英皇攪笑教學(賣魚蛋篇)

[spore637]

開頭段動畫嘅懶音:

牛 ngau4

粒 nap7

我 ngo5

你 nei5

耐 noi6

案 on3

(sorry 我認真鳥)

[tony900101]

癡舌筋

[56fpot68]

要忽2次 e個ans好正

[cltam8]

佢教ECON之嘛,叫你學發音咩? 仲有就係KEVIN高既例子的確唔考 但係起碼容易明同有趣囉 CERT LV佢教野完全無問題 簡單快捷 AL係就係略嫌太快,但係其實內容OK齊架喇 但係明得慢既人唔好補囉,甩左就係咁先 我中4至中7都補KEVIN KO,完全無問題 成績良好 補習叫夾唔夾個導師教法架姐 批評唔駛講得咁絕

[Kiwiness]

good, thank you!

[banzaofking]

語癌...

[xsz0606]

20蚊6粒蛋......贵D喔....

[alemx205]

我覺得佢講得幾好喎..

[FionaYoutub]

佢又唔係教中文

[tkhoo662]

簡直不知所謂

[tomyan112]

食頭三粒會開心D?Kevin Ko既口味都......

呢個比喻好差

[andy123cheng]

@tomyan112 呢個比喻係為左令聽者更易明姐 其實佢係指可以滿足到需求既程度更大 讀過econ既朋友都知經濟學係假設消費者需求愈大/供應愈少,­願意付出既價格就愈高 由於人既慾望係無窮無盡 所以首先假設個呀媽係想食多過6粒既魚蛋或者牛丸 而食3粒魚蛋/牛丸既價值分別各10,食6粒魚蛋/牛丸既價值分­別係15<<<供應愈少,價格愈高 所以叫雙丸既價值(10+10=20)好大機會會大過食淨丸既價­值(15) 點解話好大機會而唔係必定? 因為我以上既價值只係假設 可能有人係根本唔鐘意食魚蛋/牛丸 咁佢食雙丸既價值(或者係滿足需求既程度)就會低過食淨丸既價值 . . . . . 唔通你想佢咁樣講咩...

[wasqsx00133]

佢講的野唔係唔岩，不過好似有d白癡。`

[cpssnorman]

佢把聲好煩

[MrSuzuki1991]

呢個係中六既concept

Diminishing marginal use value

[SiuPhoebe1995]

@MrSuzuki1991 我f3戈陣好似學過wo =.=

[saYUIsage]

唔係好明

[juliachan622]

我唔睇個樣仲以為係詹端文....

[simonpvp]

其實個老闆目的就係要賣你2碗

winner is 雙園佬~~

[banzaofking]

可能用英文冇懶音呢....

[stanfamily]

on lun 9 !

[sakumi0604]

嘩.. 好野..咁都得呀?!

[bobbybobby1993]

我讀science ge..... 所以唔明... 如果你中意食雲舌唔係食晒全部仲開心咩= = 定係讀commerce d人先明 = =

[dragonofhehell]

@bobbybobby1993 枉你讀science,分析能力都咁低..我都讀science­都明啦..

[SiuPhoebe1995]

@dragonofhehell e d野唔關事ga wo 我夠讀science 我明wo 但係e d野真係唔慣science定com ge問題 lor

[cwcshum]

這個老師說話口齒不清，好多懶音。

[KOFXII]

唔錯 幾得意

[chowkinglun7x]

個講法咁屈機既= = 雖然係照住佢讀果科黎解釋 xd

[Clkiphone]

照佢咁講......一碗$50而得一粒魚旦或一粒牛丸都大把人­買啦！睇佢幅圖尼講，食第一粒時開心到咁頂點。

[PlayerAlpha]

supply and demand curves

where they meet is called the equilibrium (in that particular market)

[fatterkai]

只可以咁講，佢講ｇｅ野好粗鬆

如果教ｃｅｒｔ，跟本唔使講呢ｄ野，

如果教ａ－ｌｅｖｅｌ，佢有ｄ　重要ａｓｓｕｍｐｔｉｏｎ冇左．．．

唔比人係ｏｎｌｙ喜歡一樣？又，可以６粒都抵唔返１粒ｕｔｉｌｉ­ｔｙ，唔詳述了，講咩都好，有人肯比錢佢佢就係叻仔，香港就係咁­

[jimmyjimmy1449]

果個人好似講波= =

[fiddleric326]

懶音王！誤人子弟！

[tcdes13]

其實主要係"痴利根"

[96169QQ]

講就講到好似好勁...

不過事實上,

真正讀e-con人都知道,

姖講既人根本就考吾到,

所以補左都系考試時冇幫助=]

[harrypotter271828]

wow

好勁

[lichitat2001]

- seems that their is too much assumption for this example

- also I don't understand what he wants to explain?

-and are there any if A then B testable implication?

-this is a problematic example............

[lichitat2001]

only true if

- Assumption hold: the price of a bowl of fish ball and beef ball equal their total use vale respectively

- ****there is NO definite relationship between TUV and PRICE(we can only say that TUV at least equal price, if not equal, there must be consumer surplus(TUV>P))

-as a result, the above hypothesis will be invalid if the assumption does not hold.

[lichitat2001]

- or as the comment below, if an individual is willing to buy a bowl of mixed ball by paying $22, it only reflects that the TUV of  mixed ball is $22, it is the third different product, still there is no systematic relationship of mixed ball with a bowl of fish ball or a bowl of beef ball

- like complement, if coffee and sugar mixed together(become third product), the value of it could be higher than mere sugar or coffee, why dont use complement as an explanation?

[ccf2424]

勁!

[cynyyt]

I agree it is a bad example to demonstrate diminishing marginal utility, however, I don't thing the extra $2 comes from transaction cost. While it's true that the marginal utility for the consumer is diminishing, in this example, it's clear that the consumer is viewing the three combinations of fishball and meatball as three different product. So, we cannot use the fishball and meatball demand function to "explain" the price of the combination. We should look at a third demand function.

[jimfee42]

A bad example to demonstrate marginal utility. The actual reason for higher price is the transaction cost. Think about this. Since we can't always find another person to do the exchange of fishball and beef ball, we can ask the restaurant to "find" that person for us. The transaction cost to do is the extra $2.

[sora08141314]

社會主義:P

[wongyiubun]

，有d打橫來講

[idolcrazy]

"偉大嘅工程'

超好笑

我要試下補英王

[pk123qwe]

下 我聽唔到懶音= =...聽得幾明囉 懶唔懶音真係咁困擾您咩??

[terrycheung07]

this is not 9up~

This is econ

[stephenlee1110]

...

[clementnarutosai]

kevin ko is the best in the world lamchin14  everyone knows you are working for xxx

[pierrelss]

完全9up!

[macauapril]

哇,係就係好好笑,不過阿sir d 懶音聽得我仲好笑!

[verdi4321]

His dialect sounds really like an idiot.

[hata9413]

阿媽係女人

[sakunashi]

why can't the world's politician understand something this simple? or is it because we are too selfish to share?

[lamchin14]

阿sir , 你 d 懶音好勁呀救命...