Producers Are Doing Much More Than Just Producing

AudioMentor

The economic principal I am researching is that people generally respond to incentives in predictable ways, and how producers have responded to changes in technology.

My research question to help me study the economic principal is how technology has changed the role of a producer in the music industry over the years.  

First, producers obviously have much more technology available to them today which has caused their role in the music making process to change.  In the past, the main role of a producer was to almost have a managerial role in the studio.  The recording audio engineers, mix engineers, session musicians, and many other roles were filled by different people that the producer was in charge of.  They were to make sure that all of these people didn't go over their budget and also got everything done by the deadline.  Nowadays, the role of a producer includes many of these jobs such as mixing the music that artists make, creating beats/background music for artists and in general have a much bigger role in the music business.  

Second, with laptops and small midi keyboards and a few other small instruments, producers are able to make and mix music much more easily on the go.  Because of this, producers have much more time to spend either creating songs or mixing/editing songs made by other artists or even themselves.  This is very important because producers can put out music for listeners to appreciate much more frequently.

Third, with producers making more and more beats for artists to make music on top of, many rap artists in particular will write lyrics over a beat that was made by a producer, not themselves.  This also helps make new music much more readily available to listeners because the producer and the artist are sort of splitting the work of making a song.  Additionally, it helps some producers such as Metro Boomin and many more make a name for themselves because they would probably not be very well known otherwise.  

In my next blog post, I will research how the styles of music that people prefer has changed over time and what effect technology has had on this change.  

How will the NFL regulate its players from abusing the PED policy?

Source: SB Nation 

In an article written by ESPN, the NFL players union is frustrated at the league for requesting to test five certain players for PED's, as for their names came up in a report that said they were all abusing the policy. My economic policy is Institutions, "rules of the game" so to speak. NFL players in general have commonly had issues with the policy since they seem to take it pretty lightly. Almost every other week or so you hear about a player being suspended for abusing it and this can no longer go on.


Something needs to be done with respect to this because clearly the policy at hand isn't stopping them. With that being said, those five players don't feel it is fair for them to be tested since the source it came from is indeed not credible. This leads to the bigger problem: the players' union overall doesn't believe they are very trusted by the league. They frequently advocate against doing interviews with league officials since they believe the questions being asked aren't always relevant and therefore could lead to either getting themselves or other into some type of trouble. "The NFLPA believes it is its responsibility to protect its players from those kinds of situations, and honestly, it's correct. If not to advocate for the players and make sure their employers aren’t trying to take advantage of them, what’s the purpose of a union? 

Next blog post: How will the MLB regulate PED abuse?

Why Is a Concert Ticket So Expensive

Live Design

The economic principle I am researching is demand, specifically for rock concerts. And how Prices are affected by complementary goods.

 Over the last decade we have seen a huge increase in the prices of concert tickets, specifically rock and roll concerts starting in 1997. Bruce Springsteen concerts are no exception. While it may seem anything but, the music industry like all others is governed by the laws of economics.

 There are many reasons that the price of concert tickets have gone up in recent years, but I will explore just a few today. When someone goes to a concert they usually will by complementaries, such as CDs, albums, t-shirts, ect. However in recent years music streaming services have taken over and sales of CDs and albums have dropped to almost zero. According to The Economics of Real Superstars: The Market for Rock Concerts in the Material World by Alan B. Krueger, ¨the decline in complementarities is the main cause of the recent surge in concert prices¨.

 This makes sense because if the amount of profits from commodities declined, artist must raise the prices of concerts if they want to have the same total profit. Even though Prices for Bruce Springsteen concerts are expensive often they can pale to other´s. Kruger cites that often ¨Springsteen, for example, sets his ticket prices well below their market Value¨. For some artists it is not all about the money.

 Artists are able to raise to price of concert tickets and people will still attend because for some superstars, the market for a rock concert is inelastic( According to Econlife.com), which means the demand curve is extremely steep because price will have little effect on quantity demanded. A good example of a markets elasticity is Springsteen on Broadway, which ticket prices for sold for more than Hamilton as prices soared above 500$.

