Buying things specifically to sell for a profit.

[Iwritecode]

For those that missed it, there was an interesting and somewhat heated debate about this in another thread. Here's the post that started it off.

http://www.thedarktower.org/palaver/showthread.php?17109-Christine-Blu-Ray-Limited-Edition-Pre-sale&p=763147&viewfull=1#post763147


Personally, I feel like the people who buy extra copies of these things with the express purpose of flipping them are scumbag pieces of shit. No offense.

Honestly, I agree to a point. I don't know that I'd go so far as to call the people that do it "scumbag pieces of shit" but the practice does annoy me a little. Especially the problems that it can create.

Mostly I'm thinking about 1996 when the Tickle-me-Elmo first came out. My wife and I picked up one for our daughter in September simply because she liked Elmo. By the time November and December rolled around people were literally fighting each other in the store aisles over them. Half of them didn't even want them to give to a child but to list them in a newspaper ad for $100. IIRC the same thing happened with "Teacher Barbie"

Anyone remember the Beanie Baby craze? When McDonald's started putting them in happy meals I witnessed people buying the happy meals and then simply throwing the food out. All so they could make a few bucks.

I worked at a toy store for a couple of years when the Star Wars action figures were first re-released and we constantly had people coming into the store hovering over us so they could grab the figures the second we took them out of the box. I know of one manger that actually got in trouble because he was holding a bunch of the McFarlane sports figures back so he could buy them himself and sell them to his buddies.

So I understand the though process behind the practice and the risk/reward factor. And maybe it's a little bit of jealousy of never being the one that was in the right place at the right time to take advantage of doing something like this (I'm always a day late and a dollar short in finding out what the hot new thing is) but it is a bit annoying to want to buy something simply because you want/like it and find out it's sold-out because everyone is selling it on eBay for 3 times the original price. Especially when it's a toy or doll meant for children.

[Jean]

In the former Soviet Union it was a crime; misdemeanor or felony, depending on the profit made. Curiously, it was called "speculation" (спекуляция). Theoretically, the practice of "speculation" may lead to it becoming impossible for people to buy anything at all at its adequate price.

[Tito_Villa]

The less said about the former soviet union and communism the better imo

[Mr. Rabbit Trick]

The USA was, and continues to be, built on capitalism. Good luck to anyone who makes a profit on anything, especially in hard economic times.

"You pays yer money, and takes yer chance."

[Pasiuk57]

I see no problem with it. I've sold doubles of items in the past and bought items from people who were selling their 2nd copy.

[Jean]

The USA was, and continues to be, built on capitalism. Good luck to anyone who makes a profit on anything, especially in hard economic times.

"You pays yer money, and takes yer chance."Exactly. Hence my referring to Soviet attempts to control economy, a negative example that serves as reductio ad absurdum. Another approach to control is bringing in the moral aspect into an intrinsically a-moral field (enterprise).

[Iwritecode]

In the former Soviet Union it was a crime; misdemeanor or felony, depending on the profit made. Curiously, it was called "speculation" (спекуляция). Theoretically, the practice of "speculation" may lead to it becoming impossible for people to buy anything at all at its adequate price.

As far as I know, it's still illegal to stand in front of a venue and sell tickets to the concert/sporting event for more than face value. Yet it perfectly legal to scalp them online. :confused:

[Room 217 Caretaker]

What would happen to the market if all you could do is buy?

Mulleins

[Jean]

In the former Soviet Union it was a crime; misdemeanor or felony, depending on the profit made. Curiously, it was called "speculation" (спекуляция). Theoretically, the practice of "speculation" may lead to it becoming impossible for people to buy anything at all at its adequate price.

As far as I know, it's still illegal to stand in front of a venue and sell tickets to the concert/sporting event for more than face value. Yet it perfectly legal to scalp them online. :confused:

Yes. These inconsistencies apparently are attempts to compromise between total control and total dog-eat-dog chaos. For example, when Mr. Rabbit Trick says, "especially in hard economic times", he seems to mean "especially in not-quite-so-hard economic times", because in really hard times selling bread and other staples would be regulated in all (modern) systems. I believe that this would be done by means of direct control rather than appeals to moral, since in really hard times the former stop working.

[pathoftheturtle]

The USA was, and continues to be, built on capitalism. Good luck to anyone who makes a profit on anything, especially in hard economic times.

"You pays yer money, and takes yer chance."Exactly. Hence my referring to Soviet attempts to control economy, a negative example that serves as reductio ad absurdum. Another approach to control is bringing in the moral aspect into an intrinsically a-moral field (enterprise).Oh, it is amoral, alright.

[Randall Flagg]

Personally, I feel like the people who buy extra copies of these things with the express purpose of flipping them are scumbag pieces of shit. No offense.



Mostly I'm thinking about 1996 when the Tickle-me-Elmo first came out. My wife and I picked up one for our daughter in September simply because she liked Elmo. By the time November and December rolled around people were literally fighting each other in the store aisles over them. Half of them didn't even want them to give to a child but to list them in a newspaper ad for $100. IIRC the same thing happened with "Teacher Barbie"


I remember buying and selling Cabbage Patch Kids circa 1986. I had an inside source and made hundreds-perhaps thousands of dollars, and made numerous family members ecstatic at Christmas.
I had an inside source for TME's, I made hundreds of dollars profit.
Furbies were really hot a few years ago (1998?). I had an inside source and bought dozens at list cost and sold them for triple the price. Might have made $1K+ profit, plus had several for gifts.

When Power Rangers first went insane, my son HAD to HAD to have some of the pieces (large turtle Zord).
I did not have an inside source. I found someone in San Francisco with several had to have pieces. I drove over there-50 miles, and paid some guy hundreds of dollars for the two or three items I bought. I paid quadruple list price. My son was over the top thrilled at Christmas. He is now a 23 year old college grad, and still has the pieces in his room. He cherishes them
Best money I ever spent. Thanks to the person who sold them to me at an insane profit.

http://www.collectiondx.com/gallery2/gallery/d/11234-10/Tor2.jpg

[Pasiuk57]

Nothing wrong with that!

[Randall Flagg]

I edited my comment.

[Kingfan24]

I dont know - I'm on the fence about this - its hard for me as one of the youngest King collectors to get some of his rarer stuff (s/l Christine, s/l cujo) because the prices are absolutely insane. Back when they were sold for 60 bucks a piece (like the gunslinger even) whoever bought them then made a HELL of a deal. I don't blame people for selling them at the prices they go for but as a buyer I'm on the other side where I certainly do mind simply because I LOVE King and would love to have a complete collection.

[Mr. Rabbit Trick]

The Lettered Firestarter originally cost $300. Nowadays it is around $12,000 to $15,000. Years ago, it was worth even more. Why is this?

The Lettered Danse Macabre has a lower limitation and is MUCH harder to get than the Lettered Firestarter. There are two Lettered Firestarter on ABE right now, but you will not find a Lettered Danse Macabre anywhere.

[Randall Flagg]

The Lettered Firestarter originally cost $300. Nowadays it is around $12,000 to $15,000. Years ago, it was worth even more. Why is this?

The Lettered Danse Macabre has a lower limitation and is MUCH harder to get than the Lettered Firestarter. There are two Lettered Firestarter on ABE right now, but you will not find a Lettered Danse Macabre anywhere.
15 copies for private distribution could be why. King probably has 2 or 3 himself and the other dozen are VHTF.

[Ari_Racing]

As far as the person that sells the items later doesn't complain about the price of the market when making purchases, I'm perfectly okay with that. I don't remember here, but I met A LOT of sellers that buy and sell stuff making great profit about it and then complain like hysterical school girls when an item they couldn't buy before it's sold out and they had to pay twice the value of them in the 2nd market.

[Kingfan24]

As far as the person that sells the items later doesn't complain about the price of the market when making purchases, I'm perfectly okay with that. I don't remember here, but I met A LOT of sellers that buy and sell stuff making great profit about it and then complain like hysterical school girls when an item they couldn't buy before it's sold out and they had to pay twice the value of them in the 2nd market.

well said

[Iwritecode]

I'm sure the people that are buying this stuff at triple the retail value would 10 times out of 10 rather pay the retail value instead. I'm sure the kid they are buying for would be just as happy either way. But when people flip stuff for personal profit, it just lowers the chances of that happening.

There's a slight wrongness to it IMO because simply put, you're taking advantage of people. It's like saying to someone "Sure you could have bought this at the store for X amount but I got it first. So if you want it you now have to pay me X times 3 to get it."

There are plenty of people out there willing take advantage of others and/or be taken advantage of so more power to them. I don't have to like or agree with it though.

[killbourne]

Whats the difference between a company making a profit and a indvidual? I think its crazy how much you have to pay for cable these days..LOL!

[Iwritecode]

Whats the difference between a company making a profit and a indvidual? I think its crazy how much you have to pay for cable these days..LOL!

I don't like that much either but some things are unavoidable. I hate how much I have to spend on gas and tolls but I have to get to work.

Although I guess it depends on the company too. There a lot of companies out there that make tons of profits. But who am I to say they make too much? I can always choose to not purchase anything from them if I don't like how much they charge for their products.

[Randall Flagg]

I'm sure the people that are buying this stuff at triple the retail value would 10 times out of 10 rather pay the retail value instead. .
I would rather have it for free. That just is not a real expectation.

[Mr. Rabbit Trick]

I don't have any problem with paying the "going price" for anything, and I don't mind paying for tolls, gas or cable either. ACTUALLY:

I wish my tax bill was $20 million each year!!!!

[mcdonaldj]

Food, rent/mortgage, gas, utilities-etc. are must buy items. Prices for these things directly impact quality of life. S/L books (and the most popular Christmas toys as RF pointed out) are a luxury item. I'm firmly opposed to driving up the costs of things people must buy to avoid starvation, get protection from the elements, or get to work (especially if you have a long LA commute).

However, for an item you do not really need but chose to buy (S.K. books, limited blu-rays, Shelby mustang-etc.) let the free market reign. It sucks if you are the victim of a crashing publisher's website or have to work so can't login to get the latest CD or Sub Press S/L. This forum is a good place to see if another helpful collector might sell you an extra copy they purchased at issue price (how I got Doctor Sleep S/L). Many members here are lifetime subscribers to the smaller publishing houses and have been collecting for decades so have the knowledge and contacts to find rarer items. If all else fails, and if the Ebay or Abe price outweighs your wallet or desire to have the book - then do not buy it.

In no instance do I begrudge someone's ability to buy several copies of a S/L book at issue price with the intent to resell for a profit. If I could buy 3 copies of every S/L book and sell 2 to make my personal copy free - I'd do it. Buying multiple copies is a risk as the resale value is unknown and subject to quality of the book (uncertain) and the strength of the collecting market (which can be flooded with similar like minded resellers). It takes a certain level of experience, luck and judgment to pull off and if you take the risk (as I chose not to with The Shining S/L) you deserve the reward.

[Merlin1958]

I Read the first post and understand what you are all talking about, but bottom line is, as to the thread title, it is the definition of "business" under any political structure. I was an Authorized sales agent for AT&T. I bought Telephone systems from them "specifically" to make a profit and at a deep discount. What is confusing the issue, I believe for most is that folks are adding in "Personal reasons/emotions". Sorry, but under a capitalistic system, that simply does not factor in IMHO (and pretty much in fact). Just my two cents.

FWIW, I happen to be a big Eric Clapton fan. To me EC tickets scalpers are "scum bags", but hey, that's how they make their living. Whether it's EC, Aerosmith or The Stones they don't care.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

Sporting and music events are what really get me. Because of large contracts, businesses like stubhub and the like are able to scoop large volume tickets BEFORE the go on sale to the general public. Then they mark them up 300%. This is scumbag.

[mcdonaldj]

Sporting and music events are what really get me. Because of large contracts, businesses like stubhub and the like are able to scoop large volume tickets BEFORE the go on sale to the general public. Then they mark them up 300%. This is scumbag.

I worked for a ticket broker located in Missouri in college 15 years ago. All perfectly legal and with huge money making potential. The two brothers that ran the business started out small and built it up to a several million dollar business by the time they sold out to a larger firm.

There are many people that are willing to pay big money (high demand) for premium seats that sell out in minutes (limited supply) for sporting events and concerts. Buyers would rather shell out the cash than go through the hassle of trying to buy tickets online (refreshing 50 times), at a retailer after standing in line, or on the phone (redialing 50 times). It requires quite a bit of luck to get front row seats at events and your chances go way up if you have dozens of people working for you. I don't even have a problem with presales to large ticket brokers - those guys move large volumes of tickets for events so they get preferred treatment. Preferred customer status is a common (and common sense) business practice - for example giving preference to season ticket holders and individuals who have purchased tickets for many years.

The average guy gets left out and has a difficult time getting through for premium tickets (I'm a Laker fan so I know first hand). But if the average person plans and dedicates the time to getting the tickets in advance, they can still get seats at face value for most events and if they are lucky maybe even some premium seats (which even at face value are highly priced). I've spent thousands on sporting event tickets because it is worth the cash to me to go. The only real impact is that I can only go a few times rather than all the time.

The term 'scumbag' gets thrown around a great deal on this topic (to include the previous discussion). These guys aren't purse snatching or driving up the price of baby formula. We're talking tickets and limited edition books which are by their very nature scarce in number which naturally creates the market for low supply and high demand = expensive.

[neosatus]

I used some language that was a bit harsher than the sentiment behind it called for, but here's my bottom line on this, and then I'll say no more on the subject: it's wrong to take advantage of people, and if everyone lived their lives with a sense of personal accountability for their actions, the world might be a better place.

Is that an unrealistic expectation? On the macro level, of course it is; on the micro level, it's a different story.

It's alarming you don't realize what an absolute retarded statement this is. According to that logic someone making a living-someone making profit EVER, is "taking advantage people". Any business, any service is charging more for that product than they are paying for it and selling it to other people--for profit.

So someone has the foresight so predict that a product will go up in value and they buy some to sell and that makes that person a piece of shit? LOL
You said "they know" will go up in value... but there is no sure thing. Maybe the value won't go up at all. Maybe it will go up a little bit but after shipping cost and time spent, there was no profit to be made. So quit with these stupid assumptions. You look very foolish, sir.

[Jimimck]

To me there is nothing wrong with it. I would assume (perhaps incorrectly, but IMO I beleive...) that the items that sell out, would sell out regardless if it was sold to people who just want it, or people who purchase with an intent to sell for profit. Either way the end result is the same - item sold out.

When it comes to items showing up on the secondary market, the purpose behind the sale is irrelevant. If someone who purchased it with intent to keep it ends up selling for personal/financial reasons etc, they are still going to enjoy the inflated price and sell at a profit no? So there is no difference if the intent behind that sale was to always sell at a profit - end result equals you being able to buy something that had sold out, at MARKET value.

Now some may argue that the items only sell out because of these profiteers, and that the second hand value is artificially inflated. Well to me that is just guess work and you'd never really know. When it comes to King books and S/L's selling out so quickly, you would have a hard time convincing me there aren't plenty of true collectors out there that would be next in line to purchase and the item would still sell out.

[Ben Staad]

For some things I do not have an issue with purchasing to flip and make a profit. My main problem would be where there is no limit (to number of purchases) or preferred purchasing involved. I have had to go on the secondary market (specifically sporting and music events) and purchase things for inflated price for this reason. I was online/on the phone/etc at the appropriate time for certain things only to find out the event is already sold out within 5-20 minutes of the tickets opening up. How is it possible to sell 15,000 seats within that timeframe unless seats were held back and/or groups can buy massive amounts of seats on a preferred basis. This practice is a little disturbing to me.

I don't really begrudge the purchaser (and subsequent re-seller) for making a proft though. They are only utilizing the system that is already in place.

[Iwritecode]

To me there is nothing wrong with it. I would assume (perhaps incorrectly, but IMO I beleive...) that the items that sell out, would sell out regardless if it was sold to people who just want it, or people who purchase with an intent to sell for profit. Either way the end result is the same - item sold out.

Yea, but there is a difference between 10 different people buying 10 items and being happy compared to 1 person buying all 10 items and the other 9 people buying the items at inflated prices.


When it comes to items showing up on the secondary market, the purpose behind the sale is irrelevant. If someone who purchased it with intent to keep it ends up selling for personal/financial reasons etc, they are still going to enjoy the inflated price and sell at a profit no? So there is no difference if the intent behind that sale was to always sell at a profit - end result equals you being able to buy something that had sold out, at MARKET value.

