tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post7749952853956240758..comments2024-01-28T00:20:40.933-08:00Comments on Agoraphilia: Breaking NewsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-24495259082698825392007-06-12T23:26:00.000-07:002007-06-12T23:26:00.000-07:00wow!it’s great to read articles that come directly...wow!it’s great to read articles that come directly from the heart. Thanks for sharingAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-15475790214103378852007-05-08T10:48:00.000-07:002007-05-08T10:48:00.000-07:00brilliant, well done, loved it.brilliant, well done, loved it.Andy Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01539071127876220784noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-75229603693634165622007-05-04T11:35:00.000-07:002007-05-04T11:35:00.000-07:00I agree that relation specific investments play an...I agree that relation specific investments play an important role in relationships, but I think most outside observers are accounting for that. So a relationship that seems to be defunct to mos is probably actually defunct.Michael Greineckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14779846063984632110noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-24400681480883772912007-05-02T19:44:00.000-07:002007-05-02T19:44:00.000-07:00Just a small comment on what Glen said vis a vis s...Just a small comment on what Glen said vis a vis software investment. I'm in software sales - won't say for whom - so I know where of I speak.<BR/><BR/>I have seen people recommend software puchases / decisions based on their familiarity / comfort w/ a particular product or platform wholly because it was in their comfort zone. They have justified it based on the "ramp-up" costs of "education" on the new platform, but without regard to whether said platform really provided a better, more cost efficient or flexible platform for their company.<BR/><BR/>To whit, the decision was based on the comfort zone of the influencers, not on the best interests of their company.<BR/><BR/>And yes, I may be guilty of sour grapes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-79447818369527279722007-05-02T15:18:00.000-07:002007-05-02T15:18:00.000-07:00Intersting post. You should read, if you haven't ...Intersting post. You should read, if you haven't already, the work of social psychologist Caryl Rusbult, formerly of Univ. of North Carolina now at a univeristy in the netherlands. She has used interdependence theory and research to describe the process of commitment in a relationship in much the way you have and has done extensive emprical research to back it up. (and this was 15 years ago)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-458447822989330032007-05-02T14:25:00.000-07:002007-05-02T14:25:00.000-07:00There's something quite depressing about this 'con...There's something quite depressing about this 'consumer' approach to relationship, even though I greatly enjoy the economic analysis.<BR/><BR/>Marriage, at least, is intended to be that place where we work out all sorts of weird, painful, or difficult things from our past, as well as that place in which we finally develop the key aspect of MATURITY -- the ability to put somebody else first.<BR/><BR/>A consumer approach to marriage continually avoids those key components, producing a generation of perpetual adolescents, persistently self-focused and generally mal-adjusted to adult life.<BR/><BR/>Like, say, Baby Boomers.<BR/><BR/>The irony is that up until a couple of generations ago marriage was predominantly an economic arrangement between individuals or families.<BR/><BR/>If marriage has now been transformed into something to be 'fulfilling,' then we ought at least to have the common sense -- and the grace -- to define that fulfillment as maturity, rather than perpetual adolescent arrogance and self-absorption.<BR/><BR/>There are two kinds of marriages: hard marriages and bad marriages.<BR/><BR/>Love is not a feeling, it is a verb.<BR/><BR/>Going for the easy feelings, especially again and again, is just plain childish, and perhaps even psychotic.Bart Hall (Kansas, USA)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06060627788809034719noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-32901535787259082132007-05-02T13:39:00.000-07:002007-05-02T13:39:00.000-07:00I seem to recall that there were some studies show...I seem to recall that there were some studies showing that landlords tend to keep rents at below-market prices for good tenants of long standing, for precisely the same reason. In a nutshell, it's a hassle to start over again.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-55954845371563271242007-05-02T13:34:00.000-07:002007-05-02T13:34:00.000-07:00Well everyone knows (or should know) that wives fe...Well everyone knows (or should know) that wives feed up their husbands to make them fat so that they are no longer appealing to other women. If you say to your wife, "No, no apple pie for me," or some such, a deep instinct will tell her, and maybe not erroneously, that she hasn't snared you completely.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-60564169578474241762007-05-02T13:13:00.000-07:002007-05-02T13:13:00.000-07:00gil: the relationship specific assets mean that po...gil: the relationship specific assets mean that post-breakup you end up at a state of negative worth, rather than zero. Your current relationship has added value beyond the mate aspect - knwoledge and understanding of business dilemmas, relationships with friends and associates, extended network of contacts, etc. Any serious relationship is not just between two people, it includes their entire networks and has substantial, though often hidden, added benefits. Older, less modern understandings of marriage contain a great degree of truth behind them, especially when considering ending a relationship. Just because we've come to the belief that marriage shouldn't subordinate personal interests to the commercial and political interests of a marriage, we shouldn't ignore that their are other interests and concerns that evolve from a relationship. <BR/><BR/>There is a reason why we look down on those who trade in their old wife for a trophy-wife of questionable intellience. Sure she's hot and young and more "adventurous", but she doesn't bring anything to the table outside of personal benefits. The sugar daddy brings along all sorts of other benefits (hence why she's willing to put up with his jowly, wrinkly ass) and he's overly focused on the merely personal issues rather than the extended issues. Frequently (though of course not all the time) the loss in the extended network is more severe than the increase in personal benefits resulting from a nubile, adventurous playmate. <BR/><BR/>Rupert Murdoch provides a great example of how the newer model is creating dramatic problems for his other relationships, including affecting the succession at News Corp and the ownership trusts that keep Rupert in control.Heyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08333291654356970407noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-90164574121517300542007-05-02T12:32:00.000-07:002007-05-02T12:32:00.000-07:00Didn't Proust say that marriages stay together lar...Didn't Proust say that marriages stay together largely through our fear of infidelity by our other partner and the steps we take to make such straying less likely? This seems to be the other side of the coin.<BR/><BR/>Or perhaps people who invest in improving their appearance actually want to look and feel better for themselves and the partners they love.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05171464340540406167noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-15785942076482470572007-05-02T11:55:00.000-07:002007-05-02T11:55:00.000-07:00Should I keep an old, crappy, piece of software th...<I>Should I keep an old, crappy, piece of software that I know how to use, if there are better options available whose price and learning-curve are justified by better features?</I><BR/><BR/>This is basically the business model of Windows.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-11375636950789219902007-05-02T11:42:00.000-07:002007-05-02T11:42:00.000-07:00I might be taking this analogy too far but, the si...I might be taking this analogy too far but, the situation is more akin to<BR/><BR/>1. You have a graphics program. 2. You create 10000 files with that program.<BR/>3. Your program is not doing everything you want it do, far from it.<BR/>4. If you give up the old program, you will ahve to spend months and possibly years looking for another one.<BR/>5. You will have to recreate all 10,000 files from scratch.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-18287460590252698742007-05-01T13:33:00.000-07:002007-05-01T13:33:00.000-07:00The notion that sunk costs should not affect decis...The notion that sunk costs should not affect decisions is a gross simplification. The correct lesson is that sunk costs should not be included among the marginal costs of a subsequent decision. But sunk costs, or more precisely the assets they create, can very much affect the returns from different subsequent choices.<BR/><BR/>To take your example of software: Say I already own a graphics program. It cost me $200. Now there's a new and improved graphics program that will cost $250. In deciding whether to buy the new program, the $200 I spent on the earlier version is irrelevant. But what's very relevant is that <EM>I already have a graphics program</EM>. In order to justify buying the new program, its <EM>added</EM> value over the old program must exceed its <EM>total</EM> price of $250.Glen Whitmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01425907466575991113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-11611856612162906402007-05-01T13:25:00.000-07:002007-05-01T13:25:00.000-07:00Right, but why is it rational to let my investment...Right, but why is it rational to let my investment in these relationship-specific assets affect my decisions for the future?<BR/><BR/>I'm not seeing why my knowlege of somebody's schedule and preferences should affect my decision about whether to stay with them.<BR/><BR/>Should I keep an old, crappy, piece of software that I know how to use, if there are better options available whose price and learning-curve are justified by better features?<BR/><BR/>Should that decision be affected by how well I know the software that I have (or by how hard it was to acquire that knowlege)?Gilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16905127825110313631noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-63720173330791525672007-05-01T12:33:00.000-07:002007-05-01T12:33:00.000-07:00Yes, they are sunk costs, but they are not just su...Yes, they are sunk costs, but they are not <EM>just</EM> sunk costs. They are sunk costs that create assets whose value is contingent on continuation of a specific relationship. Other sunk costs create assets with non-specific value -- for instance, a college education.Glen Whitmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01425907466575991113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3829599.post-46024012922870553332007-05-01T12:06:00.000-07:002007-05-01T12:06:00.000-07:00It seems like many of the things you're calling re...It seems like many of the things you're calling relationship-specific assets are more usefully considered sunk costs.Gilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16905127825110313631noreply@blogger.com