 In my next blog post I will explore why people like the sound of Springsteen and why he has become so successful.

How do soccer trades work

Source: Us.as.com

The Economic principal I’m doing is People gain when they trade voluntarily.
 My Topic is: What ways do Soccer Trades happen that being loans, selling players, or player swaps? 

The subtopic I’m doing today How do they work?

Soccer transfers happen twice a year the first one being between the end of the first season and in Europe August 31st, in America August 9th and the other being sometime during the middle of the season, each country decides when they would like to have it. In England, it was from the first to the 31st of January this year.

 The BBC published an article about this very topic called “How does a football transfer work?” and they do a pretty good job explaining what goes down when a player gets transferred like asking “Who gets the money?” and the answer to that, isn’t the player but the club he’s moving to and prime example was when Neymar jr. went from Barcelona to PSG and paid the buyout clause in Neymar's old Barcelona contract, which was set at 222m euros. So the 222m euros went to Barcelona instead of Neymar and some of the money went to Neymar’s agent as well.

 In my next blog post, I will research the question “What happens if something were to happen to the player in question?”

How do graphic designers use colors to invoke feelings towards a brand or product?

SOURCE: Interaction Design Foundation

Color is a powerful communication tool and arguably the most influential aspect of design. It can be
used to signal action, influence mood, and create physiological reactions. Certain colors have even been
associated with increased blood pressure, increased metabolism, and eyestrain. So how does it work?

First think about some popular brands like Starbucks or Domino’s. Iconic and recognizable through their colors. Starbucks uses that classic deep green, accenting it with darker greys and brown. Every Starbucks you walk into has the same feel and that's thanks to color. The deep green they use is meant to represent affluence and abundance, the dark slate gives a sense of balance and sophistication, and the brown gives the natural and rustic feel. All together, just by looking at the colors you feel calmed and feel like you’ll be getting a product that is natural and earthy that is higher end. Colors like green and brown are used to give a space or logo a sense a calm as studies have shown that is reduces heart rate.

Another color that has a similar effect is blue, one of the colors Domino’s uses. Blue is one of the most popular colors in logo creation and gives a sense of trustworthiness, something Domino’s values and promises. The other half of their logo is a bright red. Red is the most popular and often used color in logos, from entertainment like Marvel and Netflix to fast food like McDonalds and KFC. Red has been shown to increase heart rates and actually activates the pituitary gland which releases hormones into the bloodstream and stimulates metabolism along with other aspects of your body making it no surprise why so many food joints use the color.

We can use this to break down other things, not just logos. Police officers wear blue to give a sense of security and trustworthiness, Marvel uses red to express energy and power, Mattel uses pink for Barbie to show off the femininity and innocence of the doll. Next time you go to a mall take a look at the businesses you frequent or those you don’t and look closer at what colors they’re using and you might just peek behind the logo.

Next post will cover the use of shapes in design.

What do Athletic Trainers do?

What do Athletic Trainers do?

Athletic trainers do most of their rehab and assist their patients in their offices.

The economic principle I’m exploring is Because of scarcity, people choose. All choices have an opportunity cost.

My research question to help me study the economic principle is “Due to a scarcity of athletic trainers in major league sports, what is the opportunity cost of the athletes that need assistance with training and injuries?”

The article Current Concepts in Sports Injury Rehabilitation published in National Institute of Health titled “Current Concepts in Sports Injury Rehabilitation” demonstrates this economic principle by arguing and showing the planning that it takes for an athletic trainer to help all their patients/team members, the rehab they have to go through, and how to let the person go back to the sport.

First, an Athletic Trainer helps all of their patients and team members that they work for and with. Normally, an athletic trainer works for a specific team, such as The Chicago White Sox, and they are dedicated to work with the players and create workouts, rehabilitation workouts, assist in training, workout with the players, and always take care of the injuries that occur during games, practices, and even off the field. When an injury occurs during a game or practice, the athletic trainers are responsible for taking them out of the sport temporarily or permanently so the injury can start the healing process. Athletic trainers work with the injured player and the coaches to create schedules for the player to ensure a safe return to the sport.