I’ve always been told that the value of an item is whatever you can get somebody to pay you for it. Maybe I’m looking at this backwards? Maybe I should be complaining about all the people that buy stuff at inflated prices. If nobody bought the stuff on the secondary market there wouldn’t be any sellers.

Pipe dream I know…


Now some may argue that the items only sell out because of these profiteers, and that the second hand value is artificially inflated. Well to me that is just guess work and you'd never really know. When it comes to King books and S/L's selling out so quickly, you would have a hard time convincing me there aren't plenty of true collectors out there that would be next in line to purchase and the item would still sell out.

There is almost 2 different arguments here. There are things that are made in limited supply that are sold and once they are gone, they are gone. Like books and movies and concert tickets. Then there are things that are in high demand simply because they are new.

Look at the people that stand in lines for the newest electronic item whether it's an Iphone or a PS3 or an Xbox or whatever. They buy out the store and then minutes later the stuff is on eBay for 100's of dollars more. Then people pay the enormous prices just so they can be "first". But a couple of weeks later everyone and their brother has one because they waited until the rush died down.

Christmas time typically causes an inflated demand and value as well. Look at the people that pack the stores on Black Friday to buy stuff that they can usually get in January for less.

[Iwritecode]

For some things I do not have an issue with purchasing to flip and make a profit. My main problem would be where there is no limit (to number of purchases) or preferred purchasing involved. I have had to go on the secondary market (specifically sporting and music events) and purchase things for inflated price for this reason. I was online/on the phone/etc at the appropriate time for certain things only to find out the event is already sold out within 5-20 minutes of the tickets opening up. How is it possible to sell 15,000 seats within that timeframe unless seats were held back and/or groups can buy massive amounts of seats on a preferred basis. This practice is a little disturbing to me.

I don't really begrudge the purchaser (and subsequent re-seller) for making a proft though. They are only utilizing the system that is already in place.

I've had this happen plenty of times.



When I complain about it the response I usually get is "Life isn't fair".



Which is true.



And that sucks.

[Brice]

It seems obvious to me that in any economic system this would happen and I don't at all view it as taking advantage of people. So long as your not like buying all the baby formula or medicines on the market and marking them up to astronomical prices I don't really see anything shady in the purchasing and reselling of stuff.

[mistercrowley]

If you don't like the price don't buy it, it's that simple. If you want a copy at retail price then make time to buy it when it gets released otherwise don't begrudge people who are spending thousands of dollars in order to make a profit

[CRinVA]

You can't please all the people all the time.

Remember in a free market society that simple economics is the primary driver - the Law of Supply and Demand! Never better exemplified than on ebay. I got something; five other people got the same thing; twenty people want the something. The price goes higher and higher!

House prices, gasoline, milk, bread and eggs. Teletubbies, S/L books, tickets to sporting or concerts, beanie babies, insurance, ... How about the banks, doesn't it just yank yer chain to have to pay some stupid $2 - $3.50 fee to get you own money out of an ATM when it has been long proven that the cost to the bank for ATM electronic transactions is minimal, as in pennies. Think of how much of a markup that is! It's in the thousands of % markup!

To me the only real "scum bags" would be those that jacked up the price of something that was "life-saving" to profit on someone else's woes.

My pet peeve is in fact Stub Hub - whcih I call legalized ticket scalping. You can get busted for scalping tickets at teh gate at a ballpark, but you can sell the same tickets at inflated prices online! I know its all part of supply and demand and someone is going to profit. In the case of stb hub they aer just not going to profit form me. As an example, just recently the only way for me to get decent seats for the Yankees/Nationals Exhibition game (and most here know that I like Merlin am a diehard Yankee fan) was through Stub Hub, where the seat prices were more than tripled. I am not paying the price asked to see my beloved team. Perhaps if it was a meaningful game like The World Series (stranger things have happened) I would swallow my pride and buy the tickets. But for the everyday games - not happening. I'll buy the tickets through the venue if I want to see the game.

[pathoftheturtle]

I've always been told that the value of an item is whatever you can get somebody to pay you for it. Maybe I'm looking at this backwards? Maybe I should be complaining about all the people that buy stuff at inflated prices. If nobody bought the stuff on the secondary market there wouldn't be any sellers.
I own a funny comic book in which Jay & Silent Bob are angry because people in their neighborhood become more interested in collectibles than drugs. It's hard to be a successful drug pusher if the addicts won't stay addicted.

[Kingfan24]

retarded

Neostatus - It's alarming that YOU don't understand that this is extremely offensive to a lot of people asshole. Quit with the stupid assumptions that the word you just used is okay, You are the one looking foolish sir. I work with mentally handicapped and physically disabled children every day. I can't believe you even had the nerve to say that.

[Merlin1958]

I realize that this may sound a little off coming from me, but really folks we should really try to remain civil and refrain from insulting each other with foul or questionable language. Right?

[Kingfan24]

im with you on that merlin - i apologize but that word is horrible

[Randall Flagg]

...The terms used for this condition are subject to a process called the euphemism treadmill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism_treadmill). This means that whatever term is chosen for this condition, it eventually becomes perceived as an insult. The terms mental retardation and mentally retarded were invented in the middle of the 20th century to replace the previous set of terms, which were deemed to have become offensive. By the end of the 20th century, these terms themselves have come to be widely seen as disparaging and politically incorrect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness) and in need of replacement...

[pathoftheturtle]

And I think to myself, "What a wonderful world." :evil:

[Merlin1958]

And I think to myself, "What a wonderful world." :evil:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IoO5nkxT_4

[pathoftheturtle]

If you think that someone is being ignorant, it's better to just accuse them of ignorance than to compare them with the mentally handicapped. We should learn the difference. If people just conform in their word choice and don't actually get the point of this, then nothing really changes. Same thing with state control over resources. If a government institutes any system to control greed and exploitation, the greedy just conform outwardly and then move on to exploit the new system.

[Merlin1958]

If you think that someone is being ignorant, it's better to just accuse them of ignorance than to compare them with the mentally handicapped. We should learn the difference. If people just conform in their word choice and don't actually get the point of this, then nothing really changes. Same thing with state control over resources. If a government institutes any system to control greed and exploitation, the greedy just conform outwardly and then move on to exploit the new system.

You really need to run for office!!! LOL LOL LOL

[Randall Flagg]

Back on topic please.

[Bryant Burnette]

I used some language that was a bit harsher than the sentiment behind it called for, but here's my bottom line on this, and then I'll say no more on the subject: it's wrong to take advantage of people, and if everyone lived their lives with a sense of personal accountability for their actions, the world might be a better place.

Is that an unrealistic expectation? On the macro level, of course it is; on the micro level, it's a different story.

It's alarming you don't realize what an absolute retarded statement this is. According to that logic someone making a living-someone making profit EVER, is "taking advantage people". Any business, any service is charging more for that product than they are paying for it and selling it to other people--for profit.

So someone has the foresight so predict that a product will go up in value and they buy some to sell and that makes that person a piece of shit? LOL
You said "they know" will go up in value... but there is no sure thing. Maybe the value won't go up at all. Maybe it will go up a little bit but after shipping cost and time spent, there was no profit to be made. So quit with these stupid assumptions. You look very foolish, sir.

Taking advantage OF people. Don't forget the "of," as that's the word that really ties the phrase together.

[Merlin1958]

I used some language that was a bit harsher than the sentiment behind it called for, but here's my bottom line on this, and then I'll say no more on the subject: it's wrong to take advantage of people, and if everyone lived their lives with a sense of personal accountability for their actions, the world might be a better place.

Is that an unrealistic expectation? On the macro level, of course it is; on the micro level, it's a different story.

It's alarming you don't realize what an absolute retarded statement this is. According to that logic someone making a living-someone making profit EVER, is "taking advantage people". Any business, any service is charging more for that product than they are paying for it and selling it to other people--for profit.

So someone has the foresight so predict that a product will go up in value and they buy some to sell and that makes that person a piece of shit? LOL
You said "they know" will go up in value... but there is no sure thing. Maybe the value won't go up at all. Maybe it will go up a little bit but after shipping cost and time spent, there was no profit to be made. So quit with these stupid assumptions. You look very foolish, sir.

Taking advantage OF people. Don't forget the "of," as that's the word that really ties the phrase together.

Please pardon me, but I'm not "getting it". Sorry, I'm older.

[Bryant Burnette]

So far, all I've heard in the way of explaining why it's okay to engage in profiteering of the kind that I was talking about when this topic got kicked off is some variant of the following: "The system permits for it, and it worked for me, and that's all I care about." At the bottom of things, it's selfish behavior that fails to take into account other people's feelings.

[Bryant Burnette]

[QUOTE=Iwritecode;767980] It's hard to be a successful drug pusher if the addicts won't stay addicted.

Good point. Which is why I never buy things at a huge, inflated markup.

Well, that and the fact that I'm usually broke...

[Bryant Burnette]

So long as your not like buying all the baby formula or medicines on the market and marking them up to astronomical prices I don't really see anything shady in the purchasing and reselling of stuff.

The degree of severity is obviously EXTREMELY different, but otherwise there's no fundamental difference: it's one person, more advantaged than others, using his/her influence to hog the supply and exploit the demand for personal gain.

[Merlin1958]

So far, all I've heard in the way of explaining why it's okay to engage in profiteering of the kind that I was talking about when this topic got kicked off is some variant of the following: "The system permits for it, and it worked for me, and that's all I care about." At the bottom of things, it's selfish behavior that fails to take into account other people's feelings.

That is a wholly unrealistic opinion to have. However, I do understand your point.

[Brice]

As do I but I'll put the idea forth that whereas most of us would agree that exploiting for a need based commodity and just something someone would like to have is vastly quantifiably different. I am sure Mr. Burnette would disagree, but no I don't see it as different degrees of the same thing. A want is simply that and not a neccessity such as food, or medicine. I see absolutely nothing wrong with profiting on things people merely desire and can comfortably do without. And if anyone does feel there is no difference they are equally entitled to pick up multiple copies of rare books and sell them at cost...or even at a loss....thus maximizing people's happiness.

[Bryant Burnette]

[QUOTE=Bryant Burnette;768087]That is a wholly unrealistic opinion to have. However, I do understand your point.

Unrealistic...?

How so?

[Merlin1958]

[QUOTE=Bryant Burnette;768087]That is a wholly unrealistic opinion to have. However, I do understand your point.

Unrealistic...?

How so?

If you don't know then you are beyond enlightenment.

[Bryant Burnette]

Thanks, richard.

[AKC]

Haven't we beat this fucking horse to death?

Holy shit....

[Bryant Burnette]

Haven't we beat this fucking horse to death?

Holy shit....

Probably so, but nobody is making you read it.

[Brice]

Thanks, richard.

I believe you're confused good sir. His name is Bill. I only point this out because if you're NOT confused you're implying something really not nice and since you've already come in here (not this thread, but the other)kinda' brashly ...just if you're gonna' call names have the balls to do so even if it does have negative consequences. I mean to tell people that they're not being nice by not conforming to your own ideals while slyly acting like a smartass, being passive agressive, and calling people names is kinda' dickish, ya' know?

[Bad Penny]

Bravo, Brice, Bravo :clap:

[mcdonaldj]

So far, all I've heard in the way of explaining why it's okay to engage in profiteering of the kind that I was talking about when this topic got kicked off is some variant of the following: "The system permits for it, and it worked for me, and that's all I care about." At the bottom of things, it's selfish behavior that fails to take into account other people's feelings.

If a buyer speculated and bought multiple copies that is just part of a free market that supports private ownership. Your subjective and simplistic opinion that it is selfish behavior ignores many perfectly valid points to the contrary raised in this thread and the previous one.

If you would personally like to acquire a S/L edition at or near issue price after missing out on the original sale (and who's fault was that?) get off the soapbox and try making some acquaintances here. I purchased a S/L IT close to issue price and S/L Doctor Sleep at issue price from members here.

Finally, stating a need to consider 'other people's feelings' in relation to buying S/L books is a bit dramatic. Someone can chose to do you a favor (usually because they like you - hint, hint) and sell you a book at issue price or they can charge a premium for their time and effort in acquiring the book up to whatever price point the market will bear. The choice is theirs as the owner, not yours as a guy who thinks you deserve a cheaper S/L book.

[Randall Flagg]

Thanks, richard.
Either say it or don't.
Call him a "dick", but the "richard" comment was pretty weak.
Perhaps just state your side of the debate.

P.S. neg rep added for the statement.

[neosatus]

retarded

Neostatus - It's alarming that YOU don't understand that this is extremely offensive to a lot of people asshole. Quit with the stupid assumptions that the word you just used is okay, You are the one looking foolish sir. I work with mentally handicapped and physically disabled children every day. I can't believe you even had the nerve to say that.

lol, I won't be changing my language for you, or anyone else. Keep whining--it's hilarious. You don't get to tell me what to do. Got that?

This is just for you:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUvdXxhLPa8

[neosatus]

...The terms used for this condition are subject to a process called the euphemism treadmill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism_treadmill). This means that whatever term is chosen for this condition, it eventually becomes perceived as an insult. The terms mental retardation and mentally retarded were invented in the middle of the 20th century to replace the previous set of terms, which were deemed to have become offensive. By the end of the 20th century, these terms themselves have come to be widely seen as disparaging and politically incorrect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness) and in need of replacement...

Thank you Jerome. I have endless respect for people who think for themselves.

[pathoftheturtle]

While we are again off topic, may I just add very quickly --
I work with mentally handicapped and physically disabled children every day.Thanks for doing that. I have endless respect for people who think about others.

[biomieg]

As do I but I'll put the idea forth that whereas most of us would agree that exploiting for a need based commodity and just something someone would like to have is vastly quantifiably different. I am sure Mr. Burnette would disagree, but no I don't see it as different degrees of the same thing. A want is simply that and not a neccessity such as food, or medicine. I see absolutely nothing wrong with profiting on things people merely desire and can comfortably do without. And if anyone does feel there is no difference they are equally entitled to pick up multiple copies of rare books and sell them at cost...or even at a loss....thus maximizing people's happiness.

I agree 100%.

[WeDealInLead]

[QUOTE]retarded


lol, I won't be changing my language for you, or anyone else. Keep whining--it's hilarious. You don't get to tell me what to do. Got that?

]

You know, I had typed an actual response to this but fuck it, what's the point. Any adult who actually talks this way wouldn't get it. So here's a quick fuck you instead.

[Iwritecode]

it's one person, more advantaged than others, using his/her influence to hog the supply and exploit the demand for personal gain.

This.

I get reasoning behind it. I really do. People like to make money. And if it takes selling something to someone so desperate to own that item that they'll pay whatever the asking price is, so be it.

It's like that old saying, "There's a sucker born every minute."

There are also plenty of people willing to take advantage of those "suckers".

[mistercrowley]

I know its "not fair" that everyone can't get a copy at retail price but if you don't like it don't buy it and don't collect. Life's not fair. Get over it

[Brice]

The very idea of fairness when speaking of limited editions is ludicrous. I mean if we want fair then EVERYBODY should have one....even if they can't afford it. We should have book welfare for those who can't. We could still call it limited as it would be strictly limited to the number of men, women,and children on the planet.

[Iwritecode]

The very idea of fairness when speaking of limited editions is ludicrous. I mean if we want fair then EVERYBODY should have one....even if they can't afford it. We should have book welfare for those who can't. We could still call it limited as it would be strictly limited to the number of men, women,and children on the planet.

What about the things that become artificially limited due to time constraints (like people that have to have a certain thing before Christmas) or simply because it's the hot new thing that everyone is trying to buy (see Furbies, Beenie Babies, ect...)?

[bdwyer19]

The very idea of fairness when speaking of limited editions is ludicrous. I mean if we want fair then EVERYBODY should have one....even if they can't afford it. We should have book welfare for those who can't. We could still call it limited as it would be strictly limited to the number of men, women,and children on the planet.

What about the things that become artificially limited due to time constraints (like people that have to have a certain thing before Christmas) or simply because it's the hot new thing that everyone is trying to buy (see Furbies, Beenie Babies, ect...)?

