[meteorite-list] Ash Creek Prices.

From: Jason Utas <meteoritekid_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:36:32 -0800
Message-ID: <93aaac890911041536k6cbb2ad0t85a594bd64a2402e_at_mail.gmail.com>

Michael,
You wrote my name at the top of your post; it wasn't the accident of a
reply-function that put me there.

True, I didn't weight the averages, but take a look at the March 24th
post; most of the stones *were* between ten and twenty grams. And all
of the other numbers I stated - that the majority of finders came away
with a stone 60g or larger, and that more than 2/3 of hunters came
back with ~50g grams or more - that's all true. My average might not
represent the weighted average weight of the stones, but your replies
- that most hunters came away with a gram or two, and that most stones
found weighed a gram or two are also not entirely true. While many of
the stones found were in that range, the majority were 10-15g+.

> For your information, Greg has been pounding me and Jack for months about
> Arizona, this is what this is about.

Ok...then next time please don't involve me by writing my name at the
top of the page...

> Your data on Ash Creek is very wrong though, you are simply adding up the
> total weight and dividing it among known stones for an average weight,
> totally unscientific.

Yes and no - see above.

> Three?large stones weighed neary 40% of the mass recovered. I know most
> hunters found one or two over 20 grams, but most were less than 10 grams.

That only effects the weighted average of the weights - not the other
things I said - again, addressed above.

> Anyway, Jason, why dont you search for stones I sold, NEVER one gram on
> ebay, I sold two stones to collectors, both stone in the 5 gram or less
> range. The rest I kept or traded to ASU at a $30 gram trade rate (fair price
> in my view and theirs as they were happy).

That does sound fair, but then I fail to see why you wrote a post
seeming to defend the $100/g price tag *especially* when you yourself
saw this as unreasonable and donated many of your finds for $30/g. I
still see that price as high, by the way - compare to Park Forest,
which sells in the $20-25/g range nowadays.

> I sold the large stone for not far above $10 gram. Fair price.? so the
> argument about $100 gram is moot on my part anyway, as I never participated
> in those sales.

Again, I used those numbers because you criticized Greg's note saying
that prices were unreasonable. And they were. At $100/g, I would
have made $19,000 if I sold my stones. Not bad for a week's walking
around. Of course, that would only be a profit of $17,000 or so, but
still.

Which really begs the question - based on what you're saying now, you
should have no beef with Greg whatsoever over what he was saying about
the price range on West. He wasn't asking for $5/g - in my opinion
(and, from what I gathered, this was his opinion as well), if the
stones sold in the $20-30/g range, prices would actually be *fair.* I
wouldn't call them good prices, and I personally wouldn't buy them at
that price, but I think that's what he was getting at.

The older prices for West ($60-100/g) simply don't make sense. Again,
I find it hard to find a flaw in this statement given the fact that
expenses for Park Forest were undoubtedly higher, the fall was much
more interesting (so many hammers, an urban fall!), and...the tkw's
aren't *that* far apart. It's the only fall I can really relate West
to, as it's the only sizable American fall from which any number of
stones was made available to collectors in the past decade or so.

> Please dont even think about making these kind of profit statements, as they
> are so far off they aren't even funny.

You seem(ed) to be defending the $100/g price tag, so I used it.
Don't blame me.

> The buyer of the mass is on this list, he can contact you should he desire
> to confirm my price.

Don't really care - as I said, that wasn't my point in the first place.

> I have to go back and look at the books but in all honesty, I cleared about
> $3000 after expenses on Ash Creek and have a nice little pile of stones on
> the side.

Again, don't care. Wasn't the point of my email.

> Not quite the mega numbers you are putting in your email.

Mhm. But now you seem to be advocating the $30/g price tag, or
thereabouts, so I've really nothing to say - from my perspective,
you've done a 180.

> Either way, this argument still comes down to one simple fact I am trying to
> get through to Greg, if you dont like the price, don't pay it.

That's not what you said at all. Go have a look at the email - if
that's what you were trying to say, you didn't accomplish it, and you
made it a pretty mean email on top of that.

> Just don't keep crying neary a year later.

I assume you're talking to him, not me.
And the language, again - you're asking for people to take offense.
This is the sort of thing my older brother would say to me to goad me
into fighting - 'you're such a crybaby' and all of that rubbish.
I have two things to say to this:

1) You're sending an email out to 900 people. Saying stuff like that
so that everyone can see it is...kind of embarrassing.

