who has them in stock?
Re: 175 SMK
Saw a box of 500 yesterday at a gunshop and was reaching to grab it when I saw $245.00 written on it!!!!
Saw a box of 500 yesterday at a gunshop and was reaching to grab it when I saw $245.00 written on it!!!!
Re: 175 SMK
Sinclair has the 178 A-Max as a possible alternate....
Sinclair has the 178 A-Max as a possible alternate....
Re: 175 SMK
This guy is trying to rip people off midway lists 500 for 139.99 and are taking back orders.
This guy is trying to rip people off midway lists 500 for 139.99 and are taking back orders.
Re: 175 SMK
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1000 YDS. IS FUN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This guy is trying to rip people off midway lists 500 for 139.99 and are taking back orders. </div></div>
Really, you think?! I had a little discussion with the owner that went like this:
me-"is that supposed to be for 1000?"
him-"no, that's the right price"
me-"$100 over retail?!"
him-"if you can get 'em elsewhere be my guest"
me-"this pound of VVn320 I just bought will be the last money I ever spend here"
him-"suit yourself"
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1000 YDS. IS FUN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This guy is trying to rip people off midway lists 500 for 139.99 and are taking back orders. </div></div>
Really, you think?! I had a little discussion with the owner that went like this:
me-"is that supposed to be for 1000?"
him-"no, that's the right price"
me-"$100 over retail?!"
him-"if you can get 'em elsewhere be my guest"
me-"this pound of VVn320 I just bought will be the last money I ever spend here"
him-"suit yourself"
Re: 175 SMK
Some of the responses I have received from my WTB post for 175 SMK's are in line with your experience at the gun shop.
$40+ per 100? Thanks, but I'll keep looking.
Others have replied in the normal range and I'm happy to send the funds immediately.
Some of the responses I have received from my WTB post for 175 SMK's are in line with your experience at the gun shop.
$40+ per 100? Thanks, but I'll keep looking.
Others have replied in the normal range and I'm happy to send the funds immediately.
Re: 175 SMK
UPS just dropped off 1K for me from Bruno's.
Respectfully,
LG
UPS just dropped off 1K for me from Bruno's.
Respectfully,
LG
Re: 175 SMK
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1000 YDS. IS FUN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This guy is trying to rip people off midway lists 500 for 139.99 and are taking back orders. </div></div>
Really, you think?! I had a little discussion with the owner that went like this:
me-"is that supposed to be for 1000?"
him-"no, that's the right price"
me-"$100 over retail?!"
him-"if you can get 'em elsewhere be my guest"
me-"this pound of VVn320 I just bought will be the last money I ever spend here"
him-"suit yourself" </div></div>
This is where fundamentals of price theory should come into the thinking of a retailer who bitches about internet sales and gunshows cutting into his business. The idea is to set a price level that covers your costs and provides a desired level of profit without driving off your customers who run the gamut from being unwise consumers to people who are very aware.
Go too high, and you piss everyone off.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1000 YDS. IS FUN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This guy is trying to rip people off midway lists 500 for 139.99 and are taking back orders. </div></div>
Really, you think?! I had a little discussion with the owner that went like this:
me-"is that supposed to be for 1000?"
him-"no, that's the right price"
me-"$100 over retail?!"
him-"if you can get 'em elsewhere be my guest"
me-"this pound of VVn320 I just bought will be the last money I ever spend here"
him-"suit yourself" </div></div>
This is where fundamentals of price theory should come into the thinking of a retailer who bitches about internet sales and gunshows cutting into his business. The idea is to set a price level that covers your costs and provides a desired level of profit without driving off your customers who run the gamut from being unwise consumers to people who are very aware.
Go too high, and you piss everyone off.
Re: 175 SMK
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1000 YDS. IS FUN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This guy is trying to rip people off midway lists 500 for 139.99 and are taking back orders. </div></div>
Really, you think?! I had a little discussion with the owner that went like this:
me-"is that supposed to be for 1000?"
him-"no, that's the right price"
me-"$100 over retail?!"
him-"if you can get 'em elsewhere be my guest"
me-"this pound of VVn320 I just bought will be the last money I ever spend here"
him-"suit yourself" </div></div>
This is where fundamentals of price theory should come into the thinking of a retailer who bitches about internet sales and gunshows cutting into his business. The idea is to set a price level that covers your costs and provides a desired level of profit without driving off your customers who run the gamut from being unwise consumers to people who are very aware.
