Fallout 4

[Vlad]

Originally Posted by treegate

Obviously you don't understand my posting. I said if nobody HERE on this site wants it then he should keep it and resell it. There should be no reason why he can't profit off of it if nobody here responds to him. It is quite gracious of him to offer it to fellow collectors here but if nobody wants it, why should he cancel it if he can make some money off it? Capitalism is a good thing. He can then sell for whatever amount he wants, even if its for more than what he paid. What is wrong with that? If it me and I offered it here for people at cost to help someone out and nobody responded I would sell it and let the secondary market dictate the price.

Actually, obviously you don't understand my point.

Obviously offering it here is a great thing and one of the reasons why this community is so lovely, but see, believe it or not the world of collectors is larger than this forum and keeping a second order of any sold out item is therefore making someone else in the world that wanted that miss out on getting it at retail price, perhaps even someone that now can't afford it and so only someone with enough money can get it from some reseller, oh, but wait, fuck being a good person and wanting things to be more fair for everybody as a whole when you can have capitalism and personal profit! Or at least that pathetic, tired excuse that resellers, scalpers and their sympathisers always end up using of bringing capitalism into an argument of what's actually the most fair for everybody as if your individual political views absolve you of being the sort of type to not give a shit about anybody else except your profit.

Personally, that's probably why I have a problem with it, I'm not a greedy, selfish, 'capitalist'. I want things to be more fair and to give people a chance and so I can look beyond personal profit and because of all of that, it frankly disgusts me, and in my opinion, as it should any other collector that gives any kind of a shit about their fellow collectors that they might make miss out on something they want.

Actually, to be honest, that's probably the point in that last paragraph, if it wasn't for profiteering, scalping scum, nobody might have to offer up extra unwanted orders because everybody's had a fair chance of getting it in the first place.

[flatout]

Originally Posted by treegate

The link shows the Pipboy Edition which is different than the link he mentioned for the Anthology. Also remember the exchange rate, $99.99 Australian is about $74 U.S. dollars which is still rather high for the Anthology on PC. Australia's goods can be quite expensive, probably due to the high costs shipping products there and they pass that onto their residents which is unfortunate. I ship items to Australia all the time and its one of the most expensive places to ship to.

Oops, I meant to do the Fallout Antholgy... fixed: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01...JP6MWOG546DTRM

Still, anything more then a conversion to conversion rate IMO sucks. That is not saying there are not reasons sometimes... just saying it sucks.

[treegate]

Originally Posted by Vlad

Actually, obviously you don't understand my point.

Obviously offering it here is a great thing and one of the reasons why this community is so lovely, but see, believe it or not the world of collectors is larger than this forum and keeping a second order of any sold out item is therefore making someone else in the world that wanted that miss out on getting it at retail price, perhaps even someone that now can't afford it and so only someone with enough money can get it from some reseller, oh, but wait, fuck being a good person and wanting things to be more fair for everybody as a whole when you can have capitalism and personal profit! Or at least that pathetic, tired excuse that resellers, scalpers and their sympathisers always end up using of bringing capitalism into an argument of what's actually the most fair for everybody as if your individual political views absolve you of being the sort of type to not give a shit about anybody else except your profit.

Personally, that's probably why I have a problem with it, I'm not a greedy, selfish, 'capitalist'. I want things to be more fair and to give people a chance and so I can look beyond personal profit and because of all of that, it frankly disgusts me, and in my opinion, as it should any other collector that gives any kind of a shit about their fellow collectors that they might make miss out on something they want.

Actually, to be honest, that's probably the point in that last paragraph, if it wasn't for profiteering, scalping scum, nobody might have to offer up extra unwanted orders because everybody's had a fair chance of getting it in the first place.

Socialism in it's purest form. Did I say in my post that he should sell for hundreds of dollars over cost? No. I said let the secondary market dictate the price. If someone is willing to pay x amount over retail price who are you to dictate that they shouldn't? Yes I am sure a lot of people would love to have an item like this at cost, and he made the offer here that someone could which is very gracious of him and I support that. But if no one is interested, what obligation does he have or anyone for that matter to make sure he finds someone who can have it cost? None. I'd gladly help someone here and I have several times in getting items at cost and shipping them out using up my time to do so and those people have been very thankful, but where is is stated that a person can't put something up for sale on eBay or Amazon and let the secondary market dictate the price? What harm is there in that in all seriousness?