Then it comes down to a want vs. a need. This is capitalistic society. Nobody HAS to own a Furbie or a Beanie Baby, or a Stephen King S/L. But if they want one, then it's a completely different story. Nobody is being forced to buy a S/L at a certain price. But if someone absolutely has to have one, they should be prepared to pay whatever the market dictates.

[pathoftheturtle]

retarded


lol, I won't be changing my language for you, or anyone else. Keep whining--it's hilarious. You don't get to tell me what to do. Got that?

]

You know, I had typed an actual response to this but fuck it, what's the point. Any adult who actually talks this way wouldn't get it. So here's a quick fuck you instead.Well, I don't know. Assuming that some people are not worth the effort would seem to be the problem of saying that somebody "sounds retarded" in the first place. One can choose to be intractably ignorant, but I'd be careful jumping to conclusion that someone's deeply unrepentant. Maybe he just still doesn't see. I agree with Carlin, and as the information Jerome reported indicates, it may be harmless to refer to someone who is actually mentally challenged as "retarded" if the context is descriptive and not intending to disparage. I think it is important to be aware of what it implies about such people, however, if you warn someone whose opinion you don't like that they could be mistaken for one of them.



So far, all I've heard in the way of explaining why it's okay to engage in profiteering of the kind that I was talking about when this topic got kicked off is some variant of the following: "The system permits for it, and it worked for me, and that's all I care about." At the bottom of things, it's selfish behavior that fails to take into account other people's feelings.

That is a wholly unrealistic opinion to have. However, I do understand your point.I don't think it is an inaccurate analysis of the arguments presented that none disprove the self-interest on that side of things. They mostly just point out that there is some degree of selfishness on the other side, too. Whether it's at all realistic for people in general to be more selfless, I don't know, honestly. But it is true that systemic wrongness doesn't absolutely justify a particular wrong, so it's fair to want people to at least say "I do understand your point." Nevertheless, unless you have a really practical method to help parties who might get a little screwed under the current system without more fundamentally screwing other parties, then it is NOT fair, really, to expect more than that.
James Whitcomb Riley's poem: My Philosofy (http://www.readbookonline.net/readOnLine/62253/)

[WeDealInLead]

Path, I'll write a longer reply tomorrow night but more likely on Sunday. It comes down to this- using someone's sexual orientation, race or disability as a derogatry term directly states there is something wrong with any of those. They're words of hatred and discrimination. I saw what RF posted and took something else from it. Words are fluid and change meaning with time and enlightment. Can you imagine a society where dropping the N-bomb was still widely acceptable? When I take my daughter to see cartoons there are characters saying "moron." I wince every single time. How is that appropriate to teach our kids that their classmates' condition is a put-down? How is that in any way different from calling someone a fag?

As far as using "retarded" as a descriptive... dunno, I'm at work right now with two girls with disabilites. I could go ask them if they can think of any instance when using that word is not offensive to them. I'm sure what the answer would be though. I've seen some terrible things over the 12 years I've been doing this so I get a little emotional when an issue I care about comes up.

Lastly, anyone can use any words they wish. But there might be people who don't like it. You keep your right of speech but it pales next to a goddamn human rights issue and dignity. None of us are perfect and things slip out but a little empathy goes a long way. Imagine your daughter with a disability and ask yourself how you would react if some jackass used those terms.

[tippy4]

I used some language that was a bit harsher than the sentiment behind it called for, but here's my bottom line on this, and then I'll say no more on the subject: it's wrong to take advantage of people, and if everyone lived their lives with a sense of personal accountability for their actions, the world might be a better place.

Is that an unrealistic expectation? On the macro level, of course it is; on the micro level, it's a different story.

It's alarming you don't realize what an absolute retarded statement this is. According to that logic someone making a living-someone making profit EVER, is "taking advantage people". Any business, any service is charging more for that product than they are paying for it and selling it to other people--for profit.

So someone has the foresight so predict that a product will go up in value and they buy some to sell and that makes that person a piece of shit? LOL
You said "they know" will go up in value... but there is no sure thing. Maybe the value won't go up at all. Maybe it will go up a little bit but after shipping cost and time spent, there was no profit to be made. So quit with these stupid assumptions. You look very foolish, sir.

Taking advantage OF people. Don't forget the "of," as that's the word that really ties the phrase together.

Please pardon me, but I'm not "getting it". Sorry, I'm older.

neosatus left the word OF out of "taking advantage people", and BB is focusing on his typo/grammar instead of the actual issue.

[tippy4]

Haven't we beat this fucking horse to death?

Holy shit....

I am with you on that.

Somebody smack they guy who started this thread.

From what I read, only person here has issue with the practice.

[killbourne]

Haven't we beat this fucking horse to death?

Holy shit....

I am with you on that.

Somebody smack they guy who started this tread.

+1

[mcdonaldj]

Haven't we beat this fucking horse to death?

Holy shit....

I am with you on that.

Somebody smack they guy who started this tread.

From what I read, only person here has issue with the practice.

True the thread topic is getting redundant - the only two things I'm interested in now are:

1. Holy shit I have to watch saying the word retarded when I really mean stupid...as in 'that was a retarded thing to do'. It never crossed my mind how offensive that could be.

2. How the heck did you get 5 copies of The Shining S/L when we were limited to 1 per customer? I smell a secret book buying trick I need to learn. Although I didn't have a few thousand bucks lying around to buy them anyway and the terrible cover art would have me worried.

[tippy4]

I just asked four friends to buy them for me.

[bdwyer19]

So... what more needs to be said, before this thread gets archived?

[Jean]

just a quick question to all:

if you bought something your friend needed, would you re-sell it to him at a higher price? If the answer is negative, then we understand that the practice of re-selling something (obviously, I mean re-selling without adding any value to the original object) this way is not perceived as moral in interpersonal relationships. Buisiness is amoral by definition, so the bottom line may be that we should discriminate between what is personally (un)acceptable, and what is supposed to be (dis)allowed in a field that is intrinsically impersonal.

[AKC]

We have indeed offically beat this fucking horse to death.....

It's toast...... :emot-flame:

[Randall Flagg]

I am not going to close it, or archive it. If there is no interest, it will slowly drop off the first page. Once it drops, I will then archive it.

[Cook]

I am not going to close it, or archive it. If there is no interest, it will slowly drop off the first page. Once it drops, I will then archive it.

Fascinating thread, it has shown a different "flavor" to a few individuals here. :)

[Brice]

just a quick question to all:

if you bought something your friend needed, would you re-sell it to him at a higher price? If the answer is negative, then we understand that the practice of re-selling something (obviously, I mean re-selling without adding any value to the original object) this way is not perceived as moral in interpersonal relationships. Buisiness is amoral by definition, so the bottom line may be that we should discriminate between what is personally (un)acceptable, and what is supposed to be (dis)allowed in a field that is intrinsically impersonal.

I do not think business is intrinsically amoral. I think the line should be drawn on what is a need or a want. Not only would I not charge my friend $5 for a loaf of bread; I wouldn't charge my enemy that either. Of course I reserve the right to charge less (maybe even give it to them) than I would for a friend than an enemy or a stranger. When you get to discusing luxury items I'm still more inclined to give a deal to a friend than to an enemy, but less inclined to be as generous. I still might give a deal just not as nice of one as I might if it were something needed.

[TwistedNadine]

1. Holy shit I have to watch saying the word retarded when I really mean stupid...as in 'that was a retarded thing to do'. It never crossed my mind how offensive that could be.


Ditto. Other than this enlightenment the rest of this thread is useless except for it's entertainment value

[pathoftheturtle]

Sometimes I wonder whether it's the best idea, the way that we depersonalize strangers. Especially regarding necessities: "Price gouging" is illegal in the U.S. -- that refers to speculation in particular situations that we find especially objectionable. The practical result of friends getting lower prices is cozy little cliques and classes. Insider trading is also illegal, and stems from similar ethics and relationships. Another form of the same thing, really. Free market just means each person may discriminate as a fundamental right. We like to believe that capitalism ensures fairness, but it does not. If money did not exist, people would cheat each other and constantly take advantage, but thanks to money, people... cheat each other and constantly take advantage. Find a legitimate way to steal, and your wealth spends the same way as it would if you earned it the hard way. Further, "who you know" is provably the main factor in getting a job, and plainly a major advantage in landing a "good" position with easier work with higher pay.
But I'm not sure if that is still on-topic or not. Anyway, if all this thread ever does is make a few who didn't realize how offensive "retarded" can be aware, I still think that's time well spent. Most people just do it out of habit, without thinking about the meaning. The problem is that bullies predisposed to actual hatefulness pick up on all of that casual language and it makes them feel society in fact shares their attitude.

[Merlin1958]

retarded


lol, I won't be changing my language for you, or anyone else. Keep whining--it's hilarious. You don't get to tell me what to do. Got that?

]

You know, I had typed an actual response to this but fuck it, what's the point. Any adult who actually talks this way wouldn't get it. So here's a quick fuck you instead.Well, I don't know. Assuming that some people are not worth the effort would seem to be the problem of saying that somebody "sounds retarded" in the first place. One can choose to be intractably ignorant, but I'd be careful jumping to conclusion that someone's deeply unrepentant. Maybe he just still doesn't see. I agree with Carlin, and as the information Jerome reported indicates, it may be harmless to refer to someone who is actually mentally challenged as "retarded" if the context is descriptive and not intending to disparage. I think it is important to be aware of what it implies about such people, however, if you warn someone whose opinion you don't like that they could be mistaken for one of them.



So far, all I've heard in the way of explaining why it's okay to engage in profiteering of the kind that I was talking about when this topic got kicked off is some variant of the following: "The system permits for it, and it worked for me, and that's all I care about." At the bottom of things, it's selfish behavior that fails to take into account other people's feelings.

That is a wholly unrealistic opinion to have. However, I do understand your point.I don't think it is an inaccurate analysis of the arguments presented that none disprove the self-interest on that side of things. They mostly just point out that there is some degree of selfishness on the other side, too. Whether it's at all realistic for people in general to be more selfless, I don't know, honestly. But it is true that systemic wrongness doesn't absolutely justify a particular wrong, so it's fair to want people to at least say "I do understand your point." Nevertheless, unless you have a really practical method to help parties who might get a little screwed under the current system without more fundamentally screwing other parties, then it is NOT fair, really, to expect more than that.
James Whitcomb Riley's poem: My Philosofy (http://www.readbookonline.net/readOnLine/62253/)

Dude, seriously, you've GOT to run for office!!! LOL J/K

[pathoftheturtle]

Dude, seriously, you've GOT to run for office!!! LOL J/KYeah; I still can't figure out whether that is a compliment or an insult. :lol:

[Merlin1958]

Dude, seriously, you've GOT to run for office!!! LOL J/KYeah; I still can't figure out whether that is a compliment or an insult. :lol:

LOL Have your people contact, my people!!! LOL

[Iwritecode]

Haven't we beat this fucking horse to death?

Holy shit....

I am with you on that.

Somebody smack they guy who started this tread.

From what I read, only person here has issue with the practice.

Don’t know if you’re talking about me or the person that made the original post in the other thread but I was just trying to spark some conversation. With this thread already going 3 pages, it looks like I have.



I've found that if people can remain civil, the topics where there are two obviously divided opinions make for some pretty interesting threads. It's usually the hot button topics like gun control, abortion or religion that get people going but this topic was different and I hadn't seen it discussed before.

Besides, if you don't like it you are free to ignore it.

[tippy4]

I was talking about you if you started the thread.....but I really did not want you actually smacked in the head.

That was my way of expressing my frustration with this thread.

An overwhelming majority of people have no problem with buying to resell, and a couple of people do.

There is not much else to say.

[neosatus]

[QUOTE]retarded


lol, I won't be changing my language for you, or anyone else. Keep whining--it's hilarious. You don't get to tell me what to do. Got that?

]

You know, I had typed an actual response to this but fuck it, what's the point. Any adult who actually talks this way wouldn't get it. So here's a quick fuck you instead.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZMpuzabEJU

[Kingfan24]

Path, I'll write a longer reply tomorrow night but more likely on Sunday. It comes down to this- using someone's sexual orientation, race or disability as a derogatry term directly states there is something wrong with any of those. They're words of hatred and discrimination. I saw what RF posted and took something else from it. Words are fluid and change meaning with time and enlightment. Can you imagine a society where dropping the N-bomb was still widely acceptable? When I take my daughter to see cartoons there are characters saying "moron." I wince every single time. How is that appropriate to teach our kids that their classmates' condition is a put-down? How is that in any way different from calling someone a fag?

As far as using "retarded" as a descriptive... dunno, I'm at work right now with two girls with disabilites. I could go ask them if they can think of any instance when using that word is not offensive to them. I'm sure what the answer would be though. I've seen some terrible things over the 12 years I've been doing this so I get a little emotional when an issue I care about comes up.

Lastly, anyone can use any words they wish. But there might be people who don't like it. You keep your right of speech but it pales next to a goddamn human rights issue and dignity. None of us are perfect and things slip out but a little empathy goes a long way. Imagine your daughter with a disability and ask yourself how you would react if some jackass used those terms.

Couldn't have said it any better myself

[neosatus]

Path, I'll write a longer reply tomorrow night but more likely on Sunday. It comes down to this- using someone's sexual orientation, race or disability as a derogatry term directly states there is something wrong with any of those. They're words of hatred and discrimination. I saw what RF posted and took something else from it. Words are fluid and change meaning with time and enlightment. Can you imagine a society where dropping the N-bomb was still widely acceptable? When I take my daughter to see cartoons there are characters saying "moron." I wince every single time. How is that appropriate to teach our kids that their classmates' condition is a put-down? How is that in any way different from calling someone a fag?

As far as using "retarded" as a descriptive... dunno, I'm at work right now with two girls with disabilites. I could go ask them if they can think of any instance when using that word is not offensive to them. I'm sure what the answer would be though. I've seen some terrible things over the 12 years I've been doing this so I get a little emotional when an issue I care about comes up.

Lastly, anyone can use any words they wish. But there might be people who don't like it. You keep your right of speech but it pales next to a goddamn human rights issue and dignity. None of us are perfect and things slip out but a little empathy goes a long way. Imagine your daughter with a disability and ask yourself how you would react if some jackass used those terms.

I have absolutely nothing against anyone with a disability--nor did I even vaguely indicate as much. Obviously the Carlin video went way above your head, douchebag.

Regarding your two girls.. it's offensive because you TEACH THEM that it's offensive. The same way that some people only feel abused after they are told that they were abused--regardless of if it even happened or not.
TL;DR -- Your ubersensitive bitch-made bullshit is what is teaching them to feel "offended".


And regarding your "people who don't like it" comment. You don't have to like it. And I don't have to like what you say, but I would never tell you you can't or shouldn't be able to say something.

It's like the theists that have the belief that blasphem is sinful. Some of those...it's enough for them that they don't blasphem themselves.
But other theists--that's not good enough. Other theists go one step further and tell others not to blasphem--they tell them that's wrong. They tell them to follow their rules.

You're that kind of person--telling other people that they must follow their beliefs.

[Kingfan24]

Don't bring religion into this - it's got nothing to do with it. I assume you think it's also okay to use words like f*g to describe homosexual men and women. C'mon man - it's not about free speech or us telling you not to say something. It's about what is socially acceptable, and what is morally right.

[neosatus]

Don't bring religion into this - it's got nothing to do with it. I assume you think it's also okay to use words like f*g to describe homosexual men and women. C'mon man - it's not about free speech or us telling you not to say something. It's about what is socially acceptable, and what is morally right.

lol, religion wasn't even the point. How sad is it that you can't see that?

Socially acceptable and morality isn't black and white. Not everyone has the same beliefs. That's what you're not grasping. The only thing you are grasping is the anxiousness to sit on the edge of your seat, ready to pounce on anyone who says something that you think you're SUPPOSED to be offended by. You're not even offended yourself--you're white-knighting for random disabled people who weren't even being talked about.

[Kingfan24]

No actually I'm not white knighting for anyone - I am offended by it because my cousins child is mentally handicapped, ass hole. I can't help it you think that you should be entitled to say whatever you want to t whomever you want to. Obviously I wasn't the only one offended - I'm done with this topic because this wasn't the time or place for this argument - but maybe you should be aware of what words carry what weight.

[neosatus]

Don't bring religion into this - it's got nothing to do with it. I assume you think it's also okay to use words like f*g to describe homosexual men and women. C'mon man - it's not about free speech or us telling you not to say something. It's about what is socially acceptable, and what is morally right.

