[meteorite-list] Meteorite Market 101

From: MexicoDoug_at_aol.com <MexicoDoug_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri Jun 11 17:30:29 2004
Message-ID: <9.2ba1d993.2dfb7e6c_at_aol.com>

Hi Rob,

Thanks for the welcome ... I am glad friends are still allowed to have
different opinions and still be friends ... on the meteorite list. In your most
courteous reply I understand two potential objections for discussion:

1. The relevance it has to the concrete situation concerning our own intrepid
Bob Verish.

In my case I could say I am probably far more ignorant than you to what
started this issue. My answer had absolutely nothing to do with the concrete case
you mention as I still haven't even read it, still don't know who the other
seller is, silent auctions, or how much, etc. What I can say is that I have
been repeatedly impressed by the efforts of Bob and hope that destiny is very
kind to Bob for his spirited and tireless contributions. I was specifically
responding to and concerned with the comments of our chief economy columnist, who
chose to define list ethics, and dismiss a very reasonable objection by
another listmember, and same who has shamelessly insulted many, including yours
truly.

2. Whether the price is affected significantly.

Here I am a bit unclear regarding your logic, though you clearly seem
concerned that justice happens. I would add to my comments that if you increase
supply, the "law of supply and demand" cause the price to go down for price
elastic materials which are discretionary (though this discretionary nature is
debatable among some anomalies). Supply and demand don't care how the price
equilibrium is reached, so I don't see how an auction vs. "fixed price" changes the
product being sold. Cold economic theory on the contrary provides for
everyone to come out of the woodwork with their offerings once they are convinced
that their price might be met ... and the information available to consumers you m
ention is this list itself which is a public forum not intended to favor
sellers over buyers, last time I checked.

Also,
3. You mentioned the concept of an "ethical business decision". I am not
convinced that ethics is driving these type of generalized business decision
supported in Michael's treatise. But rather than open a can of worms for myself
that could enhance an already losing game theory proposition for me ... I'll
agree to leave it at simply a "business decision" and leave all reference to
ethics out ... especially good ethics.

Saludos, Doug



I suppose the only way that the second seller influences the final price of
Bob's auction is that it refreshes people's memories as to what price (some)
dealers are willing to sell LA 001.? In that respect, one could question the
necessity for the second seller to choose that precise moment to offer his
material at a fixed price.? If he's had this material available at that price
for
some time, and consumers have had easy access to that information, then
I say consumers be damned -- making the ethical business decision not to
interfere with another's sale out-trumps any concern for the buyer.? This
would hardly be a case of collusion; it's simply good ethics.? --Rob

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/attachments/20040611/2b5a591a/attachment.htm
Received on Fri 11 Jun 2004 05:30:20 PM PDT