Subject:
|
Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 Feb 1999 03:41:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1908 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, bwappo@ee.net (Adam Yulish) writes:
[...]
> In addition, lego commerce happens on two levels: buying/selling, and
> trading. No matter how high or how low the "actual" prices for sets may
> go, the level of trading will remain the same. Set prices could inflate
> to 200%, and the trading field stays level. If people were just
> interested in one theme, then things would be unreasonably imbalanced
> between themes, but there are way too many people into lego to worry
> about theme inbalance. RTL/Lugnet and the Internet as a whole has long
> since surpassed the prerequisite critical mass necessary for theme
> balance.
I wonder if there are exceptions to this... Certainly if someone has a
brand new 6074 Black Falcon's Fortress which typically goes for (say) $100-
$150 in auctions, and someone else has a brand new 6980 Galaxy Commander
which typically goes for the same amount (say), then a trade would be
equitable...
But if someone wants to trade a brand new 6074 Black Falcon's Fortress
($35 set from '86) for a brand new 6807 (unnamed $2 European Space set from
'85), then the person giving up the 6074 is getting a great deal while the
person giving up the 6807 is getting ripped off by $50 or $100 (or more).
(OK, well, "ripped off" is relative -- since maybe both people are pleased
with the trade.)
The point is, unless the fair market values of the items being traded are
reasonably equal, a trade really isn't a fair trade; even in pure trading,
the cumulative side-effects of buying/selling/auctioning play a role.
Some additional data: A couple years ago, someone was kind enough, upon
discovering a previously unknown very small Space set, to offer it to me
before putting it up for auction or soliciting other trade offers. We'd
done a few trades/sales in the past and trusted each other and I also
happened to have an old set he had on his want list. I thought his offer
(of granting the right of first refusal) was *extremely* kind, and we worked
out a trade valuing the set at ~$400 US. I think I paid for in part using
cash or other LEGO sets, including another older Canadian/European-only
Space set. So basically, in this case, the trade was super-lopsided in
terms of the original prices, but quite fair (I hope) in terms of current
fair market values. I think we were both very pleased with the trade.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
| (...) I suppose exceptions are possible, but other than momentary fluctuations, The general "level" of set worth continues to be pretty even across the board. (...) <Adam digresses for a moment> Are you serious? The 6807 is worth *that* *much*? It (...) (28 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
| <snipped a lot of stuff that has already reached conclusion> (...) I agree. I find that the former appear when selling unusual items, and the latter appear when selling big items. The rest tends to even out. (...) I think (2) only occurs when the (...) (28 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
89 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
|
|
|
|