Let me give you an example. If someone sells an item for fifty dollars over retail or five dollars over retail, so what? That is what someone is willing to pay for the item. Does that make the seller some evil "capitalist" because it sold to someone who was willing to pay an amount that is over retail cost? No, profit is a good thing, that profit a person makes may go to help with other expenses he has so he doesn't have to rely on someone else helping him. Perhaps you live in a country where everyone expects everything to be taken care by their government, despite the fact that its the people who end up covering all the taxes to pay for everyone else. I don't believe in that, you may disagree and have every right to, but at the same time respect those opinions that differ from yours with a bit of dignity and maturity.

For the record, in my line of work I used to help people out by selling items at less than fair market value as these items didn't have "retail" prices, listening to their stories about how they needed the item and would not be able to pay more. So I would help them out only to learn they were in turn reselling the very same item behind my back at a profit so I stopped. So what is more "evil" as you put it, the person who sells for a profit as a business, or the person who lies about needing something and gets the item at a less than market value price only to turn around and resell for themselves at a high profit, yet lying through their teeth initially to gain financially?

[Vlad]

Originally Posted by treegate

Socialism in it's purest form. Did I say in my post that he should sell for hundreds of dollars over cost? No. I said let the secondary market dictate the price. If someone is willing to pay x amount over retail price who are you to dictate that they shouldn't? Yes I am sure a lot of people would love to have an item like this at cost, and he made the offer here that someone could which is very gracious of him and I support that. But if no one is interested, what obligation does he have or anyone for that matter to make sure he finds someone who can have it cost? None. I'd gladly help someone here and I have several times in getting items at cost and shipping them out using up my time to do so and those people have been very thankful, but where is is stated that a person can't put something up for sale on eBay or Amazon and let the secondary market dictate the price? What harm is there in that in all seriousness?

Let me give you an example. If someone sells an item for fifty dollars over retail or five dollars over retail, so what? That is what someone is willing to pay for the item. Does that make the seller some evil "capitalist" because it sold to someone who was willing to pay an amount that is over retail cost? No, profit is a good thing, that profit a person makes may go to help with other expenses he has so he doesn't have to rely on someone else helping him. Perhaps you live in a country where everyone expects everything to be taken care by their government, despite the fact that its the people who end up covering all the taxes to pay for everyone else. I don't believe in that, you may disagree and have every right to, but at the same time respect those opinions that differ from yours with a bit of dignity and maturity.

For the record, in my line of work I used to help people out by selling items at less than fair market value as these items didn't have "retail" prices, listening to their stories about how they needed the item and would not be able to pay more. So I would help them out only to learn they were in turn reselling the very same item behind my back at a profit so I stopped. So what is more "evil" as you put it, the person who sells for a profit as a business, or the person who lies about needing something and gets the item at a less than market value price only to turn around and resell for themselves at a high profit, yet lying through their teeth initially to gain financially?

Look, I think we've found the root of the problem, definitely actually, going by the sort of borderline libertarian spiel you put in the second paragraph.
(Although I like the irony of having the audacity to imply that I wasn't dignified or mature enough whilst you can throw in the sneaky insult that I've heard so often before of, "Perhaps you live in a country where everyone expects everything to be taken care by their government". If you want to be so dignified and mature, try not implying that all people of my nationality are lazy and entitled, y'know, the way I've always seen that used by those closer to your political views. )

We'll never see eye-to-eye on this because, to not mess you about and just be straight, so this isn't meant as a personal attack because frankly I can't be arsed wasting my time on it, I think that typical right-wing, yay! free market, blaming my views on my government for not being some horrific Thatcherite dog-eat-dog hellhole (god forbid we have the NHS and free prescriptions and anything like that! Look at us dirty, Commie fucks, trying to support everybody in as equal a way as possible!)

As for your last paragraph, that was good of you, but really, you got burned by some royal pricks, does that excuse any of the relevant points we've been talking about, well, no. It's not really as relevant in this context, especially with you trying to frame it as a moral problem at the end, they're as bad as each other to me.

Also, to be clear, I didn't use the word "evil", maybe don't try and twist my words to suit your argument...


However, most importantly, you've still missed the entire point.
This is not some political issue and about our respective viewpoints on that but as I have always put it, it is a personal moral issue for me of someone putting personal gain over the fairness of everybody. But re-reading your reply, I can see you don't have an answer to that with how quickly you guide it to the politics side right at the start of paragraph two.