Go too high, and you piss everyone off. </div></div>
Actually the fundamentals of price theory support raising prices during a shortage. It's the market's method of rationing.
Selling your walls bare during an outward shift in demand is just about the stupidest thing a retailer could do.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1000 YDS. IS FUN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This guy is trying to rip people off midway lists 500 for 139.99 and are taking back orders. </div></div>
Really, you think?! I had a little discussion with the owner that went like this:
me-"is that supposed to be for 1000?"
him-"no, that's the right price"
me-"$100 over retail?!"
him-"if you can get 'em elsewhere be my guest"
me-"this pound of VVn320 I just bought will be the last money I ever spend here"
him-"suit yourself" </div></div>
This is where fundamentals of price theory should come into the thinking of a retailer who bitches about internet sales and gunshows cutting into his business. The idea is to set a price level that covers your costs and provides a desired level of profit without driving off your customers who run the gamut from being unwise consumers to people who are very aware.
Go too high, and you piss everyone off. </div></div>
Actually the fundamentals of price theory support raising prices during a shortage. It's the market's method of rationing.
Selling your walls bare during an outward shift in demand is just about the stupidest thing a retailer could do.
Re: 175 SMK
I've learned to try to keep a 1k reserve of 175s.
Sad state that we are in these days...
I just picked up 5K of 210Ms & 10#s of RE15 just because they were available and I had no idea of when I might see them again.
(I already had 3,800 primers & 15#s of powder.)
Had to borrow a few bucks to do it too.
Anymore perseverance is mandatory.
I've learned to try to keep a 1k reserve of 175s.
Sad state that we are in these days...
I just picked up 5K of 210Ms & 10#s of RE15 just because they were available and I had no idea of when I might see them again.
(I already had 3,800 primers & 15#s of powder.)
Had to borrow a few bucks to do it too.
Anymore perseverance is mandatory.
Re: 175 SMK
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Actually the fundamentals of price theory support raising prices during a shortage. It's the market's method of rationing.
Selling your walls bare during an outward shift in demand is just about the stupidest thing a retailer could do. </div></div>
The theory doesn't apply/work unless every retail point is aboard with the shift in pricing. As well, the theory also doesn't work when wholesale buyers of historically large quantities of said product receive preferential delivery schedules during times of shortage and continue to sell at supply/demand equilibrium pricing.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Actually the fundamentals of price theory support raising prices during a shortage. It's the market's method of rationing.
Selling your walls bare during an outward shift in demand is just about the stupidest thing a retailer could do. </div></div>
The theory doesn't apply/work unless every retail point is aboard with the shift in pricing. As well, the theory also doesn't work when wholesale buyers of historically large quantities of said product receive preferential delivery schedules during times of shortage and continue to sell at supply/demand equilibrium pricing.
Re: 175 SMK
Supply and demand works great on the macro scale, but never underestimate the micro scale where the customers recognize your profiteering for what it is and no longer buy from you because the other guy down the street refuses to jack his prices up on his stock to unreasonable levels. Setting your prices to keep your customers happy creates customer demand for dealing with you for your honesty.
Supply and demand works great on the macro scale, but never underestimate the micro scale where the customers recognize your profiteering for what it is and no longer buy from you because the other guy down the street refuses to jack his prices up on his stock to unreasonable levels. Setting your prices to keep your customers happy creates customer demand for dealing with you for your honesty.
Re: 175 SMK
DownZero,
After completing a mind numbing semester of Price theory, 25 years ago, some specifics and particulars have slipped my mind. My point related to pricing as a way of maintaining an equilibrium balance of pricing so as to deter the customer from seeking subsitutes or alternatives. Of course rising costs change the price point as well. And my reasoning is based on the establishment being run as a going concern; hence the business would naturally avoid sub cost pricing. I assume the owner is wise enough to know his costs and avoid losses. It's the other end of the graph I'm referring to.
