French Connection (formerly known as London Connection)

El coste de oportunidad y su aplicación a las relaciones de pareja


El coste de oportunidad básicamente se define como la cantidad a la que hay que renunciar de un bien o servicio para obtener una unidad adicional de otro.

A parte de miedos, inseguridades, mujeres que empiezan a pensar en tener hijos etc., lo que pasa con las parejas, es que normalmente, cuando ya llevas un tiempo, no logras apreciar, valorar, incluir en tus cavilaciones, comidas de tarro y demás dudad de pareja que puedas tener el famoso e importante coste de oportunidad!!
En las relaciones de pareja, normalmente, por miedo a hacer daño, por sentimiento de culpabilidad o por lo que sea no dices “joder, esta tía me mola, voy a echarle un par”. No es como ir a comprar un filete a Waitrose y que te sepa medio bien y decir un día: “voy a probar el de Sainsbury’s, me cuesta un 40% menos y aunque mi paladar se resienta un poco, como el de Waitrose sólo me satisface en un 60%, prefiero renunciar a unidades en la “escala Gourmet”, en favor de un aumento de mi economía”. Con las parejas esto es inviable. Normalmente porque uno/a se pregunta si el “filete le puede saber peor” y encima entra en juego la posibilidad de arriesgar y acabar quedándose on two candles, con remordimientos y jodido de la vida…

De todos modos, yo abogo por el Carpe Diem, claramente, y si las tías pensaran en base al coste de oportunidad “Llevo 3 años con mi novio, y en una escala del 1 a 10 de satisfacción en una relación, me satisface en un 5,7. No obstante, este otro tío me mola más, aunque le acabo de conocer, y sé tengo una probabilidad de que una relación salga bien a medio-largo plazo de únicamente pongamos un 15%. No obstante, en una sola noche/semana el nuevo me va a dar placer y me va a hacer ser feliz de una manera tal que va a compensar para bien la bajísima escala de satisfacción con mi actual novio. Así que aunque a los 7 días la “relación” con el “nuevo” se vaya al garete, me la juego…” Pero claro, no es el caso y por eso se ve a tanto hideputa indocumentado, majadero y gentuza con novias de bien… y viceversa!!!

Hay que tener en cuenta que esta teoría de que el coste de oportunidad no entra en juego a la hora de valorar a la pareja sólo se cumple si el nivel de satisfacción es menor de un 8. Es decir, si tú estás contento con tu novia a niveles próximos al 80% o más, obviamente la regla del coste de oportunidad se invierte y dices “para qué cojones me voy a meter en camisas de once varas, si al final la posibilidad de salir perdiendo es muy grande y mi pareja actual es la vida.” Es decir, pongamos que tu novia està megabuena, es megamaja y atenta contigo, sabes que no quiere a otro, estàs a gusto de la leche con ella, llegas del curro a casa y sólo quieres verla a ella, te mola hacer planecillos los findes con ella, ella te deja tu libertad y ya la repera, se abona contigo a los CELTICS. No vas a dejar todo esto de lado para conseguir una unidad adicional de placer que no te va a llevar a ningún lado!! Tampoco es plan de perder del todo los papeles!!! Que somos tíos, pero no gilipollas!! (Hay que tener en cuenta que si se cumple todo lo anterior, eres el tío más afortunado del mundo y tu valoración debería ser de 10/10, sino, eres un cabrón!!!)