[treegate]

Originally Posted by Vlad

Look, I think we've found the root of the problem, definitely actually, going by the sort of borderline libertarian spiel you put in the second paragraph.
(Although I like the irony of having the audacity to imply that I wasn't dignified or mature enough whilst you can throw in the sneaky insult that I've heard so often before of, "Perhaps you live in a country where everyone expects everything to be taken care by their government". If you want to be so dignified and mature, try not implying that all people of my nationality are lazy and entitled, y'know, the way I've always seen that used by those closer to your political views. )

We'll never see eye-to-eye on this because, to not mess you about and just be straight, so this isn't meant as a personal attack because frankly I can't be arsed wasting my time on it, I think that typical right-wing, yay! free market, blaming my views on my government for not being some horrific Thatcherite dog-eat-dog hellhole (god forbid we have the NHS and free prescriptions and anything like that! Look at us dirty, Commie fucks, trying to support everybody in as equal a way as possible!)

As for your last paragraph, that was good of you, but really, you got burned by some royal pricks, does that excuse any of the relevant points we've been talking about, well, no. It's not really as relevant in this context, especially with you trying to frame it as a moral problem at the end, they're as bad as each other to me.

Also, to be clear, I didn't use the word "evil", maybe don't try and twist my words to suit your argument...


However, most importantly, you've still missed the entire point.
This is not some political issue and about our respective viewpoints on that but as I have always put it, it is a personal moral issue for me of someone putting personal gain over the fairness of everybody. But re-reading your reply, I can see you don't have an answer to that with how quickly you guide it to the politics side right at the start of paragraph two.

Well let's start with the fact that YOU turned it into a personal attack, not I. You first went off spewing your comments unleashed to a certain degree, not I. I only defended my views and rightfully so. You may disagree with me all day long, and for that I understand, but it's how YOU chose to do it. You are allowed to share your opinion and I am allowed to disagree, and vice versa.

You appear to be anti-capitalism by your posting, thus, anti-personal gain. In all seriousness what is wrong with a person making a profit? Using the example of the PipBoy Edition, what is wrong with someone reselling it and making a profit for themselves perhaps using that profit to better their situation, which could be a situation you aren't familiar with? How do you know a person who is profiting isn't using that money to help pay a medical bill or help provide for their family? You don't so it's best not bash someone just because they want to profit when it comes to selling.

Yes I agree, it would be nice if there would be a way for everyone who wanted a PipBoy Edition to get one at retail but in this case what I feel you are completely forgetting is the fact that it is a "Limited Edition". You have a huge demand but a low supply. Generally when that happens, the secondary prices on the supply go up, because demand dictates it.

Follow me with this....let's say you have 1000 PipBoy Editions and you have 5000 people who all want one at retail. You put them up for sale at retail price, some people know about them going up, some people don't. Some people feel it is wise to get one now, while others feel they will wait and get one later in a store (despite the fact that the stores won't have them). You make it clear its a limited edition and for sake of the argument you disclose that there are only 1000 made (where in reality Bethesda never said how many were made but they continued to have the factory produce as many as possible until the factory said "no more" to them).

Now, all 1000 sell out. You have 4000 people who didn't get one. You then have 100 of those people who got one who decide they want to resell it. Now what is fair? For those 100 people to go to the remaining 4000 people and then look at them and say "Ok you are worthy of buying mine at retail, but you over there aren't." How is that fair? Don't you think what would be better is say "Ok I am going to sell mine, and I am going to put it up on x auction website and start it off at retail price, you 4000 people will dictate the final selling price". So now you have 4000 people who can either bid on it
or not. No one is forcing them to bid and purchase it, they are given a choice, they can either bid, or not. Now, someone really wants it, and they are willing to pay 4x the retail price. Is it bad or wrong that someone is willing to pay that? Is it equally wrong for the seller to then accept that as a final winning bid price? No it's not. All 4000 people had in this case a chance to bid, if some didn't want to pay over retail, then that is understandable its a choice pure and simple. For those who can't afford it, perhaps buying a video game is something they should be spending their money on in the first place. Just because a person wants does not mean they are in a place to have it. I want a 2016 Audi R8 convertible. Can I afford it? No. Do I expect a dealership to sell me one at cost just because I want it? No. Should I rethink it and realize that car is not in my future because it doesn't make financial sense? Yes, I should look elsewhere for a car that fits my budget. Same logic here with the game or anything else for that matter.

Now don't go down hard on the seller, as he let the 4000 dictate the final price. Don't be hard on the winning bidder because he really wanted the item, more so than anyone else, and perhaps just because he/she can afford it doesn't make them any less of a person. Now the original owner has sold his for 4x retail price. Under your logic that person is bad, they are a "greedy capitalist" even though you have no clue what this person intends to do with the money. They could be using the extra money to help themselves get out of debt, or help someone in their family with medical expenses, etc. The fact of the matter is YOU assume a person is greedy despite the fact that you don't know what they are using the money for.

