[meteorite-list] Ad New Canadian Meteorite for sale

From: Jason Utas <meteoritekid_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 16:29:18 -0800
Message-ID: <93aaac890812071629j24577be4m2d646f2b0a318b8d_at_mail.gmail.com>

Darryl,
Rants? At least I give you the courtesy of addressing everything you
say. When one decides to...skip....parts of a message he (or she) is
attempting to refute, it simply gives the impression that there are
things they would prefer not to have to (or can't) debate, probably
because it wouldn't support their claims.
As far as I'm concerned, if you can't deal with a single page of text,
it's your problem, not mine.

With regards to your statement, no, not really. You referred to
"low-end numbers being bandied about," without acknowledging my high
estimate for Park Forest. Which would have rendered your entire
message a moot point, had you taken it into account. You were
referring directly to my post. Hardly "standing alone." You might
also note that your message was a direct reply to me, as well as to
the meteorite-list.

I know; I was there. The estimate was $500-700, but it wouldn't fetch
an initial price of....I forget the price at which it was initially
started. The auctioneer let it down to $200. Then $190. The final
price was $200 - a mere $1.67/g.

Jason



On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 4:08 PM, Darryl Pitt <darryl at dof3.com> wrote:
>
>
> Yeah Jason, I didn't refer to your email in its entirely---a tall order
> given the length of such rants. Nor was I wasn't responding to "your
> message" as there were other contributors to the thread, and my statement
> kind of stood on its own as a general review of the currents in valuation.
> Jeez.
>
> For the record, Mike Farmer's report of Udei Station having sold for just
> $2/gram at Bonhams today.....
>
> ...that's right. My consignment. Competitively priced.
>
> Collectors are not hurt by a shake-out of the outliers---those mega-low and
> mega-high anomalies--I actually believe we would all ultimately benefit.
>
>
> Sincerely / Darryl
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 7, 2008, at 5:57 PM, Jason Utas wrote:
>
>> Darryl, Darren, All,
>>
>> You referred to the low prices mentioned in my email when I had
>> included Park Forest. If you didn't mention Park Forest, you didn't
>> refer to my email in its entirety, and didn't clarify. How was I
>> supposed to know you were only responding to half of my message?
>>
>>> As it regards the Chergach and Bassikounou examples, I sincerely believe
>>> that irrespective of how inexpensive initial suppliers sell material,
>>> that
>>> it is incumbent on us to consider the implications of our pricing in the
>>> marketplace.
>>
>> So we should place some sort of value on meteorites above what the
>> finders ask for them because....well, I can see why you as a dealer
>> would say this -- but from a collectors point of view, your statement
>> makes no sense whatsoever. Or from a logical standpoint. Why should
>> rocks have some inherent monetary value? It makes no sense
>> whatsoever.
>> That said, if you, as a dealer/supplier decide that they should have
>> some arbitrary value, and price what you sell accordingly...well, the
>> final decision rests in my hands, as the buyer. You can ask for
>> whatever you think they're worth, but unless the collectors on the
>> other side agree with you, it doesn't matter. Dealers only have the
>> ability to suggest prices. It's the collectors/buyers who actually
>> set them.
>>
>>> I take a longer view of such anomalies. Just because I was offered
>>> Chergach
>>> at $0.50/g doesn't mean that it's responsible for me to widely offer it
>>> for
>>> $1.50/g even though it represents a 200% profit to me.
>>
>> Responsible? I'd say your fellow collectors would be happy, and
>> content with the fact that they could afford specimens twice as large
>> at the same cost as the ones they just bought.
>>
>> In fact, anyone reading this thread should now know that if they
>> bought any from you, the reason they don't own a specimen twice as
>> large is because you thought it would be irresponsible to only take a
>> 200% mark-up.
>>
>> I'd be pissed-off, big time.
>>
>>> Whether we can
>>> quantify the effect or not, beyond cheap meteorites have an effect on the
>>> rest of the marketplace. They create their own "gravity." That's all
>>> I'm
>>> trying to say.
>>
>> Oh, I never said it wouldn't have an effect on the rest of the market.
>> Though now that you're bringing that up, you seem to be saying that
>> having lower prices would be a bad thing. Considering that most
>> people in the meteorite-world are collectors, and not dealers, well,
>> you're in a minority. By all means, you're entitled to your view, but
>> you are in a minority.
>>
>> As to whether or not it's worth, say, $10/g or more...you're entitled
>> to your opinion as a dealer, and I'm sure that if you get your hands
>> on some, you'll charge what you like. As said, I, as a potential
>> buyer, will simply refrain from buying any and voice my opinion that
>> way...as I'm sure others will as well. I've heard reports that the