Rather like the proprietor driving a Hummer and taking 6 vacations with his trophy wife (Is she really fifty?) while constantly raising prices and whining about how "rough it is out there"!
I ran my little carpentry business while going to college and always found it ironic that almost none of my professors ever ran so much as a department in the college let alone an actual business!
If I could I'd charge $50,000 for every lock I install. I won't do any will I? How many will I get to install if I do them for nothing? Somewhere in between those extremes is the price level that both I and my clients can live with.
I'm no fan of anti-gouging laws but I grew up in a small New Hampshire town with people who had loooooong memories!
Take care.
DownZero,
After completing a mind numbing semester of Price theory, 25 years ago, some specifics and particulars have slipped my mind. My point related to pricing as a way of maintaining an equilibrium balance of pricing so as to deter the customer from seeking subsitutes or alternatives. Of course rising costs change the price point as well. And my reasoning is based on the establishment being run as a going concern; hence the business would naturally avoid sub cost pricing. I assume the owner is wise enough to know his costs and avoid losses. It's the other end of the graph I'm referring to.
Rather like the proprietor driving a Hummer and taking 6 vacations with his trophy wife (Is she really fifty?) while constantly raising prices and whining about how "rough it is out there"!
I ran my little carpentry business while going to college and always found it ironic that almost none of my professors ever ran so much as a department in the college let alone an actual business!
If I could I'd charge $50,000 for every lock I install. I won't do any will I? How many will I get to install if I do them for nothing? Somewhere in between those extremes is the price level that both I and my clients can live with.
I'm no fan of anti-gouging laws but I grew up in a small New Hampshire town with people who had loooooong memories!
Take care.
Re: 175 SMK
Who's got the 210M primers?
Who's got the 210M primers?
Re: 175 SMK
Natchezss HAD them this past Monday.
I was lucky enough to be browinsing the reloading thread when someone posted up with that little piece of intel.
I don't get lucky often, but I am sure thankfull that I did this time.
I'd be willing to sell the 5K case to you for $500 though.
(Just being cute, I wouldn't sell them at any price.)
Price gouging by local guys and at the Gun Shows is a bit disheartning, but American none the less.
Fortunately for all of us, the big guys have kept their pricing relatively the same.
I paid $169.95 + $22.50 HAZMAT for the 210Ms.
That's a far cry from the $100 per 1K that some ass clowns are trying to charge on GunBroker.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=136753457
Natchezss HAD them this past Monday.
I was lucky enough to be browinsing the reloading thread when someone posted up with that little piece of intel.
I don't get lucky often, but I am sure thankfull that I did this time.
I'd be willing to sell the 5K case to you for $500 though.
(Just being cute, I wouldn't sell them at any price.)
Price gouging by local guys and at the Gun Shows is a bit disheartning, but American none the less.
Fortunately for all of us, the big guys have kept their pricing relatively the same.
I paid $169.95 + $22.50 HAZMAT for the 210Ms.
That's a far cry from the $100 per 1K that some ass clowns are trying to charge on GunBroker.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=136753457
Re: 175 SMK
Damn, and that is the old packaging too.
If they are really going at those rates, I am sitting on a gold mine!
Damn, and that is the old packaging too.
If they are really going at those rates, I am sitting on a gold mine!
Re: 175 SMK
yeah there's some dumb shit going on on gun broker. trying to find bullets and brass now. I heard winchester .308 is supposed to be good....
yeah there's some dumb shit going on on gun broker. trying to find bullets and brass now. I heard winchester .308 is supposed to be good....
Re: 175 SMK
Well,
While ammo is still stupid and powder, primers and bullets are still uncertain, I can tell you I believe the good times are coming back on rifles. I stopped into the SRT store in Clearwater today and saw several M-1As, AR15s (Bushy and RR for $815.00!!!), Mini -14s under $750 (?), Lots of Ruger stuff on sale (I know, I know, some of us despise Ruger...But I found 20 round Ruger mags for $25.00!!!!), including a couple of the new 5.56 rifles. And Ruger is making 30 round mags now, though pretty steep at $50.00.