2) It just doesn't belong. If you have a beef with him, you should
both have it out on the side, maturely. Goading...just doesn't belong.

> I am not too concerned at this point about Greg Catterton, he wants us to
> give him everything, and nothing less will satisfy him.

Asking for prices that were in the $20-30/g range isn't insane. It's
what collectors have come to expect the price tag to be on new
American falls, due to what we've seen in the past. There's really
nothing to explain the 500% markup between Ash Creek and Park Forest
prices...there just isn't.

You seem to be suggesting that the price was $100/g, but since he's
asking for less, he must be asking for the stones for next-to-nothing.
 Your logic is just...well, it's not logic. Asking for fairer prices
on a fall that's $100/g doesn't mean he's asking you to sell at $5/g.
That's just taking what he said and twisting it so that he looks
stupid, when he's really asking for something that is, at least from
what I've seen over the past eleven years in the market, quite
reasonable.

> So I don't expect a Christmas card from him as this point.

I don't understand your point of view - it would seem to me that
losing a customer would be a bad thing.

Jason

> Michael Farmer
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jason Utas" <meteoritekid at gmail.com>
> To: meteoritehunter at comcast.net
> Cc: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com, "star wars collector"
> <star_wars_collector at yahoo.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2009 3:04:55 PM GMT -07:00 U.S. Mountain Time
> (Arizona)
> Subject: Re: Ash Creek Prices.
>
> Michael,
> Frankly, I'm insulted by your crassness and apparent lack of knowledge
> about practically everything I wrote - or at least, your negligence in
> addressing it in your email paired with the other things you said
> seems to say as much.
> You sent and addressed that message to me, and yet it really does not
> address any of my points; yes, collectors went there, and yes, many
> came away with little or no material.
> The average weight of the stones found, as tabulated, was 39.8 grams;
> as such, I believe your estimate of 90% of the stones found weighing
> less than 10g is quite simply false. ?True, fewer larger stones were
> found, but many were found in the 20-30 gram range; in fact, stones
> between 10-20g compose the majority of the stones found.
> That said, well - I'll go through your email thoroughly.
>
>> Greg's whining is out of control.
>
> Uncalled for. ?He really didn't say a word about you - his ideas may
> not have been right, but if you start talking to people like that,
> you're not going to have very many friends.
>
>> Ash Creek was perhaps overpriced at $100 per gram for stones larger than a
>> gram or two. However, you are acting like every person there came home
>> with
>> pockets full.
>
> It's an ordinary chondrite - a pretty fall, admittedly, but why would
> you say it should have cost five times the going price of Park Forest?
> ?Again, you're not addressing the entire gist of the thread. ?I never
> once "complained" about the high prices. It was a thread composed by
> people hypothesizing why in fact the prices were so high. ?Since they
> are. ?And you can't really argue with that.
>
>> Give me a break, most people were lucky to go home with 3 or 4 small
>> stones,
>> 90% under 10 grams.
>
> According to the list of finds tabulated and posted to the list, no,
> that is not true. ?Many people did go home with that many stones, but
> more than half of the hunters at least one find above 60 grams. ?See
> the March 24th post to the list regarding a tabulation of West finds
> to that date. ?At any rate, more than 2/3 of the people who
> participated had found more than fifty grams of material overall, but
> the fact that more than half had a stone above sixty grams pretty much
> flies in the face of what you just said.
>
>> I am sure you are both smart, so do this, check on airplane tickets, o say
>> from California to Dallas Texas. Short notice tickets were expensive, I am
>> sure no one paid less than $300 to $400.00
>
> Yeah, I think we paid $700 each, roundtrip - booked the night before.
>
>> I myself, on three trip there, spent more than $1500 on tickets
>
> Pretty much what we paid.
>
>> Car rentals for me for one month, more than $1200.00.
>
> Well, we were only there for a week - our cost was a few hundred
> dollars, so you beat us there.
>
>> Hotel, more than $2000.00
>
> Well, if you lived there for a month, I guess that would run up - so
> you're beating our cost by about $3,000, with a total cost of $4,700.
>
>> Food I dont count since I eat anywhere.
>
> So no additional cost there on top of living expenses.
>
>> Not to mention that little thing called my time, more than 20 days of
