[meteorite-list] Help with Ebay bidding

From: Richard Montgomery <rickmont_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 08:16:45 -0800
Message-ID: <1C2C073E283142E0B62425F299002A3C_at_bosoheadPC>

I knew going in that I wasn't going to learn the weights until I weighed
them myself...and I was a bit taken aback by how thin they were when they
arrived; then I realized that I still had some prizes after all. I always
learn something (no matter how small) when I add a piece to my
collection....in this case, I learned the conditions of this particular
seller's presentation and now I know what I'd be encountering if I choose to
again in the future.

Interestingly, right after this thread started, positive feedback
arrived.....

-Richard Montgomery


----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Blood" <mlblood at cox.net>
To: "Jason Utas" <meteoritekid at gmail.com>; "Richard Montgomery"
<rickmont at earthlink.net>
Cc: "Met. Michael Gilmer" <meteoritemike at gmail.com>; "Meteorite List"
<meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>; <valparint at aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 1:13 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Help with Ebay bidding


> Jason,
> Of course you are right - it is a matter of taste.
> As for a dealer "withholding" weight, that is not
> Reasonable - unless he doesn't want to open the
> Membrane box, or risk breakage or whatever. People
> Should just buy what they want and some want
> Weight and some want surface area.
> No question, given say a 30mm X 30mm all else
> Being equal (price and appearance) I would take the
> Thicker one - but if the thicker one is 3 times the $,
> Then I would always take the thinner one - but that
> Is just me.
> Michael
>
>
> On 3/7/11 9:24 PM, "Jason Utas" <meteoritekid at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello All,
>> I'd like to point out a few things.
>>
>> First and foremost is that we are meteorite collectors. Collectors.
>> What does that mean? It means that for some irrational reason, we
>> have all decided that it is a worthwhile endeavor to spend our
>> hard-earned money on chunks of rock that happen to be a little
>> different than the more easily available ones that have originated on
>> earth. We buy them because we consider them to be 'interesting' or
>> 'pretty,' and that's about it.
>>
>> So when I hear collectors saying that they want to buy the thinnest
>> slice possible of a given meteorite, it makes me want to stand back
>> and ask...why? Such a comment does make a lot of sense. Since rarer
>> types of meteorites are often very expensive (and are priced per
>> gram), a thinner piece would logically be more easy to see -- if
>> seeing the specimen were an issue.
>>
>> But, personally, from a collector's (my) point of view, I'd have to
>> disagree. If I wanted a piece of a given meteorite, I'd gladly pay
>> twice as much for the thick slab or endcut that weighed twice as much
>> as a mm-thick slice of greater surface area.
>>
>> Why is that? It's because if I want a given meteorite, I don't just
>> want a piece that feels like a cross between a baseball card and a
>> credit card. I'd prefer a piece that has some heft to it.
>> Perhaps that's not such a reasonable demand when one is talking about
>> a lunar or a martian meteorite -- but there's a reason why Peter and I
>> personally haven't bought very many of those. The few that we have
>> purchased have been smaller complete individuals, and we prefer them
>> to slices of equivalent weights.
>>
>> And since I'm a collector, and I prefer such pieces, those are the
>> "better" ones. In my opinion. You guys should stop trying to push
>> your wants on other people as common sense, because, if you prefer
>> thin slices, that's your preference -- not mine. And neither one is
>> "better." Your desire is rational in one sense - if you're willing to
>> spend only enough to buy a gram or so of the moon, then yes, I can see
>> why you would prefer a wafer with a larger surface area. And I prefer
>> specimens that have some weight and heft -- meteorites that I can see
>> *and* feel.
>>
>> And there's much more to my rationale than just that. Stability,
>> difficulty of preservation, and the fact that the prices for such
>> specimens *are* significantly inflated in general all make these less
>> desirable to me. That and the fact that I wouldn't feel comfortable
>> with ever taking them out of a membrane box because I'd fear for the
>> samples' safety.
>>
>> But, yes. I see where you're coming from. If visibility is your only