The prices and quantities of rifles and handguns were back to normal and priced reasonably, if not low. Can ammo and reloading stuff be that far behind?
Well,
While ammo is still stupid and powder, primers and bullets are still uncertain, I can tell you I believe the good times are coming back on rifles. I stopped into the SRT store in Clearwater today and saw several M-1As, AR15s (Bushy and RR for $815.00!!!), Mini -14s under $750 (?), Lots of Ruger stuff on sale (I know, I know, some of us despise Ruger...But I found 20 round Ruger mags for $25.00!!!!), including a couple of the new 5.56 rifles. And Ruger is making 30 round mags now, though pretty steep at $50.00.
The prices and quantities of rifles and handguns were back to normal and priced reasonably, if not low. Can ammo and reloading stuff be that far behind?
Re: 175 SMK
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Brain</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The theory doesn't apply/work unless every retail point is aboard with the shift in pricing. As well, the theory also doesn't work when wholesale buyers of historically large quantities of said product receive preferential delivery schedules during times of shortage and continue to sell at supply/demand equilibrium pricing. </div></div>
Not true at all. Pricing below equilibrium will just get you sold out before you can replenish. It doesn't matter what your suppliers do.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Beer Alchemist</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Supply and demand works great on the macro scale, but never underestimate the micro scale where the customers recognize your profiteering for what it is and no longer buy from you because the other guy down the street refuses to jack his prices up on his stock to unreasonable levels. Setting your prices to keep your customers happy creates customer demand for dealing with you for your honesty. </div></div>
Price theory is a <span style="font-style: italic">microeconomic </span>concept by definition.
If the guy down the street refuses to raise his price, he'll be like everyone else right now, out of stock. The guy who raises his prices still has a product to offer to the customer who wants it most and is willing to pay for it.
Personally, I'd rather be paying $50-60 a thou for small pistol primers right now than be out completely. A higher price is better than nothing available at any price (aka, shortage).
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">DownZero,
After completing a mind numbing semester of Price theory, 25 years ago, some specifics and particulars have slipped my mind. My point related to pricing as a way of maintaining an equilibrium balance of pricing so as to deter the customer from seeking subsitutes or alternatives. Of course rising costs change the price point as well. And my reasoning is based on the establishment being run as a going concern; hence the business would naturally avoid sub cost pricing. I assume the owner is wise enough to know his costs and avoid losses. It's the other end of the graph I'm referring to.
Rather like the proprietor driving a Hummer and taking 6 vacations with his trophy wife (Is she really fifty?) while constantly raising prices and whining about how "rough it is out there"!
I ran my little carpentry business while going to college and always found it ironic that almost none of my professors ever ran so much as a department in the college let alone an actual business!
If I could I'd charge $50,000 for every lock I install. I won't do any will I? How many will I get to install if I do them for nothing? Somewhere in between those extremes is the price level that both I and my clients can live with.
I'm no fan of anti-gouging laws but I grew up in a small New Hampshire town with people who had loooooong memories!
Take care. </div></div>
1. Supply has nothing to do with demand. "Rising costs" has nothing to do with the price that consumers are willing and able to pay. The price of a product on the shelf reflects consumers' willingness and ability to pay, and has nothing to do with what the supplier is charging. Yes, stores aren't going to sell below their cost, and the law of supply states that sellers will be more willing to supply more at a higher price. But it is consumers who are most responsive to price in this instance--because what we have is a shift in demand here; supply is unchanged, or, if anything, shifted outward as suppliers try to meet demand.
2. Complaints about profit are nothing less than class envy, and nothing more. Margins go up and they go down; such is the business cycle. Yesterday, it was oil, and today, it's reloading equipment. Tomorrow it will be something else. Such is the way of a functional market.
3. I am an econ student now, but I was a business owner before. I wish that I knew then what I know now, about how markets respond to changes in price, instead of being concerned about my "margins," I would have been researching market price and pricing accordingly.
4. You're absolutely right about the $50k vs. $0 comment. You have to find a price that keeps you working 8 hours a day, but doesn't put you out of business. $0 would put you under, and $20 per lock might have you working 22 hours a day. A more reasonable price of $70 per lock gets you 8 hours of work a day...a price that makes you much more willing to supply your labor rather than sit at home.
