| Do you think some kind of bidding or voting on the maximum donation amounts involved would make sense? Ie, cities each vote on what they think a "proper" maximum reward would be, then set it at the average. Relatedly, I'm not sure why a supermajority of cities agreeing to limit gifts would be generally in their best interests: 1. Lower status ("less popular") cities gain more donations via rewards 2. I would guess status/popularity probably follows a power curve 3. Therefore the long tail cities are able to flatten the distribution curve by bidding their way up 4. If they went back to a level playing field, they would drop back down the curve, likely losing the (smaller but nonzero) overall financial boost gained after bidding Basically: if I am a small city with few "natural" benefactors, I can bid my way up the curve (admittedly depending on the elasticity of "demand") such that I gain more from more donations than I lose in larger rewards. ...unless the market today just drives everyone to offer the maximum reward? Super interesting though, thank you for sharing this! |