Megan McArdle takes a look:
Why are the Weasleys poor? Why would any wizard be? Anything they need, except scarce magical objects, can be obtained by ordering a house elf to do it, or casting a spell, or, in a pinch, making objects like dinner, or a house, assemble themselves. Yet the Weasleys are poor not just by wizard standards, but by ours: they lack things like new clothes and textbooks that should be easily obtainable with a few magic words. Why?
Even though Megan has some issues with the economics, I must say the finances of Harry Potter are quite impressive! Of course, it may be a bit of a mixed bag for those affiliated with the Potter franchise:
...the book’s U.S. publisher, Scholastic Corp. is shipping a record 12 million copies tonight, things may not stay so rosy in the company’s future; Bloomberg.com reports that it faces “an exodus of investors as the series ends,” with the stock already falling 30 cents as of this morning. Meanwhile, The Street’s James Altucher advises against buying Scholastic in his list of Potter franchise stock picks.
Despite the misgivings of some about the economics portrayed in the books, some prominent economists really like them.
Elsewhere, Ali finds finds himself surrounded by Potter-Mania:
Amazon.com reports that Falls Church, which is a town between Fairfax (where I live) and Arlington (where I work), is the Harry-est Town in America, i.e. had the most pre-orders for the book per-capita.
But oh look, Fairfax is 3rd on the list of the top 100, and Vienna, Fairfax's sister city, is 4th. And D.C. beats out all the states in Pottermania.
(HT Nothing Adds Up)
No comments:
Post a Comment