5. Sure, people will remember that you raised your prices. But I won't forget all the foolish retailers who refused to raise their prices, and thus sold out, either, because we have a market full of retailers that can't sell me anything at any price, because they failed to raise their prices in time to respond to a shift in demand.
This microeconomics lesson comes to you free of charge from a Big Ten econ student, and is worth no more than what you paid for it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Brain</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The theory doesn't apply/work unless every retail point is aboard with the shift in pricing. As well, the theory also doesn't work when wholesale buyers of historically large quantities of said product receive preferential delivery schedules during times of shortage and continue to sell at supply/demand equilibrium pricing. </div></div>
Not true at all. Pricing below equilibrium will just get you sold out before you can replenish. It doesn't matter what your suppliers do.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Beer Alchemist</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Supply and demand works great on the macro scale, but never underestimate the micro scale where the customers recognize your profiteering for what it is and no longer buy from you because the other guy down the street refuses to jack his prices up on his stock to unreasonable levels. Setting your prices to keep your customers happy creates customer demand for dealing with you for your honesty. </div></div>
Price theory is a <span style="font-style: italic">microeconomic </span>concept by definition.
If the guy down the street refuses to raise his price, he'll be like everyone else right now, out of stock. The guy who raises his prices still has a product to offer to the customer who wants it most and is willing to pay for it.
Personally, I'd rather be paying $50-60 a thou for small pistol primers right now than be out completely. A higher price is better than nothing available at any price (aka, shortage).
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">DownZero,
After completing a mind numbing semester of Price theory, 25 years ago, some specifics and particulars have slipped my mind. My point related to pricing as a way of maintaining an equilibrium balance of pricing so as to deter the customer from seeking subsitutes or alternatives. Of course rising costs change the price point as well. And my reasoning is based on the establishment being run as a going concern; hence the business would naturally avoid sub cost pricing. I assume the owner is wise enough to know his costs and avoid losses. It's the other end of the graph I'm referring to.
Rather like the proprietor driving a Hummer and taking 6 vacations with his trophy wife (Is she really fifty?) while constantly raising prices and whining about how "rough it is out there"!
I ran my little carpentry business while going to college and always found it ironic that almost none of my professors ever ran so much as a department in the college let alone an actual business!
If I could I'd charge $50,000 for every lock I install. I won't do any will I? How many will I get to install if I do them for nothing? Somewhere in between those extremes is the price level that both I and my clients can live with.
I'm no fan of anti-gouging laws but I grew up in a small New Hampshire town with people who had loooooong memories!
Take care. </div></div>
1. Supply has nothing to do with demand. "Rising costs" has nothing to do with the price that consumers are willing and able to pay. The price of a product on the shelf reflects consumers' willingness and ability to pay, and has nothing to do with what the supplier is charging. Yes, stores aren't going to sell below their cost, and the law of supply states that sellers will be more willing to supply more at a higher price. But it is consumers who are most responsive to price in this instance--because what we have is a shift in demand here; supply is unchanged, or, if anything, shifted outward as suppliers try to meet demand.
2. Complaints about profit are nothing less than class envy, and nothing more. Margins go up and they go down; such is the business cycle. Yesterday, it was oil, and today, it's reloading equipment. Tomorrow it will be something else. Such is the way of a functional market.
3. I am an econ student now, but I was a business owner before. I wish that I knew then what I know now, about how markets respond to changes in price, instead of being concerned about my "margins," I would have been researching market price and pricing accordingly.
4. You're absolutely right about the $50k vs. $0 comment. You have to find a price that keeps you working 8 hours a day, but doesn't put you out of business. $0 would put you under, and $20 per lock might have you working 22 hours a day. A more reasonable price of $70 per lock gets you 8 hours of work a day...a price that makes you much more willing to supply your labor rather than sit at home.
5. Sure, people will remember that you raised your prices. But I won't forget all the foolish retailers who refused to raise their prices, and thus sold out, either, because we have a market full of retailers that can't sell me anything at any price, because they failed to raise their prices in time to respond to a shift in demand.