Do you even know any homosexual women or men? They use that word themselves... and you know what most of them--in my experience--don't even care if a straight person uses that word. It's the mindless white knights that step up because they believe it's their duty to step up to defend them. Because they don't have anything better to do, or say? I don't know... but it's pretty silly.

[neosatus]

No actually I'm not white knighting for anyone - I am offended by it because my cousins child is mentally handicapped, ass hole. I can't help it you think that you should be entitled to say whatever you want to t whomever you want to. Obviously I wasn't the only one offended - I'm done with this topic because this wasn't the time or place for this argument - but maybe you should be aware of what words carry what weight.

But you ARE white knighting. You aren't offended because you're not even handicapped. That's what white knighting means... lol

[Kingfan24]

Actually I do - my best friend is homosexual and yes he DOES care when people use that word. He's been spit on, hit with beer cans, and mugged because he was a homosexual, as these people called him a f*g. So don't even go there before you start spouting off about things you don't know.

[Kingfan24]

First thing they taught me in college about education was don't argue with children because you can't win - grow up and join the rest of us in civilized society.

[neosatus]

Actually I do - my best friend is homosexual and yes he DOES care when people use that word. He's been spit on, hit with beer cans, and mugged because he was a homosexual, as these people called him a f*g. So don't even go there before you start spouting off about things you don't know.

It's not the word that hurts, it's the abuse that hurts. i.e. the Abusive Context is what matters.

But I'm sure ^that^ will go above your head as well.

[Merlin1958]

First thing they taught me in college about education was don't argue with children because you can't win - grow up and join the rest of us in civilized society.



Actually I do - my best friend is homosexual and yes he DOES care when people use that word. He's been spit on, hit with beer cans, and mugged because he was a homosexual, as these people called him a f*g. So don't even go there before you start spouting off about things you don't know.

It's not the word that hurts, it's the abuse that hurts. i.e. the Abusive Context is what matters.

But I'm sure ^that^ will go above your head as well.

Okay, IMHO you BOTH need a 24 hr "Time out"!!! Rethink, re-tool and come back fresh and ready for battle!!! Relax guys, this is a discussion and not a flame war!!! Let's just give peace a chance!!! LOL



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwNg4lHFj7I

[wizardsrainbow]

Back on topic here.....if buying extra copies only to be resold at a profit pisses some people off, then they must not be customers of mine at Betts Books.....when new S/Ls come out for a King book, I sometimes (depends on the publisher) get to buy up to three copies (rather than being limited to one like most of you folks) that I can resell....and PLENTY of you come to me with extra copies that I buy (you profit) and that I am able to resell (I profit too usually). So does that make my business wrong ethically? I understand it may seem so to some people and I'm cool with that.

[Jimimck]

David, if you stop selling to us, thats when we will be pissed at you :-)

[wizardsrainbow]

:-) Not planning to stop any time soon!

[killbourne]

:-) Not planning to stop any time soon!

Good.

[Bad Penny]

Yeah, we know where you live mate !!! :ninja:

[mcdonaldj]

:-) Not planning to stop any time soon!

Good.

+1 Good!

[mcdonaldj]

Actually I do - my best friend is homosexual and yes he DOES care when people use that word. He's been spit on, hit with beer cans, and mugged because he was a homosexual, as these people called him a f*g. So don't even go there before you start spouting off about things you don't know.

It's not the word that hurts, it's the abuse that hurts. i.e. the Abusive Context is what matters.

But I'm sure ^that^ will go above your head as well.

Agreed, there is something to the intent when someone says a word (along with tone, context, body language-etc). It definitely makes it worse or better depending on the situation.

However, the person saying words like "retard" or "fag" doesn't get to say I didn't mean to offend you so why the hell are you offended? When you chose to use words you know could and probably will offend someone (rather than similar words that make the same point) then the 'I can say whatever I want' argument is at the very least tactless and shows a definite lack of class.

[Randall Flagg]

Discussion about disparaging and or insensitive remarks is for another thread. Not this one.

Please stick to the topic.

Members who stray will receive a warning PM from me.

[stkmw02]

Here's my take on this whole issue... my husband and I considered making the trip to see King at his next signing on the East Coast this summer. In addition to the fact that we'll have a new baby to prevent us, we also have no money left for "fun" stuff since we've been preparing for the next generation of King fan. How would we be able to justify the trip, if we were to decide to go? We would go together... each of us would get a book signed... and we would sell one copy in order to "profit". Our wallet takes less of a hit, you get the opportunity to add to your collection even if you weren't able to attend the event. If both parties agree to a fair sale, no harm done.

Let's say a new Oy statue is released, only 10 available. I decide to purchase all 10 and resell at higher rates. Is it fair? No. Is it wrong? No. I personally wouldn't be quite so drastic... but if I had enough funds to "invest" in something like that, I would buy two or three instead of the one that would never leave my collection. Why? Not to "profit" so I could be wealthy, but as security for the rest of my collection. If times got tough now, I'd have to part with books and items that I love because my duplicates are already long gone. Picking up a few extra items that could be resold later for a higher value would allow me to preserve my collection or provide me with the finances necessary to expand my collection at a later date. It's simple money management. Just like buying two huge packs of toilet paper if they are on sale, so you can save a few bucks wiping your ass later.

[divemaster]

Let's say a new Oy statue is released, only 10 available. I decide to purchase all 10 and resell at higher rates. Is it fair? No. Is it wrong? No. I personally wouldn't be quite so drastic...

Just for the sake of discussion, let's say the distributor makes a rule "one to a customer" in an effort to allow 10 fans to purchase at the issue price. Is it wrong to manipulate IP addresses or mailing / credit card combinations, or getting friends and co-workers to purchase multiples on your behalf?

Regardless of one's answer, does it matter if the intent is to have "security for the rest of [a] collection" vs. intent to profit?

I know there are people who see no problem with buying up multiple copies of a book despite a publisher placing safeguards to prevent this. (Safeguards which are easily overcome).

[Iwritecode]

Here's my take on this whole issue... my husband and I considered making the trip to see King at his next signing on the East Coast this summer. In addition to the fact that we'll have a new baby to prevent us, we also have no money left for "fun" stuff since we've been preparing for the next generation of King fan. How would we be able to justify the trip, if we were to decide to go? We would go together... each of us would get a book signed... and we would sell one copy in order to "profit". Our wallet takes less of a hit, you get the opportunity to add to your collection even if you weren't able to attend the event. If both parties agree to a fair sale, no harm done.

Let's say a new Oy statue is released, only 10 available. I decide to purchase all 10 and resell at higher rates. Is it fair? No. Is it wrong? No. I personally wouldn't be quite so drastic... but if I had enough funds to "invest" in something like that, I would buy two or three instead of the one that would never leave my collection. Why? Not to "profit" so I could be wealthy, but as security for the rest of my collection. If times got tough now, I'd have to part with books and items that I love because my duplicates are already long gone. Picking up a few extra items that could be resold later for a higher value would allow me to preserve my collection or provide me with the finances necessary to expand my collection at a later date. It's simple money management. Just like buying two huge packs of toilet paper if they are on sale, so you can save a few bucks wiping your ass later.

There are plenty of ways to justify it but even you admitted in your post that it's not fair.

Right/wrong is a bit of a gray area as there's a certain morality to it as well. Personally, I wouldn't feel quite right buying two things and selling one for double the price just so I could have one basically for free. Essentially you're getting someone else to pay for the things that you want and profiting on others greed and/or desperation.

I'd compare it more to buying TP at the gas station 2 blocks away instead of buying it at the store that's a 5 minute drive. Sure the gas station is close and convenient, but you are going to pay twice the price for that convenience.

[mcdonaldj]

El Jefe - back on topic as commanded.

Lol - the 'wipe your ass later' comment was hilarious.

Circumventing the publisher's one per customer rule without their consent is suspect from a purist morality standpoint. The only benefit is to the individual and it does not serve the common good (JSM) and you would not want everyone to do it (IK). But...on the long list of bad things you can do, this ranks with not paying a parking meter and running the risk you might get a ticket. Not paying the meter (or letting it expire and riding out those last 10 minutes) takes away income from the local community which benefits others too.

On a side note, getting friends to purchase seems like a more acceptable practice (other options stink like a lie).

I guess bottom line - I would not lose much sleep either way.

[mistercrowley]

Hey if someone is willing to pay me twice what I paid for something ill do it in a heartbeat and not feel even a little guilty. Profiting off of others is how you make money. I'm not holding anyone hostage or making them buy anything. I always get a kick out of people who bitch about something not being fair. What gave you the impression that life was fair?

[divemaster]

Hey if someone is willing to pay me twice what I paid for something ill do it in a heartbeat and not feel even a little guilty. Profiting off of others is how you make money. I'm not holding anyone hostage or making them buy anything. I always get a kick out of people who bitch about something not being fair. What gave you the impression that life was fair?

I don't think that's the real issue here. That is, I'm not sure anyone on this site would disagree with that. The secondary market for anything has the potential for wide variations in price compared to the original sale and people should be able to sell at what the market will bear.

[pathoftheturtle]

Hey if someone is willing to pay me twice what I paid for something ill do it in a heartbeat and not feel even a little guilty. Profiting off of others is how you make money. I'm not holding anyone hostage or making them buy anything. I always get a kick out of people who bitch about something not being fair. What gave you the impression that life was fair?

I don't think that's the real issue here. That is, I'm not sure anyone on this site would disagree with that. The secondary market for anything has the potential for wide variations in price compared to the original sale and people should be able to sell at what the market will bear.Uh, I think that price variations in the secondary market IS the issue here, whether it is in fact a good topic to take issue with or not. MOST on this site agree that people should be able to sell at what the market will bear, but a few apparently do not.


I know there are people who see no problem with buying up multiple copies of a book despite a publisher placing safeguards to prevent this. (Safeguards which are easily overcome).They're easy to overcome because they are mere tokens. It's policy not law; they know quite well how the market works. Not that they (as a whole company) especially care once they've made their sales. Lip service is paid to prevention just to defuse the very type of hard feeling that inspired this thread. That's all.


... Picking up a few extra items that could be resold later for a higher value would allow me to preserve my collection or provide me with the finances necessary to expand my collection at a later date. It's simple money management. Just like buying two huge packs of toilet paper if they are on sale, so you can save a few bucks wiping your ass later.The problem that arises is that different subjects share the same physicality; we're affected by the decisions made by others. Property from one party's point of view represents common resources in the views of other parties, with this disparity of perspective increasing as more is accumulated, so that at high levels, the 1% choose, in what seems a logical enough fashion, whether to wipe their asses today with the lives of Africans or Asians. You did a good job of presenting how things look from the inside of the process for people who might not understand that there is rarely any ill intent, yet it's still possible such sense of being removed from moral concerns is really just illusion.

Pardon me for dragging religion into it, but I like to point out when people say "Money is the root of all evil." that the actual quote from 1 Timothy is "The love of money is the root of all kinds of evil." I believe that capitalism is a relatively useful tool, but it is good for everyone to keep a measure of caution alive within themselves about it. Real life may not be fair, but that doesn't mean that we have to wallow in the unfairness.

[stkmw02]

Just for the sake of discussion, let's say the distributor makes a rule "one to a customer" in an effort to allow 10 fans to purchase at the issue price. Is it wrong to manipulate IP addresses or mailing / credit card combinations, or getting friends and co-workers to purchase multiples on your behalf?

Regardless of one's answer, does it matter if the intent is to have "security for the rest of [a] collection" vs. intent to profit?


This would once again depend on the situation for me. At an event where we would accrue travel/ticket expenses, my husband and I would probably still get two in order to make the trip more "worth it". And, since he would be paying to attend also, I wouldn't feel this was cheating. (Especially since we would resell as an auction - where the buyer can determine the value - or for a reasonable cost, not a set price that would be "double" the purchase price).

If we're talking books released for sale with no expense except the purchase price... my husband and I may still purchase one for each of us as an investment, but would never involve other friends etc. to buy out any more. And the "investment" is because - prior to meeting - we had two separate collections. My husband still has some of his own (duplicate) items in his office, but we agreed they could be parted with if we fell on truly hard times. (I tend to keep my collection items in new condition, while my husband likes to read and re-read and sometimes share his coffee with the items in his collection). So, technically, it would be two separate items to two separate customers for two separate collections... and we even have separate collection funds (though our travel fund is joint).

Also, if it was something that was limited to a very low number, we would only buy one. Maintaining good standing in the collecting community is important, as is keeping up good karma. Plus, the goal is not to turn around items for a profit as a business. The goal is to sustain a collection without allowing it to become a financial burden.

Honestly, I don't think we've ever sold a King item for profit... mostly because we've never attended any King events and have never found ourselves to be in desperate need of the funds. All the King books I've rehomed have either been gifted to young collectors, donated to local libraries, sold for charity, or traded to fill other gaps in my collection. Of course, in the near future, I expect we may be parting with more items to fund our continued collecting... since our usual "fun" money is now "diaper" dollars. (Although - remember how our collection funds are separate? - my husband always seems to have more collecting cash than I do and I have a feeling he may not use quite as much of it on the baby as I will.)

From a buyer standpoint, if you happen to have an extra copy of a book I cannot get elsewhere, I will determine whether your price matches my budget... I have no problem walking away from a sale because the price is too high, even if it means leaving a gap on my shelves. That's my choice. Of course, I could be eternally grateful that your husband is reselling his copy from an event that I could not attend... or I could be disappointed that all ten copies of the book I need are being sold by you at ridiculous rates thanks to your IP sneakiness. For the record, knowingly manipulating regulations (like the one per customer rule) for the sole purpose of reselling at an extremely high rate should get you some bad karma.

[stroppygoblin]

I don't collect S/N's never mind S/L's but i'm curious to get the reaction from the members here if a copy was bought purely to 'flip' and make a profit. There are a lot of people here who it would seem be willing to pay $1000's for this book. If it was sold for $1k - 2k (a sum easily supported short term with a credit card) and then sold for 2k - 3k, thats a pretty hefty profit. Would other members be glad of an opportunity to get hold of a copy (especially those with large wallets) or would there be anger at the profiteering?

This is in no means a statement of intent - I am just curious to know the other members feelings - chances are its going to happen.

[MandaBunny]

...(a sum easily supported short term with a credit card).....

Does PS require payment at time of order? Unless someone has the funds to pay off the charge immediately without the flip, that amount could be on the card for a while if they pre-sell months in advance and PS charges upfront rather than when it ships. It sounded like they don't have the signature sheets passed around yet so it is possible they are about where CD is with their Carrie and it seems Brian said they were hoping for a September ship.

[mikeC]

I don't collect S/N's never mind S/L's but i'm curious to get the reaction from the members here if a copy was bought purely to 'flip' and make a profit. There are a lot of people here who it would seem be willing to pay $1000's for this book. If it was sold for $1k - 2k (a sum easily supported short term with a credit card) and then sold for 2k - 3k, thats a pretty hefty profit. Would other members be glad of an opportunity to get hold of a copy (especially those with large wallets) or would there be anger at the profiteering?

This is in no means a statement of intent - I am just curious to know the other members feelings - chances are its going to happen.

I would guess that instant flipping will happen to over 50% of these books purchased.

[webstar1000]

I don't collect S/N's never mind S/L's but i'm curious to get the reaction from the members here if a copy was bought purely to 'flip' and make a profit. There are a lot of people here who it would seem be willing to pay $1000's for this book. If it was sold for $1k - 2k (a sum easily supported short term with a credit card) and then sold for 2k - 3k, thats a pretty hefty profit. Would other members be glad of an opportunity to get hold of a copy (especially those with large wallets) or would there be anger at the profiteering?

This is in no means a statement of intent - I am just curious to know the other members feelings - chances are its going to happen.

I, for one, think this is not cool. But... it will happen. And that is too bad:(

[webstar1000]

Should have to paid for in full at time of purchase...

[mistercrowley]

My goal if purchased is purely to flip the book

[Frankie]

I don't collect S/N's never mind S/L's but i'm curious to get the reaction from the members here if a copy was bought purely to 'flip' and make a profit. There are a lot of people here who it would seem be willing to pay $1000's for this book. If it was sold for $1k - 2k (a sum easily supported short term with a credit card) and then sold for 2k - 3k, thats a pretty hefty profit. Would other members be glad of an opportunity to get hold of a copy (especially those with large wallets) or would there be anger at the profiteering?