Second, the athletic trainers put the players through rehab if necessary after an injury occurs and slowly bring the players back to playing regularly. They create workouts to do with the injured player and make sure that they will be coming back to playing and have a plan of when they should be back in the sport. During the rehab time, they have to make sure that the player is doing the correct work in order to return back to the sport by making sure that they are using correct form so they do not injury themselves more.

Third, the athletic trainer is able to release the player when they believe they are capable of returning and continuing practice with a higher intensity. First, the athletic trainer allows the player to go to a practice when they believe they are able to continue practice as usual. The player goes to practice but does not give full effort while the trainer watches to make sure they are not showing signs that the injury is restricting them in any way. The player has to go through one practice before a game without any signs that the injury is interfering with the players activity, and after they go through a practice with their teammates, then they are able to return to playing to their fullest ability-which includes games.

In my next blog post I will research the question: What are alternate options for sports players who are injured/need training?

What sort of countries/cultures are more likely to be interested in the exotic pet trade? Which ones are more averse to the idea?

Source: cleveland.com

The economic principle I’m exploring is “Institutions are the ‘rules of the game’ that influence choices.” My research question to help me study the economic principle is “How does the varying legality of exotic pet ownership around the world influence the exotic pet trade?” My sub-research question is “What sort of countries/cultures are more likely to be interested in the exotic pet trade? Which ones are more averse to the idea?” 

The article published on National Geographic’s website titled “Young Collectors, Traders Help Fuel a Boom in Ultra-Exotic Pets” (by Rachael Bale) demonstrates this economic principle by showing that due to the poorly-enforced and sometimes unclear laws surrounding ownership of exotic pets internationally, even cultures that typically pride themselves on being “environmentally friendly” have been participating extensively in the illegal purchase and sale of animals. If laws were consistent among cultures and more strictly enforced, they might influence people’s decision to participate in the trade in the sense that they would make it a lot less appealing.

 When people generally consider the exotic pet trade, they only think of it as something going on in third-world countries, and as something only done by criminals, the poor, or the uneducated. While it’s true that “Asia dominates the international trade in live animals, according to a 2013 Oxford University study”, the market wouldn’t be so large and lucrative if it was restricted to just one continent or one social class. According to the article, “In the Persian Gulf, big cats have become the latest must-have accessory for the super-rich”, and “global demand for exotic pets is growing” overall, seemingly among people of varying degrees of wealth.The Western world is not innocent either - “In the U.S., it’s believed there are more wild animals in homes and roadside attractions than in zoos...And Europeans are importing reptiles in greater quantities than anyone else, according to the BioScience study”.

 While the trade flourishes in Asia because “China has some laws protecting certain species from becoming exotic pets, but traders seem to have no problem circumventing them” and because of the reported “‘safe haven’” (according to “Peter Li, a professor at University of Houston-Downtown and China policy specialist at Humane Society International”) the internet and social media provides for black market trade, it seems that the black market for exotic animals is not isolated to any one country or group. It’s an international problem, and can likely only be solved with international cooperation and awareness. 

 In my next blog post I will research the question “How has the increasing awareness of environmental issues affected the trade over the years? Has the environmental movement shrank it?”

What effects have the ¨Super teams¨ of the NBA have had on the rest of the league?

SOURCE: Sporting News

economic principle I’m exploring is  how people's decisions are influenced  by scarcity of
goods and the opportunity costs associated with them.

My research question to help me study the economic principle is how have NBA teams been able to establish super teams, with limited salary cap´s and limited superstars. ¨Until the NBA breaks up its ¨super teams¨ it is basically just European soccer. this article dives into the effects super teams (Warriors) have had on the league as a whole.

 First, in order for a team to develop they most give up other things such as players and money. The warriors have been able to get five superstars where others are lucky to have two. In the warriors case the players have given up a lot of money to keep that dynasty together.