This microeconomics lesson comes to you free of charge from a Big Ten econ student, and is worth no more than what you paid for it.
Re: 175 SMK
DZ,
While I think we are talking around each other a little, I think we are in agreement to a large extent. The problem economics posesses is that it isn't Chemistry or Mathematics: where the same inputs always yield the same results regardless of viewpoint, agenda or semantics or polemics.
1) You say supply has nothing to do with demand; I'd respond, "Yes and no".
2) I agree, but have always felt it prudent to "blend in" rather than broadcast success like a big city pimp! But to each his own; the successful have a right to enjoy the fruit of their efforts. I'll let you know I handle it if the circumstance ever arises!
3) I finished (finally, it took 11, part time, years!) college in '89' and went to work for a general contractor doing commercial construction. One day a fax lands on my desk with an ad for a commercial door outfit that listed their unit prices for stuff I had been installing prior to starting with my outfit. Looking at the prices made me a little nauseous: they charged way more than I had been charging and were busy...DOH!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cognitive disonance I believe it's called.
4) I always like any sentence that begins with "you are absolutely right"
5) My point about geometric price hikes, perhaps has as much to do with client relations/management as with demand/supply elasticity or other academic meandering. Long term Marketing strategies become as important as economics here.
The facts are that; A) people always want a gold chalice at dixie cup prices.
B) People always want a little extra they feel others aren't getting.
C) People always remember feeling cheated. Some may forgive it, but very few forget, and that feeling is not always logical or factual. It does however, exist, and a smart merchant remembers this fact.
So while reloading components were faced with a sudden and huge increase in demand, the response to that demand was both logical and avarcious. Manufacturers have in fact upgraded production capacity and have been working with their suppliers of raw materials and distributors to make this ramped up output get to market.
Consumers, frenetically willing to pay anything, gave rise to a secondary, "extralegal", futures and auction market that gave the price hiking greater momentum. Some retailers have been indifferent to the impression they may be taking advanage of customers, many of whom are feeling pressured from all sides: emplyment pressures, diminished net worth, a increasingly pessimistic business outlook, increased costs for many products and services, etc.
Given the available substitutes, consumers are feeling less guilt in bypassing the retailer in purchasing their reloading supplies online. Retailers can feel free to spout off the teachings of Dr. Freidman or Sowell (I'm a big fan of both), but that won't help them get customers back once they are gone.
Certainly all of this can be explained and justified in purely economic terms. But this does little to ameliorate the views of rational people who feel taken advantage of, whether accurately or not.
DZ,
While I think we are talking around each other a little, I think we are in agreement to a large extent. The problem economics posesses is that it isn't Chemistry or Mathematics: where the same inputs always yield the same results regardless of viewpoint, agenda or semantics or polemics.
1) You say supply has nothing to do with demand; I'd respond, "Yes and no".
2) I agree, but have always felt it prudent to "blend in" rather than broadcast success like a big city pimp! But to each his own; the successful have a right to enjoy the fruit of their efforts. I'll let you know I handle it if the circumstance ever arises!
3) I finished (finally, it took 11, part time, years!) college in '89' and went to work for a general contractor doing commercial construction. One day a fax lands on my desk with an ad for a commercial door outfit that listed their unit prices for stuff I had been installing prior to starting with my outfit. Looking at the prices made me a little nauseous: they charged way more than I had been charging and were busy...DOH!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cognitive disonance I believe it's called.
4) I always like any sentence that begins with "you are absolutely right"
5) My point about geometric price hikes, perhaps has as much to do with client relations/management as with demand/supply elasticity or other academic meandering. Long term Marketing strategies become as important as economics here.
The facts are that; A) people always want a gold chalice at dixie cup prices.
B) People always want a little extra they feel others aren't getting.
C) People always remember feeling cheated. Some may forgive it, but very few forget, and that feeling is not always logical or factual. It does however, exist, and a smart merchant remembers this fact.
So while reloading components were faced with a sudden and huge increase in demand, the response to that demand was both logical and avarcious. Manufacturers have in fact upgraded production capacity and have been working with their suppliers of raw materials and distributors to make this ramped up output get to market.