At the end of the day we are talking about a "limited edition" item, which I think you haven't realized that when you have something limited, not everyone will be able to get one. It is not my responsibility or obligation to sell it at my cost, there is no law that says I or anyone else has to. If I want to profit or better yet if YOU wanted to profit, then more power to you. You won't be frowned up, better still, you should NOT be frowned upon for selling at a profit, regardless of what that profit amount is, especially if the profit will go to better your life or someone you knows life. Make sense?

Again, we can go round and round about it, but why? We will both disagree so really what is the point? You believe in everyone getting something for the same price, and I do as well to a point, but I am also very much for profit, for capitalism. I want to better my life for myself, I don't want handouts and expect someone to better my life for me. That isn't meant to be a dig at you at all so don't take it that way.

[Vlad]

Originally Posted by treegate

Well let's start with the fact that YOU turned it into a personal attack, not I. You first went off spewing your comments unleashed to a certain degree, not I. I only defended my views and rightfully so. You may disagree with me all day long, and for that I understand, but it's how YOU chose to do it. You are allowed to share your opinion and I am allowed to disagree, and vice versa.

You appear to be anti-capitalism by your posting, thus, anti-personal gain. In all seriousness what is wrong with a person making a profit? Using the example of the PipBoy Edition, what is wrong with someone reselling it and making a profit for themselves perhaps using that profit to better their situation, which could be a situation you aren't familiar with? How do you know a person who is profiting isn't using that money to help pay a medical bill or help provide for their family? You don't so it's best not bash someone just because they want to profit when it comes to selling.

Yes I agree, it would be nice if there would be a way for everyone who wanted a PipBoy Edition to get one at retail but in this case what I feel you are completely forgetting is the fact that it is a "Limited Edition". You have a huge demand but a low supply. Generally when that happens, the secondary prices on the supply go up, because demand dictates it.

Follow me with this....let's say you have 1000 PipBoy Editions and you have 5000 people who all want one at retail. You put them up for sale at retail price, some people know about them going up, some people don't. Some people feel it is wise to get one now, while others feel they will wait and get one later in a store (despite the fact that the stores won't have them). You make it clear its a limited edition and for sake of the argument you disclose that there are only 1000 made (where in reality Bethesda never said how many were made but they continued to have the factory produce as many as possible until the factory said "no more" to them).

Now, all 1000 sell out. You have 4000 people who didn't get one. You then have 100 of those people who got one who decide they want to resell it. Now what is fair? For those 100 people to go to the remaining 4000 people and then look at them and say "Ok you are worthy of buying mine at retail, but you over there aren't." How is that fair? Don't you think what would be better is say "Ok I am going to sell mine, and I am going to put it up on x auction website and start it off at retail price, you 4000 people will dictate the final selling price". So now you have 4000 people who can either bid on it
or not. No one is forcing them to bid and purchase it, they are given a choice, they can either bid, or not. Now, someone really wants it, and they are willing to pay 4x the retail price. Is it bad or wrong that someone is willing to pay that? Is it equally wrong for the seller to then accept that as a final winning bid price? No it's not. All 4000 people had in this case a chance to bid, if some didn't want to pay over retail, then that is understandable its a choice pure and simple.

Now don't go down hard on the seller, as he let the 4000 dictate the final price. Don't be hard on the winning bidder because he really wanted the item, more so than anyone else, and perhaps just because he/she can afford it doesn't make them any less of a person. Now the original owner has sold his for 4x retail price. Under your logic that person is bad, they are a "greedy capitalist" even though you have no clue what this person intends to do with the money. They could be using the extra money to help themselves get out of debt, or help someone in their family with medical expenses, etc. The fact of the matter is YOU assume a person is greedy despite the fact that you don't know what they are using the money for.

At the end of the day we are talking about a "limited edition" item, which I think you haven't realized that when you have something limited, not everyone will be able to get one. It is not my responsibility or obligation to sell it at my cost, there is no law that says I or anyone else has to. If I want to profit or better yet if YOU wanted to profit, then more power to you. You won't be frowned up, better still, you should NOT be frowned upon for selling at a profit, regardless of what that profit amount is, especially if the profit will go to better your life or someone you knows life. Make sense?

