Wandered round Borders with b12 today, looking for a book to buy with my 25% discount coupon (yes, I'm auntie like that).
Books I passed up on:
Steven Johnson's "Everything Bad Is Good for You: How Today's Popular Culture Is Actually Making Us Smarter" (cos it's a hardcover copy and surely there is a paperback version coming out soon?).
G. H. Hardy's "A Mathematician's Apology" (I've wanted to read this book on and off since the second ever entry of my blog. There, I mentioned I kept a sms text paraphrased from Hardy, which stated: "A good proof has a very high degree of unexpectedness, inevitability and economy". The problem is this book is so thin I think I can actually speed read through it within an hour at Borders, so one day I shall.)
Book I actually bought:
Barry Schwartz's "The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less".
I bought this because I randomly flipped to a page which was explaining regret or sunk costs.
A theatre tried selling season subscriptions at both a discounted rate and at full price, and found the following phenomenon:
People who bought full price season subscriptions were more likely to attend performances, because they would feel worse for not attending as they had spent more money.
Though the focus on this issue was the paradox of choice, I was actually thinking thinking about another angle, i.e:
If the above phenomenon were true, would you (as the theatre's management) rather sell discounted season subscriptions (and hence have fewer people seeing your performances but have possibly higher box office takings), or
sell full price season subscriptions (and hence have more people seeing your performances but have possibly lower box office takings)?
Books I passed up on:
Steven Johnson's "Everything Bad Is Good for You: How Today's Popular Culture Is Actually Making Us Smarter" (cos it's a hardcover copy and surely there is a paperback version coming out soon?).
G. H. Hardy's "A Mathematician's Apology" (I've wanted to read this book on and off since the second ever entry of my blog. There, I mentioned I kept a sms text paraphrased from Hardy, which stated: "A good proof has a very high degree of unexpectedness, inevitability and economy". The problem is this book is so thin I think I can actually speed read through it within an hour at Borders, so one day I shall.)
Book I actually bought:
Barry Schwartz's "The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less".
I bought this because I randomly flipped to a page which was explaining regret or sunk costs.
A theatre tried selling season subscriptions at both a discounted rate and at full price, and found the following phenomenon:
People who bought full price season subscriptions were more likely to attend performances, because they would feel worse for not attending as they had spent more money.
Though the focus on this issue was the paradox of choice, I was actually thinking thinking about another angle, i.e:
If the above phenomenon were true, would you (as the theatre's management) rather sell discounted season subscriptions (and hence have fewer people seeing your performances but have possibly higher box office takings), or
sell full price season subscriptions (and hence have more people seeing your performances but have possibly lower box office takings)?
1 Comments:
Depends on what you are trying to achieve. In the long run, it should be better to have bigger audiences so the reputation of the company can grow. Of course, to get to the long run, you need to survive in the short run. Simplistically, sell both.
trjs
By
Anonymous, at 11:23 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home