If one
bans something, then it must stop. If it does not, for example because some people
want it to keep happening, then costs for the provider of the banned substance
or activity will rise to include the cost of avoiding the ban. The provider wants
to maintain margins, so the price to the consumer will rise as the cost rises.
That
isn’t all. Being a provider of something which is banned carries risk. To
reflect the additional risk of possible consequences to the provider of a
banned substance or activity, the price will rise more than the cost rises –
and the greater the risk, the higher the margin to reflect it.
This
“bad will” premium – the opposite of the good will that makes legal businesses
attractive – makes the banned practice more lucrative for providers, not
less. Unless the ban reduces the number of users or the amount of the banned
substance or activity, then providers will become richer and more able to
afford ways to avoid the ban and to promote their (banned) product.
No comments:
Post a Comment