Again, we can go round and round about it, but why? We will both disagree so really what is the point? You believe in everyone getting something for the same price, and I do as well to a point, but I am also very much for profit, for capitalism. I want to better my life for myself, I don't want handouts and expect someone to better my life for me. That isn't meant to be a dig at you at all so don't take it that way.

This is what I meant by the not seeing eye-to-eye, that we should of course just leave it as we obviously don't agree but I'll answer the points you asked about as a courtesy for typing such a long answer to me in the hope that we can agree to disagree and at least leave it somewhat amicably.


Now my problem with the personal gain is in the way that it's done, the way scalping and reselling is done screws others and it's that selfishness, to give it a name, that I find abhorrent.
Sure, you might have all these justifications but you're still doing it in a way that screws other people for your own gains. (Although, really this isn't a dig at you but as a genuinely funny point, perhaps they wouldn't have to desperately try to pay for medical bills if there was something like, oh, I don't know, the NHS?) When I was in a bad place and could've used the extra money I could've made a killing off of CEs but I didn't because it would have gone against my morals of screwing other people for my gain, it simply wouldn't have been right to me, justification or no justification.

And again, you're not picking up on my point when you claim that I'm forgetting how a limited edition works. I'm obviously well aware that some people will miss out and be disappointed, what I'm meaning is that things would be better if they at least got a fair chance of securing the item through people only ordering as much as they actually need.

Also, as far as your scenario goes, it's off too, the 100 resellers wouldn't be choosing who's worthy or not, if those 100 were returned to the pot it would be that chance again for someone to get it, it isn't a case of deciding who is worthy as far as someone wanting one for themselves and not profit goes so without that understanding of what I'm meaning it shakes the rest of the scenario, however what I will say is that your point of the person paying 4x more is also flawed in this argument because I personally see that also as the problem with reselling in real life, again, it comes to that difference in viewpoint where I believe that just because you have more money, that shouldn't give you an advantage over someone else and so again, that falls to the unfair category.

And another again, the justification does not matter when it impacts others in this way, that's my point also that you aren't getting, the very nature of scalping and reselling is screwing people over for your personal gain, that's the issue I have, people could justify almost anything, it doesn't mean that their actions are then justifiable.

I won't take your last point as a dig if you don't take mine as a dig then because, the same as you, it isn't meant to be, I just want to explain my viewpoint, I am very much for fairness and equality in every way and I don't care for valuing personal profit over other, more important things, whether that's in something as ultimately futile as collectors editions or in education, healthcare, etc. I also want to better my life through hard work and I don't want 'handouts' but I also don't see those that need help in times of need or things like the NHS or free prescriptions or free University as bad things that eat into my precious hoard of personal wealth, if I have to pay more tax to keep things like this for me and for everyone else, so be it, I'll be happy with that if it makes things better for everyone.

[Toasty the Baker]

Okay, once the posts start getting THAT long I think it's time to simply agree to disagree.

[Vlad]

Originally Posted by Toasty the Baker

Okay, once the posts start getting THAT long I think it's time to simply agree to disagree.

You shurrup with your being sensible!

Haha, I'm leaving it now anyway, I'm glad we've managed to explain our differences but nothing else can really be added now.

[flatout]

I will say something, though as a point of fact... all retail selling is by definition selling something for more then they bought it for. Your local store does this.

That doesn't deal with the limited nature of things I know... but the limited part and people buying more 2 CEs instead of one is just something everyone has their opinion on (and there are points to both sides... though my personal opinion is on side is based more off emotion towards it instead of the actual realities of it (not talking about this discussion above, just in general)).

Capitalism is pretty immoral... that is a fact IMO (I know some of us Americans have a hard time saying or even seeing this as during the cold war there was propaganda that anything but Capitalism was evil and if you were any of those you were a traitor and a spy).

Truth is there is no good system... why you ask? Because the people who run it are fallible and inevitably corrupt (which in turn corrupt even a perfect system if such a thing could be thought up). Communism is actually a good theory, but as we have seen human nature abuses such a system from the top (and same goes for our system once you get most of the wealth in 1% of the populations hands like it is now).

It is all a crap shoot really guys. You have to make the best of whatever system you try to make your living in. Try to find the right balance for your sensibilities.

Just my half cent on social systems.

[CheapAssassin]

Real Fallout Confirm in near future.

And this from Flatout.

Truth is there is no good system... why you ask? Because the people who run it are fallible and inevitably corrupt (which in turn corrupt even a perfect system if such a thing could be thought up). Communism is actually a good theory, but as we have seen human nature abuses such a system from the top (and same goes for our system once you get most of the wealth in 1% of the populations hands like it is now).