Thought I Was Smooth

Log in

SmokingPipes.com Updates

New Cigars




PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Status
Not open for further replies.

BROBS

Lifer
Nov 13, 2019
11,765
40,026
IA
It’s fine. We remember who gouged people on Eso and who was fair. $200 for a common bag of ASTB and $300 for any un-aged eso is ludicrous. I remember those who did this and they are not a member of the pipe smoking community as far as I’m concerned. They are profiteers. Eso is not so good as to pay $300 a bag for fresh shit. We’ve created this ourselves. Stop paying these prices or ban Chinese IP’s or VPN’s from this forum.
 

jpmcwjr

Moderator
Staff member
May 12, 2015
24,568
27,071
Carmel Valley, CA
I 100% disagree. The attitude of price gouging does not stop at non-essential goods. These are the same people who will not bat an eyelid to price gouge essential goods.

By definition if it's non-essential, it's not gouging. Gouging is illegal, not to mention immoral.

Sorry, but prices for your aged premium tobaccos and whiskeys are exempt from that label. Now, greed, rapaciousness, etc. are all up for grabs,
 

craig61a

Lifer
Apr 29, 2017
5,765
47,544
Minnesota USA
By definition if it's non-essential, it's not gouging. Gouging is illegal, not to mention immoral.

Sorry, but prices for your aged premium tobaccos and whiskeys are exempt from that label. Now, greed, rapaciousness, etc. are all up for grabs,

I think gouging could be applied to non essential items... If they are rare and in demand.

But it’s all just a matter of semantics.

As long as the market will bear the price being asked, well then who outside the transaction has any position to question it?
 

jpmcwjr

Moderator
Staff member
May 12, 2015
24,568
27,071
Carmel Valley, CA
By definition if it's non-essential, it's not gouging. Gouging is illegal, not to mention immoral.

Sorry, but prices for your aged premium tobaccos and whiskeys are exempt from that label. Now, greed, rapaciousness, etc. are all up for grabs,
Forgot to mention scalping. Illegal in many places, but to me, not immoral. You don't have to see that match-up, concert, event, now do you?

Now, where the scalper has arranged to gather significant numbers of tickets, pounds of tobacco, cases of first release wine, etc., far beyond what he could reasonably use himself, that, to me, is immoral. Not that the scalpee much cares at the time.
 

jpmcwjr

Moderator
Staff member
May 12, 2015
24,568
27,071
Carmel Valley, CA
I think gouging could be applied to non essential items... If they are rare and in demand.

But it’s all just a matter of semantics.
Isn't everything? :). Seriously, there is a big difference between gouging and scalping or whatever you want to call price hikes on non-essential goods.

[edit. to correct spelling]. cshubhra, please take note!
 
Last edited:

Aomalley27

Part of the Furniture Now
Mar 8, 2021
763
1,696
Chicagoland area
Forgot to mention scalping. Illegal in many places, but to me, not immoral. You don't have to see that match-up, concert, event, now do you?

Now, where the scalper has arranged to gather significant numbers of tickets, pounds of tobacco, cases of first release wine, etc., far beyond what he could reasonably use himself, that, to me, is immoral. Not that the scalpee much cares at the time.
Immoral????? I’d certainly say unethical, but not immoral.
 

telescopes

Pipe Dreamer and Star Gazer
People who behave in a certain manner that demonstrates indifference to others often have a very high opinion about themselves, their ethics, morals, and shrewdness. Everyone else who knows them simply regards them as a self-centered asshole, and that line starts with the people who know them best: their wives and children. Knock yourself out and pat yourself on the your shoulder.
 

craig61a

Lifer
Apr 29, 2017
5,765
47,544
Minnesota USA
In the past the issue of what people were charging on the trader has come up, and it was pretty much shut down.

There’s nothing in the rules section that dictates what prices people are allowed to charge. To do that would be foolish and unenforceable.

Nobody here knows whether or not the seller actually sold the items for the asking price. They could have come to another price in PM.

My point is that arguing the details of a sale here in the forum isn’t going to change anything.
 

telescopes

Pipe Dreamer and Star Gazer
In the past the issue of what people were charging on the trader has come up, and it was pretty much shut down.

