A lot of people wonder why athletes and entertainers get
paid so much. You know the old cliché,
how can we pay teachers so little but pay athletes $25 million to swing a
bat? It seems a little ridiculous,
doesn’t it?
The reason for their inflated salaries lies in a fundamental
concept of economics. Basic economics
states that people get paid in exchange for the services they provide their
employers. Having said that, another
fundamental concept is the idea of service
consumption and how it relates to salaries. As an employee a company consumes
your service. Typically, only one
company can consume your service at a time; therefore, only one income stream
can be applied to that service per unit time.
Athletes and entertainers are different. For them the service they provide is not
consumed so much by their franchise or studio, but by sports fans and
moviegoers. Athletes provide a service
which fans consume, not the franchise itself. Movie stars provide a service that moviegoers consume, not so much the
studio releasing the film.
The beauty of it is that the service can be consumed by more
than one individual per unit time. Think
about it, a stadium of people watching A-Rod consumes his service at the same
time, which means his service is available to thousands of people in unison. Factor in television and you’ve got a service
available to millions of people all at once. The more consumers of your service per unit time means you have a
greater source of income per unit time. In other words, you can make millions of dollars while doing no more
work than any other person. The
difference is the level of consumption of that service.
For famous people, the A-Rods and George Clooneys, the value
added because of their expertise and fame only augments the fact that millions
of people can consume their service at a single time. For the average Joe, this is like having an
MBA that a million companies are willing to pay for versus having an
undergraduate degree consumed by millions of companies. This explains the reason for the range of
salaries in sports and entertainment. Note,
however, that even unknown relief pitchers command six-figure salaries due to
the level of service consumption available to them. The difference between them and Brandon Webb
is expertise and command of the game.
That’s pretty much the reason behind it all. It is not so much a case of skewed priorities
in our society, but more an example of economics supporting the situation. So next time somebody makes a comment about
athletes’ salaries you can explain the economic underpinnings of it!
And while their audience is smaller, it still doesn't explain why incorporated engineers make more than them. I like your thinking, and from a purely economic standpoint it makes sense. But it doesn't discount our societal problems.