Beren Said (17/08):> "Want to talk about
- how they make profit from people selling fake items, overpriced items, so called rare items,... "

I think you have a legitimate point on fake items, and I personally believe eBay turns a blind eye to the extent of the fakes sold through it. Especially with autographed items, one only has to look at some of the regular purveyors of signed crap to see these guys are shifting thousands upon thousands of suspect items and clearly not getting brought to account.

However, I think it is any sellers prerogative to overprice an item, so long as that item is genuine and accurately described. A free market is just that. The seller is free to ask any price, and the buyer is free to utterly reject that price.

From a sellers point of view, the correct price of an item at any given point in time is simply what one person in the market will pay. Non-eBay sellers are every bit as guilty on asking daft prices for books. You (Beren) recently commented on putting the odd item up for sale at an excessive price that you don't really expect to sell. [Beren 17/08/10 wrote: "it indeed happens we list books at prices we do not expect to sell at. An example was the Cor Blok painting Rene had listed on his website, he did not expect to sell it at the asking price, but was willing to let it go if someone was crazy enough to pay 'that amount' for it"]

A quick search for "Tolkien" on ABE will list a whole bunch of overpriced tomes (which also typically won't sell). I stand by the right of any seller to request any price they feel like, just as I stand by my right not to buy the items. With regards to the classification as "rare", this is really just a totally subjective term which would be impossible to police the accuracy of. Is 500 copies rare, 100 copies, 10 copies? Depends on the item and the size of the prospective market for that item. I think it is up to the buyer to know what they consider to be an appropriate price and to be aware of how scarce or otherwise a book is. Information is power and it it up to the buyer to be informed.

"- how they don't allow people to comment on items, and leave the 'seller' (including people selling fake items, overpriced items, so called rare items,... ) to decide to post q&a's on the items, while it should be the other way around"

I basically agree, although I'm not sure how you would stop competitors deliberately sabotaging each others auctions. I think making the display of Q&A along with responses appear automatically might be a possibility, though, subject to profanity filters being employed.

>" - how they undermine the book selling business by allowing this"

eBay couldn't care less about the book selling business and, honestly, why should they? The traditional book business (selling via means other than eBay) is a competitor. They *should* care about their customers and promote honesty, safety, transparency, etc. [which they claim to, but don't], but caring about a specific business is probably not in their remit.

All eBay cares about is taking a percentage on transactions, and it wants the highest volume of highest value transactions possible. The reason for all the postage changes with regards to books was quite obviously to bump the price of each transaction so they could make more money. It is important not to forget that eBay are in it for the money and absolutely nothing else.

>"- how they could change some things to make all better"

They don't want it to be better or it would be. They simply want to make as much money as possible. They don't care about buyers or sellers, just completed transactions.

Fundamentally, the only way to fix eBay is to vote with your feet and not use it. Personally, I have pretty much abandoned it as a buyer as prices are usually unrealistic (and I can't generally be bothered to sell books as it is too much effort for the handful that I would like to be rid of).

Stu

Christina and I still keep an eye on eBay and very occasionally pick up an item (I just bought an out-of-print classical CD), but the climate of the site has changed, with proportionately many more professional sellers and straightforward commercial goods, which translates into fewer bargains and unusual lots, less fun for the buyer.

As for overpricing - my apologies to those who have heard me tell this story before - there was once a book dealer who had a large number of Tolkien items and priced most of them very high (relative to the time, some thirty years ago, though some of the prices would be high even today). Somehow we came to talk on the phone, and I let him know that all of the Tolkien collectors I knew, as well as my impecunious self, couldn't possibly afford most of what he was offering (I did buy a few things more reasonably priced). He replied that he was deliberately pushing the envelope on Tolkien prices, having bought high at auction and now priced high in his catalogue on the basis of the auction values, so as to make as much as he could - it was going to fund his childrens' education, he said - and he could wait until he got what he was asking. Well, although a handful of very well-heeled dealers have been able to do so, this one couldn't, or wouldn't, wait too long. Within a year or so, I believe, I saw the remaining stock offered at Sotheby's New York, and it sold at a relative loss.

Wayne

I suppose I should clarify what I mean about Tolkien books being a good investment: I am not buying these books for re-sale, and plan on keeping them forever. However, I also wont buy a book that I think is overpriced or lacks value. Somewhere in the back of my mind is a part of me which wont part with the money unless it seems (to me') like it's a reasonable price. My definition of reasonable price is basically buying slightly under the going Market price. So, you could say that most of my purchases to date are already good investments because I could sell them today for a small to moderate profit. I have, in fact, recently done this with one of the books on my blog- bought two and sold one for a 20% profit. I am not looking to make money out of my collection, but likewise I am not going to buy any books that I think are well overpriced.

