Random Thought Thread

bluemax_1 said:
A little clarity on this part, please?
Click to expand...

Lotteries are free to enter. This means there's an advantage to be had by entering everything you can and selling what you don't want. There are people who enter literally every lottery, give away, and drop to improve their changes of getting something.

Lotteries in this fashion are problematic because the number of "folks who want just want the item" is much smaller than the "folks who will enter everything and see what they win." And this makes it unfair.
 
Not meaning to break the debate but have to go at a tangent:

Whenever I fall sleep uncovered (no blankets, etc) I have the weirdest nonsensical dreams. I think that my skin getting cold has something to do with my brain misfiring while in the sleep mode. I don't know if any of these are facts, but I believe 'em to be true!
 
Josh K said:
I understand this in principal, but I think it's confusing to implement and prone to risk. For example, without properly understanding who is bidding the auction is prone to tampering. This is true whether you do a fancy "let's get fair market value" auction or a straight highest bidder auction.

How to sell desirable commodities in a "fair" way is a very hard problem. I think this is not a problem worth solving because there will always be a group (those that didn't win) that complains it was unfair. For example, let's say the base price of this complex grind low-volume boot dagger is $500. Run this Vickery auction and a bunch of folks bid $2000, setting the price for all 40 at $2000. Then a few of those folks decide "well $2000 was the low number, I'll bet someone was willing to pay $5000!" and decides to sell their knife.

A bunch of folks who wanted a $500 knife now face a 10x MSRP if they want to obtain one.

This hard problem exists no matter what system you use. Lotteries are already filled with folks who enter everything they can.
Click to expand...

IMO what you describe isn’t a problem.

It’s extremely unrealistic that a bunch of people, or anyone will bid $2000. But if they do, and Nathan sells 10 $500 knives for $20,000, do you really think he won’t make more?

Do you think that there is a market for an unlimited supply at $2000?

I’d bet no one will pay $2000 with a hope to resell at a profit. If they did, they would be pushed out of the brand and we’re all the better for it.

The larger the batch, the lower the market price will be via Vickery auction.

I think CPK as an entity should take more value at the initial sale vs secondary market sellers taking that profit.
 
The people who are consistently fast winners on Friday sales want to keep things status quo.
The people who consistently lose on Friday sales want to change the status quo.
The people who benefit from existing rules want them carved into stone tablets.
The people who suffer under existing rules want new rules even if they can’t define the advantage.
Such is human nature.
The “Me First” movement preceded all the recent social justice movements by thousands of years.

I personally have no need for a boot dagger, so I will not be trying for one.
Unless I become a flipper looking to take advantage and price gouge my friends here.
I am not a flipper.
I value my friends and the good-natured camaraderie here more than the cost associated with getting any knife.

Good luck to all of you in your quest for a Boot Dagger. I’ll be watching from the sidelines. I hope things can remain lighthearted and fun for all involved.

Phil
 
Last edited:
^ Phil, you truth'd it my friend but there is an added subcategory: there are those who would never sell a prized CPK and consider such prized rarity as heirloom material. What their bequeathed doth can only be left to others' speculation. For this very reason, you may still want to subscribe for a chance at, just maybe.
 
Casinostocks said:
I've never met him in person but something tells me that Erich's S&M tendencies make him enjoy bombardment with very hot stones better. I also don't know this for a fact, but I believe it to be very true!
Click to expand...
I was thinking more California style of stoning;)
 
Josh K said:
Lotteries are free to enter. This means there's an advantage to be had by entering everything you can and selling what you don't want. There are people who enter literally every lottery, give away, and drop to improve their changes of getting something.

Lotteries in this fashion are problematic because the number of "folks who want just want the item" is much smaller than the "folks who will enter everything and see what they win." And this makes it unfair.
Click to expand...
Still trying to understand how this differs from the typical frenzied sales :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top