[meteorite-list] Ad New Canadian Meteorite for sale

From: Darryl Pitt <darryl_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 14:58:49 -0500
Message-ID: <229E9866-D9C6-4102-8E40-FE4EC8F54413_at_dof3.com>

Hi Again, Darren...

Gotta jump in for a minute before taking off....

Two very different thoughts were thrown together and the result is a
bit confusing.

I was not suggesting to keep prices high. Oh my golly, no. I am only
attempting to suggest that a longer view should be taken and that it
would be nice if an effort were made to reduce the number of pricing
anomalies. By the way, most wealthy collectors I know do not buy
common specimens. The involvement of such collectors simply provides
increased stability by driving overall demand which enhances the value
of all of our collections---not a bad thing. It's going to be a long,
long time before any of us have to worry about an inability to be able
to snag cheap meteorites.


All best and wishing everyone a nice Sunday!

Darryl



On Dec 7, 2008, at 2:26 PM, Darren Garrison wrote:

> On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 12:57:16 -0500, you wrote:
>
>> This is a serious business...
>
> One last point on this-- of course a "business" will legitamately
> want to make
> as much money for product or service X as they can for it-- but it
> is entirely a
> different matter to expect customers of said business to want the
> business to
> charge more, which is what Darryl said and I was replying to--
>
> quote:
>
> "Everything else being the same, no witnessed fall should ever sell
> for
> a couple of bucks a gram, and we should all strive to make certain
> this doesn't occur."
>
> Meaning-- we should try to keep the prices of these high, even if
> they could
> sell for less. With the implication that this is to attract "serious
> collectors", which seems to mean rich people collecting for future
> profits.
>
> Now, while (to illustrate with some other buyable product) it is
> well and good
> for Best Buy to want $1000 for a flat-screen TV if they can get it.
> But it
> isn't reasonable to expect the customer to want Best Buy to charge
> $1000 for
> that flat-screen when it COULD sell for $100. If what it costs to
> sell it at a
> profit is $1000, then fine. But if it could be sold for $100, why
> on Earth
> would the customer be expected to get behind selling it for $1000
> just because
> $100 is "too cheap"? My position as a consumer is to attempt to pay
> the lowest
> reasonable cost for any item.
>
> I'd think that the main expense for hunters isn't the travel costs,
> but the cost
> of buying the meteorites from the land owner, who always expect it
> to be a "get
> rich quick" situation. If the land owners expect (and get) a price
> that
> requires hunters to resell it at around $50 a gram, then that's what
> the hunters
> will have to charge. But if the land owners didn't expect as much
> money, then
> the resellers wouldn't have to charge as much money. It is a
> feedback loop.
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Sun 07 Dec 2008 02:58:49 PM PST