• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

The insidious "Sunk Cost" fallacy

TBRS1

Transparent turnip
V.I.P Member
A cognitive bias is a thinking flaw to which all humans are susceptible. They are a product of our evolutionary history. Cognitive biases are definable, and predictable.

That means that people who understand them can use them to manipulate people.

The Sunk Cost Fallacy is especially dangerous, and very commonly exploited by con men.

Sunk Cost Fallacy: Imagine you have a 12 year old car.
One day, the radiator springs a leak and needs repair (say, maybe $300).

$300 is much less than the cost of a reliable replacement, so you do it.

Two weeks later, it's the oil pump ($600). Same logic as before, plus the idea that "I just put $300 into that car, if I sell the car, I loose that $300." So you do it.

Couple weeks later, the transmission goes out ($3000). Well, gotta replace that, otherwise the $900 already spent gets flushed down the toilet, so you're now up to $3900.

Next, the head gasket... Gotta fix that or the $3900 is wasted. Then the engine needs a valve job... and so on...

Other Examples:
A gambler has put $3000 dollars into the slot machine. If they don't keep putting money in, all the money they've already put in is gone, so... KEEP GOING.

A person is in a bad relationship. That person has already put X years into the relationship. If they leave, all that is lost, so... DON'T LEAVE.

You can think of many more. Be aware, though, that scammers and con artists frequently exploit this - an investment scam (start with small amounts, get the mark "hooked", and work slowly up to the big score), for instance.

Or maybe a fake psychic who begins with a small, nominal fee. But the spirits are ANGRY, so each session requires more financial investment...
 
I already had one shot, may as well kill the bottle.

Yeah, this can apply to alcoholics as well.
Unfortunately, that is true.

If you think historically, the Vietnam War looks like an entire government caught in the sunk cost fallacy.

Utterly horrible.
 
We took our 23-year-old Toyota 4-Runner to the dealership last week for servicing and to fix something or the other with the steering. We debated whether we were wasting money fixing up the old car but decided to do it anyway. The dealership offered us $15,000 for the car (unsolicited by us!), said it was a classic, great pearl color, and in excellent condition although it has about 200,000 miles on it. I think they would've paid more than $15,000 for it but we declined the offer because there's nothing as good on the market for $15,000 - $20,000 to replace what we already have. Plus, insurance and license tag are cheap because it is so old.
This is the first car I've ever owned that actually appreciated in value when it got over 20 years old! Ha!

Time will tell if we made a mistake. Meantime, it drives really well. We mostly use it for hauling stuff around our land and to run errands in a nearby small town.
 
We took our 23-year-old Toyota 4-Runner to the dealership last week for servicing and to fix something or the other with the steering. We debated whether we were wasting money fixing up the old car but decided to do it anyway. The dealership offered us $15,000 for the car (unsolicited by us!), said it was a classic, great pearl color, and in excellent condition although it has about 200,000 miles on it. I think they would've paid more than $15,000 for it but we declined the offer because there's nothing as good on the market for $15,000 - $20,000 to replace what we already have. Plus, insurance and license tag are cheap because it is so old.
This is the first car I've ever owned that actually appreciated in value when it got over 20 years old! Ha!

Time will tell if we made a mistake. Meantime, it drives really well. We mostly use it for hauling stuff around our land and to run errands in a nearby small town.

I had to make a similar decision some years back with my 2000 Toyota Celica GTS. Unquestionably the most reliable and long lasting car I ever owned, at 17 years. I chose to finally part with it, opting for a new car that had technology from a newer era. Though my only real costs were registration, insurance and normal maintenance of the car. Unheard of!

It works for me, though on occasion I wonder about costs, needing to have the transmission rebuilt at around $5000. More if it involved a new clutch too. Though one aspect of the equation would have continued to go south on me. The rising cost of insurance in Nevada, and for a formally designated "sports car".

BTW, everyone I ever knew who liked 4-Runners appreciates the older ones when it comes to the looks of the vehicle. I'd probably have held onto it too. ;)
 
Last edited:
We took our 23-year-old Toyota 4-Runner to the dealership last week for servicing and to fix something or the other with the steering. We debated whether we were wasting money fixing up the old car but decided to do it anyway. The dealership offered us $15,000 for the car (unsolicited by us!), said it was a classic, great pearl color, and in excellent condition although it has about 200,000 miles on it. I think they would've paid more than $15,000 for it but we declined the offer because there's nothing as good on the market for $15,000 - $20,000 to replace what we already have. Plus, insurance and license tag are cheap because it is so old.
This is the first car I've ever owned that actually appreciated in value when it got over 20 years old! Ha!

Time will tell if we made a mistake. Meantime, it drives really well. We mostly use it for hauling stuff around our land and to run errands in a nearby small town.
That's part of what makes this fallacy so very insidious.

Sometimes it does pay to put more money into something (a person's primary home, for instance).

The problem doesn't show up until one is already in deep.

Sometimes the best choice is to get out. Not necessarily always, though.
 
That's part of what makes this fallacy so very insidious.

Sometimes it does pay to put more money into something (a person's primary home, for instance).

The problem doesn't show up until one is already in deep.

Sometimes the best choice is to get out. Not necessarily always, though.

There's another part of that equation as well. - One's advanced age.

It's beginning to dawn on me how many things I own that will likely outlast me. So the urge to buy something new just doesn't have the same "sparkle" it once did. When it may be more prudent to simply hang onto what I already have.

- "If it ain't broke....." ;)
 
Last edited:
There's another part of that equation as well. - One's advanced age.

It's beginning to dawn on me how many things I own that will likely outlast me. So the urge to buy something new just doesn't have the same "sparkle" it once did. When it may be more prudent to simply hang onto what I already have.
LOL - I read your previous post and thought a similar thing.

I have a big, 4wd truck. It should be pretty reliable for the next 10 years. After that, I probably won't be driving much.

It would pay to keep repairing the truck since the resale value isn't going to matter to me.

Likewise, if a person buys a vintage car to restore, they know in advance that it will require a lot of work and new parts.

The buyer is OK with that because the point in restoring a car isn't to get reliable transportation, it's to enjoy the work and the ultimate satisfaction of cruising about in a cool old car.
 
Sunk Cost Fallacy: Imagine you have a 12 year old car.
I just bought a 12 year old car and I think the previous owners had come to the conclusion that it would start costing them more money soon, but I bought it with that knowledge and had money set aside to spend on getting things fixed or replaced.

Original cost of the car including on road costs (tax etc.) was Au$9500. Since then I've spent another Au$3500 on it. Just a few little odds and ends to sort out now and then I should have a pretty reliable car that'll last until I'm too old to drive. Something cheap to run and reliable for less than Au$15000 is very cheap these days.

Other than that I always described the concept you're talking about with the parable of the monkey with it's hand stuck in the olive jar. It's hand wouldn't be stuck if it would just let go of the olives. So many people get trapped in to difficult lives simply because they can't let go of things.
 
It's beginning to dawn on me how many things I own that will likely outlast me. So the urge to buy something new just doesn't have the same "sparkle" it once did. When it may be more prudent to simply hang onto what I already have.
Reminds me of an old story about a young investment broker that thought he'd scout out a country town looking for wealthy land owners. Everyone fobbed him off and a couple of them mentioned that there was only one man in town that would have any money to invest, Old Jack.

The insurance broker found Old Jack in the pub and introduced himself then started talking about investment portfolios, as soon as he mentioned long term and short term investments Old Jack cut him off short, "Not interested.". The stock broker asked him why not and Old Jack said "I'm 87 years old, at my age you don't even buy green bananas."
 

New Threads

Top Bottom