Subject:
|
Re: No really - a rational discussion of people selling via eBay?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.theory
|
Date:
|
Thu, 20 May 1999 03:33:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
720 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote in message <3742efd4.17452068@lugnet.com>...
:On Tue, 18 May 1999 02:40:39 GMT, "Janet Zorn"
<lighthouse@bonzai.net>
:wrote:
:
:>In general, to economists, scalper is not a meaningful term./1/
People
:>have things that others want more than they do and they want to get
as
:>much as they can for those things. What they can get is determined
by
:>how much people want them. Do you have to sell at cost not to be a
:>scalper? How much profit can you make before you are labeled a
:>scalper?
:
:Scalpers typically buy large quantities of a limited supply of items
which
:have a significant value for only a limited time. Common
target-items for
:scalpers are concert tickets and collectable toys.
:
:The goal of a scalper is to acquire and resell these items before
they lose
:their value.
:
:In collectable circles, scalpers are villified for the following
reasons:
:
:1. (Not the primary problem) Scalpers have no interest in the items
they
:are selling -- they are only in it for the money.
The less their interest the lower their reserve price. For the right
price I'll
sell all my Lego. At some price it will look like I'm only in it for
the money.
I doubt I'm that different from virtually everyone else in this
respect. I don't
think this makes a helpful definition.
:2. 'Scalper' sometimes equals 'vulture'. When I see verbiage like
"LEGO
:X-Wing! Super Rare!", I cringe. Strictly speaking, this was a true
:statement. At the time of that auction, those items were hard to
find.
:But the whole truth was that they were only rare for a short time,
and now
:are available in most areas. Scalpers often prey on the uninformed.
This is true. It is not nice behavior. What then do we call buyers who
pay
below market value to uninformed sellers? I guess we could call them
scalpers also. This helps to make a clear definition. But the fact
that this
effect is very temporary and that we are not talking about necessities
of life
make me want to do no more than cringe.
:3. We all expected that SW LEGO sets were going to be in short supply
for a
:time. There was a certain feeling that most people were willing to
'share'
:the available items, and not clean out what few sets were in stores.
:Instead of buying 5 or 10 X-wings, people would buy 1 or 2, because
they
:figured later on, availability would be greater, and they could get
more.
:This way, more people could enjoy them now. Scalpers place
themselves
:first.
The last sentence is not so good to me for a definition, but the rest
is helpful.
Scalpers are not altruistic like some others are and they have deep
pockets.
The last part is necessary because they have to significantly deplete
a local
market to cause a problem. Honestly when I bought my 3 SW sets I was
not
thinking about saving some for the rest of y'all. I bought what I
could afford.
:4. Scalpers misuse/abuse the system. They don't break the rules, but
they
:don't 'add value to the community'.
See, this is where it gets vague to me. These "scalpers" are also part
of a
community. So the reward they get must count for something. And as I
said
before the people they sell to are better off after the sale by the
preferences
that they have revealed.
:5. If a scalper fails to resell a collectable toy before it value
drops
:(due to increased availability), they will use the liberal return
policy of
:retail stores, and return the unsold items.
Good, then snowspeeders will be easier to find on the shelves. This
can't be
too big of a problem since the policies are set at the stores'
discretion.
:For me, it's not necessarily any one thing a seller does which marks
them
:as a scalper (although the points I listed above are a big part of
it).
:It's as much the attitude as anything else.
Steve, I can see what you are saying here. Numbers 2 & 3 seem to make
a solid definition to me. But these definitions don't make scalpers
sound
like a big problem to me. It is sort of an "offending the community
sensibilities" kind of thing. Since preferences are not uniform across
the
community, there's not going to be too much agreement on who is and is
not a scalper, and if they do fit the definition how much difference
it makes.
That's why, rationally, I think that if we can't convince each other
that this is
a problem then let's not call names over it.
DJ Zorn
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
20 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