Consumers, frenetically willing to pay anything, gave rise to a secondary, "extralegal", futures and auction market that gave the price hiking greater momentum. Some retailers have been indifferent to the impression they may be taking advanage of customers, many of whom are feeling pressured from all sides: emplyment pressures, diminished net worth, a increasingly pessimistic business outlook, increased costs for many products and services, etc.
Given the available substitutes, consumers are feeling less guilt in bypassing the retailer in purchasing their reloading supplies online. Retailers can feel free to spout off the teachings of Dr. Freidman or Sowell (I'm a big fan of both), but that won't help them get customers back once they are gone.
Certainly all of this can be explained and justified in purely economic terms. But this does little to ameliorate the views of rational people who feel taken advantage of, whether accurately or not.
Re: 175 SMK
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">DZ,
While I think we are talking around each other a little, I think we are in agreement to a large extent. The problem economics posesses is that it isn't Chemistry or Mathematics: where the same inputs always yield the same results regardless of viewpoint, agenda or semantics or polemics.</div></div>
This is actually not true. The theories of economics are based on <span style="font-style: italic">observation</span>; the exceptions to them are very limited and beyond the scope of this discussion. All scientific theories must be repeatable; economics is no different.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">1) You say supply has nothing to do with demand; I'd respond, "Yes and no".</div></div>
They are independent of each other, so you can say "yes and no" if you prefer, but the answer is, as a matter of science anyway, "no."
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">3) I finished (finally, it took 11, part time, years!) college in '89' and went to work for a general contractor doing commercial construction. One day a fax lands on my desk with an ad for a commercial door outfit that listed their unit prices for stuff I had been installing prior to starting with my outfit. Looking at the prices made me a little nauseous: they charged way more than I had been charging and were busy...DOH!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cognitive disonance I believe it's called.</div></div>
Yeah. It's always amazing to me that I can buy stuff and resell it and realize a pretty decent profit.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">5) My point about geometric price hikes, perhaps has as much to do with client relations/management as with demand/supply elasticity or other academic meandering. Long term Marketing strategies become as important as economics here.
The facts are that; A) people always want a gold chalice at dixie cup prices.
B) People always want a little extra they feel others aren't getting.
C) People always remember feeling cheated. Some may forgive it, but very few forget, and that feeling is not always logical or factual. It does however, exist, and a smart merchant remembers this fact.
So while reloading components were faced with a sudden and huge increase in demand, the response to that demand was both logical and avarcious. Manufacturers have in fact upgraded production capacity and have been working with their suppliers of raw materials and distributors to make this ramped up output get to market.
Consumers, frenetically willing to pay anything, gave rise to a secondary, "extralegal", futures and auction market that gave the price hiking greater momentum. Some retailers have been indifferent to the impression they may be taking advanage of customers, many of whom are feeling pressured from all sides: emplyment pressures, diminished net worth, a increasingly pessimistic business outlook, increased costs for many products and services, etc.
Given the available substitutes, consumers are feeling less guilt in bypassing the retailer in purchasing their reloading supplies online. Retailers can feel free to spout off the teachings of Dr. Freidman or Sowell (I'm a big fan of both), but that won't help them get customers back once they are gone.
Certainly all of this can be explained and justified in purely economic terms. But this does little to ameliorate the views of rational people who feel taken advantage of, whether accurately or not. </div></div>
Friedman was a macroeconomist; his work is pretty useless to this. Sowell's work is extensive and I'm not sure if it covers this issue or not...but these fundamental theories that we're referring to here are literally hundreds of years old.
I think there is some truth to what you're arguing in this segment, but I also think, that on the whole, that it's absolutely wrong.
Some consumers will gripe and scream about the new prices. They might even avoid the retailers who "gouged" during a hike in demand. But, on average, the market will tend to function consistent with price theory.
I know it seems ridiculous to suggest that people will just deal with the massive increase in price during changes in market equalibrium, but I suggest that you observe the market for gasoline. Yeah, people gripe and bitch. But, on average, the market functions and people respond to price changes. Sure, some of us say we're getting gouged, and maybe we are...