There’s nothing in the rules section that dictates what prices people are allowed to charge. To do that would be foolish and unenforceable.

Nobody here knows whether or not the seller actually sold the items for the asking price. They could have come to another price in PM.

My point is that arguing the details of a sale here in the forum isn’t going to change anything.
I agree 100%. The only issue I have with people who corner the market for personal gain on a non traditional investment commodity such as tinned tobacco is that the latent result is to NOT improve upon a rendered service, but to extract value from the commodity in a manner that benefits less people, not more. The overall moral argument for capitalism is that it streamlines efficiencies and allows producers and consumers to derive maximum benefits. For both parties, not just one. When one party prevails at the expense of consumers overall, the moral argument for capitalism is lost on the masses. Or have we forgotten to read our college text books on market economies and substituted those that favor The Prince?
 
  • Like
Reactions: depriest1022

craig61a

Lifer
Apr 29, 2017
5,765
47,544
Minnesota USA
I agree 100%. The only issue I have with people who corner the market for personal gain on a non traditional investment commodity such as tinned tobacco is that the latent result is to NOT improve upon a rendered service, but to extract value from the commodity in a manner that benefits less people, not more. The overall moral argument for capitalism is that it streamlines efficiencies and allows producers and consumers to derive maximum benefits. For both parties, not just one. When one party prevails at the expense of consumers overall, the moral argument for capitalism is lost on the masses. Or have we forgotten to read our college text books on market economies and substituted those that favor The Prince?
The buyer purchased the items under his own volition.

The price of Esoterica tobaccos has been spiraling upward for the past several years. There's a website that leverages that trend, and has become the de facto standard in pricing for the secondary market. It's often mentioned in the selling thread as a comparison.

As far as the market being cornered, anybody can buy these items at a more reasonable price by doing a little due diligence, and establishing a relationship with any number of B&M establishments who will take phone orders and ship to them.

Online vendors offer alerts, which are dicey, as there is usually some lag time, and by the time you get to the site what you want may have sold out already.

There are other avenues to acquire ESO... I does demand putting in some work. In lieu of that, there is the option of finding someone who has it for sale and offers it at a price, cash and carry, so to speak. If the price doesn't sit well with somebody, there's always the option not to buy it.

If purchasing things and setting them aside to capitalize on a higher price at later time makes them an opportunistic asshole, well then count me in. I've bought land, guitars, guns, stamps, coins, pipes, tobacco and most of the time have realized a net gain upon selling them. I can't wrap my head around this whole spending money on stuff to eventually lose money thing. But I do donate and volunteer to certain causes, and gift things... Maybe so I can rationalize to myself that I'm not really such an opportunistic asshole after all. :confused:
 

niblicck

Can't Leave
Oct 7, 2020
385
3,128
Alabama
If purchasing things and setting them aside to capitalize on a higher price at later time makes them an opportunistic asshole, well then count me in. I've bought land, guitars, guns, stamps, coins, pipes, tobacco and most of the time have realized a net gain upon selling them. I can't wrap my head around this whole spending money on stuff to eventually lose money thing. But I do donate and volunteer to certain causes, and gift things... Maybe so I can rationalize to myself that I'm not really such an opportunistic asshole after all. :confused:
This is the way that I have perceived the transaction also no matter what price the buyer purchase point was. And please do not forget along with being self-centered assholes were also perceived to be sociopaths to some.
 

Jacob74

Lifer
Dec 22, 2019
1,243
6,665
Killeen, TX
Ethics and pipes, what could be more natural a conversation to have? . I wish we all were able to enjoy this conversation together in a lovely room with great ventilation and fine liquor.

I believe that there is a certain utility in opportunism of this sort, and if we were to argue ethics from that angle, we might choose an entirely different path of conversation.