>> tkw could be well over 200kg or more; if, after a mere week of amateur
>> hunting in sub-zero temperatures and restricted access, 40+kg were
>> recovered...how much of any fall is ever collected in the first week?
>> Maybe 10%? Maybe 20?
>>
>> - Sorry for the lateish reply, but I was at the Bonhams Auction.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Darryl Pitt <darryl at dof3.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Jason,
>>>
>>> Small detail....I never mentioned Park Forest. And speaking of being
>>> "at a
>>> loss for words," I don't quite know how to respond to your unbridled
>>> attack
>>> on "my" point of view regarding the same(?!)
>>>
>>> As it regards the Chergach and Bassikounou examples, I sincerely believe
>>> that irrespective of how inexpensive initial suppliers sell material,
>>> that
>>> it is incumbent on us to consider the implications of our pricing in the
>>> marketplace.
>>>
>>> I take a longer view of such anomalies. Just because I was offered
>>> Chergach
>>> at $0.50/g doesn't mean that it's responsible for me to widely offer it
>>> for
>>> $1.50/g even though it represents a 200% profit to me. Whether we can
>>> quantify the effect or not, beyond cheap meteorites have an effect on the
>>> rest of the marketplace. They create their own "gravity." That's all
>>> I'm
>>> trying to say.
>>>
>>> All best / Darryl
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 7, 2008, at 11:02 AM, Jason Utas wrote:
>>>
>>>> Darryl,
>>>> Low-end numbers? Even Park Forest which was witnessed, caught on
>>>> numerous videos, and fell in a densely populated urban environment -
>>>> in what may well be a majority of cases, hitting man-made objects, was
>>>> selling for $30/g or so at the time of the fall - a price which has
>>>> stayed roughly the same, if it hasn't come down a few dollars per gram
>>>> since then.
>>>> How much Park Forest was recovered? According to this report, roughly
>>>> 30kg.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Aug04/ParkForest.html
>>>>
>>>> More of this fall has been recovered in the past week than from the
>>>> entire fall of Park Forest.
>>>> It hasn't hit anything interesting, as far as we know.
>>>> It's an ordinary chondrite - even Park Forest had some pretty
>>>> brecciation/melt. I've heard of nothing of the sort from this fall.
>>>> It was caught on video, granted, and that does make it special in one
>>>> way...why you think that should boost the value of it to twice the
>>>> value of the undoubtedly more interesting Park Forest, also caught on
>>>> video (and five or ten times the price of other comparable falls), I
>>>> honestly...I'm at a lack for words.
>>>>
>>>> "Low-end numbers being bandied about?"
>>>>
>>>> On the one hand, you seem to criticize the high price being asked by
>>>> these sellers, and on the other, you say the current market rates for
>>>> other falls are "low-end numbers?"
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand. $5-10/g for these new falls is far overpriced, as
>>>> best I can tell. At least with Chergach and Bassikounou, suppliers
>>>> were contacting list-members directly and offering stones at $2/g
>>>> initially - less for larger stones.
>>>>
>>>> You seem to be saying that's too cheap. Why? If the sellers are
>>>> content, and I don't think the buyers are complaining, well, I can't
>>>> see any reason for you to say such a thing. If both parties are
>>>> happy, I honestly don't see how you can say such a thing.
>>>>
>>>> Look at the numbers from my last email. A mere $10/g would provide
>>>> the hunters each with $5,000, assuming they only came back with 250g
>>>> each.
>>>>
>>>> It's classic marketing technique to tell potential buyers that they
>>>> got precious little out of the fall, as they said they did.
>>>> If people think there's less, they'll want to buy more. There's a
>>>> reason they're not telling anyone how much they got, after all. I
>>>> wonder why...and I wonder if they ever will tell us how much they
>>>> found/were allowed to keep.... After all, unless they're just using
>>>> that as a marketing ploy, they really have no reason not to tell us.
>>>>
>>>> Jason
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 7:38 AM, Darryl Pitt <darryl at dof3.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times: meteorites as a
>>>>> collectible do not attract more serious collectors because there are
>>>>> too
>>>>> many aberrations of valuation--such that the aberrations have become
>>>>> the
>>>>> norm. Several serious collectors who have been intrigued with
>>>>> meteorites
>>>>> have shared with me that they've opted not to climb in because of their
>>>>> belief in an "immature" and "unsophisticated" marketplace. Their
>>>>> words.
>>>>>
>>>>> In my humble opinion, the quality of the fireball video associated with
>>>>> the
>>>>> Canadian event makes it worth far more than the low-end numbers being
>>>>> bandied about.
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> All best / d
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> =====================
>>>>>
>>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> 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 07:29:18 PM PST