Subject:
|
Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.theory
|
Date:
|
Tue, 14 Sep 1999 01:05:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1400 times
|
| |
|
|
On Mon, 13 Sep 1999 21:39:25 GMT, "Richard Franks"
<spontificus@__no_spam_please_im_veggie__yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 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.
>
> 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.
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 to be smoking some really
really strong dope to go for that.
I've said it before - if I were concerned about making the _most_
money from auctioning my parts, I'd not waste my time with it. I
could make more spending a couple extra hours per week consulting than
I do in a month of Lego auctions. So I'm not doing it to make TONS of
money, but I'm sure as heck not going to waste my time doing it for
5%. Shucks, I'd let Todd do all the hard work and just buy the parts
I want rather than make 5%, or buy all the sets anyway and give the
stuff I don't want to charity and load up on the karma.
Sorry, but you seem awful fond of that word profiteering. I'd like
for you to tell me straight up if you think what I, Todd, Gene, Naji,
Matt, and others do is profiteering, or if it is doing anything but
providing a service for our community.
> The way the proposed system works is that you start of with a small amount of
> credit, but have to auction items on the system to recieve more credit.
> Therefore you wouldn't have the problem of lots of buyers but no sellers.
Ok, but unless you could wave a magic wand and literally force
everyone to participate in this, there would always be those who
wouldn't, because they'd be interested in making more money (which
isn't a bad thing, btw). I know, I know, this is all a dream, this is
your perfect world scenario.
But I gotta be honest, this whole thing smacks of wealth
redistrobution, with just a nice pretty "to better the community" face
put on it. I don't know why any sane person would want to participate
in this, unless, of course, they could be assured everyone else would
be forced to do so.
> This is true for a lot of people, and for a lot of people this is because the
> money they make from selling profitable items they put back into their own
> hobby, which requires buying over-priced items. The question is that if people
> could buy the sets they desire by spending less real money, would they feel the
> need to auction their sets for a profit?
There was a time when I poured everything I made from selling Lego
parts back into a Lego-buying fund. That lasted until I ended up with
more than a room full of unopened sets in the queue to be broken up
for auction.
Now I set aside some of the money for buying sets, and the rest goes
into our down-payment fund. Call it profiteering if you want, but if
I end up funding my downpayment with the time we spend doing Lego
auctions, well, then I'll get to say my house was built by Lego.
> Assuming internet usage continues to expand, then in a few years, instead of 10
> people bidding on an item, there will be 20, then 50, then 100 etc. What will
> happen to the prices then?
Dunno, I'm no economist. I'd say if there are 10 times more buyers
there will be some equivalent percentage of sellers.
Or do you mean for items like 4558? Prices will be sky-high for
those, as they should be. 10 year old 10 years from now can't afford
one? Tough, I couldn't afford all the rookie baseball cards I wanted
back in the 70's when I was collecting as a 10 year old either.
College student can't afford a $300 monorail because Larry decides he
needs another one? Too bad, let the college student study a little
harder, or get some practical experience working someplace, then let
him get out into the real world and earn some money so he can be Larry
20 years from now.
--
The parts you want and nothing else?
http://jaba.dtrh.com/ - Just Another Brick Auction
Why pay eBay? Run your own LEGO auctions for free!
http://www.guarded-inn.com/bricks/
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | 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)
|
52 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