For instance, in a hypothetical situation, the original opportunist purchases a stockpile of goods. Goods in and of themselves might have a moral or ethical quality, (being the fruit of slave labor, or being essentially exploitive in some way). Outside of that, the purchase of the stockpile of goods hasn't any essentially immoral or unethical quality to it.
Then to the stockpiling of the goods themselves. If maintaining or growing that stockpile is to the detriment of others, then certainly we might observe it as an immoral or unethical act. But if we have goods that have no intrinsic immoral quality, and if the stockpiling of goods isn't immoral, we are still in fine shape.
Lastly, to sell those stockpiled goods at market value. If the goods are sold in a marketplace, that, in essence defines the market value. If priced too high initially, they won't sell. If priced too low, the seller doesn't realize maximum profit.
Neither of those conditions indicate any immoral or unethical act.
This is how we can have an ethical and moral trade in vintage items, collectibles, objets d'art, and etc.

The distinction between the moral or ethical conditions of capitalistic acquisition, and immoral or unethical capitalistic acquisition, should probably be made at the level of the goods themselves. Otherwise, we start having to debate whether or not profit motive in and of itself is inherently immoral.
 

Jacob74

Lifer
Dec 22, 2019
1,243
6,665
Killeen, TX
Ethics and pipes, what could be more natural a conversation to have? . I wish we all were able to enjoy this conversation together in a lovely room with great ventilation and fine liquor.

I believe that there is a certain utility in opportunism of this sort, and if we were to argue ethics from that angle, we might choose an entirely different path of conversation.

For instance, in a hypothetical situation, the original opportunist purchases a stockpile of goods. Goods in and of themselves might have a moral or ethical quality, (being the fruit of slave labor, or being essentially exploitive in some way). Outside of that, the purchase of the stockpile of goods hasn't any essentially immoral or unethical quality to it.
Then to the stockpiling of the goods themselves. If maintaining or growing that stockpile is to the detriment of others, then certainly we might observe it as an immoral or unethical act. But if we have goods that have no intrinsic immoral quality, and if the stockpiling of goods isn't immoral, we are still in fine shape.
Lastly, to sell those stockpiled goods at market value. If the goods are sold in a marketplace, that, in essence defines the market value. If priced too high initially, they won't sell. If priced too low, the seller doesn't realize maximum profit.
Neither of those conditions indicate any immoral or unethical act.
This is how we can have an ethical and moral trade in vintage items, collectibles, objets d'art, and etc.

The distinction between the moral or ethical conditions of capitalistic acquisition, and immoral or unethical capitalistic acquisition, should probably be made at the level of the goods themselves. Otherwise, we start having to debate whether or not profit motive in and of itself is inherently immoral.
Also, Stonehaven is ****ing delicious.
 

telescopes

Pipe Dreamer and Star Gazer
The buyer purchased the items under his own volition.

The price of Esoterica tobaccos has been spiraling upward for the past several years. There's a website that leverages that trend, and has become the de facto standard in pricing for the secondary market. It's often mentioned in the selling thread as a comparison.

As far as the market being cornered, anybody can buy these items at a more reasonable price by doing a little due diligence, and establishing a relationship with any number of B&M establishments who will take phone orders and ship to them.

Online vendors offer alerts, which are dicey, as there is usually some lag time, and by the time you get to the site what you want may have sold out already.

There are other avenues to acquire ESO... I does demand putting in some work. In lieu of that, there is the option of finding someone who has it for sale and offers it at a price, cash and carry, so to speak. If the price doesn't sit well with somebody, there's always the option not to buy it.

If purchasing things and setting them aside to capitalize on a higher price at later time makes them an opportunistic asshole, well then count me in. I've bought land, guitars, guns, stamps, coins, pipes, tobacco and most of the time have realized a net gain upon selling them. I can't wrap my head around this whole spending money on stuff to eventually lose money thing. But I do donate and volunteer to certain causes, and gift things... Maybe so I can rationalize to myself that I'm not really such an opportunistic asshole after all. :confused:
No, not an asshole, lol. My criticism is more measured toward those who apply capitalistic practices in a manner that yields little benefits to society in terms of improving efficiencies. The examples you provided fall within the scope of fair market capitalism. Now, if you somehow were able to corner the market on guitars, with hold the instruments from musicians unless they paid a remarkably high price not commensurate with the production costs and transaction costs, then yes, you would be a robber Barron- or more easily stated, an asshole. There was a reference to the morality of capitalism made earlier in the thread. That is what I am referring to
 
Status
Not open for further replies.