This is in no means a statement of intent - I am just curious to know the other members feelings - chances are its going to happen.

I don't like it, whether it's iPhones or Wiis or PS3s or books.

[mistercrowley]

Don't buy it and it has no affect on you.

[webstar1000]

I don't collect S/N's never mind S/L's but i'm curious to get the reaction from the members here if a copy was bought purely to 'flip' and make a profit. There are a lot of people here who it would seem be willing to pay $1000's for this book. If it was sold for $1k - 2k (a sum easily supported short term with a credit card) and then sold for 2k - 3k, thats a pretty hefty profit. Would other members be glad of an opportunity to get hold of a copy (especially those with large wallets) or would there be anger at the profiteering?

This is in no means a statement of intent - I am just curious to know the other members feelings - chances are its going to happen.

I don't like it, whether it's iPhones or Wiis or PS3s or books.

I agree because the person that will actually cherish or use this item gets F*%@@'d out of it. I think it's a tad dirty and I have never done it. Nor will I...

[mistercrowley]

So the only people who can buy books are those that will never sell them for a profit?

[mistercrowley]

I hate to tell you this but if people didn't sell their books for a profit you or anyone else new to collecting would have zero chance of ever obtaining a past king book that you didn't own

[Frankie]

So the only people who can buy books are those that will never sell them for a profit?

There is a quite obvious difference between buying a book and later selling it for a profit, and buying a book SOLELY to IMMEDIATELY flip for a profit.

I buy books to collect, not to flip for a profit. Even if I one day sell a book for a profit, that doesn't change that. Buying a book solely to immediately/rapidly flip for a profit differs extremely both in intent and functionality.

[mistercrowley]

No really it doesn't matter what your intent is. You buy a book and later sell it for a profit and you are doing the same thing regardless. If able I would buy 3 or 4 copies of a book and keep one for myself while selling the others. The best of both worlds

[Frankie]

No really it doesn't matter what your intent is. You buy a book and later sell it for a profit and you are doing the same thing regardless.

Buying a book to collect, later deciding that you'd rather have something else or you need the money (usually months/years later), and selling it for a profit is not the same thing as buying something solely to immediately flip for a profit. If it's the same to you (since you do it) then bully for you, it isn't the same to me, I think it's sleazy.

[mistercrowley]

Be careful because you are calling quite a few king collectors sleazy. Also comes off as a bit whiny. After all if you want something at face value there is nothing stopping you from purchasing it. Your good intentions are very noble, I hear the road to hell is paved with them :cool:

[Frankie]

Be careful because you are calling quite a few king collectors sleazy.

Thanks for the warning. I don't like it. If some King collectors get butthurt because I don't like it, I don't really care.

[mistercrowley]

Thanks for worrying about my hiney.

[thegunslinger41]

No really it doesn't matter what your intent is. You buy a book and later sell it for a profit and you are doing the same thing regardless. If able I would buy 3 or 4 copies of a book and keep one for myself while selling the others. The best of both worlds


True mistercrowley, the end result is the same. However the paths traveled are in stark contrast in spirit.


G


PS I myself do a few flips from time to time...sometimes to my chagrin, a FLOP, unfortunately. Oh well. My latest series of flips and kung-fu moves netted me an awesome $1800 gaming laptop. Yay me!

[MandaBunny]

He might not even get one so who knows who will be able to flip them? I understand both sides of the issue but I prefer the non-flipping mentality. Flipping just forces someone who couldn't get in on the initial sell to pay an artificially high price for an item they want to keep. But as mistercrowley pointed out, no one is forced to buy it. If no one gives in and pays the high price then the flippers would have no incentive to flip.

[stroppygoblin]

And thus the hoped for discussion begins! :)

I'm personally on the fence with this particular book. I have in the past bought a book that was a bargain with the intention of selling on (normally because I already have a copy) or because it is a set of books that included one item I needed and the rest is not needed. In fact I literally just bough a 3 book set JUST for the slipcase on one of the books. It was cheaper to buy and ship the books than to buy and ship just the slipcase from CD! I have also sold books for cost or even at a small loss, just because I knew a fellow collector on here was looking for it (and others have done the same for me).

For those of you that disagree with mistercrowley, which would you prefer, 26 avid collectors of Lettered's all getting the book and it never being sold until they pass on, or a couple of people who have no intention of keeping the book and allowing you to purchase it at an inflated price?

The assumption that if the person with intent to flip didn't buy it, YOU would have been able to - is statistically NOT the case. The fact that they did (potentially) buy it increases your odds of ownership dramatically.

[webstar1000]

I hate to tell you this but if people didn't sell their books for a profit you or anyone else new to collecting would have zero chance of ever obtaining a past king book that you didn't own

You sound like your getting upset over my comment. If that is what you do then so be it. I said I do not do that... books gaining value over time is another story and should I ever sell my collection I hope that I will sell them at a profit not a loss. Someone jumping on the Carrie bandwagon to gouge someone that actually will care for and keep that book right away is another story.... but you may look at it your way I guess.

[thegunslinger41]

I will also say that there is a difference between buying a book at a bookstore...or even (for example) buying 10 THE SHINING GIFT EDITIONS from SubPress, and immediately trying to resell them for twice the purchase price, and snagging (sometimes using friends and multiple credit cards) "limit one per household" presale items...only to immediately resell them for 3-4 times purchase price.


The Gift Edition of THE SHINING didn't sell out in the blink of an eye and everyone who REALLY wanted one purchased 1, even 2. So any left over at that point (and there were LOTS) were there for the taking for anyone wanting to...hell...buy 10 of them to resell them at some point.


G

[Frankie]

And thus the hoped for discussion begins! :)

I'm personally on the fence with this particular book. I have in the past bought a book that was a bargain with the intention of selling on (normally because I already have a copy) or because it is a set of books that included one item I needed and the rest is not needed. In fact I literally just bough a 3 book set JUST for the slipcase on one of the books. It was cheaper to buy and ship the books than to buy and ship just the slipcase from CD! I have also sold books for cost or even at a small loss, just because I knew a fellow collector on here was looking for it (and others have done the same for me).

For those of you that disagree with mistercrowley, which would you prefer, 26 avid collectors of Lettered's all getting the book and it never being sold until they pass on, or a couple of people who have no intention of keeping the book and allowing you to purchase it at an inflated price?

Who says the former case would result in all the books going to only "avid collectors of Lettered's"? When the book goes on sale the more casual collector that might only want one Lettered as the crown jewel in his collection has as good a chance as anyone of getting the book directly from the publisher. Non avid collectors have a better chance WITHOUT flippers, because with any flipped book the avid Lettered collector is still going to end up with the book, as they're not likely to be outbid by the non-avid lettered collector.



The assumption that if the person with intent to flip didn't buy it, YOU would have been able to - statistically NOT the case. The fact that they did (potentially) buy it increases your odds dramatically.

But for at least one person, it is absolutely 100% the case. If the 26th person to hit the submit order button is a flipper and I'm the 27th person, then that is precisely what happened. If 12 through 26 were flippers, then 27 through 41 lost their book to a flipper and now will have to pay them for it or go without. Immediate flips like this are taking the book out of the hands of one collector and putting it in the hands of another collector. Of course statistically it doesn't mean that YOU will always get it, but statistically it means YOU will always have a BETTER chance at getting it (for list), however.

[mistercrowley]

See I never gouge anyone. I put the book up for sale on eBay and let people bid themselves silly. I mean part of the money I get goes into collecting books I want (Carries does nothing for me but hey The Stand does so maybe I'll put part part of the money I get into a King S/L I actually want).

[Frankie]

and snagging (sometimes using friends and multiple credit cards) "limit one per household" presale items...only to immediately resell them for 3-4 times purchase price.


Particularly disgusting, since it is actively cheating the system and intent of the publisher.

[Frankie]

No really it doesn't matter what your intent is.

Do you apply the "intent doesn't matter if the end result is the same" philosophy to life in general, or just book flipping?

If I accidentally bump into an old lady and she falls down, it's the exact same thing as if I go out of my way to trip her and knock her to the ground, since either way she ends up on the ground, and intent doesn't matter?


Also comes off as a bit whiny.

Funny, I was thinking you were getting all whiny just because you can't handle that people think your flipping is sleazy.

[mistercrowley]

Fight the good fight franky I'm going to find that old lady and hit her over the head with my Shining S/L

[Frankie]

Fight the good fight franky

I'll read that as "I realize intent is paramount, and is an inherent component in our laws and indeed our very society, but when it comes to book flipping I pretend it doesn't matter because I am personally profiting off it."

Fair?

[Kingfan24]

and snagging (sometimes using friends and multiple credit cards) "limit one per household" presale items...only to immediately resell them for 3-4 times purchase price.


Particularly disgusting, since it is actively cheating the system and intent of the publisher.

I have to say this is what made me so mad with the Joyland release. I DESPERATELY wanted a lettered edition. I had the money and submitted my order. It got canceled. I come to find out sometime later titan was contacted in regards to any extra lettered copies they may have. Someone here got lucky and got one. Now tell me, why was MY order canceled and the other person given the book? People were buying 10-20 copies (and sometimes more) of the unsigned edition and selling them for huge profits. Not to mention the signed copies. Some people ended up with 10 or more of those to. ANALECTA books comes to mind. Severe price gouges there.

While i don't begrudge anyone who did it because they had the financial means to do so, I still think its a nasty practice and one that pisses off the majority of the collecting world. It's not only in books either. Any collectible item has this issue.

[frik]

No other publisher runs a lottery for their books. They simply announce a date and time and it's then every man/woman for him/herself. No messing about required.


Lonely Road Books also held a lottery for Blockade Billy.

Are you sure? I can't remember, and I have the gift, numbered and lettered edition.
All three direct from LRB.

sk

[frik]

A lottery was also conducted for the extra (and/or unclaimed) copies of Philtrum's Eye of the Dragon. I was the lucky winner in the second drawing,

John

As was I.

sk

[mcdonaldj]

Flipping is not sleazy. They spend just as much time logging in trying to buy the book as the next guy (which is all you are out) and then it is their's to do with as they please. Let go of some imagined scenario where a flipper is taking away your book - it is not stealing or dishonest or somehow unethical.

Best of luck to everyone on getting a copy, but any way it shakes out there are going to be some sad folks 5 seconds after this thing goes on sale.

[webstar1000]

Flipping is not sleazy. They spend just as much time logging in trying to buy the book as the next guy (which is all you are out) and then it is their's to do with as they please. Let go of some imagined scenario where a flipper is taking away your book - it is not stealing or dishonest or somehow unethical.

Best of luck to everyone on getting a copy, but any way it shakes out there are going to be some sad folks 5 seconds after this thing goes on sale.

I agree there will be some people that have all the money they can spend ready for this and will be disappointed and then Ebay will have that one for 3 times the price:( The good thing about members here is... yes they flip... BUT they flip fair. Small profit many times AND they buy King books with the profit for their collections for the most part. So... my sourness is not with our members... our members are awesome and I am glad to be part of the talks we all have. Wish this was an S/L (limited like say.. Salems) and we all got a copy to cherish:)

[ELazansky]

Everyone has an equal chance of buying the book at the onsale date and time. If you are one of the lucky ones to obtain a copy, congrats. If you then want to turn around and sell it for twice the price, then congrats again. Making a profit on something you own is legal and nothing to be ashamed of.

I have bought some books and flipped for a small profit, while other times, I have sold extra copies at face value to members who weren't able to get a copy directly. I felt good both times. You can call flipping sleazy or whatever else you choose. The owner can do what he or she wants with their book.

[thegunslinger41]

Flipping is not sleazy. They spend just as much time logging in trying to buy the book as the next guy (which is all you are out) and then it is their's to do with as they please. Let go of some imagined scenario where a flipper is taking away your book - it is not stealing or dishonest or somehow unethical.

Best of luck to everyone on getting a copy, but any way it shakes out there are going to be some sad folks 5 seconds after this thing goes on sale.


LOL. Yep, it will probably take all of five seconds. In this case, I should go ahead and wake up at 2:30am when it goes on sale. Wake up, log-in, "item is sold out", FUK!, go back to bed....it will all just seem like the briefest of bad dreams in the morning. :)


Gabriel

[Frankie]

Making a profit on something you own is legal and nothing to be ashamed of.

I don't recall anyone saying it is illegal, unless you're saying that since it's legal it can't be distasteful or objectionable, which I would heavily disagree with.

There were literally numerous children that didn't get a Wii for Christmas because of flippers in front of their parents in line, and the parents couldn't afford to pay the markup the flippers demanded. You and many other people may think differently, but if I had been one of those flippers, I would be extremely ashamed.

This is the same thing, even though people are more likely to get up in arms about stories involving children and Christmas and less well-to-do parents, than they are about upper middle class guys fighting over a collectible.

Maybe sleazy is too strong of a word, but I absolutely find it distasteful and objectionable. I have had the chance to flip (including the Wii) and I've never taken it. I would rather see the product go to the end user at market price.

[Roseannebarr]

I am not a flipper and i am not upper middle class. i use my credit cards and run them up like all good hoosiers do. If i had money i would be doing something really fun with it. and probably be in jail.

[Kingfan24]

Making a profit on something you own is legal and nothing to be ashamed of.

I don't recall anyone saying it is illegal, unless you're saying that since it's legal it can't be distasteful or objectionable, which I would heavily disagree with.

There were literally numerous children that didn't get a Wii for Christmas because of flippers in front of their parents in line, and the parents couldn't afford to pay the markup the flippers demanded. You and many other people may think differently, but if I had been one of those flippers, I would be extremely ashamed.

This is the same thing, even though people are more likely to get up in arms about stories involving children and Christmas and less well-to-do parents, than they are about upper middle class guys fighting over a collectible.

Maybe sleazy is too strong of a word, but I absolutely find it distasteful and objectionable. I have had the chance to flip (including the Wii) and I've never taken it. I would rather see the product go to the end user at market price.

I agree with you - but the secondary market allows us to have the books thankfully. I, for one, like many others here I think will never sell their collection unless ABSOLUTELY necessary. I think at that point, once selling for good, is when I would price them at market value. However I have flipped once, recently, with the A Clash of Kings. I did that because I knew I wanted some money to put toward a Stand S/l - so I did it. I sold it for less than market value so I made some money and the guy that bought it paid less than the 1000 dollars they were going for.

[T-Dogz_AK47]

My goal if purchased is purely to flip the book

Hmmm... Classy! :thumbsup:


No really it doesn't matter what your intent is. You buy a book and later sell it for a profit and you are doing the same thing regardless. If able I would buy 3 or 4 copies of a book and keep one for myself while selling the others. The best of both worlds

Even more classy! :clap:


I hate to tell you this but if people didn't sell their books for a profit you or anyone else new to collecting would have zero chance of ever obtaining a past king book that you didn't own

That statement is nonsense. I own several PC copies of long out of print S/L and Lettered Editions that I have purchased in the last year at the original published price. :nope:


Be careful because you are calling quite a few king collectors sleazy. Also comes off as a bit whiny. After all if you want something at face value there is nothing stopping you from purchasing it. Your good intentions are very noble, I hear the road to hell is paved with them :cool:

Nice. I see you're still a master at making new friends and influencing people... :emot-roflolmao:

[bdwyer19]

I missed out when The Shining S/L went on sale. Meanwhile, a member here bought more than one copy, and I was able to work out a deal with him to purchase it. In the end, he made a nice profit, and I got the numbered copy I was hoping for. Everyone wins!

[mistercrowley]

I bought my copy through a third party seller the same way so it all works out :)

[thegunslinger41]

Making a profit on something you own is legal and nothing to be ashamed of.

I don't recall anyone saying it is illegal, unless you're saying that since it's legal it can't be distasteful or objectionable, which I would heavily disagree with.

There were literally numerous children that didn't get a Wii for Christmas because of flippers in front of their parents in line, and the parents couldn't afford to pay the markup the flippers demanded. You and many other people may think differently, but if I had been one of those flippers, I would be extremely ashamed.

This is the same thing, even though people are more likely to get up in arms about stories involving children and Christmas and less well-to-do parents, than they are about upper middle class guys fighting over a collectible.

