"It’s not a charity" Topic

So I cleaned the basement and found some items from the ‘nauts selling at prices making it worth the trouble.

I like people who think my prices are too high: I'm not running a charity here. I can put it back in the basement for a couple more decades if you want. I think I'm running slightly under market for the sale, buy someone else's if you want.

The value of anything is only what people will pay for it.

The value of anything is only what people will pay for it.

You need a willing buyer and a willing seller. I need buyers who don't think pennies on the dollar make me "willing."

"Pennies on the dollar" is an artificial concept, antithetical to the economic principle Col Durnford is presenting.

If I pay $0.60 USD for foam board, $0.25 USD for paint, $0.25 USD for glue and assemble a piece of terrain from it, there is nothing inherent in any of that that means people "should" pay me more than $1.00 USD for it. Even if my terrain piece is a photo-realistic copy of an actual building that was a key piece of terrain in the Stalngrad battle.

Living with money (basically a fancy IOU) as the primary mechanism of trade for generations has given us many myths about the value of assets, and the money itself. These myths embed hardest in the section of the economy engaged in goods transfer, then second hardest in consumption. Believing in inherent economic value of assets is at the core of every burst economic bubble.

If you are a producer, you are acutely aware of the lack of inherent value, or you are rapidly not selling. You are more acutely aware if you produce a perishable product (food, information, etc.).

The inconsistency of of the PotD argument is that it creates an inconsistency. If you need willing buyers and willing sellers, the buyer says 'I need sellers who don't think dollars for pennies worth of stuff make me "willing."'.

That creates an impasse. You get past that by both sides realizing that there is no inherent value in the thing, and both of their price points are only individual opinions.

That creates an impasse

Not exactly, 40K knights are "worth" $170 USD because that is the price and people buy it. So, Ferraris are not worth $300 USDK because they won't sell me one for 30?

eBay needs a "firm" option which I guess is just selling it except an auction allows for the possibility of being underpriced

40K knights are inherently worth nothing. As you point out, their retail price point is only meaningful if people are willing to pay it. The actual retail price is the combination of the desires of consumers to have them and the aims of GW to provide a product and make a profit.

Nothing in that prevents you from selling one for $140 USD or $200. USD Your dynamic with potential customers is different than GW's.

A customer is unlikely to buy one from you for $200 USD if they know they can get one for cheaper (two bits – availability to purchase and awareness).

If you have a model GW doesn't produce any more and people still want it, that can drive the price up.

If you have a model GW produces a lot of but people don't want, you can't sell it for the retail price (neither can GW); this is how discounts and sell-offs happen. BTW, this is how I get my GW SM for max $1 USD each.

BTW – I see minimum bids on eBay all the time.

When not buying from business or dealer I think people expect more of a bargain when sold by an individual. If something costs $20.00 USD from a business and you sell it for $19.00 USD most people are not going to buy unless they already want that item. Have to make it worth someone while to buy something they were not already intent on buying.