Subscribe to our RSS feed
EconLife.com connects economics to everyday life, current events and history.

Tag Archives: demand

Decisions Have An Opportunity Cost That Require Tradeoffs

In economics, sometimes psychology comes in handy…

If you were creating a wine list for a restaurant, which order would you select:

  • Alphabetize everything.
  • By price, start with the cheapest bottles.
  • By price, start with the most expensive bottles.
  • Group by wine type, and then select, from above, one of the first 3 choices.

If psychologists are right, first you should diminish our choices by grouping items. But not too much. Too many items and we might select none of them. Too few and we are dissatisfied. Recent research indicates that at fast food establishments we like 6 items in each category (chicken dishes, pasta, starters…) while in finer restaurants, we prefer selecting among 10 entres.

Next, a reference point is important. Where you start determines how you assess the subsequent selection. One analysis of a menu (below) at Balthazar, a NYC restaurant, explained that they listed a $155 seafood platter at the top right hand side and a $100 platter next to it to create a reference point or an “anchor.” Seen next to the $155 item, people happily select the $100 platter because it appears more reasonably priced. So, for the wine list, place the most expensive bottle first.

Finally, another study indicated background classical music can make a difference. In upscale restaurants, the music seemed to influence more expensive wine purchases. French music even appeared to generate a preference for French wine. Add in slow music and a hint of lavender and people linger more.

Fundamentally, when designing a menu, restauranteurs hope to attract us to their most profitable items, their “stars” and steer us away from popular items that are unprofitable, their “plow horses.” On the Balthazar menu below, their “stars” like the seafood platters and shrimp cocktail initially attract us. By contrast, I suspect they do not want us to order items at the bottom in their “menu Siberia.”

In the menu pdf, here, prices are easier to read than below.

Restaurant Psychology

You can see why, in 2002, Princeton psychology professor emeritus Daniel Kahneman won the Nobel Prize in economics (actually called the Sveriges Riksbank–Sweden’s central bank– Prize in Economic Sciences in honor of Alfred Nobel). I recommend his most recent book, Thinking Fast and Slow, as the perfect example of how behavioral economics is the intersection of psychology and economics.

Sources and Resources: This fascinating Guardian UK article describes menu psychology in greater detail while this one provides further analysis of the Balthazar menu.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

Is It Better to Outsource or Insource T-shirts?

The Bangladesh building collapse tragedy led me to 3 types of news articles. I wonder what the impact is when you combine them. Please let me know your opinion.

1. Suppliers: Low Cost

  • The cost attraction of Bangladesh has been tough to resist. At $40 a month, the average Bangladesh worker gets one-quarter of the Chinese entry level wage. Add to that an EU loophole that eliminated duties on imports from Bangladesh and the incentive to produce there multiplied.
  • You can see why Benetton, facing price competition from H&M and Zara, started using factories in Bangladesh. Even when they placed an order with an Indian contractor, he did some of the manufacturing in Bangladesh. In a 2012 report, McKinsey called Bangladesh the “next hot spot” for manufacturing.
  • Now, responding to the outcry, firms are saying they will not use their Bangladesh facilities. However, in an NPR interview, a worker advocate in Bangladesh emphasized that she did not want jobs to leave her country. Her people needed the work.

2. Consumers: Low Prices

  • Bangladesh is one reason shoppers believe there is a $5 t-shirt and a $6 bikini waiting for them. Commenting on the tragedy in Bangladesh, one Primark London shopper said, “They definitely need to improve, but I’ll still shop here. It’s so cheap.”  Another shopper, also at Primark, said, “If prices went up I wouldn’t buy from here.”

3. Fair Trade Labels: New Incentives

  • Researchers from Harvard and MIT concluded that even at outlet stores where they expect affordability, certain consumers are willing to pay more for ethically made clothing. Using data from 111 Banana Republic stores, researchers chose 3 products: A $130 woman’s linen suit, a $12 men’s T-shirt, $18 yoga pants. Buyers of the linen suit were willing to pay $18 more for a fair labor standards label. However, people purchasing the cheaper items were not influenced by elevated labor standards.
  • I suspect here, we are looking at price elasticity of demand. With higher prices leading  to considerably fewer purchases, the demand is elastic for lower priced items. On the other hand, people purchasing a more expensive item demonstrate more inelasticity. For them, a relatively substantial price hike does not affect buying behavior.

So…

We have cheap production costs, low retail prices and burgeoning ethical incentives. How will supply and demand respond?

