwise, if he’s satisfied with the seat that he paid for and he’s not worried about what he lost, then he should just keep the seat.
It all depends on which goal he is trying to accomplish at the present time.
quote:
Humble yourself man. You just proved his point while trying to sound smart, but making yourself look dumb.
Wrong. See my paragraph above. It make sense from an economical standpoint. It just depends what the passenger was trying to accomplish.
If he’s trying to maximize profit/ minimize costs, accepting he $1500.00 is the correct economical choice. The premium price that he paid is already a sunk cost that cannot be recovered.
If he’s not concerned with that at alll, then it would make sense to refuse the deal.
This post was edited on 6/25/19 at 6:01 pm
Posted on 6/25/19 at 5:53 pm to Blueprint
quote:
so now he's only out of pocket 1200
Right I mean this part right here is how he's still losing money. He's still out of pocket when he could have bought a regular seat to begin with and came out with more money.
Unless Cam is giving him AT LEAST what he paid extra for the seat, he's losing money.
Posted on 6/25/19 at 5:57 pm to cbree88
quote:
That’s actually not how economics work.
It is EXACTLY how economics work. You're forgetting this huge thing called intrinsic value. The guy paid extra for the leg room because to him it was worth it.
It only becomes a sunk cost if he suddenly decides he does not want to extra leg room and is looking to recoup some of that value.
Being that the guy told Cam no, that second part is not the case.
Posted on 6/25/19 at 6:03 pm to bonethug0180
Did you not read my post?
I provided both of the possible scenarios. It can make sense both ways, depending on what the man’s goal is at the present time. Apparently the man’s goal was the latter of the two scenarios.
I provided both of the possible scenarios. It can make sense both ways, depending on what the man’s goal is at the present time. Apparently the man’s goal was the latter of the two scenarios.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News