Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Windjammer" data-source="post: 8036277" data-attributes="member: 60075">Thank you for such an astute and well-argued response. Pay certainly doesn't correlate with skills, I completely concede that.I'm less certain that point was made in the post I was responding to. That post seems to not mention individual pay at all; instead, it talks about an macro-economic equation that has implications for individual pay levels:A profession with low entry barriers (such as absence of certification or educational requirements) frequently results in high supply. That high supply is met with demand that is both<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">low: people don't shop for RPGs like they do for groceries (publishers attempt to offset this by offering subscription services, like 4e did with DDI or Paizo does with Pathfinder etc)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">and <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/012915/what-difference-between-inelasticity-and-elasticity-demand.asp" target="_blank">elastic</a>: a publisher can reject with minimal consequences a RPG writer's demands for higher pay; a RPG customer is unwilling to pay a twice-as-skilled writer $100 instead of $50 for the same 200-page hardcover (though certain exceptions are made for absolute star designers).</li> </ul>This doesn't directly correlate pay with skill. It correlates (a) the combination of high supply and low demand with (b) low pay. Skills are but one factor for high supply (a); the suggestion was made that higher skill and entry requirements would lower the supply, which would then offset the supply/demand ratio towards better pay. So no, I don't think the post equated pay with skill, quite the opposite.Is that argument a bit quick and overlooks pertinent factors? Absolutely. For one, it's empirically false that low entry requirements always generate high supply. You also need market agents' willingness to enter a low-barrier market that's oversaturated. That's something the above equilibrium equation is silent about, and where Owen's posts do so much to help us understand better. Even if RPGs retained their low entry barriers but there were only five people each year willing to write RPG products for the entire industry, you can bet that those writers would be paid a lot, lot more - for now you've just wiped out a key factor in elasticity.And that goes to your point, that pay doesn't equate skill. In a weird way, I think all of us agree on that, we just put the emphasis on different points in the overall equation. I'm certainly grateful you made me step back and think that equation through more thoroughly than above - so, thank you.</blockquote>

Verification