Which manga or anime fits this criteria?
Csm
>>281837434Every long shounenBerserkNasuverseRebuilds
>>281837462>>281837479All of those are exceptionally financially successful though. I don't think you quite grasp what a "sunk cost" is.
>>281837434Boruto
>>281837434Kill blue
>>281837434toriko, it ended though
>>281837586It's sunk cost for the reader, not for the publisher (the one who benefits).
>>281837434Murata Punch Man
>>281837586I'm actually having a hard time thinking of one from the creator side. Maybe the Dies Irae gacha whose production hell killed Light.
Most harem romcoms
>>281838062That one's weird in how Murata willingly, publicly scraps and redoes months of work over and over. I guess it qualifies from the perspective of whoever's paying him and not using their veto power.
>>281837434one piece
>>281838063Wasn't there a rumor about wsj printing extra copies of One Piece?
>>281837984Even then, if you got far into a series then surely it's because you enjoyed it early on, no? So you already got something out of it.Sunk cost only makes sense in the context of turning a profit or not anyway.>>281838239Extra copies of one of their most successful series of all time? Gee, I don't know anon.
>>281838297>then surely it's because you enjoyed it early on, no?>I already spent so much time [enjoying it], I need to stick to it and make [derivative spinoff sequel] workanon, I... >>281837434
>>281838351That's not sunk cost fallacy then. Sunk cost is spending more and more in the hopes of finally getting something out of it. The key element is that it didn't and doesn't work but you're tricking yourself into thinking if you keep putting more into it it's bound to pay off eventually.Enjoying something and then not really enjoying it anymore but still reading it isn't "sunk cost", because there 1. isn't a cost and 2. you already "profited".
>>281838297>So you already got something out of it.Yeah. "Already," as in, the past, and aren't anymore.
>>281838484You're retarded. It's a sunk cost because you keep paying hoping for the satisfuing end that will never come, long after enjoyment has faded. That you once enjoyed it doesn't change that.
>>281838484>there 1. isn't a costThe cost is time. Time is included as a kind of cost in the fallacy if you didn't buy the magazine.>2. you already "profited".Yes, so why are you still "investing". That IS sunk cost.
>>281838484Let's say you read a 100 chapter manga. It's enjoyable, and the first 50 chapters are really good with a satisfying conclusion to the arc.The next arc is kind of shit, but you keep on reading because the manga was good before, and surely, it can get better again. 25 chapters later, it still hasn't gotten back up in quality, but since you've already read 25 chapters after it's gone to shit and there are only 25 chapters left, you keep on reading.The first 50 chapters aren't sunk cost, but the time spent reading 51-75 is, and reading 76-100 is a further investment of time due to sunk cost fallacy.In other cases when we speak of the sunk cost fallacy, there's often NO tangible return at all, i.e. the first 50 chapters that were good, but the concept can still be applied to cases like "series you don't enjoy anymore".
>>281838213The only correct answer
It's Kill Blue.
>>281838297>Even then, if you got far into a series then surely it's because you enjoyed it early on, no?no, many people read it only to get closure. But the nagging of feeling of wanting closure is toxic, and yet due to sunk cost we think it will be worth it
