2236Re: [the boredoms] Re: Suprer Roots 7 (& 8)?
- Jan 22, 2006On Jan 22, 2006, at 6:02 PM, steve matis wrote:
> what argument of mine is flawed? that there is something wrong withAs my last reply considered, is the seller price gouging if he paid
> price gouging people?
an already gouged price for the item?
> people who sell rare music can easily make their livelihood byMy impression is that this seller is just a dude selling a record,
> selling their items at legitimate prices. for example, rrrecords
> always sells all sorts of rare things on ebay and they always
> start their prices low and let the people buying the music
> determine the final price. there is NOTHING wrong with that.
> there is also nothign wrong with wanting to recoup your 'loses,'
> but if you end up always trying to break even, you'll just be in
> the red with a bunch of awesome records that no one will be able
> to afford. even $30 woudln't have been THAT much to ask, seeing as
> how SR7 was an only available as an import, but still, it's the
> general thought that counts.
not a dealer. No matter.
> if this guy's edition of SUPERROOTS 7 was signed by the band andI agree, it's unfortunate that items like this tend to sell for such
> came with something stupid and collectable (like limited edition
> cardboard underwear worn by eye during their 1992 tour), i could
> understand the higher asking price, but i still think its wrong to
> ask for so much money on such a mass manufactured album. "super
> roots 7" was not some arcane, unique album limited to 3 copies
> handmade in the mountains of tibet by blind monks. it was a mass
> produced product that was available WIDELY all over the place, not
> just in japan. it is harder to find now, but its not impossible.
> you either have to be patient, or in this case: RICH.
a high price. And yes, it'd be great if everyone was willing to sell
everything for a reasonable price that everyone agrees on. Of course,
it doesn't work like that. Suppose this guy sells his Super Roots 7
for $20, probably less than what he paid to import it (but it is a
used item, after all), and plans to use this money to buy, say, Rilo
Kiley's The Initial Friend EP. This EP routinely sells well over $100
- he's not likely to find someone as generous as he was with his
Boredoms EP. If he's going to be forced to pay top dollar for an item
he wants, is it so wrong to charge top dollar for an item he's
selling? So while it's not something I'd do, I can understand why
others would [sell their CDs for market-inflated prices].
> sorry that i am trying to defend my right as a purchaser ofValue is subjective and most objects have their price. Perhaps Super
> music to not get ripped off.
Roots 7, as meticulously calculated by the seller, is worth exactly
$52. To you, it's worth $30. Who's right?
All in all, I can see why a person would sell a rare CD for a high
price just as I can see why a person would be upset that this person
is selling their rare CD for a high price. Today, however, thanks to
the Intarweb, you can essentially hear any piece of music you want at
zero cost. So, for someone so concerned with the music, and who's a
"real fan," it seems a bit contradictory to blast another user based
on your materialistic wants. Yes yes, you want the actual CD, the
cover art, disc art, etc. etc. I'm in the same boat.
I donno, this whole thing seems silly to get worked up about. It
sucks, but the music can still be heard relatively easily so....yeah.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>