Thoughts on price transparency?

Any legal tactic a dealer chooses is his to employ as far as I am concerned. Whether or not it's worth the seller's attempts to try it depends upon his evaluation of reputational risk versus profit. I, for one, would not find it to my benefit to deal with a vendor that employs illegal, unethical, or semi-fraudulent methods. And, since I don't have any way to verify the "transparency" data, it then becomes just so much bunkum to me, far more likely to be a manipulative falsehood than not. Just as I don't deal with rude, antagonistic, condescending people, I would not deal with those that attempted to perpetrate this tactic upon me. And once a dealer tried to play me with this tactic, his reputation would be trashed with me.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I have never had a buyer horn in on what my cost or spread is on an item. If lowball offer may just get rid of them or give them line (like below).

I have had sellers volunteer at shows “that’s just $5 over cost” (world gold coin), or “I operate on a 4 pct spread” (wholesaler - boxes of slabbed coins), “it’s $100 which is lowest consignor will do.”

So if I were pressed on what my spread is borrow something from playbooks above or use some of my own lines. My cost in an item, how I operate is confidential with the seller, proprietary data of my business not their business.

For unreasonable offers (asking for outrageous discounts above 10 pct) just use one of plays above, make counter offer, or get rid of them. You could ask them “have one sell me at that?” Shuts them up every time. I have no use for tirekicker low ballers. If they want buy at wholesale - go open coin shop.

 

This may be my one out of a thousand posts where I agree with @GDJMSP . Most any statement of “transparency” from a dealer can be completely made up. Thus the utility is immediately nil.

Coins are not fair trade coffee beans or “blood” diamonds. If you like the coin and the price is fair based on your due diligence - that’s all that matters.

 

I'll have to agree to disagree about only buying from those you know. A large amount of my purchases have been from people I never knew and still don't. That's just the nature of the online marketplace (like eBay). And the vast majority of those purchases were perfectly fine (I'd estimate at least 95% positive). In fact, a good deal of my favorite coins were bought from online people I didn't know. I've had more issues with electronics purchased online but even those were easily settled via eBay buyer protection or my credit card.

As to the eBay feedback, I agree that there are issues with it. All I was doing was putting together a plausible hypothetical where all three sellers had the same percentage. Like it or not, that percentage sways a large number of buyers. I was controlling for the feedback factor (since different feedback percentages would lead many to exclude the lower ones).

 

And for me it's one where I disagree more than I do with him in most threads.

Like I wrote a few posts back, transparency that is made up will often be weeded out from the market (since it can be checked to a certain extent). And the utility is certainly not nil. When you catch someone that makes up their "transparency," then you get a better view of that seller's integrity (which can be a big part of choosing to deal or not to deal with them).

 

It would have to be voluntary by sellers, as coin sales and numismatic interests are one of the least regulated businesses in the country.

Who would regulate the “transparency”?

What ramifications would a non-compliant seller face?

What is the ultimate goal of this additional bureaucracy?

I’m not a dealer, but as a buyer - I see little benefit of such “transparency” when it can not be verified or believed in any way. This is a hobby where the buyer needs to do their due diligence before making purchases.

The past financial details regarding exchanges of a coin are irrelevant to the contract that seller and buyer are entering into now. If seller and buyer are happy with the terms of sale, that’s all that matters. Provenance is one thing; bureaucracy is a whole other beast.

 

There wouldn't be any bureaucracy and my plan would operate based on the open market. No one would have to participate and no one would audit the numbers. The buyers would judge the accuracy of the information based on one or more of the following:
(1) their own research and understanding of the market
(2) reviews/feedback from other buyers
(3) feelings ...least rational but potentially most powerful

 

You are glaringly correct when you say that their is a general antagonistic attitude toward business these days. I face it every day at my office. In recent years I have been asked to enter into project contracts that require me to dictate my cost in a spreadsheet. That spreadsheet then calculates a 5% overhead for my business. Ha! No business alive can survive on a 5% overhead. I refuse to enter into these contracts until they remove that verbiage.... And yes, that is very much a sign of the times..... But consider this. If I have to call my lawyer, I immediately know that call will cost me $300.00 an hour. And buddy, she has that stopwatch running the second I call. The only product I am receiving for that cash outlay is her opinion. And I don’t always agree with or use it!

My point is this. I am the best at what I do and I know that and that makes my product worth more than 5% overhead. My lawyer is relentless. She is worth every cent of $300.00 an hour to me....... If your years of numismatic experience gain you a purchasing edge, you have earned the monetary reward for your years of experience. That’s my two cents worth anyway...

 

It’ll never happen.

 

Never is a powerful word. Never say never.
I've considered doing it.