>> hunting, time when I could make no other sales.
>
> I don't know what that would add up to, but - pretty much irrelevant -
> see below.
>
>> THOUSANDS on expenses, I found all of 20 stones. I walked more than 200
>> miles (320 km) to find those stone. I want to keep almost all, so there
>> was
>> about 5 stones I was willing to sell.
>
> Right ?- we estimate that we walked 15-20 miles per day every day for
> I think five or six days - I can't recall the first and last dates
> clearly now. ?At least ~100 miles, at any rate - no different than if
> we'd spent a week in the local Mojave.
> I don't know what your base expenses were - I suppose $50/day on
> Enders' farm and $1/g on finds - plus whatever else you paid people.
>
>> WOW, I guess I should have put $5.00 gram on those stones an made about
>> $200.00
>
> See, this is where I get confused. ?Whenever anyone questions the
> price of West, I always see this kind of a response.
> Even if you spent all thirty days on Ender's farm, it would amount to
> a mere $1,500 in cost to you - trivial in comparison to the amount of
> material you walked away with given the price per gram that you're
> suggesting. ?Again, see below.
>
>> ?hmmm, that would not even be worth my time to package them based on
>> expenses.
>
> Well, yeah. $200.00...but I'm not one to pull numbers out of my ass.
> See below.
>
>> Now, take most people who went home with say 5 or 6 stones, perhaps
>> $1200.00
>> in expenses, and most stones 2 or 3 grams were the norm.
>
> Either they didn't participate in the list survey or your numbers are
> simply wrong.
>
>> Again, not even
>> making expenses back and we worked our asses off to find those little
>> stones. So people set the price in the $100 gram range, and buyers paid
>> it.
>
> Most of the people you're talking about would have been collectors,
> not dealers. ?Looking at that list from March 24th, most dealers
> netted at least a few hundred grams.
>
>> Prices have dropped now because collectors have all the Ash Creek they
>> want
>> apparently. I was in?Munich last week though, and I had no ash creek for
>> sale and was asked?by several people for it.
>
> If people are asking for it, then there is demand. ?This bit doesn't
> make sense.
>
>> Greg?stop your crying, it is really getting old, and I am not sure if you
>> have noticed, but a large number of people have dropped off the list, it
>> has
>> become a pitiful place full of whining and crying and little else.
>
> Again, a good way to make someone hate you, especially when they
> haven't spoken a word against you.
>
>> Get over yourself.
>
> I assume this is directed at me, since the previous comment was
> directed at Greg, and the email is addressed to both him and myself.
>
> All I can say is - you're one to talk.
>
>> You want to find the Benson fall, get off your ass, as we said months ago,
>> get out here and look for it. What do you want, for me to? drive you to
>> the
>> strewnfield and hold your hand while you search? Should I give you my
>> single
>> piece I found because you want it?
>
> Perhaps you're talking to Greg?
> I haven't spoken a word about Benson, and was too busy to go there at
> the time. ?I'm a full-time student, Michael. ?Double-majoring and all.
> ?Kind of busy. ?Trust me, I wanted to go - you of all people should
> know that. ?But I have a life that doesn't let me drop everything at a
> moment's notice to do what I love. ?I didn't complain.
> Why are you sending this to me.
>
>> You are no being resonable or logical. When the coordinates are published,
>> you are welcome to hunt all you want.
>
> Again, I shall merely say - you're one to talk. ?Your argument is
> based on no real data, and the content of this message is, to be
> frank, inappropriate. ?Even if you think Greg was wrong, this is no
> way to talk to a peer or a colleague.
> I'm not really sure why you addressed this to me as well, since you
> didn't address a single iota of what my messages to the list were
> actually about, but I'm offended all the same by what you said.
>
> Oh - and at $100/g, you made 2657g x $100g = $265,700 off of one month
> working this fall.
> At $50/g, 132,850
> At $40/g, $106,280
> At $30/g, $79,710
> At $20/g, $53,140
> At $5/g, $13,285
>
> If your expenses were in the $20k range, which I'm assuming they were
> given your stated costs, you made $240,000+ (at $100/g), off of this
> fall. ?Or if you kept 2kg of material, and sold a mere 660g you got
> paid ~$50,000 and 2kg of West for your month of work.
>
> Just thought I'd crunch some numbers...I'll say nothing about what
> they might mean, though I think the people to whom you cc'd this
> message will find them interesting enough.
>
> I have to go; I have a 2pm class.
>
> Jason
>
Received on Wed 04 Nov 2009 06:36:32 PM PST