[bumby]

Can you elaborate on how the research was conducted and specifically how the risk was measured by consumers?

There’s an awful lot of research that implies humans are very poor estimators of low probability / high severity events

[ryanmarsh]

Research was normal UX/cust research... interviews, polls, etc.

Customers were intelligent and motivated by a desire to do their own hedging rather than have an REP in the middle with an opaque profits. There’s a lot of profit in there and customers wanted to keep it. Customer ultimately knows his own demand and tolerances better than any REP. When I say “he” I mean men. Overwhelmingly male market. Lots of small business owners, day traders, cognizant their investment performance. This was very early. Few had even heard of Griddy at this point. I think it’s a fantastic addition to the market. What’s missing is the ability to hold futures. That would really level the playing field for sophisticated customers.

[rfdave]

Sounds like a fun filled hobby. How many people are interested in actually spending 30 to 40 hours spooling up to understand what they're getting, and 5 to 10 hours a month tracking it? I'm sure there's a population, but I'd rather spend another $20/month and do something fun with my time.

[bumby]

Thanks for responding. I’ll just say it’s important to distinguish between a desire to make a profit and the ability to accurately gauge risk. Behavioral economics has a lot to say about this