81,841
edits
Rent-seeking: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
*'''[[Franchising]]''': Taking an idea or a business model someone else has invented — McDonald’s is the best example — and paying them a franchise fee to operate it. Here is ''double'' rent-seeking: the franchisee pays the franchisor, and the customer pays the ''franchisee''. | *'''[[Franchising]]''': Taking an idea or a business model someone else has invented — McDonald’s is the best example — and paying them a franchise fee to operate it. Here is ''double'' rent-seeking: the franchisee pays the franchisor, and the customer pays the ''franchisee''. | ||
*'''[[Software as a service]]:''' The simple answer to the question [[why is reg tech so disappointing?]] — is that tech businesses can’t make money if all they get paid for is writing software. This would be like Mick Jagger only getting paid for fifteen minutes’ work — where is the logic, or the justice in that?<ref>Irony alert.</ref> | *'''[[Software as a service]]:''' The simple answer to the question [[why is reg tech so disappointing?]] — is that tech businesses can’t make money if all they get paid for is writing software. This would be like Mick Jagger only getting paid for fifteen minutes’ work — where is the logic, or the justice in that?<ref>Irony alert.</ref> | ||
*'''[[Regulatory rent-seeking]]''': A regulatory fine for some impermissible behaviour which, while significant, pales into insignificance with the value accrued to the miscreant who carries out the behaviour, such that it suits both of them to carry on with the activity. Where the time don’t match the crime. | |||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
*[[ClauseHub: theory]] | *[[ClauseHub: theory]] | ||