Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

This does not look very impressive, rather the opposite, but, paradoxically, both Users X and Y benefit highly from this special service.  This is because they are now free to interpret the forecasts in their own way. (see Fig12.A.20).

  • User X,

...

  • has low protection costs

...

  • and can afford to interpret the "don't know”” forecast as if it could rain and therefore

...

  • decides to take protective action.  By doing so, User X drastically lowers his costs to €10 per day

...

  • .  This is €20 cheaper than following

...

  • the forecasts of Agency C.
  • User Y,

...

  • has expensive protection

...

  • costs and will prefer to interpret "don't know”” forecast as if there will be no rain and decides not to

...

  • take protective action.  By doing so, User Y lowers his costs to €26 per day

...

  • .  This is similar to following the forecasts of Agency B.


Fig12.A.20: The expected daily expenses when the end-users are free to interpret the "don't’ know”” forecast either as "rain", if they have a low c/L ratio, or as "no rain", if their c/L ratio is high.

So what might appear as "cowardly" forecasts prove to be more valuable for the end-users! If  If forecasters are uncertain, they should say so and thereby .  In this way forecasters can gain respect and authority in the longer term.

...