Ya han surgido preguntas sobre por qué un 8 es la marca a tener en cuenta. Cada uno debe medir este valor en función de sus propias inquietudes y sus ganas de vivir la vida! Bajar del 8 se acerca peligrosamente a la mediocridad a mi modo de ver, pero cada uno es libre de ver las cosas como quiera…

En conclusión, hay que evitar ser un Stu Inman de la vida (legendario GM de los Trailblazers, por lo malo…) y echarle ganas al tema y jugársela un poquito de vez en cuando. Nunca debería repetirse un: “And with the number two pick in the 1984 NBA Draft, the Portland Trailblazers select Sam Bowie…”. Jordan fue elegido en el número 3 pq el amigo Stu ya tenía en su equipo a Clyde Drexler a otro escolta (en mi teoría: la pareja) y no quiso apostar por otro escolta (la nueva/el nuevo) pensando que lo que tenía era suficientemente bueno!! Teniendo en cuenta que Hakeem fue el número uno de aquel draft, una elección legítima, ya que fue el jugador dominante en la NBA entre 1993 y 1995, no vamos a criticar al GM de los Rockets. Sería entrar en terreno pantanoso y comparar a Elle McPherson con Cindy Crawford y tampoco es plan…

Pues eso, que hay que evitar ser un tipo como el General Manager aquel de los Blazers. Para los curiosos: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stu_Inman

Labels: Tube Thoughts

Labels: Random stuff

Labels: Sports

... Italy makes it to the World Cup Final in absolutely spectacular fashion!!!

Labels: Sports

• 5) Kobi Kuhn (Switzerland): Best generation of Swiss footballers probably EVER in his hands. Has done a decent to good job in the qualifying stage. Knows what he´s doing with his defensive minded, Italian like, playing style. The Swiss even could have beaten France in the Group stage and are the only team not to concede a goal in the World Cup!! Everything looks promising so far, so why does he belong on this list? He probably made some minor mistakes against the Ukraine (like playing Hakan Yakin too long when he had only Frei up front, like not giving Behrami a chance, like taking our best penalty specialist out when the game was clearly headed to overtime...) but what puts Kobi on this list are his post game comments. Things like "We´ve learnt a valuable lesson here for the European Championship in 2008", "We have to be proud of the national team...", stuff like that is just unacceptable if you consider the team had played a good first stage and was facing the UKRAINE, a horrible team, for a spot in the Quarter-Finals against Italy, whom they could actually have beaten. So we have one of the Best Swiss Teams ever, they are playing Well, they finish ahead of France in the Group Stage, and they face an easy rival for a place in history and all the manager tells the press is basically that he´s happy with elimination. That he can live with it? He was coaching the better side of the two in his biggest game ever and yet going home looked to be ok... Call me crazy but I just cannot understand this.

• 4) Carlos Alberto Parreira (Brazil): It was their World Cup to loose and they went home early! Best individual talent in the World Cup and yet displayed horrible performances in most games. Playing your friendlies against some sh*tty Swiss squads helped, what? Another example of a team with really everything in their favour, who failed. At least if a good squad had beaten them... but France??? They should´ve learnt the lesson from the France-Spain game: Guard Henry and Ribery. But no, after a free kick the Henry scores alone on the far post. Clap, clap... What is worse though is that they were unable to create quality football for the whole game. Ronaldinho has looked crap during the whole tournament, same as Ronaldo to be honest. Cafú is completely wahed up, running on fumes, possibly not even a starter on 70% of the rest of the teams, but just when Parreira saw no escape in the France game he had the guts to take out his captain and play Cicinho. What a shame!! In conclusion, poor in game coaching, no gameplan whatsoever and an early exit. Better don´t return to Brazil yet...