Maybe sleazy is too strong of a word, but I absolutely find it distasteful and objectionable. I have had the chance to flip (including the Wii) and I've never taken it. I would rather see the product go to the end user at market price.





Years from now...some old flipper geezer is gonna die and when they have his estate sale they will find all of his spare bedrooms FILLED with perfectly sealed Mint Condition "Talking ELMO" plush toys from way back. Poor fella. One mans treasure if held to long becomes the same mans deluded trash. An actual true sad story I ran across a while back was that of a California family who collected Beanie Babies like crazy back when it was all a crazy...when good Christian women were meeting strangers in parking lots and swappin BJs for "the rare variant" of whichever beanie babie they were needing. Ok...maybe the last bit was made up (or maybe not...for I'm sure some people will take their deepest darkest shames to their graves!). So anyhoo...the man said that it was an "investment" and that they were gonna send all 3 or 4 of their kids off to college with the $$ after they "FLIPPED" the rare Beanie collectables. The parents would send these kids running into stores and buying multiples of these things. Poor kids. Ok..I realize now that I am now rambling like a madman. It's one of my coworkers bdays today. Ugh...hurry up with this bday cake already!


G

[thegunslinger41]

BTW...I already promised my sister that I would take her to see Taylor Swift (actually I wouldn't mind seeing her). So, I am ready to "punch-a-scalper" if they try to ruin my day!


-G

[Frankie]

I missed out when The Shining S/L went on sale. Meanwhile, a member here bought more than one copy, and I was able to work out a deal with him to purchase it. In the end, he made a nice profit, and I got the numbered copy I was hoping for. Everyone wins!

Except the 751st person that tried to buy one from SP.

[The Library Policeman]

See when you buy a book and it arrives at your house - you can, if you wish, take it out back and set it on fire whilst filming it for You Tube.
That would be much more annoying than flipping it for a profit imo :evil:

[The Library Policeman]

Unless it was a Koontz book of course.,...... :lol:

[bdwyer19]

I missed out when The Shining S/L went on sale. Meanwhile, a member here bought more than one copy, and I was able to work out a deal with him to purchase it. In the end, he made a nice profit, and I got the numbered copy I was hoping for. Everyone wins!

Except the 751st person that tried to buy one from SP.

Well, I had gone back and forth when they went on sale, and made the choice then not to buy because I didn't like the original art. I regretted my choice after Vincent Chong was announced. But since I had my finger on the mouse almost ready to buy when they were on sale, would that make me #751??

[mistercrowley]

I actually ordered one initially then canceled after I saw Rodriguez s art. Once they picked chong to replace him I ordered one through a third party for significantly more. It happens and I was fine with it. By the way Frankie what are your thoughts on booksellers who's very purpose is to buy books at a discount and sell for a profit? Are they sleazy as well?

[Frankie]

By the way Frankie what are your thoughts on booksellers who's very purpose is to buy books at a discount and sell for a profit? Are they sleazy as well?

Your rationalizations are getting increasingly ridiculous, and they were pretty bad to begin with. Just give it up and realize that not everyone thinks the way you do.

[ELazansky]

By the way Frankie what are your thoughts on booksellers who's very purpose is to buy books at a discount and sell for a profit? Are they sleazy as well?

Your rationalizations are getting increasingly ridiculous, and they were pretty bad to begin with. Just give it up and realize that not everyone thinks the way you do.

We get it. You don't like flippers. That's fine. Just give it up and realize that not everyone thinks the way you do.

[Frankie]

By the way Frankie what are your thoughts on booksellers who's very purpose is to buy books at a discount and sell for a profit? Are they sleazy as well?

Your rationalizations are getting increasingly ridiculous, and they were pretty bad to begin with. Just give it up and realize that not everyone thinks the way you do.

We get it. You don't like flippers. That's fine. Just give it up and realize that not everyone thinks the way you do.

If you'll look through the thread, you'll notice that I initially merely stated my opinion, crowley was the one that started whining because peoples opinions differed from his. I'm more than content to let it lie, but I'm also not going to let Crowley get away with spouting nonsense as the final world on the subject. He wants to keep making lame rationalizations, I'll keep pointing out that they're lame.

[mistercrowley]

I have no problem with debating with you Frankie but what sets you and T-Dogz apart from others is that you act like such assholes when you disagree with someone. Why does everything have to be personal just because we disagree?

[Frankie]

Be careful because you are calling quite a few king collectors sleazy. Also comes off as a bit whiny. After all if you want something at face value there is nothing stopping you from purchasing it. Your good intentions are very noble, I hear the road to hell is paved with them :cool:

As far as I'm concerned this is the first post that made it personal and also was basically entirely argumentative. Practically trolling. Maybe we can make a poll or something, because from where I'm standing you're the one being the asshole here.

[stroppygoblin]

I have no problem with debating with you Frankie but what sets you and T-Dogz apart from others is that you act like such assholes when you disagree with someone. Why does everything have to be personal just because we disagree?

^^^^
This.

I also fail to see the need for comments to be personal. As the instigator of the debate, I can enjoy both sides of the argument but NOT when the response becomes infantile.

[mistercrowley]

By the way Frankie what are your thoughts on booksellers who's very purpose is to buy books at a discount and sell for a profit? Are they sleazy as well?

Your rationalizations are getting increasingly ridiculous, and they were pretty bad to begin with. Just give it up and realize that not everyone thinks the way you do.

We get it. You don't like flippers. That's fine. Just give it up and realize that not everyone thinks the way you do.

If you'll look through the thread, you'll notice that I initially merely stated my opinion, crowley was the one that started whining because peoples opinions differed from his. I'm more than content to let it lie, but I'm also not going to let Crowley get away with spouting nonsense as the final world on the subject. He wants to keep making lame rationalizations, I'll keep pointing out that they're lame.


I wasn't trying to rationalize anything, I legitimately wanted to know your thoughts and you responded in a very aggressive and condescending manner. Thanks!

[mistercrowley]

Be careful because you are calling quite a few king collectors sleazy. Also comes off as a bit whiny. After all if you want something at face value there is nothing stopping you from purchasing it. Your good intentions are very noble, I hear the road to hell is paved with them :cool:

As far as I'm concerned this is the first post that made it personal and also was basically entirely argumentative. Practically trolling. Maybe we can make a poll or something, because from where I'm standing you're the one being the asshole here.


Did you miss the part where you called people sleazy ? It was before that post. I should not have taken the bait but clearly you have a short memory

[T-Dogz_AK47]

By the way Frankie what are your thoughts on booksellers who's very purpose is to buy books at a discount and sell for a profit? Are they sleazy as well?

Your rationalizations are getting increasingly ridiculous, and they were pretty bad to begin with. Just give it up and realize that not everyone thinks the way you do.

Yes listen to Frankie and give up. :emot-roflolmao:



We get it. You don't like flippers. That's fine. Just give it up and realize that not everyone thinks the way you do.

Well I for one, totally agree with Frankie... :thumbsup:

[killbourne]

I have no problem with debating with you Frankie but what sets you and T-Dogz apart from others is that you act like such assholes when you disagree with someone. Why does everything have to be personal just because we disagree?

Isn't that the trend in society anyways. Everyone is so sensitive, that they cant go a day without getting offended. Everyone is better than the next person. Your time is more precious than my time. You deserve that lane before me because you drive a better car.....blah, blah, blah.

[stroppygoblin]

T-Dogz, do you have anything to contribute to the discussion other than standing on the sidelines and doing the equivalent of shouting "fight, fight" ?

[Frankie]

By the way Frankie what are your thoughts on booksellers who's very purpose is to buy books at a discount and sell for a profit? Are they sleazy as well?

Your rationalizations are getting increasingly ridiculous, and they were pretty bad to begin with. Just give it up and realize that not everyone thinks the way you do.

We get it. You don't like flippers. That's fine. Just give it up and realize that not everyone thinks the way you do.

If you'll look through the thread, you'll notice that I initially merely stated my opinion, crowley was the one that started whining because peoples opinions differed from his. I'm more than content to let it lie, but I'm also not going to let Crowley get away with spouting nonsense as the final world on the subject. He wants to keep making lame rationalizations, I'll keep pointing out that they're lame.


I wasn't trying to rationalize anything, I legitimately wanted to know your thoughts and you responded in a very aggressive and condescending manner. Thanks!

Aggressive like telling someone they're whining, telling someone to be careful about what they say, and that they're paving the road to hell?

Your question is ridiculous. Either you're not thinking at all and just want to argue, or you're not thinking at all because you just want to rationalize your position out of self interest.

If I buy a book from Betts he's doing a service for the seller that doesn't want to deal with selling a hundred books individually, and also doing me a service by putting me in contact with a seller that I might never have come in contact with. He's adding value.

If I buy a book from a B&M store, I get to examine the book in person and make sure it's exactly what I want, plus don't have to worry about shipping problems or packing problems. Added value.

If I buy a book from Abes it's hoped that I'm dealing with a professional that's at least moderately competent in grading and packing and isn't going to rip me off, rather than some random eBay schlub, many of whom are incompetent if not downright dishonest. Added value.

Buying a Carrie Lettered and putting on eBay the next day for 2 grand over list is adding no value whatsoever.

[T-Dogz_AK47]

Did you miss the part where you called people sleazy ? It was before that post. I should not have taken the bait but clearly you have a short memory

He didn't call people sleazy, he called the act of flipping sleazy... But of course, if you feel particularly sensitive with the term 'sleazy', then maybe it was a bit too close to home eh? :biggrin:

[Aronstg]

Well I didn't want to get involved in this "messy" conversation because honestly I could care less what someone does with their copy. There is always a mark up from production to end user so however it gets there is all the same to me.

I do feel I have to stick up for Mistercrowley here though for those who think he is sleazy or simply a profiteer. I recently purchased an item from him for about $170 under market price. He could have gotten more from me for the book and he declined that. So I don't think he fits the mold of evil profiteer that some may think here.

I think a lot of us look at collecting from both the aesthetic and investment aspect, I know I do. If he wants to buy the book, hold it in his hands, admire it and then pass it on immediately then so be it.

[Frankie]

Be careful because you are calling quite a few king collectors sleazy. Also comes off as a bit whiny. After all if you want something at face value there is nothing stopping you from purchasing it. Your good intentions are very noble, I hear the road to hell is paved with them :cool:

As far as I'm concerned this is the first post that made it personal and also was basically entirely argumentative. Practically trolling. Maybe we can make a poll or something, because from where I'm standing you're the one being the asshole here.


Did you miss the part where you called people sleazy ? It was before that post. I should not have taken the bait but clearly you have a short memory

Did I call you sleazy? I didn't call anyone sleazy. I said a practice was sleazy, not a person, hence not personal. If we can't discuss how we feel about the practice without you whining about it being personal, how can there be any debate at all?

You're going to take anything that anyone says that's negative about flipping personally because you're a flipper. You can't put that on me.

[mistercrowley]

Honestly I'm just going to give up trying to have a conversation with you. I don't need to rationalize anything. I'm going to do what I want to do regardless of what you think. When you called the act of simply purchasing to make a profit I initially took offense and called you whiny was not nice and for that I do apologize. That's the last I'll say to you.

[bdwyer19]

... And yet another conversation gets out of control when RF isn't here to moderate!! Hopefully he's back soon!

[mistercrowley]

T-Dogz, do you have anything to contribute to the discussion other than standing on the sidelines and doing the equivalent of shouting "fight, fight" ?

The answer to that appears to be no

[T-Dogz_AK47]

Aggressive like telling someone they're whining, telling someone to be careful about what they say, and that they're paving the road to hell?

Your question is ridiculous. Either you're not thinking at all and just want to argue, or you're not thinking at all because you just want to rationalize your position out of self interest.

If I buy a book from Betts he's doing a service for the seller that doesn't want to deal with selling a hundred books individually, and also doing me a service by putting me in contact with a seller that I might never have come in contact with. He's adding value.

If I buy a book from a B&M store, I get to examine the book in person and make sure it's exactly what I want, plus don't have to worry about shipping problems or packing problems. Added value.

If I buy a book from Abes it's hoped that I'm dealing with a professional that's at least moderately competent in grading and packing and isn't going to rip me off, rather than some random eBay schlub, many of whom are incompetent if not downright dishonest. Added value.

Buying a Carrie Lettered and putting on eBay the next day for 2 grand over list is adding no value whatsoever.


Now that is a reasoned argument. Good post, sir! :thumbsup:

Rep points awarded! :)

[Frankie]

Honestly I'm just going to give up trying to have a conversation with you. I don't need to rationalize anything. I'm going to do what I want to do regardless of what you think. When you called myself and others sleazy simply for purchasing to make a profit I initially took offense and called you whiny was not nice and for that I do apologize. That's the last I'll say to you.

Misrepresenting what I said isn't nice either. Maybe you should lay into webstar also, he thinks its a tad dirty, so by your reasoning he was making it personal and saying that YOU are dirty.

Look at your first three posts in this (recent) thread. You really think those could be part of a rational reasonable debate? "Don't buy it and it doesn't effect you" and "If it weren't for flippers like me you wouldn't ever get any books on the secondary market"? They're overly sensitive, butthurt, lame rationalizations. Unless everyone in the thread said nothing beyond "I love flippers and am glad for the service they provide" you were going to take it as a personal insult at some point.

[mistercrowley]

I enjoy my conversations with webstar. With you and T-Dogz....no. You fly off the handle if there is a question asked or a different opinion given. Questions are considered ridiculous simply because your on the opposite side of the spectrum. Thankfully the majority of people on here are fun to talk without going straight into asshole mode

[Frankie]

I enjoy my conversations with webstar. With you and T-Dogz....no. You fly off the handle if there is a question asked or a different opinion given. Questions are considered ridiculous simply because your on the opposite side of the spectrum.

You can't see any difference between what Betts does and flipping a newly released book immediately on eBay for a large profit?

REALLY?

He said it was dirty. I said it was sleazy. You laid into me.

[MandaBunny]

I think Jerome would say something like "back on topic." Nothing will ever get resolved about the issue here. Too bad there can't be a duel. :huglove:

[Frankie]

I think Jerome would say something like "back on topic." Nothing will ever get resolved about the issue here. Too bad there can't be a duel. :huglove:

Hear hear. I'll try and behave. :)

[mistercrowley]

I enjoy my conversations with webstar. With you and T-Dogz....no. You fly off the handle if there is a question asked or a different opinion given. Questions are considered ridiculous simply because your on the opposite side of the spectrum.

You can't see any difference between what Betts does and flipping a newly released book immediately on eBay for a large profit?

REALLY?

He said it was dirty. I said it was sleazy. You laid into me.


Further debate is pointless. Let's just stop talking to each other

[mistercrowley]

Well I didn't want to get involved in this "messy" conversation because honestly I could care less what someone does with their copy. There is always a mark up from production to end user so however it gets there is all the same to me.

I do feel I have to stick up for Mistercrowley here though for those who think he is sleazy or simply a profiteer. I recently purchased an item from him for about $170 under market price. He could have gotten more from me for the book and he declined that. So I don't think he fits the mold of evil profiteer that some may think here.

I think a lot of us look at collecting from both the aesthetic and investment aspect, I know I do. If he wants to buy the book, hold it in his hands, admire it and then pass it on immediately then so be it.

Thanks Aron. How's the Remarque coming?

[T-Dogz_AK47]

Originally Posted by Aronstg
Well I didn't want to get involved in this "messy" conversation because honestly I could care less what someone does with their copy. There is always a mark up from production to end user so however it gets there is all the same to me.

I do feel I have to stick up for Mistercrowley here though for those who think he is sleazy or simply a profiteer. I recently purchased an item from him for about $170 under market price. He could have gotten more from me for the book and he declined that. So I don't think he fits the mold of evil profiteer that some may think here.

I think a lot of us look at collecting from both the aesthetic and investment aspect, I know I do. If he wants to buy the book, hold it in his hands, admire it and then pass it on immediately then so be it.

mistercrowley doesn't even like PS Publishing books, let alone be able to admire and appreciate the Lettered copy of Carrie before passing it on. He has been very clear about his inherent distaste for PS Publishing when he shamelessly bashed them a few weeks ago...

Copies of this book should only be sold to collectors who will treasure it and truly appreciate its value.

[divemaster]

There are people on this site who, according to their posts, will buy or attempt to buy multiple copies of a S/L edition in order to sell the extras to compensate for the cost of the one they want to keep.