I just hate it when people have this much to say; it provokes too much thought! --I want to reply to so many (everything!) things others (everyone!) have said & I don't know if I have the stamina to type that much...

An aside to Bruffyboy: I think we probably all get what you mean regarding value, price etc. I think everyone likes to challenge their own collecting credentials; test them if you like --to make sure they aren't overpaying for items. (Paying market value is fine; paying under market value even better!) Inevitably this can appear as if one is overly preoccupied with price & money. I certainly can't deny thinking in this way on occasion, although, like you, I have no plans to buy & sell books. I haven't sold anything I've bought. So, I think I get where you’re coming from.

But, Beren! I read this a while back, & just can't let it pass without comment. Firstly, Stu --I couldn't agree more wholeheartedly with almost all of what you said. You quoted Beren at one point, and I'll put his comment up again (--from earlier in this thread.)

. An example was the Cor Blok painting Rene had listed on his website, he did not expect to sell it at the asking price, but was willing to let it go if someone was crazy enough to pay 'that amount' for it. It did however sell and both parties are happy. So does it mean this painting is worth this price? Not really, but some collectors do spent crazy money to obtain unique items like that.

Beren

I'm sorry, & I'm not having a go here at you guys as individuals [I'm only using how I've interpreted this statement as an example], but this is the perfect example of what should never happen when dealing with any seller. Buyers, especially when buying from reputable Tolkien specialist dealers (as in this case), trust you guys unquestionably to price honestly; as discussed, this would be in relation to the price you acquired the item for & what price you might reasonably think the item is worth. (Granted, the latter is subjective.) [Italics added for clarity -BH]

It is not [or would not be], however, acceptable (without seriously damaging your reputation as an honest, trustworthy, & ethically-minded seller) to put stuff up at 'crazy' [i.e. grossly overpriced even in your own judgement] prices & to pose this [a] disingenuous argument about market value. Unless the buyer went into this sale with their eyes wide (wide) open (& was fully aware of how overpriced the seller admitted this item was), then this kind of pricing policy is [or rather, would be] shameful profiteering & dishonesty by the back door. [Italics added for clarity -BH]

Let’s examine what was [or at least what I thought you] said. Your basically saying [this is what it sounded like] this: you buy an item for, let’s say (simplistically), £1000. You decide, what with all your overheads & your legitimate right to make money, that the item could be sold for £2000 --&, as well as making you a profit, this would also fairly reflect its current value. [This would be fine.] [But] Because you personally don’t want to part with the item (it’s nice; it’s unique etc), rather than just not listing it for sale, you list it for a grossly overinflated (overinflated in your opinion) price [e.g. £4000] with the delusional self-justification that if you are going to have to part with it --you’ll only do so if the up-side is great financial gain to yourself. [Italics added for clarity -BH]

This [hypothetical example] is wrong [if it were to happen] on many levels, but mostly because some buyers genuinely (& it is very hard, subjective even, to price unique items) have no firm idea of fair value --& are [would be] relying on you to adhere to reasonable practises in pricing items for sale. It is not justifiable to simply fall back on some old mantra that equates to: if people are willing to pay the price I list an item for, then it’s their own fault if they’re ripped off! --Why don’t [or rather, why wouldn't] you just not list it at this price? [Italics added for clarity -BH]

[Italics have been added for clarity to most of the above paragraphs, as they (originally) were clearly a mis-interpretation of what Beren said. Furthermore they were far too specific to the example Beren gave; the specifics of which I new nothing about --I should not have commented in this way. BH 5th Sept. 2010]

Maybe I’m over reacting slightly to this (casual?) comment. Does nobody else think that this is wrong? All I can say is, I sincerely hope this doesn’t happen with non-unique items too, where (to be frank) it is even less justifiable.

Second point:

Very important are dust jackets, for example the 1st US The Hobbit jacket is in itself more valuable then the book itself. Any flaw in the jackets can reduce the value of any book enormously.

Beren

I’m sure this is true, but can we concede that this is a decidedly modern phenomenon? And, that this is a kind of chicken-and-egg scenario. Clearly buyers, new to collecting, discover very early on that dustjackets are of extreme importance, simply because the market says they are important! The longer you are exposed to this concept of worth, the more you are inclined to believe it. In any case this is purely (hopefully) of neurotic importance to the collector only! (--& I’m a signed up member of this club!) Yes, the jacket can be of literary and bibliographical importance, but this hardly justifies its importance over the printed matter itself.

Lastly:

If you buy a brand new edition today and it looks *any* different in ten years time than it does today, then IMHO, you don't know how to look after your books!

-Stu

Spines (of books like the big oversized 2004 Silmarillion) do struggle to hold the weight of the pages if standing upright. Ten years on your shelf and these are going to struggle to remain square & tight I think.