But we still buy gasoline and go about our lives. Reloading components are no different. Either the price will ride to cut quantity demanded to a level that keeps product on the shelves, or supply will shift back out to lower prices again, or some of both, but either way, one thing is for certain--capitalism functions because both suppliers and consumers respond to market price. And, we, as consumers, must deal with the fact that the market price is higher today than it was before Obama got elected--because there are more gun owners today than there were on November 3rd.
I think that's a good thing in the long run. But that's a different issue.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">DZ,
While I think we are talking around each other a little, I think we are in agreement to a large extent. The problem economics posesses is that it isn't Chemistry or Mathematics: where the same inputs always yield the same results regardless of viewpoint, agenda or semantics or polemics.</div></div>
This is actually not true. The theories of economics are based on <span style="font-style: italic">observation</span>; the exceptions to them are very limited and beyond the scope of this discussion. All scientific theories must be repeatable; economics is no different.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">1) You say supply has nothing to do with demand; I'd respond, "Yes and no".</div></div>
They are independent of each other, so you can say "yes and no" if you prefer, but the answer is, as a matter of science anyway, "no."
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">3) I finished (finally, it took 11, part time, years!) college in '89' and went to work for a general contractor doing commercial construction. One day a fax lands on my desk with an ad for a commercial door outfit that listed their unit prices for stuff I had been installing prior to starting with my outfit. Looking at the prices made me a little nauseous: they charged way more than I had been charging and were busy...DOH!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cognitive disonance I believe it's called.</div></div>
Yeah. It's always amazing to me that I can buy stuff and resell it and realize a pretty decent profit.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">5) My point about geometric price hikes, perhaps has as much to do with client relations/management as with demand/supply elasticity or other academic meandering. Long term Marketing strategies become as important as economics here.
The facts are that; A) people always want a gold chalice at dixie cup prices.
B) People always want a little extra they feel others aren't getting.
C) People always remember feeling cheated. Some may forgive it, but very few forget, and that feeling is not always logical or factual. It does however, exist, and a smart merchant remembers this fact.
So while reloading components were faced with a sudden and huge increase in demand, the response to that demand was both logical and avarcious. Manufacturers have in fact upgraded production capacity and have been working with their suppliers of raw materials and distributors to make this ramped up output get to market.
Consumers, frenetically willing to pay anything, gave rise to a secondary, "extralegal", futures and auction market that gave the price hiking greater momentum. Some retailers have been indifferent to the impression they may be taking advanage of customers, many of whom are feeling pressured from all sides: emplyment pressures, diminished net worth, a increasingly pessimistic business outlook, increased costs for many products and services, etc.
Given the available substitutes, consumers are feeling less guilt in bypassing the retailer in purchasing their reloading supplies online. Retailers can feel free to spout off the teachings of Dr. Freidman or Sowell (I'm a big fan of both), but that won't help them get customers back once they are gone.
Certainly all of this can be explained and justified in purely economic terms. But this does little to ameliorate the views of rational people who feel taken advantage of, whether accurately or not. </div></div>
Friedman was a macroeconomist; his work is pretty useless to this. Sowell's work is extensive and I'm not sure if it covers this issue or not...but these fundamental theories that we're referring to here are literally hundreds of years old.
I think there is some truth to what you're arguing in this segment, but I also think, that on the whole, that it's absolutely wrong.
Some consumers will gripe and scream about the new prices. They might even avoid the retailers who "gouged" during a hike in demand. But, on average, the market will tend to function consistent with price theory.
I know it seems ridiculous to suggest that people will just deal with the massive increase in price during changes in market equalibrium, but I suggest that you observe the market for gasoline. Yeah, people gripe and bitch. But, on average, the market functions and people respond to price changes. Sure, some of us say we're getting gouged, and maybe we are...
But we still buy gasoline and go about our lives. Reloading components are no different. Either the price will ride to cut quantity demanded to a level that keeps product on the shelves, or supply will shift back out to lower prices again, or some of both, but either way, one thing is for certain--capitalism functions because both suppliers and consumers respond to market price. And, we, as consumers, must deal with the fact that the market price is higher today than it was before Obama got elected--because there are more gun owners today than there were on November 3rd.
I think that's a good thing in the long run. But that's a different issue.