>> criteria, then a thinner slice would logically appeal more to you. I
>> personally don't find that attractive.
>>
>> So, when I emailed the ebay seller that led to this thread and asked
>> for specimen weights several months ago -- and they crassly declined
>> -- I opted not to purchase any of their specimens. Can I understand
>> their supposed rationale for preferring thin slices with large surface
>> areas? Sure. But they, as the seller, are obliged to give potential
>> buyers the information they want about the material they're selling.
>>
>> Let's compare it to buying a house. You are looking at properties and
>> are told by a seller that you can see some photos of their building,
>> but they won't let you actually go inside it or know how many bedrooms
>> or bathrooms it has before you buy it. The price seems fair based on
>> what you know of the market, and can see from the photos. The seller
>> assures you that nothing is wrong with the house.
>> Wouldn't you think it strange? The details they are withholding are a
>> good guideline for how houses are generally priced. Wouldn't you
>> think that the house *might* be flawed in some way that the seller
>> didn't want you to know? Furthermore, would you be willing to risk
>> spending your money on such a deal?
>>
>> Meteorites are currently (generally) sold by the gram. That system
>> makes sense because weight is an easily quantifiable unit. If people
>> start selling slices by the square centimeter, unless they have some
>> nifty computer programs and a scanner handy, they're not going to be
>> able to judge area as accurately -- and furthermore, people wouldn't
>> know how 'big' the pieces they were buying actually were. Weight
>> tells you how much you're getting, regardless of shape. Area doesn't.
>> Photographs can help to take care of that problem, but when slices
>> are mm-thin...Richard Montgomery noted that, for the specimens he
>> purchased, "their weights...were far more expensive than usual."
>>
>> So I was probably right in assuming that the information that the
>> seller wanted to hide -- the specimens' weights -- would likely have
>> deterred me from buying them. If you read the description, you'll
>> note that the seller isn't selling collection pieces that they've
>> purchased as-is and are now selling. He/she is doing the cutting
>> personally. Do you honestly think that they personally prefer thin
>> slices? Well, since they're removing these thin slices from
>> collection pieces, I assume that they actually own endcuts with quite
>> a bit of heft, and are thinning them to make some money. *Maybe*
>> they're just saying that ridiculous stuff about not telling people
>> specimen weights so that they can sell their paper-thin slices at
>> inflated prices. Makes sense.
>>
>> I agree that thin slices should sell for a slight premium because a
>> thinner slice means that the buyer is getting more area for their
>> money given the weight of the slice (*relevant only if buyers actually
>> prefer thinner slices). But that price hike has to make sense with
>> regard to existing average prices per gram for larger specimens,
>> because at some point the thin slice will cost as much as a thick
>> slice of the same area, and at that point there's simply no reason to
>> purchase the thinner slice.
>>
>> Even if you prefer a thin slice, you've still got to admit the fact
>> that meteorites are currently sold by weight. Changing the current
>> selling paradigm isn't going to happen for practical reasons. I agree
>> that aesthetics should have a large bearing on price, but....they
>> already do. Pretty pieces sell for more, and thinner slices are often
>> priced higher per unit weight than are thicker slices, due to demand a
>> higher demand for 'cheaper surface area.'
>>
>> This seller's not saying anything new. They're just getting people to
>> pay more by withholding information. It's apparently a good gimmick
>> (and legal, to boot). And if you want to pay more per gram for a
>> wafer-thin slice of a given meteorite than you would normally consider
>> paying, then it's a good deal for you.
>>
>> I'll refrain. I prefer meteorites with mass, and not just area. 3D
>> is where it's at. For me, though: maybe not you.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jason
>
>
> --
> "Teachin' a pig to dance is a waste of time and it irritates the pig"
> Mark Twain
> --
> 1. Whenever you're wrong, admit it,
> 2. Whenever you're right, shut up.
> Shaquille O'Neal
>
>
>
Received on Tue 08 Mar 2011 11:16:45 AM PST