Anyway, it’s hot & I’ve got my fan out. It’s heavy; made of gold I think. But it’s wafting a terrible smell my way...

BH

Khamul wrote just now -

"Maybe I’m over reacting slightly to this (casual?) comment. Does nobody else think that this is wrong? "

No, I don't think you're over-reacting. I wasn't too happy with this comment, either. I had thought about contacting Rene to see what his bottom price would be but, (saving yer honour's presence, Rene), in my experience Rene tends to be a bit immovable when it comes to asking price. Which is his right, of course.

I'd have liked to have bought one of Cor Blok's paintings because they are rare, and they have a certain style. But in the end, I decided against purchasing this example, or making an offer for it, at least partly because it was (to my mind) overpriced . I'm dismayed to see that both Beren, and Rene himself, felt the same way.

I'm not having a go at Rene, I'm just taking this as an example as Beren specifically brought it up. I just don't think this is any way for any seller to treat any buyer in any market.

BH

...and I'm agreeing with you...

Well... I think you have to see it a bit differently here. Rene was actually selling the only Cor Blok available anywhere world-wide. It is there for correct to say that he could ask 1000 Euro, but then again 10.000 Euro for it. There has not been any Cor Blok on the market for 10 years and the only ones that changed hands in the last few years were sold for much more he had listed the last painting. And these were sold without even hitting the market. These items are extremely hard to find, try to find one Cor Blok for sale please... and if you do finally find it, then try to stick a value on it. You can call it overpriced, but for any of the items I have in mind this is actually not the case, since if we find one person willing to buy this item then we have to let it go. I'm not talking about normal limited editions here, this is about unique one of kind items...

It are these items that are difficult to stick a price on them. They are extremely rare, wonderful and very much unique in all respects. These are the items that on Sotheby's sometimes sell for 20000 Euro, sometimes for 50000 Euro (probably depending on the weather). And yes, Rene had it listed at a crazy price and he would admit that, and he would in conversations with clients tell exactly that. It is not incorrect, since how much do you need to ask for such an item? Do you expect dealers to list all the 'one of a kind' items for take away prices? No, don't think so... we don't have an unlimited supply of these unique items. And we are not selling hundreds of them a year, more like a few over a couple of years.

We tend to call them 'crazy' prizes, and we tend to say "if anyone pays this amount then they can have it"... it is easy to say we as dealers are wrong, but we are the crazy guys who spent the big amounts of money first to acquire these unique items and we never know if it will sell in the end. How many times we buy items for a lot of money and in the end sell it for 'much' less and actually loose on something? You don't want to know...

All I wanted to talk you guys about is to show a little how we operate and that it is not so simple making profit on books or to think you can just buy some deluxe editions and hope to make profit later...
it is a market that goes up and down and sometimes we win some and sometimes we loose some (and we all have a job next to the book selling business, except Rene but then again he sells more then books - and is not really a rare Tolkien book specialist either). As for myself I always handle the same profit rate and never bought and 1000 GBP book and sold it for 2000 GBP, that is not my way of dealing.

But when it comes to truly one of a kind items, that we maybe have held for over 10 years, we can sometimes list them at the so called 'crazy' prices; we could easily sell them on Sotheby's or wait for a buyer... is this incorrect? No it is not. If we sell the item, we will never see it again, will never be able to buy a similar item again (because they will only come through auctions and we ourselves will not be able to buy them either), so walk in our shoes and then say it is unfair of us to stick a 'crazy' price on them.

I know the person who bought the last Cor Blok from Rene, and he knew that Rene had listed it at a high price; and still he bought it. Why? Because he could and because he really wanted to own a Cor Blok. In fact I had booth the buyer, Rene and Cor Blok around a table a day before the person bought the painting... and had discussed all about selling prices, so they were all very aware of what was going on.

Does this mean something wrong was done here? The buyer knew he was paying a lot of money for something truly unique. Rene knew he was selling something for a 'crazy' price, but on the other hand would not sell it for less either (if you know Rene he is firm on his prices). So why is this a problem? I don't see any problem... did Rene treat the market wrongly? Anyways... we are not talking about items you can buy all over the place and try to sell them for big bucks; we don't sell fake items for big bucks, we don't make tons of profit and we are most of the time fighting hard to keep going. We don't push up prices, like some book dealers like to do, in fact I would say the opposite.

Beren, I'm genuinely not having a pop. Looking back at my post (& I'll leave it un-edited, so others can judge how unfair I might have been) I may have made an error in specifically quoting you & discussing the Rene example in particular --for that I apologise if I've offended you; or perhaps (put better) totally mis-represented what actually happened in this case. No slur was intended at all against you or Rene. Please accept my apologies.