 Second, some players that have signed with the warriors have seen a huge opportunity cost of money. Superstars that deserve max contracts were signing for a small fraction of what they are worth, because of the scarcity of money a team is able to spend.

 Third, in order to gather these high callabar players teams must give up other resources i.e Demarcus cousins is among the elite and deserves a well over a hundred million dollar contract. the warriors a team with limited salary space weren't able to offer him what heś worth. Which caused Demarcus to take a six million dollar contract which is close to nothing for an elite player such as Demarcus.

 In my next blog post I will research the question: how have other teams reacted to these unbalanced teams?

How do companies choose between hiring human labor or installing robotic labor?

Hunter Belvis

Source: ATS Automation

First I will address the question: “what is the cost of robotic labor?” In the article "Motivated to Automate" Phil Davies discusses how his welding company called “OEM Fabricators” purchased an automated welder priced at 330,000 dollars. While the numbers seem quite high for a purchase, OEM President S. Mark Tyler believes that it was the right move considering the difficulty of “bringing people on board to the company” now. Tyler stated that waiting process for a filling a position could take several weeks or months compared to shorter wait times in the past. Tyler also claims that the welder has “reduced costs and has boosted productivity” and has allowed the company to pursue “new lines of business.”

It seems that the installation of robotics has helped OEM Fabricators, but what impact has this had its more lifelike workers? According the article, fears have been raised by the media and labor advocates due to the possibility that automated labor will put people out of work. While this is true for low-skilled jobs, the good news is that it is short term. Also it is likely that automated labor can create more, higher salary jobs which require “higher education and advanced skill” according to Philies. In fact due to the higher production rates and profits, some firms have hired additional workers.

this is only a mere taste of automated labor and its potential costs, there is more research that can be done. In my next blog post I will be talking about the efficiency of automated labor compared to human labor.

How climate change effects ski resorts.

Source: Powder.com

The economic principle I am exploring is: What are the opportunity costs of lift ticket prices being so high?

The overall question I will research is How does climate change effect ski resorts and why is skiing so expensive?

According to the article "Climate Study Suggests Skiing Is On a Short Leash", by powder.com the author states  "After running 300,000 years of climate model simulations, with data by the hour, the study concluded that "virtually" all ski areas in the United States will not have the snow to operate like they do today."

First, this has started to become a major panic in the skiing industry.  Businesses need to cut down on their emissions to save the environment.  If people ever want to ski through the glorious powder like they have been for hundreds of years, the pollution must be stopped. 

Second, the shorter the ski season the less profit that the big ski corporation make each year.  Eventually if they don't have enough snow  all year they may not even be able to open the mountains.  Places like Vail, Beaver Creek, and Jackson hole have the best skiing in the united states, but if climate change continues to increase at the rate it is today they will become non existent.

Third, With this new information ski hills have began to invest massive amounts of money into the snow making industry.  When companies have to invest all their money into making the snow instead of it being naturally produced they have to raise their ticket prices.  Today the average ski ticket price is $ 136 per day.  If they continue to pollute the environment with all of these harmful toxins we will begin to see ski prices rise, making it unaffordable for most. 

In my next blog I will research the question: What is the operation cost of electricity on the mountain?

is it effective for industries to influence consumers to avoid other food industries?

Source: CreditCards

The economic principle I'm exploring is whether or not it is effective

My research question to help me study the economic principle is "is it effective for industries to influence consumers to avoid other food industries?"

The article published in NPR, titled "50 Years Ago, Sugar Industry Quietly Paid Scientists To Point Blame At Fat" demonstrates this economic principle by showing how the sugar industry paid scientists to point blame on fat, had coronary heart disease falsely linked with fats, and how sugar consumption skyrocketed. 

First, in the 1960's the sugar industry funded research that showed how bad fats were for the body and downplayed the effects of sugars on the body. I think this is unethical because the sugar industry gave consumers and the public false and fabricated information to help "improve" their lifestyle choices, when in reality the industry just needed put themselves into a better light.

