Talk:Willingness to pay

Unmerged
I unmerged the two concepts willingness to pay and willingess to accept. Both concepts are related, but still quite distinct from each other and deserve a separate treatment. Willingness to pay measures consumers maximum willingness to pay for a product whereas willingness to accept refers to the minimum amount of money, where a consumer would still accept to sell a product. That does not imply, that WTP and WTA are necessarily the same, either conceptually nor in absolute value. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miller (talk • contribs) 06:38, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Very Similar to Willingness to Accept
This should be merged with Willingness to Accept. The two topics are rarely talked about separately and both are a result of Compensating and Equivalent Variation. Sean Patten University of New Hampshire

Willingness to accept payment for ending of one's life

 * Unlike WTA, WTP is constrained by an individual's wealth. For example, the willingness to pay to stop the ending of one's own life can only be as high as one's wealth, while the willingness to accept payment to accept the ending of one's life would be an extremely high number, perhaps approaching infinity.

To a sane person (defined here as a person who values their own life – otherwise, why expect payment at all? – and would generally be considered a rational actor, at least by academics), the number of this payment would not only approach infinity, it would be infinite; in other words: no payment would be high enough – or expressed differently, I submit that under no circumstances would a sane person (who values their own life and has no death-wish, as is presupposed in the scenario, after all) accept the ending of their life for payment or some other (material) compensation, perhaps unless it would provide a substantial financial or other (material) benefit to people or other beings or entities the person deeply cares about, such as their immediate family. After all, accepting payment would be pointless in this case as the payment would be useless to the person after their death! Seriously, this example is an excellent example for a hypothetical case not properly thought through. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:46, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Unused citations after copyvio removal
– DanCherek (talk) 19:48, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1509/jmkr.48.1.172. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 19:50, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Issue With The References Section
The references section in this Wiki page does not have a valid link to the original source. I did not find the link to Varian, Hal R. (1992), Microeconomic Analysis, Vol. 3. New York: W.W. Norton. through Google Scholar. I would recommend to remove the relevant material, the reference, and replace the description with an updated and trackable source.Hatian (talk) 02:46, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Issue With The Lead Section
In the current lead section it narrows willingness to pay to behavioral economics. However, there is no reliable source suggests willingness to pay can only be applied to behavioral economics. I would recommend to rewrite the lead section to avoid potential misleading.Hatian (talk) 03:19, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Issues With The Further Reading Section
There is no available link to Anderson, James C., Dipak Jain, and Pradeep K. Chintagunta (1993), "Understanding Customer Value in Business Markets: Methods of Customer Value Assessment," Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 1 (1), 3–30. And I did not find the corresponding link through Google Scholar. I would recommend to remove the citation. Also, the link for Wertenbroch, Klaus and Bernd Skiera (2002), "Measuring Consumers' Willingness to Pay at the Point of Purchase," Journal of Marketing Research, 39 (May), 228–41 is not working. This is the valid link. I would recommend to update the previous link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hatian (talk • contribs) 03:31, 22 April 2022 (UTC)