- Wed Oct 16, 2013 10:53 pm
#5887
I had been meaning to launch this discussion earlier and kept forgetting.
I was reminded about it when I saw a recent forum post where someone is selling a record that has really jumped in value since they first purchased it.
how do they price this? the sign on the wall says "No price gouging" but where does the line get drawn between gouging and getting fair market value? should we sell our stuff at under market value as a sign of brotherhood? if yes, how much under? 10%? 25%? or should we try and not make any profit at all and just sell it for our initial cost?
The higher my profit is, the more records I can buy with the proceeds. As a record junky, I have a hard time not thinking like that.
I thought it was interesting when the story of Spencer's grail acquisition came around, nobody called foul at the seller and yelled 'flipper!' or 'gouger!' personally, I have no ill will towards someone who buys/sells records to make a profit as long as they aren't taking money away from someone who really needs it - but if they do that, chances are the fuzzy ethics of record flipping is the least of their moral concerns.
as an aside, I am also skeptical that record flipping is even a lucrative field (even with gouging!). after you account for paypal/discogs/ebay/credit card fees and time spent going to the post office and hitting refresh on your browser and twitter feeds, I am doubtful there is a lot of money to be made - even if you usually bet on the right records.
thoughts? (and was this whole post just a way for me to rationalize my discogs prices?)
I was reminded about it when I saw a recent forum post where someone is selling a record that has really jumped in value since they first purchased it.
how do they price this? the sign on the wall says "No price gouging" but where does the line get drawn between gouging and getting fair market value? should we sell our stuff at under market value as a sign of brotherhood? if yes, how much under? 10%? 25%? or should we try and not make any profit at all and just sell it for our initial cost?
The higher my profit is, the more records I can buy with the proceeds. As a record junky, I have a hard time not thinking like that.
I thought it was interesting when the story of Spencer's grail acquisition came around, nobody called foul at the seller and yelled 'flipper!' or 'gouger!' personally, I have no ill will towards someone who buys/sells records to make a profit as long as they aren't taking money away from someone who really needs it - but if they do that, chances are the fuzzy ethics of record flipping is the least of their moral concerns.
as an aside, I am also skeptical that record flipping is even a lucrative field (even with gouging!). after you account for paypal/discogs/ebay/credit card fees and time spent going to the post office and hitting refresh on your browser and twitter feeds, I am doubtful there is a lot of money to be made - even if you usually bet on the right records.
thoughts? (and was this whole post just a way for me to rationalize my discogs prices?)