• 3) Luis Aragonés (Spain): He´s been a coach for about 30 years now and never won anything important with the clubs he coached. Given Spains lack of left backs, wing players, etc. his selection of 23 for the World Cup can´t be much critizised. Nevertheless, having started the Tournament in good fashion he changed his lineup for every game, and even the way Spain had played for the decisive game against the French. All of a sudden, Spain showed up with no defensive midfielder (Senna), Raúl in the lineup, a killing move, and basically 6 offensive minded players. The result: Ribery marched through the Spanish defense like a knife through butter and no one ever dared to foul him in order to prevent the equalizer. Would that have happened with Senna on the pitch? I say no! Would that have happened to a team like Italy, Argentina or even England? Never!! Someone would have stopped the French guy, even if it had cost them a yellow or even a red card. Just ask Materazzi, Deco, etc. You are playing for you nation for f*cks sake!!! And no one can make a decisive tackle in that situation??? What worries me is that probably no one even thought about it, and Casillas is to blame here as well. Spain has a lack of mental toughness and commitment in Big Stage Games that is rather exasperating!! It stinks! The players just don´t care (or at least 50% don´t) and these big tournaments seem to be more of a chance for showcasing themselves, instead of going for a WIN Spain has long awaited for... And THAT is a need for the manager to address!! Aragonés failed miserably, found no answer in his substitutions and finally got punished, in part by the referee, in part for his own mistakes... and with it, he killed a nation´s hope for redemption!!!

• 2) Sven Goran Eriksson (England): What can we say about Sven... Well, his biggest mistake is being ultraconservative. Not that his game plan is thaaaaat bad, at least in theory, but pretending to win a World Cup with no fire power up front will lead you home earlier than expected. Normally about a week before... First he calls up just four strikers, having 2 of them half injured and out of shape. Then Owen injures, Rooney never finds his rythm and Theo wasn´t about to play no matter what. That leaves as with, ouch, Peter Crouch as England´s most in shape striker. Great. He looks less agile than me with a ball on his feet, and they called me Julio Salinas in Germany, so go figure!!!! Not only did Eriksson deny Jenas or Carrick a deserved protagonism in this World Cup in favour of Hargreaves (good game his against Portugal, everything said), but in the decisive moment of the Quarter-Final against Portugal he failed to address the team´s needs and even took Joe Cole, England´s best offensive weapon, out of the contest, in what might rank as his worst move so far. He went for the defensive option when Rooney, a "Hooligan on the Pitch", was sent off and killed his team by taking out Cole. Nice move coach! Here´s a manager who has failed against Brazil, and Portugal twice in a four year time span in situations where his team could/should have won. If his team is winning he kills them by bringing in defensive minded players and thus leaving his squad with no option to come back in case the opponent equalizes, like when he brought in Hargreaves and Phill Neville in Portugal to secure a 1-0 result and his team lost composure completely. There´s certain coaches that just aren´t made for the big stage and one of them is Eriksson, he has always failed and he never ever makes the correct decision in on the verge situations.

• 1) José Perkerman (Argentina): Last but not least we have this edition´s WINNER for choking and doing a wonderful job in terms of making a contender, probably the favourite to win the Tournament, collapse, when Argentina was 1-0 up and in full control of the game. What he did last Friday is beyond belief... Argentina was the better side of the two… until it scored its goal. From then on, Pekerman, who had done fairly well throughout the World Cup, completely screwed his team, nation, everyone who believed in him and eventually set up the biggest collapse in this WC’s edition. Let’s say it’s legit to try to keep your 1-0 advantage for 30 minutes and you quit attacking the opposite goal. Then why in this world would you take out Riquelme, about the only guy on your starting eleven who can keep the ball and slow everything down, for Cambiasso when there´s still such a long way to go in the second half and you basically just quit attacking Germany´s goal!?! Try to imagine you have the so called New Maradona, teenage shooting star Messi, on your bench, you’re basically relying all your offensive power on counter attacks and maybe a lost ball… So what does Pekerman do? He wastes his last substitution to bring in Cruz (hey, nothing against him!!) and leaves the most talented guy of his squad on the bench in the most important game for Argentina since 1990? It’s easy to know if a guy should be on the pitch or the bench, being the manager: Just ask yourself the following “If you had to put someone out there to save your life, who would it be, whom would you trust?” Looking at the Argentinian bench, the answer seems too easy: Messi!!!! Further, looking at Argentina’s bench at the end of the game was shocking, as there were probably better players sitting on it than out on the pitch...

Labels: Sports