I think it depends on your context. If the alternative to buying your product is not buying your product, people may be willing to pay an amount proportional to their wealth; but if the alternative is a lower-priced competitor, the price they're willing to pay will be anchored.
Jeff Bezos is far wealthier than I am, but I don't think he would pay a million dollars for a hamburger.
I have a friend who used to be a hairdresser. Some of his customers flew across the Atlantic to Europe to get a haircut... maybe not a million dollars for a burger, but thousands for a haircut, and at least a few days spent.
> thousands for a haircut, and at least a few days spent.
This conclusion is sound if the schedule looks like fly out -> get haircut -> fly back.
If you do anything else while you're in Europe, then the travel cost is being amortized over everything you do. Maybe I was willing to pay a few thousand dollars for some Yarg cheese, and the haircut was a happy bonus.
I've heard about American people who take a plane only for eating something specific on Europe. The direct price might not be so much, but that's still on the thousands.
True but I think competition is already factored into the hypothesis as the lowest price nobody is willing to pay, which in case of a hamburger and given the competition could be only say $25. So you will be looking for a peak in the range say $10-25.
Jeff Bezos is far wealthier than I am, but I don't think he would pay a million dollars for a hamburger.