I'm not saying this is a bad thing. (Or a good thing). It's a reality.

But if you disparage "flippers" do you also include folks that scoop up multiple copies to sell at a profit as an offset?

[Patrick]

... And yet another conversation gets out of control when RF isn't here to moderate!! Hopefully he's back soon!
They're big boys. They can work out their disagreements.

Overall, I have enjoyed hearing various parties' opinions on the topic presented to the group.

Personally, on the minuscule chance that I land a copy in the publisher's sale, I plan to keep it. However I won't pretend that someone couldn't get me to sell it at a high enough price.

[T-Dogz_AK47]

There are people on this site who, according to their posts, will buy or attempt to buy multiple copies of a S/L edition in order to sell the extras to compensate for the cost of the one they want to keep.

I'm not saying this is a bad thing. (Or a good thing). It's a reality.

But if you disparage "flippers" do you also include folks that scoop up multiple copies to sell at a profit as an offset?

If there is a limit of one book per household, but someone uses various addresses and different credit cards to buy multiple copies with the intention of scalping people later on... Then yeah, I think they are to be disparaged with great fury!! :angry:

[Ari_Racing]

If there is a limit of one book per household, but someone uses various addresses and different credit cards to buy multiple copies with the intention of scalping people later on... Then yeah, I think they are to be disparaged with great fury!!

I don't think those that buy to sell could care about what others might think. I run a store and purchase items that I sell at a higher price on the next day. It's a job. And those who don't run a store but do that anyway, well...I don't see the difference. I work to earn money to spend it. They do the same and the only difference is that they don't have a store.

[Tree705]

If the publisher is willing to sell multiple copies to an individual then to me if you have a problem with that you should take it up with the publisher.
If you truly believe that a books price is inflated then wait for it to go down, 90% of books you can buy at less then original price, but don't hold your breath if it King.
Do you have any idea how many times I have planned my day around ordering a King book only to hear someone later whine that they didn't get a chance to buy it. If you missed out it is most likely your own fault, or just bad luck but its no one else's fault. My prized possession is my S/L Legends (also inscribed by Whelan and a full page remarque by Wilson) I called or visited ever bookseller I had a relationship with as soon as I found out about it, and it paid off. Uncle Hugo's came though for me and I even got the membership 10% discount. If anyone want to buy it they better come with a thick roll of Benjamin's.

Great thread

Rich DeMars

[Lookwhoitis]

I think the only thing I will "win" on onsale day is the sweet feeling of schadenfreude gained when some of these participants who are honking their horns the loudest fail to purchase one of the 26 copies! :D

[tippy4]

Be careful because you are calling quite a few king collectors sleazy.

Thanks for the warning. I don't like it. If some King collectors get butthurt because I don't like it, I don't really care.

You don't have to like it, and you don't have to be insulting either.

There is going to be a time when you might want to buy a book from someone here, and someone might just tell you they are not interested in doing business with you when that time comes.

No reason to burn a bridge...right?




I missed out when The Shining S/L went on sale. Meanwhile, a member here bought more than one copy, and I was able to work out a deal with him to purchase it. In the end, he made a nice profit, and I got the numbered copy I was hoping for. Everyone wins!

Except the 751st person that tried to buy one from SP.

The 751st person has no excuse....that book was on sale for the better part of day...maybe two days... and there was no reason they could not have ordered one.


This is an old argument...one that has taken place here many times. One group is going to feel one way, and another group is going to feel another.

Flippers serve a purpose. I resell things from time to time, and have had buyers thank me for offering them for sale on many occasions.

As I have said in the past, this is not food or medicine, or electrical generators....these are frivolous, mostly useless luxury items we are discussing here.....so those of you that get worked up about them should consider that and relax.

As far as all of the disappointed children who did not get a Nintendo Wii or a Tickle Me Elmo on Christmas morning, did you ever stop to think about the kids who were able to have something to eat on Christmas morning because Dad was able to flip a Wii or an Elmo?....or maybe the profits from a flip went toward another kid's college fund?

I am done with this discussion, and will not be adding to it beyond this post. It has been beaten to death, and then beaten some more.

[Frankie]

Be careful because you are calling quite a few king collectors sleazy.

Thanks for the warning. I don't like it. If some King collectors get butthurt because I don't like it, I don't really care.

You don't have to like it, and you don't have to be insulting either.

Neither did mistercrowley, did you admonish him in here somewhere for it, or just the person you disagree with?



There is going to be a time when you might want to buy a book from someone here, and someone might just tell you they are not interested in doing business with you when that time comes.


That's their prerogative. I'm not going to refrain from speaking my mind out of fear someone might not sell me a book in the future.

[Frankie]

[QUOTE=bdwyer19;849470]
Personally, on the minuscule chance that I land a copy in the publisher's sale, I plan to keep it. However I won't pretend that someone couldn't get me to sell it at a high enough price.

To most people, intent matters. To some people, it doesn't.

[e_taylor]

Why should the producers of the materials be allow to make a profit when they sell them to PS? How about the binder? Should they? And for that matter, why is PS charging anything more than cost for these? And King? He should just give the rights to his books to PS. It would be greedy to sell them. [/sarcasm]

Seriously. The market price is the market price. If you don't like supporting "flippers" than vow to never pay above list price for a book in your collection. Less competition for books on the secondary market will actually lower prices, so thanks!

[tippy4]

Be careful because you are calling quite a few king collectors sleazy.

Thanks for the warning. I don't like it. If some King collectors get butthurt because I don't like it, I don't really care.

You don't have to like it, and you don't have to be insulting either.

Neither did mistercrowley, did you admonish him in here somewhere for it, or just the person you disagree with?



There is going to be a time when you might want to buy a book from someone here, and someone might just tell you they are not interested in doing business with you when that time comes.


That's their prerogative. I'm not going to refrain from speaking my mind out of fear someone might not sell me a book in the future.

What I saw was post#133 in this thread where you called a group of people I belong to sleazy. Prior to that I had not seen mistercrowley insult anyone....and for that matter had not seen him do so after that.

Look, I know you are relatively new here, but for the most part, people here try to get along, exchange information, and buy and sell things from one another without too much feather-ruffling. As you said, it is your prerogative to speak your mind, but you may want to take it down a peg....like I said before...no sense in burning any bridges, and in your case burning them before they are fully built.

Shoot.......I've already allowed myself to get sucked back into this never-ending conversation that I said I was going to walk away from.

[killbourne]

can't teach turtles to fly.

[DoctorZaius]

Not looking for debate here, but I am one of those "flippers." Only twice have I had the luxury of flipping something for 3-4 times the price (The Stand and Salem's Lot) and I wish I could have gotten more to sell. Lately, with the increase in initial price, the profit is much smaller (a few hundred dollars). I do it to help support my collecting habit, and I do it for my kids (vacations/college). No one is going to make me feel guilty about it. I will be happy to read others comments, but I won't be sucked into the current debate here. I am happy with my reputation as it is.

[webstar1000]

Not looking for debate here, but I am one of those "flippers." Only twice have I had the luxury of flipping something for 3-4 times the price (The Stand and Salem's Lot) and I wish I could have gotten more to sell. Lately, with the increase in initial price, the profit is much smaller (a few hundred dollars). I do it to help support my collecting habit, and I do it for my kids (vacations/college). No one is going to make me feel guilty about it. I will be happy to read others comments, but I won't be sucked into the current debate here. I am happy with my reputation as it is.

I have to say Greg was fair, honest and did things "my way" to help me out on the shipping and going over he border. Yes he did make some money. I knew that he was going to when he offered to get me my matching number. I thought it was (to be true and honest) on the higher end of good deal but I gladly accepted none the less cause without him... I may never have found that number. So thanks for that Greg. My issue would never be with the Doctorzaius's or Tippy's of the world because there fair, and they help us collectors. What I was referring to are the guys who could care less (member these fellows mentioned care about he books) collecting and would grab say a book like Carrie and try and gouge the person that would want it. I see these guys on EBay and I don't buy there because of it. This is where we ALL GO to get decent prices on out passion.... Collecting King books. I am sorry for my post earlier and venting my frustrations... Cause all I may have done is cause members that SHOULD be friends to fight and if that is the case... Those "friends" should not be fighting. My beef and I am sure many of you here... Is NOT with any member here. Cheers DT buddies:) may ka be with you.

[Br!an]

If I buy a book from Betts he's doing a service for the seller that doesn't want to deal with selling a hundred books individually, and also doing me a service by putting me in contact with a seller that I might never have come in contact with. He's adding value.



Let's see what David says...


Back on topic here.....if buying extra copies only to be resold at a profit pisses some people off, then they must not be customers of mine at Betts Books.....when new S/Ls come out for a King book, I sometimes (depends on the publisher) get to buy up to three copies (rather than being limited to one like most of you folks) that I can resell....and PLENTY of you come to me with extra copies that I buy (you profit) and that I am able to resell (I profit too usually). So does that make my business wrong ethically? I understand it may seem so to some people and I'm cool with that.

I see no problem with reselling luxury goods for a profit.

For some it is seemingly some type of moral or ethical issue. I would be interested in the moral or ethical basis of those opposed if one exists.

[Frankie]

If I buy a book from Betts he's doing a service for the seller that doesn't want to deal with selling a hundred books individually, and also doing me a service by putting me in contact with a seller that I might never have come in contact with. He's adding value.



Let's see what David says...

If that's all David did, I probably wouldn't buy much from David.

Do you really see absolutely no difference between a bookstore and a flipper? Honestly?

[jhanic]

Be careful because you are calling quite a few king collectors sleazy.

Thanks for the warning. I don't like it. If some King collectors get butthurt because I don't like it, I don't really care.

You don't have to like it, and you don't have to be insulting either.

Neither did mistercrowley, did you admonish him in here somewhere for it, or just the person you disagree with?



There is going to be a time when you might want to buy a book from someone here, and someone might just tell you they are not interested in doing business with you when that time comes.


That's their prerogative. I'm not going to refrain from speaking my mind out of fear someone might not sell me a book in the future.

What I saw was post#133 in this thread where you called a group of people I belong to sleazy. Prior to that I had not seen mistercrowley insult anyone....and for that matter had not seen him do so after that.

Look, I know you are relatively new here, but for the most part, people here try to get along, exchange information, and buy and sell things from one another without too much feather-ruffling. As you said, it is your prerogative to speak your mind, but you may want to take it down a peg....like I said before...no sense in burning any bridges, and in your case burning them before they are fully built.

Shoot.......I've already allowed myself to get sucked back into this never-ending conversation that I said I was going to walk away from.

Thanks, Tippy. this discussion could use some moderation.

John

[The Library Policeman]

I bought 3 copies of the UK S/L Doctor Sleep (limited to one per customer) and sold 2 on ebay. The profit I made on the 2 I sold basically got me the copy I kept for free. I can honestly say I felt not one shred of guilt about it. I felt pretty great about it to be honest.

[Frankie]

Be careful because you are calling quite a few king collectors sleazy.

Thanks for the warning. I don't like it. If some King collectors get butthurt because I don't like it, I don't really care.

You don't have to like it, and you don't have to be insulting either.

Neither did mistercrowley, did you admonish him in here somewhere for it, or just the person you disagree with?



There is going to be a time when you might want to buy a book from someone here, and someone might just tell you they are not interested in doing business with you when that time comes.


That's their prerogative. I'm not going to refrain from speaking my mind out of fear someone might not sell me a book in the future.

What I saw was post#133 in this thread where you called a group of people I belong to sleazy. Prior to that I had not seen mistercrowley insult anyone....and for that matter had not seen him do so after that.


Telling someone they're whiny isn't insulting? And that actually was personal. It wasn't a general statement about a practice, it was a statement about me specifically.

FINE. It isn't sleazy. It's a "tad dirty", everyone happy now? Is that the acceptable nomenclature? Is there a term you'd prefer I use when describing how I feel about something, after asked? Sleazy isn't okay, but tad dirty is? What about shady? It's not like I said "scumbag pieces of shit" like the quote in the first post of this thread. IMO people are being overly sensitive about a practice solely because they engage in it and therefore don't care to hear the other side of the coin. My sleazy comment was not a personal attack against anyone, anyone that things otherwise needs to ponder the actual definition of "personal".

I honestly don't get where all the "You've insulted me and my honor has been grievously wounded" attitude comes from. Everyone here knows that a portion (a significant portion, I would say) of people find buying at list SOLELY to resell for profit immediately to be distasteful. Correct? So you know some people don't like it. Why do you think they don't like it? What do you want them to say when ASKED why they don't like it? What amount of soft peddling is required to not ruffle feathers?

Hasn't King actually limited list prices on some of his limiteds? Why do you think he does that? To give flippers room to profit?

Why didn't Nintendo jack up the price of the Wii (or replace Wii with one of the numerous other high demand items that have sold for more than retail in the last decade or so) from the get go? Seriously. Some or many of these products they had to know or at least suspect that demand was going to far outstrip supply initially, why didn't they double the price at first and then lower it when things calmed down?

[Br!an]

If I buy a book from Betts he's doing a service for the seller that doesn't want to deal with selling a hundred books individually, and also doing me a service by putting me in contact with a seller that I might never have come in contact with. He's adding value.



Let's see what David says...

If that's all David did, I probably wouldn't buy much from David.

Do you really see absolutely no difference between a bookstore and a flipper? Honestly?

If I sell an item on eBay for profit I'm a flipper. If I sell an item on eBay for profit through my store I'm not a flipper.

If I buy with the intent to resell for a profit in "Collectible Classifieds" I'm a flipper. If I buy with the intent to resell for a profit on my web site I'm not a flipper.

So no I honestly don't see a substantive difference.

I wonder what you think of Cemetery Dance selling and reselling books for a hugely inflated amount over and above current market value through their eBay auctions. Kind of sleazy?

[Frankie]

Why should the producers of the materials be allow to make a profit when they sell them to PS? How about the binder? Should they? And for that matter, why is PS charging anything more than cost for these? And King? He should just give the rights to his books to PS. It would be greedy to sell them. [/sarcasm]

Seriously. The market price is the market price. If you don't like supporting "flippers" than vow to never pay above list price for a book in your collection. Less competition for books on the secondary market will actually lower prices, so thanks!

All those people provide valuable goods and services. The "service" that a flipper provides, if you can really call it that, is precisely offset by the disservice he did to the collector that could have gotten the book at list price if it wasn't for the flipper.

See the difference?

[jhanic]

Frankie, in a spirit of just trying to help, you seem to be beating a dead horse. I think that, by now, we all understand that you don't approve of flipping a book. Okay, that's understood. But there are lots of other members here who don't agree with you. Let's just leave it at that.

John

[Frankie]

If I buy a book from Betts he's doing a service for the seller that doesn't want to deal with selling a hundred books individually, and also doing me a service by putting me in contact with a seller that I might never have come in contact with. He's adding value.



Let's see what David says...

If that's all David did, I probably wouldn't buy much from David.

Do you really see absolutely no difference between a bookstore and a flipper? Honestly?

If I sell an item on eBay for profit I'm a flipper. If I sell an item on eBay for profit through my store I'm not a flipper.

If I buy with the intent to resell for a profit in "Collectible Classifieds" I'm a flipper. If I buy with the intent to resell for a profit on my web site I'm not a flipper.

You buy at list in order to flip far above retail, you're a flipper. Whether you do it via eBay or a store is immaterial. The point is that bookstores, and Abes, and Betts provide services far beyond that. If that's ALL they did then yes, they'd just be flippers.


I wonder what you think of Cemetery Dance selling and reselling books for a hugely inflated amount over and above current market value through their eBay auctions. Kind of sleazy?

Far above market value? According to flippers that isn't possible. They were willing to pay it, so it was market value.

According to CD they found some books in their warehouse and put them on eBay for a dollar starting bid. Is that the same as what we're talking about here? It isn't to me.

[Frankie]

Frankie, in a spirit of just trying to help, you seem to be beating a dead horse. I think that, by now, we all understand that you don't approve of flipping a book. Okay, that's understood. But there are lots of other members here who don't agree with you. Let's just leave it at that.

John

And there's members that do. You can't have a debate with one person, so I'm not sure why it's me that's beating the dead horse and not everyone else. We're apparently all beating dead horses.