Second, there were concerns about sugars link to heart diseases. However, group called the Sugar Research Foundation wanted to deny or contradict these concerns.  The group suggested there were major problems with every study that linked heart disease and sugar, so they concluded a study saying the best way to address coronary heart disease was to leave fats out of your diet. I think it is morally wrong to falsely link something to a disease in the hopes of convincing consumers to buy their product.

Third, with new studies out about how fats link to heart disease and saying sugars are not the culprit like people may think, the consumption of fats decreased.  With the consumption of fat decreasing, people need to replace this part of their diet, which happened to be sugar. A study directly shows that after this study, Americas per capita sugar consumption would go up by a third.

In my next blog I will research the question: What does "Fat Free" really mean?

Decline of the Middle Class

Source: Reuters

The economic principle I’m exploring is Institutions are the "rules of the game" that influence choices

My research question to help me study the economic principle is "How socially mobile is America
today?"The article published in The Atlantic titled “Poor at 20, Poor for Life” demonstrates this
economic principle by showing that people aren’t moving up form where they started, the middle class is becoming stagnant, and the top is becoming very lonely.

Millennials today have a lower chance of moving up the social ladder than previous generations.
According to the article, “the probability of ending where you start has gone up, and the probability of moving up from where you start has gone down." This lack of progress shows me that the U.S has failed to give millennials the same opportunities afforded to previous generations, who benefited from low tax rates and low college tuitions. With inflation of goods and services, people now have to spend more on the same products. This makes it hard to save money, and thus prolongs the time it takes to put a down payment on a house or go on vacations every year.

The article also showed that the American Dream is fading for many. The article stated, “if you’re in the middle, you’re stuck in the middle, which means there’s less space for others to move into the middle". This article talked about the shrinking of the middle class, which has squeezed itself into being hard to enter and hard to escape. It is being shown that college degrees aren't helping much either, as the bachelor degree is losing value to employers and thus are offering lower wages for entry-level jobs. After reading this article, I recognize that the "American dream" is slowly fading and I will look into what economic factors are causing this, and whether or not they can be solved.

In my next blog post I will research the question: How much wealth disparity there is in the U.S.

What Methods are Used by Brands to Increase Scarcity and How Does it Affect the Price?

SOURCE: Hypebeast

The economic principle I’m exploring is “Because of scarcity people choose. All choices have an opportunity cost.” 

My research question to help me study the economic principle is “How Does Scarcity in the Fashion Industry Affect People’s Choices?”

The article published in BBC titled “The hype machine: Streetwear and the business of scarcity” demonstrates this economic principle by showing that companies use tactics like limiting the quantity of products, collaborating with other brands can greatly increase the products’ price.

To begin with, brands use the “drop tactic.” Brands will announce a limited release of a product at a certain date and time which increases the price through exclusivity. They will then use social media to spread the news about their products and amplify the demand. Once the release date comes, the products sells out in minutes due to a higher supply than demand.

Second, brands will collaborate with other well known brands. This adds another factor to the limited exclusivity because a collaboration between two well known brands result in styles that will never come back on top of the limited quantity. According to the article a jacket made by North face and Supreme was retailed for $498 but the market price is around $1250 due to rare collaboration and limited supply.

Finally, the scarcity of products lead to a high resale value price. According to Kyle Maiorano, a first year university student, “The Adidas Yeezy Boost is my bread and butter. I have made $200,000 last year reselling sneakers.” An example of a product with a high resale value is the Semi Frozen Yeezy Boost which sold out in seconds for $220 but can be seen being resold for as high as $1100.

In my next blog post I will research the question: What Makes Certain Brands "Higher Quality" Than Other Brands?

Price of Shoes

Source: Sole Collector

The economic principle I will study is people generally respond to incentives in predictable ways.

Links to an external site.Peoplegain when they trade voluntarily.The overall question I will research to help explore the economic principle is how do companies decide what price to sell their shoes at & why do consumers buy such expensive shoes?

