英皇攪笑教學(賭錢篇)
Loading...
50,687
Loading...
Top Comments
see all
All Comments (48)
-
@jimfee42 maybe he considers it as sunk cost because he mentioned the probably of winning is very low (or zero).
-
呢D片 呢D故事
雖然講唔出D咩大道理
但係我睇完之後覺得非常之有親切咁
所以我高度推介呢條片比讀econ既朋友收睇
-
唔好咁挑剔啦
-
但對方有可能係玩虛張聲勢心理戰搏你唔跟,其實佢無葵線5
-
judo chops!!!
-
@kelvinpoon123 你唔係認為你會勁過佢啊?
-
佢冇講錯喎
佢唔係講呢場賭局輸贏既可能性
而係解釋選擇跟或唔跟既oppotunity cost係幾多
佢由頭到尾冇建議過應該係跟定唔跟
我唔明下面果d reply點解話佢錯
-
@kelvinpoon123 你仲唔明 你自己睇多次人地00:40講咩 條友掉左1000萬出去囉
-
@ahmale 我係講緊佢話後面輸少當嬴果到.唔係講緊機會成本
-
@kelvinpoon123 留心D啦00:40你係咪無開喇叭???
Loading...
真係俾佢吹漲, 點解我以前跟佢上Econ會無呢d動畫呢?
(不過精讀班有漫畫送, 而且仲整到本YES咁)
gicole 2 years ago 16
again, he's so wrong. Each round of the bet is not independent as the winning probability changes according to the cards turned over. The $10 million should be included in opportunity cost valuation because that's the opportunity cost to win the hand and the game. Bad example. Plus, the marginal of utility plays a more important role in this case. That is the marginal utility of $1 million compared to $10 million. Senior teacher, full of shit.
jimfee42 3 years ago 8