[DoctorZaius]

I bought 3 copies of the UK S/L Doctor Sleep (limited to one per customer) and sold 2 on ebay. The profit I made on the 2 I sold basically got me the copy I kept for free. I can honestly say I felt not one shred of guilt about it. I felt pretty great about it to be honest.

My sentiments exactly!

[Kingfan24]

I think what Frankie is saying is the following.

Those who buy 10-20 copies with intent to sell at an over inflated price because of perceived value. The practice does seem a little shady when you think that you bought item X for 10 dollars and then turned around and charged 100 dollars to bob, john, jack, and his friends. That seems like gouging. Bookstores buy in bulk and get a bulk discount. They don't buy at cost and charge more. I know this for a fact. Barnes and Nobles bought copies of the Dark Man Trade edition. They sold it for exactly what CD sold it for.

People who buy 1 or two, then sell one on eBay at auction are not flippers because they didn't set the price - the bidders did.

In my experience David has always pre-ordered for customers and sold to them at cost. This is a good practice for loyal customers. Obviously he can't sell us a s/l Cujo for 60 bucks. That isn't gouging or flipping. Time has brought the price up on the older s/l.

[Br!an]

You buy at list in order to flip far above retail, you're a flipper. Whether you do it via eBay or a store is immaterial. The point is that bookstores, and Abes, and Betts provide services far beyond that. If that's ALL they did then yes, they'd just be flippers.


So now you have really lost me. Bett's exists as on online reseller specializing in Stephen King books. Buying at or below list (or market) and reselling is what he does. I have no idea what "service" you think he provides other than that of a book reseller, albeit a very good one.

Most of the booksellers on ABE are resellers too. In fact many don't even have inventories. They order the book from their supplier when you order from them. I see no added value.

Every bookseller other than the original publisher is a reseller of some type.





I wonder what you think of Cemetery Dance selling and reselling books for a hugely inflated amount over and above current market value through their eBay auctions. Kind of sleazy?


Far above market value? According to flippers that isn't possible. They were willing to pay it, so it was market value.

According to CD they found some books in their warehouse and put them on eBay for a dollar starting bid. Is that the same as what we're talking about here? It isn't to me.

I realize that it isn't the same for you. You have made that clear. What you haven't made clear is the distinction.

[mistercrowley]

I believe what he is saying is that if I put my item up for a buck its okay

[Robert Fulman]

So if I purchase a Carrie lettered, how long do I have to wait before we determine that "time has brought the price up"? Selling one week later makes me a flipper, but how about one month later, or one year later?

Should we start a "Not a Flipper" club? We can make a rule that says that if a member wants to sell a book, they must first make it available to all other members at the original price. I think that would solve all of our problems on this issue.

[cit74]

Sorry I came late to the discussion…I just bought a few extra copies of the new Neil Gaiman book - I have a few extra and wanted to see if anyone wanted one - the mark up is not too much. much less than a king limited :smile:

[Frankie]

You buy at list in order to flip far above retail, you're a flipper. Whether you do it via eBay or a store is immaterial. The point is that bookstores, and Abes, and Betts provide services far beyond that. If that's ALL they did then yes, they'd just be flippers.


So now you have really lost me. Bett's exists as on online reseller specializing in Stephen King books. Buying at or below list (or market) and reselling is what he does. I have no idea what "service" you think he provides other than that of a book reseller, albeit a very good one.

Most of the booksellers on ABE are resellers too. In fact many don't even have inventories. They order the book from their supplier when you order from them. I see no added value.

Every bookseller other than the original publisher is a reseller of some type.

As I have already explained, Bett's provides services FAR BEYOND someone clicking "submit order" at CDs website and then taking three minutes to make an eBay ad the day after they get the book in the mail. If you disagree with that, then we can discuss it, otherwise you admit Betts is providing a valuable service, and the pure flipper really is not.





I wonder what you think of Cemetery Dance selling and reselling books for a hugely inflated amount over and above current market value through their eBay auctions. Kind of sleazy?


Far above market value? According to flippers that isn't possible. They were willing to pay it, so it was market value.

According to CD they found some books in their warehouse and put them on eBay for a dollar starting bid. Is that the same as what we're talking about here? It isn't to me.

I realize that it isn't the same for you. You have made that clear. What you haven't made clear is the distinction.[/QUOTE]

It doesn't appear that they bought the books solely to immediately flip. From what I can tell, they probably bought them to sell at list and for some reason or another, didn't. It isn't the same, in function, or intent.

[Frankie]

I believe what he is saying is that if I put my item up for a buck its okay

Not really, because of intent, which we know you think is totally irrelevant, but many many many people disagree with that.

[Frankie]

So if I purchase a Carrie lettered, how long do I have to wait before we determine that "time has brought the price up"? Selling one week later makes me a flipper, but how about one month later, or one year later?

I would rather books go directly to collectors than be filtered at great cost through flippers or speculators. Why is that such a surprise to people? I honestly don't understand it. Wait, I do understand it: the flippers don't like my opinion.


Should we start a "Not a Flipper" club? We can make a rule that says that if a member wants to sell a book, they must first make it available to all other members at the original price. I think that would solve all of our problems on this issue.

You have completely misinterpreted and misrepresented my position.

[AKC]

Kinda' off topic but I'm just hoping to obtain a copy of the Carrie Lettered Edition with the intent of adding it to my collection.

Not sure what that makes me. Collector? Anti-Flipper? Dumb Ass for spending that much?
I dunno. I just want 1 of the fucking 26 copies......

Jesus.....

P.S. I should get positive rep for this post. Pretty funny after reading it again!

[Robert Fulman]

So I guess we have to amend the "Not a Flipper" club bylaws to read, "it is acceptable for a club member to offer a book for sale to a non-member at a price higher than issue price as long as the member pinky swears that the member did not initially purchase the book with the intent of ever selling it to a non-member."

[Robert Fulman]

You have completely misinterpreted and misrepresented my position.

No I didn't; my response wasn't directed at you, but was confusing because I didn't use the quote function. Feel free to ignore me; most of my posts are one-half (usually the sarcastic half) of my own internal dialog.

[Frankie]

Now you've confused me.

[Frankie]

Kinda' off topic but I'm just hoping to obtain a copy of the Carrie Lettered Edition with the intent of adding it to my collection.

Not sure what that makes me. Collector? Anti-Flipper? Dumb Ass for spending that much?
I dunno. I just want 1 of the fucking 26 copies......

Jesus.....

I think it makes you a communist, for wanting to collect a book rather than profit off it. :)

[mistercrowley]

Wait I think I understand it fulman! If we hold onto the book for more then six months and THEN sell it we are not considered flippers.

[mistercrowley]

Kinda' off topic but I'm just hoping to obtain a copy of the Carrie Lettered Edition with the intent of adding it to my collection.

Not sure what that makes me. Collector? Anti-Flipper? Dumb Ass for spending that much?
I dunno. I just want 1 of the fucking 26 copies......

Jesus.....

P.S. I should get positive rep for this post. Pretty funny after reading it again!

You son of a bitch. You told me that you were going to flip the copy of Joyland I sold you! (I kept it for a year so it's okay):)

[Robert Fulman]

Now you've confused me.
My post was in response to kingfan24's post, not yours.

[Frankie]

I'm going to say one more thing, most of which I've probably already said three times, and then I swear to Stephen I will shut up. Because I'm really not (that much of) an asshole.

I'd never really heard of buying something at retail and then making hundreds of dollars (or thousands in the case of the PS3) off it on the secondary market before the Wii and PS3. We all know flippers were buying Wiis and PS3s and selling them for way over retail. The guy that maybe doesn't have a lot of extra cash and really wanted to get his kids one amazing Christmas gift doesn't end up getting one, despite standing in a cold line for hours, because there were too many flippers in line in front of him, and he couldn't afford to pay the extra on the secondary market. You KNOW it happened. It did. Fact. I DO NOT LIKE someone taking a PS3 or Wii out of the hands of that guys kids and putting it in the hands of someone else just because that someone else can afford to pay hundreds or thousands over retail for it on eBay, despite the fact that I would/could benefit far more from flipping that I could be hurt by it. I've had the chance to flip things. I left them for someone else, and hoped it was an actual consumer and not just a flipper.

It offends my sense of fair play. Period. I don't think you take the Wii out of Tiny Tim's hands and put it in the hands of an upper middle class douchebag just to make a few bucks, despite the fact that I myself am one of the upper middle class douchebags that could benefit from it.

Yes, flipping King books is less offensive because it isn't for a kid at Christmas. But it's also more offensive because at least the Wii flippers were standing in line for hours which is something many of the end users didn't want to do, book flippers are clicking a couple buttons and not much else. You can't really claim you're providing much of a service there. To answer one of my previous questions, the reason the Sonys and Nintendos of the world don't do this themselves: because they know it will piss a ton of people directly off. Why would you do the exact same thing and NOT expect to piss some people off? If anything I'd rather see the money go to the publisher, so they can make tons of money and provide us with even more amazing production values and more amazing artwork and more signatures and more everything. I would rather NOT see the money go to someone that really did nothing more than click a few buttons to buy a book and create an eBay ad.

If you think I'm an idiot that's full of shit, then that's your prerogative, but arguments like "Don't buy it and it has no affect on you." and "No really it doesn't matter what your intent is." aren't real convincing, sorry.

And thanks whomever for the personal attack in my feedback. I hope it wasn't from someone upset at me for being insulting or "personal" since that'd be kind of hypocritical.

[Br!an]

As I have already explained, Bett's provides services FAR BEYOND someone clicking "submit order" at CDs website and then taking three minutes to make an eBay ad the day after they get the book in the mail. If you disagree with that, then we can discuss it, otherwise you admit Betts is providing a valuable service, and the pure flipper really is not.

You have not explained. You have stated so.

I suppose that I need a better definition of what you consider a "flipper." David at Bett's qualifies for many of his listings if immediately selling for profit is the criterion. The only thing I can think of that sets Bett's apart from what you call flippers is the consignment sales or sale of his own collection aspects. Otherwise both purchase, inspect, resell, package and ship books. Some better than others. I know for a fact that there are "flippers" who are better at it than David. (Love ya David)


***




It doesn't appear that they bought the books solely to immediately flip. From what I can tell, they probably bought them to sell at list and for some reason or another, didn't. It isn't the same, in function, or intent.

The intent was to make a profit. The only difference being the business model.

[Tommy]

Purely out of curiosity, besides the terminology, is there a difference between "flippers" and "scalpers" or is one just a nicer term for the other?

[Br!an]

Purely out of curiosity, besides the terminology, is there a difference between "flippers" and "scalpers" or is one just a nicer term for the other?

There is a difference between a book and a ticket. So yes there is a difference. Is there a difference between "flippers" and booksellers? No

[Merlin1958]

No really it doesn't matter what your intent is. You buy a book and later sell it for a profit and you are doing the same thing regardless.

Buying a book to collect, later deciding that you'd rather have something else or you need the money (usually months/years later), and selling it for a profit is not the same thing as buying something solely to immediately flip for a profit. If it's the same to you (since you do it) then bully for you, it isn't the same to me, I think it's sleazy.

I bet there are quite afew small press publishers that would disagree with you!!! LOL

[needfulthings]

They are the same thing! (At the time of the event)

[thegreattim]

Wow... I mean I guess that's the point of the tread and all... but wow. Here's hoping to not have to read that topic debated ever again.

*note to self - don't ever open the [Buying Things] thread again*

[Kingfan24]

Purely out of curiosity, besides the terminology, is there a difference between "flippers" and "scalpers" or is one just a nicer term for the other?

There is a difference between a book and a ticket. So yes there is a difference. Is there a difference between "flippers" and booksellers? No

I highly disagree with you about booksellers. Booksellers are there, literally, to make a profit off selling books. I'm a professional at a children's hospital. I'm not buying books intentionally to gouge customers in the other end and make a profit. Bookstores exist because they literally have one thing to do, sell books. Also, they charge cover price on books unless you are dealing with a specialty shop. Even then most charge issue price for new books. For example, Camelot sold over 70 sets of ACoK at issue price for their customers. They could have made massive profits of that book, but they didn't.

The only difference between those that flip books and tickets are the physical object they are reselling. Scalpers practices are just as disagreeable to me.

On the issue of intent, this is an extreme example, but one nonetheless. You can have assault with intent to do bodily harm/kill. Or you can have just plain assault. Not saying this is at all applicable, but I think that intent is very important.

I think there is a lot to be said about people's intentions. Devious or not, some people will disagree with your intentions and some won't.

[thegunslinger41]

I used to FLIP bubble gum on the bus on my way to school when I was in grade school. I felt rich with my $2 daily profit. Oh, how times have changed.

[Br!an]

I highly disagree with you about booksellers. Booksellers are there, literally, to make a profit off selling books. I'm a professional at a children's hospital. I'm not buying books intentionally to gouge customers in the other end and make a profit. Bookstores exist because they literally have one thing to do, sell books. Also, they charge cover price on books unless you are dealing with a specialty shop. Even then most charge issue price for new books. For example, Camelot sold over 70 sets of ACoK at issue price for their customers. They could have made massive profits of that book, but they didn't.

The only difference between those that flip books and tickets are the physical object they are reselling. Scalpers practices are just as disagreeable to me.

On the issue of intent, this is an extreme example, but one nonetheless. You can have assault with intent to do bodily harm/kill. Or you can have just plain assault. Not saying this is at all applicable, but I think that intent is very important.

I think there is a lot to be said about people's intentions. Devious or not, some people will disagree with your intentions and some won't.

I realize that there is a different business model for a primary market bookseller and a secondary market bookseller. Each are however booksellers. For many secondary market resellers it is their primary occupation. Usually the lines are blurred as to the market with the exception of the large bookstores. For instance Camelot (love ya Kim) is both a primary seller and also a reseller. They often have secondary market items for sale as well as items at list price. They also aren't averse to raising the price of a book once it is sufficiently out of print. On the other hand the reseller usually isn't just sniping lettered editions although some do.

I do find it reasonable that some collectors feel that collectors should have a greater opportunity to purchase collectible books than resellers. I just don't happen to feel that way. I also find it reasonable that some collectors feel that they, and the resellers, and anyone else who might happen to want to buy the book for whatever reason, should have equal opportunity. Neither position is illegal, immoral, unethical, "sleazy", or necessarily wrong. At least no one here has shown either to be so.

Bookselling is not a crime. The intent is to make a profit. It's a market system. I can agree that a market system isn't always agreeable. :smile:

The only actual problem seems to be with the specific business model based on a perceived intent.

Being bothered by the market for high end collectible books is definitely a First World problem. I apologize for my lack of sympathy.

[stroppygoblin]

The original question I asked (before God intervened and moved it to this thread) was:
If a copy was bought to simply 'flip', would other members be glad of an opportunity to get hold of a copy (especially those with large wallets) or would there be anger at the profiteering?"

I would say that question has been answered. 1 or 2 would be apoplectic :) but the majority (of those who commented) accept this as a reasonable practice and almost everyone has done something similar (to a smaller or larger degree).

Lessons learnt:
1. Cornering the Market and owning all copies would be frowned upon
2. Flipping is fine but don't take the pi$$
3. The inflated prices of Wii's and PS3's at seasonal times of the year can leave deep emotional scars.

[Br!an]

:wtf:

[webstar1000]

The original question I asked (before God intervened and moved it to this thread) was:
If a copy was bought to simply 'flip', would other members be glad of an opportunity to get hold of a copy (especially those with large wallets) or would there be anger at the profiteering?"

I would say that question has been answered. 1 or 2 would be apoplectic :) but the majority (of those who commented) accept this as a reasonable practice and almost everyone has done something similar (to a smaller or larger degree).

Lessons learnt:
1. Cornering the Market and owning all copies would be frowned upon
2. Flipping is fine but don't take the pi$$
3. The inflated prices of Wii's and PS3's at seasonal times of the year can leave deep emotional scars.

hahahahahahahahahahahhaha

[Tree705]

. Being bothered by the market for high end collectible books is definitely a First World problem. I apologize for my lack of sympathy.
This is the most intelligent sentence written in this entire thread.

[Dano]

I like, no LOVE flippers and whomever else sells books. It's how I've gained my collection. Please keep offering books I didn't find on my own and I will only buy what I can afford and I will be happy. Not really sure which logical fallacy the whole children's electronics story has to do with this, but to me it's a wildly fanciful statement to compare them.

Dan