According to Investopedia, there is a big difference between the cost to make shoes and what they sell at and limited supplies of new shoes endorsed by celebrities are generally overpriced. 

First, "today's retail sneaker prices reflect an overall rise in manufacturing and marketing costs as sneaker companies compete to build and maintain brands desirable to their target markets." Celebrities and social media can change the price of sneakers. "Sneaker companies, such as Nike and Adidas, outsource production to more than 1 million workers in factories in China and other countries around the world." In 2014, Nike reported $28.50 as the general cost to manufacture one pair of sneakers and ship them to the United States. Nike's cost breakdown includes approximately $27.50 per pair for Chinese factory labor and overhead costs, plus $1 in shipping. Nike likes to make at least double what they spent on the shoes.

Second, people think by buying the most expensive shoes, they're getting the best value out of them. The average American man owns 11 pairs of shoes and the woman 17 pairs. The average pair of shoes for men is $65 and the average pair of shoes for women is $85. If you spend around the average price by $20, you're getting the best value.

Third, in 2015, Adidas signed a partnership with Kanye West to create Yeezy Boost sneakers. The sneakers, priced at $315, sold out within minutes of their February 2015 launch. When shoes first come out, they're a lot more expensive and it is better to wait for the prices to drop. When the sneakers are advertised by a celebrity, companies can sell the shoes for much higher prices. In the minds of people, they think it is worth paying that amount of money.

My next research question is what brand of shoes do consumers get the most value out of? 

Factors to Consider When Designing Buildings

The economic principle I’m exploring is Institutions are the “rules of the game” that influence choices.

                             
                                                                   Source: Pinterest 

My research question to help me study the economic principle is how do architects  have to change the way they design buildings in order to impact the environment less?

The video published in TED x Talks titled “Architecture's Ripple Effect: Designing for Big Impact” demonstrates this economic principle by arguing that we need to design buildings to limit the negative impact they have on the natural environment and increase their positive impact.

First, the guy in the video says that we should build our structures with more greenery and trees because this is shown to improve the overall mental health of people, something that is a big issue right now. And has been proven to help people recover from illness and heal faster. We need to design our buildings not only to limit their negative effect on society but, to bring something new and helpful to the surrounding community.

Second, he talks about how much our buildings actually harm the environment or impact it in a negative way. He says that our buildings use 40% of all our energy and natural resources, 25% of the worlds water supply and about 33% of all CO2 emissions. He thinks that there are many things that we can do in order to help with the problem. One solution he offers is solar panels on roofs. He also says that many buildings should be self sustaining. For example one building he designed in Ireland was made from stone from the local farm's quarry.

Third, he talks about the social aspects of architecture. Going back to the example of the house he designed in Ireland he says that when the family of furniture makers approached him to help them build a bigger facility, he noticed that they had a strong culture and he had to work around that in order to build a new facility. He says that the best type of design is the type that responds to the environment and the social context of the site

In my next blog post I will research the question: What are the economic impacts of designing environmentally friendly buildings and houses?

Free trade's affect on consumer spending?

                                       

The Economic Principle I'm Exploring is that people gain when they trade voluntarily.

My research question to help me study the economic principle is How does free trade help Americans?

The article published by Investopedia called Free trade demonstrates this economic principle by showing how free trade would have an affect on the price of goods and consumer spending.

First, cheaper goods coming from places such as China and Mexico makes it so the prices go down on goods. Provided their is free trade the US will be able to get goods from these places that they can price well. Do this this imports and exports will overall increase do to the fact that people will be trading goods more frequently than the already giant trade market.

Secondly studies have shown that with  free trade consumer spending would increase by more than 5 percent per year due to this. This is overall good for the economy because consumer spending creates a stronger economy. 

Lastly going off of the second point while  consumers will be paying less they won't mind paying more for American products. According to the author "although consumers face higher prices and fewer choices under protectionist policies, movements to buy American typically generate widespread support". So even though we will have free trade people will still buy American products that are provided at stores.

In my next blog post I will research the question What countries will benefit from free trade?