I haven’t studied “capitalism” but my Masters degree is in Financial Engineering. Since you seem to care about formal economics, how do you propose solving Akelof’s Market for Lemons?
Valve solves the information asymmetry. That’s a net gain for both buyers and sellers. But you’ve studied economics, so you probably know that already.
So let’s skip to the meat of the question. How do you propose determining the intrinsic value of resolved information asymmetry.
masterspace@lemmy.ca 4 days ago
Lmfao, you’re literally trying to pull a Goodwill Hunting? Bruh we’ve seen this movie.
How about you explain precisely what information is asymmetric and what they’re solving?
nednobbins@lemmy.zip 4 days ago
You’re the one claiming to be the economics expert. I’m simply correcting the record.
masterspace@lemmy.ca 4 days ago
Lmfao, this is the fastest I’ve ever seen an attempted Goodwill Hunting fall on its face.
You have literally no idea what you even asked.
nednobbins@lemmy.zip 4 days ago
Are you actually confused about the information asymmetry in video game purchases? Given your weird movie references I assumed you were just trying to change the topic.
I’ll try to use small words. Before you play a game, you don’t know if it’s goo;, just as used car buyers don’t know if the used car is a lemon. Without a buyer protections that drags the price of good games down just as lemons drag down the price of used cars. Akerlof goes into the proof for the car part of this in his paper.
“Lemon laws” mostly solve that problem for cars. Steam mostly solves that problem for video games. That requires trust. You may not trust Steam but millions of people do. They’ve repeatedly made decisions that benefit gamers so gamers flock to them. Thats why they buy so many games from Steam even when they’re available elsewhere. If they broke that trust they’d probably never get it back but, until then, their net effect is to increase revenue for studios by providing a market where people are comfortable enough to spend more money.