The World's Leading Clothing Exporters from WSJ.com

The World’s Leading Clothing Exporters from WSJ.com

Sources and Resources: Each of my articles ideally conveyed the incentives to which producers and consumers are responding. Bloomberg (quotes source) and the WSJ (graph source, above), here and here, conveyed the cost incentives while the NY Times optimistically (and perhaps unrealistically) presented a burgeoning response to fair trade publicity. You might want to ground all the news articles with these two studies that display for Banana Republic and fair trade coffee what we really buy rather than what we say.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

Nutella Open Jar

The Nutella-gate crisis at Columbia University is classic demand and supply.

First the facts…

A “creamier-than-peanut-butter, chocolate hazelnut spread from Italy, …” Nutella had been served in crepes on weekends at Columbia’s undergraduate dining halls. However, when Columbia started offering it alone, the response was massive. Students ate huge amounts in the dining hall and used soup containers and cups to take Nutella to their dorm rooms.

Concerned, cafeteria authorities complained that they were depleting the school’s food budget. At $5,000 a week according to the Dining Services Executive Director, the total could be $250,000 a year. Disagreeing, Columbia students cited much cheaper Costco prices.

At this point, officials realized they had to contain a rapidly escalating crisis.  Calling it “a tongue-in-cheek university statement,” they said, ”Nutella-Gate Exposed…It’s a Smear.” As for the numbers, the university admitted they were far lower than $250,000 and they added that students were leaving dining halls with much less because of the publicity.

Thinking about incentives, the student response to Nutella was predictable. On the demand side, paying as much as $2363 a semester for a meal plan, they have the “all you can eat” incentive. Taking Nutella, some bread, maybe silverware and plates back to the dorm cost them nothing extra.

Because meal plans give students access to an unlimited supply for a single price, for an individual student, the supply curve is perfectly elastic. So, when his or her demand increases, still it crosses supply at the same price. The result? Students have the incentive to consume huge amounts. The law of demand, with less quantity at higher prices does not kick in.

How to get around demand side “over consumption?” I read that one Columbia dining hall eliminated trays. (I am not sure if all did.)

Even when demand increases, price is constant because of perfectly elastic supply.

Even when a student’s demand for Nutella increases, price is constant because of perfectly elastic supply.

Sources and Resources: While my Nutella quote is from a NY Times article and I got other facts from a follow-up NY Times piece and Business Insider, the Columbia Spectator provided a more serious perspective.

 

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

The ROI From College

It can be tough to represent a college through a logo.

Drake University thought it was saying that it gave students something extra when it added a “+” to its logo. The problem was that the other half of the logo was a “D.” Soon, for many reasons, they realized they did not want their school associated with a D+.

A petition at the University of California pushed the school toward eliminating its new logo when more than 50,000 people said it looked too slick and corporate. Hoping to modernize its 1868 seal, the University had traveled too far from a traditional image of an open book on an intricate background.

NY Times Picture of Old and Rebranded University of California Logo

During 2010, Johns Hopkins faked a rebranding on April Fools Day when it announced that it was eliminating the “S” in Johns because of all the confusion it generated.

And finally, I came across this “Les Misérables” parody from Boston University students. We could say that it rebrands the entire college experience.

Our Bottom Line: Like any business, colleges compete. For many schools, competition means you need a “brand,” an identity to distinguish yourself from others. How you brand yourself could depend on whether your market is an oligopoly where you compete against a small number of schools or monopolistic competition in which there are many.

Sources and Resources: A hat tip to the NY Times for their column on college rebranding, more on the Drake story here, and on Penn’s Wharton School rebranding through a new marketing style that relies on charts, graphs, a “quant” feel. I do recommend reading more about the Johns Hopkins April Fools story in The Washington Post and looking at one person’s list and pictures of the 15 ugliest logos.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

Sort of like lunch, there is no such thing as a free parking space. It costs us dollars or time.

Hoping to optimize so valuable a commodity, some cities are installing parking devices that use demand and supply to price spots. The approach resembles a variable pricing model where a good becomes more expensive when less is available.  Others, concerned about the time we waste have apps that instantaneously identify empty parking spaces.

Now, we can add Parking Panda.

Like any market maker, Parking Panda pairs people with parking spots and those who need them. Anyone who has a parking spot can enroll. You might own an office building with a lot that is unused over the weekend or have a home with a driveway you would like to monetize. Whatever the reason, by enrolling with Parking Panda, someone looking for parking can find you.

Our bottom Line:  Isn’t it fascinating how a market, with no direction from government, can satisfy people’s needs and make a community more efficient?

Sources and Resources: Thanks to Slate where I first learned about Parking Panda. Also, here is the classic Donald Shoup paper, ”The High Cost of Free Parking,” an econlife post on San Francisco parking solutions, and a recent NY Times article on their progress.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment