Page 3 of 3

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:19 am
by OrangeRKN
This thread is so frustrating. It shouldn't need to be made explicit in the hypothetical that the ticket is non-refundable and non-transferable. For everyone saying "well I probably do want to see Drake if I bought the ticket", imagine that you bought the ticket to see the support act and they have since cancelled. Maybe that'll help accept the situation where you bought a ticket to something you don't want to go to, where the only choice to be made is whether to go or not.

What about this one, considering this is a gaming forum: You buy a digital game and quickly decide you enjoy nothing about it. Do you keep playing to completion out of some obligation to get your money's worth?

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:20 am
by Tragic Magic
That's easy, I'd get a refund through Steam.

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:21 am
by OrangeRKN
I hate u

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:57 am
by Tomous
I’d trade the game with Preezy for Drake tickets

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:22 am
by Alvin Flummux
I'd go, because I spent the money, but I'd look for other activities to do in the area so maybe I could get more out of the trip before and after the concert, to make it feel worthwhile.

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:20 am
by Saint of Killers
If I bought tickets and then later decided I no longer wanted to go, I'd quickly deduce my social/one of many other anxieties was playing up and I was trying to talk myself into staying in my comfort zone. So I would end up going anyway and would likely have a good time, later wondering what the hell I was worried about to begin with.

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:27 am
by Saint of Killers
OrangeRakoon wrote:What about this one, considering this is a gaming forum: You buy a digital game and quickly decide you enjoy nothing about it. Do you keep playing to completion out of some obligation to get your money's worth?


No. If you change quickly decide to eventually realise.

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 7:28 am
by Moggy
OrangeRakoon wrote:For everyone saying "well I probably do want to see Drake if I bought the ticket", imagine that you bought the ticket to see the support act and they have since cancelled.


Who the strawberry float spends lots of money on a big act, just to see the support act? It would be cheaper to go to the gig of the support act and not have to put up with watching Drake.

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 7:32 am
by Corazon de Leon
Moggy wrote:
OrangeRakoon wrote:For everyone saying "well I probably do want to see Drake if I bought the ticket", imagine that you bought the ticket to see the support act and they have since cancelled.


Who the strawberry float spends lots of money on a big act, just to see the support act? It would be cheaper to go to the gig of the support act and not have to put up with watching Drake.


Or you could end up with what I call a Silversun Pickups situation, wherein I missed them supporting Placebo in 2009 and they never came back. :cry:

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 7:44 am
by Moggy
Corazon de Leon wrote:
Moggy wrote:
OrangeRakoon wrote:For everyone saying "well I probably do want to see Drake if I bought the ticket", imagine that you bought the ticket to see the support act and they have since cancelled.


Who the strawberry float spends lots of money on a big act, just to see the support act? It would be cheaper to go to the gig of the support act and not have to put up with watching Drake.


Or you could end up with what I call a Silversun Pickups situation, wherein I missed them supporting Placebo in 2009 and they never came back. :cry:


You didn't want to see Placebo?

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 8:47 am
by Corazon de Leon
Moggy wrote:
Corazon de Leon wrote:
Moggy wrote:
OrangeRakoon wrote:For everyone saying "well I probably do want to see Drake if I bought the ticket", imagine that you bought the ticket to see the support act and they have since cancelled.


Who the strawberry float spends lots of money on a big act, just to see the support act? It would be cheaper to go to the gig of the support act and not have to put up with watching Drake.


Or you could end up with what I call a Silversun Pickups situation, wherein I missed them supporting Placebo in 2009 and they never came back. :cry:


You didn't want to see Placebo?


I wasn’t bothered - had already seen them a few times and probably wouldn’t have bought a ticket otherwise.

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:33 pm
by sawyerpip
Here's a (not so) hypothetical example for you all - you sat down to watch the Isner v Anderson Wimbledon semi-final at 1pm. It's now half past 7 and it's still going on. You're completely bored and have other things you want to do, but you've invested so much time into this match you don't want to miss the ending. What do you do?

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:38 pm
by Moggy
sawyerpip wrote:Here's a (not so) hypothetical example for you all - you sat down to watch the Isner v Anderson Wimbledon semi-final at 1pm. It's now half past 7 and it's still going on. You're completely bored and have other things you want to do, but you've invested so much time into this match you don't want to miss the ending. What do you do?


Record it and fast forward through it tomorrow.

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:42 pm
by Poncho
I'm going through this right now with the tennis. It's so boring and the quality of play has been so low that I am very aware I'm wasting my Friday evening and should do something else, but I feel like I've got to stick it out now.

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 12:44 am
by Pedz
Moggy wrote:
sawyerpip wrote:Here's a (not so) hypothetical example for you all - you sat down to watch the Isner v Anderson Wimbledon semi-final at 1pm. It's now half past 7 and it's still going on. You're completely bored and have other things you want to do, but you've invested so much time into this match you don't want to miss the ending. What do you do?


Record it and fast forward through it tomorrow.


Do other things and check the Tennis Thread Title for spoilers.

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 6:16 am
by Saint of Killers
Pedz wrote:
Moggy wrote:
sawyerpip wrote:Here's a (not so) hypothetical example for you all - you sat down to watch the Isner v Anderson Wimbledon semi-final at 1pm. It's now half past 7 and it's still going on. You're completely bored and have other things you want to do, but you've invested so much time into this match you don't want to miss the ending. What do you do?


Record it and fast forward through it tomorrow.


Do other things and check the Tennis Thread Title for spoilers.


legit irl lol

I chose to do the other things.

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 8:34 am
by Ad7
Moggy wrote:Who the strawberry float spends lots of money on a big act, just to see the support act? It would be cheaper to go to the gig of the support act and not have to put up with watching Drake.


I remember back when oasis were massive, they were supporting the black crows in the US throughout whole tour and a good chunk of the crowds were oasis fans who would leave before the black crows came on.

In response to the topic, it's linked to disposable income really. Back in the day I'd have gone to the gig regardless because I'd spent the money and it'd feel like a waste, whereas recently we've bought tickets to gigs and then they've got closer and we flat out can't be arsed to go any more and agreed the only reason we were still thinking of doing so was because we'd already paid for it.

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2018 9:07 am
by Tragic Magic
I think I have a good example.

You've paid £200 to attend a stag weekend and you're best man to the groom. But a month before the stag, the wedding is called off due to an altercation. It's too late to get your money back so do you go on the weekend for just a lads piss up, spending more money on travel, food and booze or do you not bother?

I'm not gonna bother :x

Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy

Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2018 9:20 am
by Moggy
Tragic Magic wrote:I think I have a good example.

You've paid £200 to attend a stag weekend and you're best man to the groom. But a month before the stag, the wedding is called off due to an altercation. It's too late to get your money back so do you go on the weekend for just a lads piss up, spending more money on travel, food and booze or do you not bother?

I'm not gonna bother :x


Depends on how many drag queen shows you can see while you are away.