 | | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
|
(...) Workable? Who knows - I'm not a mathematician or an economist. Desirable? Heck no. We live in the real world. In the real world the person willing AND able to spend the most for something gets it. That's the way it is, and that's the way it (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
|
(...) Real world ethics debate aside, does Lego-Distribution have to be so heavily tied to the real-world and the evolved Capitalism that we know today? If we can think of a fairer system for Lego, then why isn't that desirable? Richard (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
|
If there is no benefit to sellers, who is going to participate? You can set up whatever scheme you want but unless there is motivation, you're going to have a lot of buyers but no sellers. I know I certainly would not sell for less than the most the (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
|
(...) This is true, which is why I think a statutory 5-10% profit should be standard on such a system. That way sellers won't lose money, but they also won't feel guilty or profiteering by making a small amount. The way the proposed system works is (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
|
(...) Maybe I'm just on a different wavelength here, but I don't understand this desire to disassociate one part of our lives from reality. I work hard every day in the real world. I pay for goods and services in the real world. I earn a wage in the (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
|
(...) Who says 5-10% profit is even WORTH doing anything? So I'm supposed to buy $500 worth of closeout Lego after Christmas, spend literally weeks sorting it with my wife, then auction off the bulk of the parts I don't need for a lousy 5%? I'd have (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
|
(...) It would be your choice, and no-one would pass judgement upon you either way. I don't think that both systems are mutually exclusive, and I think each has its uses. (...) The names that I know probably make profit, but I don't believe that (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
|
In article <YZzdNx2DUuvsNBNRZYL...@4ax.com>, Mike Stanley <cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com> writes (...) The New Lego Order - This millennium Lugnet, next millennium the world! A thousand years of fair-play! (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
|
I know some of what I'm going to say has been said before, but I say it again just to re-iterate. First: Only a small number of sets fit into the "so highly desired" that their price gets ridiculous. Very few are irreplaceable (ok, so the Metroliner (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
|
In lugnet.market.theory, Frank Filz writes: <snipped lots of good points> Your arguments are pretty convincing - maybe now isn't a time in which we need a different system. Maybe we never will! But thanks to everyone who listened to my ponderings :) (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