My post (rant?) also wasn't meant to suggest you're making a killing out of selling books; or that you're inflating prices or otherwise manipulating the markets. As I said, I wasn't specifically talking about you at all (--& I hope it is seen that most of my comments were generalisations using this example as a starting point.) [Last comment added for clarity -BH]

I'm not going to patronise you by heaping praise on your site (& bookstore) either --I think you know how I feel & view your own set-up. And, I ('we' I'm sure) do appreciate you posting (at length) regarding the other side of the trade i.e. from the sellers perspective. I do want to hear what you have to say; & not just so I can shoot you down or have a grumble (--altho' it might appear that way!)

But, why are you calling them 'crazy' prices? You made me think that you (& R) were of the opinion that the price you listed this particular item for was in your own opinion higher than it should have been (i.e. more than it was worth) --& that you were surprised that someone took the bait. Clearly I mis-interpreted quite how specific you were being i.e. in discussing purely one-off/unique (& therefore extremely difficult to price) items.

I'll try & come back to this a little less personally.

BH

Thanks for that, Beren. (wish we had a 'thumbs up' icon here).

Let's take a step back for a moment - and please bear in mind that, as always I can only speak for myself in these matters.

It may seem that we (or rather I) am taking a rather stern view of a specific dealer's pricing practices based on a report by one of our fellow forum members. In light of Beren's post just now, and looking back on his previous post (on p.7 of this thread) I think I am probably being too hard on Rene whom, I have to say, I have met on several occassions, and from whom I have bought some good stuff over the years. I've always been satisfied with my purchases, and find Rene a very kind and knowledgable person to do business with. I would recommend him to anyone.

I think what struck me as possibly an 'unkind' remark in Beren's post was this:

"An example was the Cor Blok painting Rene had listed on his website, he did not expect to sell it at the asking price, but was willing to let it go if someone was crazy enough to pay 'that amount' for it. "

On reflection, this seems to me to have been 'said' in what I would call a 'vaunting' style - the sort of thing I imagine one might hear behind the scenes at a book fair between dealers: 'I got rid of that book; you'll never guess what I got for it...' - that sort of thing is ok between one dealer and another. But when uttered on a site such as this, largely populated by those of us on the other side of the dealer's table, it might seem to smack of triumphalism.

But taking a further step back, I am just as 'guilty' of doing the same on the other side of the coin. I'm quite happy to tell my fellow collectors about the bargains I've managed to acquire over the years. Swings and roundabouts. The difference being that these conversations usually take place off - forum, often face-to face, so the person I'm speaking to can see and hear my expressions of gladness (when I've nabbed something good) or sadness (when one got away).

But I'd like to look again at Beren's original message: the passage which irked me comes from a larger portion of his post.

"In my book there is no such thing as aiming to make "as much profit as possible" ... We most of the time work with a fixed margin we aim at (that mostly includes free shipping costs, insurance and possibility for a reduction)... resulting in that when we manage to track down a very rare copy and after some negotiating pay a certain amount (mostly depending on what we believe the book can be sold for); the selling price is already set in the process.

So sometimes we get lucky and are able to sell some books at a price we think is very good or lower then we would actually estimate it. But since we were able to buy it cheap we can offer it cheap. Some dealers prefer to add a lot extra, but we prefer selling and finding a collector to treasure this rare book above making monster profits. Guess it is because we truly love to 'find' books and find our pleasure in the 'hunt' and not so much in the 'gain'.

Of course, since we are collectors ourselves, we always find it hard to sell some pieces or do not think it is time yet to sell some pieces... I know Rene also follows that rule... it indeed happens we list books at prices we do not expect to sell at. An example was the Cor Blok painting Rene had listed on his website, he did not expect to sell it at the asking price, but was willing to let it go if someone was crazy enough to pay 'that amount' for it. It did however sell and both parties are happy. So does it mean this painting is worth this price? Not really, but some collectors do spent crazy money to obtain unique items like that."

Sorry for the long quote, but I feel it was necessary, for my understanding at least, to put Beren's words into context. I do not now think that he was being triumphal in this post. I certainly don't think that he was implying any improper practice by himself (implicitly) nor Rene (explicitly). For my part, I'd like to withdraw my earlier remarks, and I offer my apologies to Beren and to Rene for any hurt caused.

*note - Khamul posted while I was away editing this (rather long) post. K. makes the interesting point about why B. used the word 'crazy'. Actually, it makes sense - I can imagine Rene using the word 'crazy', but in a self-deprecating way. If I'd heard him say this in person, doubtless I'd laugh along with him, taking the meaning in the way I think he meant it. To me at least, this is another example of the internet's frustrating inability to send clear 'messages' of a person's real intentions. To sum up - if I had any doubts about Rene's intended meaning, as reported by Beren, I have none now.