Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by leesec | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

leesec

Why would a zoo or something just be for wealthy people

View on HN

Investors expect returns on the hundreds of millions of dollars they've invested.

At best, it'll be a very expensive zoo.

They could just get the government to pay the company gobs of money for conservation efforts...

In fact, Apple has invested so much money in the iPhone. The only way they can make it work is if they sell the iPhone only to billionaires. Yes, just like Disney. The cost of Disneyland and Disneyworld mean that the only way it could provide a return is if the only people who can attend are the very wealthy. I think my model of the world is very good. It accurately describes things.

iPhones are very expensive.

If you own an iPhone, you're already wealthier than a large chunk of the planet.

Oh I see. When you meant "very expensive" you meant "easily accessible for the median American" and when that guy said "wealthy people" you interpreted that to be "the median American". It's true that Europeans and so on are quite poor but the company is in the US. Yep, factually most Africans can't go to Disneyland either.

Spot on.

If Disneyland claimed to be helping fix world problems like biodiversity loss and climate change, that would be worth criticizing as well.

Well, fortunately, the US won't be involved in fixing world problems any more now that USAID is out. Our dirty dollars shan't taint the virtuous poor any longer.

I don't know who you are or why you charge 850/hr to book but I like your brand of snark and I hope you post more often

Nah. The zoo's expenses will be pretty much fixed, regardless of number of visitors. They'll want as many visitors as possible: there's more money in selling a million cheap tickets per day than there is selling 5 expensive ones!

At worst, it'll be a very crowded zoo

Presumably those expenses will be a lot higher than a regular zoo, at least in the short/mid term.

I'd assume that translates to relatively costly ticket prices, right?

I dunno. If we assume rational, greedy owners and the costs are fixed(as in, there's a cost per animal, not a cost per visitor), the costs are pretty much irrelevant to pricing. They'll want to maximise income. The parameters that matters are how many visitors you'll get at any given price point, multiplied by that price point.

Ofc, I'm assuming Homo Economicus run this zoo, that might not be accurate irl

The business model of Colossal is to patent and sell genetic editing techniques that they prove out in their deeextinction process, for whatever that is or isn't worth.

Would you say they "spared no expense"?

Id pay to go to a zoo full of wealthy people in cages

Reply on news.ycombinator.com