Ranking Value and Preference: A Model of Superstardom

Harashima, Taiji (2016): Ranking Value and Preference: A Model of Superstardom.

Abstract

Superstars earn extremely high incomes as compared with those of ordinary people, but why? In this paper, I present a model of superstardom that explains the mechanism of extremely high incomes based on the concepts of ranking value and ranking preference. I propose that goods and services possess not only practical values but also ranking values because people derive utility through various types of rankings. This emotional response (i.e., ranking preference) gives monopolistic powers to the producers of some types of goods or services. For some goods and services (e.g., professional sports), the ranking preference is very strong and therefore so is the level of monopolistic power. This strong monopolistic power is the origin of the extremely high incomes of superstars.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Superstar; Income inequality: Ranking Value; Ranking preference; Monopoly
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D1 - Household Behavior and Family Economics > D11 - Consumer Economics: Theory; D - Microeconomics > D3 - Distribution > D31 - Personal Income, Wealth, and Their Distributions; D - Microeconomics > D4 - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design > D42 - Monopoly; D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D63 - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement; J - Labor and Demographic Economics > J3 - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs > J30 - General

References

Adler, Moshe (1985) “Stardom and Talent,” American Economic Review, Vol. 75, pp. 208–212.

Adler, Moshe (2006) “Stardom and Talent,” in Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, Vol. 1, Victor A. Ginsburgh and David Throsby (ed.), North Holland, Amsterdam.

Bayly, Karen L., Christopher S. Evans and Alan James Taylor (2006) “Measuring Social Structure: a Comparison of Eight Dominance Indices,” Behavioural Processes, Vol. 73, No. 1, pp. 1-12.

Borghans, Lex and Loek Groot (1998) “Superstardom and Monopolistic Power: Why Media Stars Earn More Than Their Marginal Contribution to Welfare,” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, Vol. 154, No. 3, pp. 546–571.

Cannon, Walter, B. (1915) Bodily Changes in Pain, Hunger, Fear and Rage, An Account of Recent Researches into the Function of Emotional Excitement, D. Appleton and Co., New York and London.

Fischer, Norman (2002) “Competitive Sport's Imitation of War: Imaging the Completeness of Virtue,” Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 16-37.

Frank, Robert H. (1985) Choosing the Right Pond: Human Behavior and the Quest for Status, Oxford University Press, New York.

Frank, Robert H. (1991) “Positional Externalities,” in Strategy and Choice, Zeckhauser, R.J. (Ed.), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Frank, Robert H. and Philip J. Cook (1995) The Winner-Take-All Society, The Free Press, New York.

James, William (1910) “The Moral Equivalent of War,” in Writings: 1902– 1910, Bruce Kuklick (ed.), 1987, Library of America, New York.

Landau, H. G. (1951) “On Dominance Relations and the Structure of Animal Societies: I. Effect of Inherent Characteristics,” The Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp 1-19.

Rosen, S. (1981) “The Economics of Superstars,” American Economic Review, Vol. 71, pp.845–858.

Santayana, George (1972) “Philosophy on the Bleachers,” in Sport and the Body, Ellen Gerber (ed.), Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia.

Solnick, Sara J. and David Hemenway (1998) Is More Always Better?: A Survey on Positional Concerns,” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Vol. 37, pp. 373 – 383.