22LR, what happened this time, they are everywhere

[WebSnyper]

I immediately delete any email I get from cheaperthandirt.com & don't even see what their prices are on anything.

There should be an unsubscribe button. Might save you the small effort of deleting and send them a bit of a message if others follow suit.

 

[Ingomike]

You guys will be right at home whining about a private company selling their product in this thread.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/break-room/478936-guess-who-gouging-again.html

Unbelieveable that freedom loving gun folks worry so much about what a company does and harbors resentment like a scorned lover.

 

[WebSnyper]

You guys will be right at home whining about a private company selling their product in this thread.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/break-room/478936-guess-who-gouging-again.html

Unbelieveable that freedom loving gun folks worry so much about what a company does and harbors resentment like a scorned lover.

It is absolutely their right to do so. It's also my right to take my business elsewhere, for as long as I choose to do so.

 

[Ingomike]

It is absolutely their right to do so. It's also my right to take my business elsewhere, for as long as I choose to do so.

Agreed, who has the right to to libel a legal company selling legal product on the Internet?

 

[Mongo59]

If what they say is false it is libel, but what if it is true?

 

[johny5]

It is absolutely their right to do so. It's also my right to take my business elsewhere, for as long as I choose to do so.

I won't speak for Mike, though I suspect he may agree. It is not that anyone questions your right to take your business wherever you choose. That's not the issue. Its the visceral reaction that people have and the vocal response that accompanies it that leaves others cold.

Do y'all not see the irony? Yes, you do have the right to take your business elsewhere. Do that.

What I've seen in the past is - people get to the point that they CANNOT take their business elsewhere, because the so-called 'gougers' are the only ones who are able to maintain a stock. Why are they able to maintain a stock? It is because they are setting their prices north of the market price. This is the only way to locate the appropriate price in a free market - raise the price until demand and supply are back in balance.

I have never bought anything from Cheaper than Dirt. I am not affiliated with them in any way. But, I grow weary of watching the relentless attacks on their business by those who appear to have little working knowledge of how goods are traded in a free market. Our experiences in modern-day, stable retail environments have led us to believe that prices should not fluctuate - that any variation in price beyond some menial percent is evidence of foul-play. Nope. It is the free market. When times are uncertain, prices can and should reflect that reality!

For anyone who complains about the heightened prices, I issue the following challenge; Are you willing to sell the firearms and ammo that you have at the price you previously paid? Without exception I have received a resounding 'NO'. This is an instinctive recognition that the value of that good is higher, even if only temporarily.

Our markets are remarkably stable the majority of the time. Sadly this leads many to have an unrealistic expectation of stability and a resulting tendency to assign motives in circumstances where those unrealistic expectations are not met.

You have the right to attack Cheaper than Dirt - but it says more about you than it does about them.

 

[Ingomike]

I won't speak for Mike, though I suspect he may agree. It is not that anyone questions your right to take your business wherever you choose. That's not the issue. Its the visceral reaction that people have and the vocal response that accompanies it that leaves others cold.

Do y'all not see the irony? Yes, you do have the right to take your business elsewhere. Do that.

What I've seen in the past is - people get to the point that they CANNOT take their business elsewhere, because the so-called 'gougers' are the only ones who are able to maintain a stock. Why are they able to maintain a stock? It is because they are setting their prices north of the market price. This is the only way to locate the appropriate price in a free market - raise the price until demand and supply are back in balance.

I have never bought anything from Cheaper than Dirt. I am not affiliated with them in any way. But, I grow weary of watching the relentless attacks on their business by those who appear to have little working knowledge of how goods are traded in a free market. Our experiences in modern-day, stable retail environments have led us to believe that prices should not fluctuate - that any variation in price beyond some menial percent is evidence of foul-play. Nope. It is the free market. When times are uncertain, prices can and should reflect that reality!

For anyone who complains about the heightened prices, I issue the following challenge; Are you willing to sell the firearms and ammo that you have at the price you previously paid? Without exception I have received a resounding 'NO'. This is an instinctive recognition that the value of that good is higher, even if only temporarily.

Our markets are remarkably stable the majority of the time. Sadly this leads many to have an unrealistic expectation of stability and a resulting tendency to assign motives in circumstances where those unrealistic expectations are not met.

You have the right to attack Cheaper than Dirt - but it says more about you than it does about them.

I'm Ingomike and I approve this message...

 

[ljk]

You have the right to attack Cheaper than Dirt - but it says more about you than it does about them.

 

[johny5]

@ljk - I have a hunch about the meaning of your posting, but I do not think it would be fair to respond based on those assumptions. Help me understand the point of the picture so that I can make a response, unbiased by my own interpretation of your intent.

 

[Farmerjon]

I won't speak for Mike, though I suspect he may agree. It is not that anyone questions your right to take your business wherever you choose. That's not the issue. Its the visceral reaction that people have and the vocal response that accompanies it that leaves others cold.

Do y'all not see the irony? Yes, you do have the right to take your business elsewhere. Do that.

What I've seen in the past is - people get to the point that they CANNOT take their business elsewhere, because the so-called 'gougers' are the only ones who are able to maintain a stock. Why are they able to maintain a stock? It is because they are setting their prices north of the market price. This is the only way to locate the appropriate price in a free market - raise the price until demand and supply are back in balance.

I have never bought anything from Cheaper than Dirt. I am not affiliated with them in any way. But, I grow weary of watching the relentless attacks on their business by those who appear to have little working knowledge of how goods are traded in a free market. Our experiences in modern-day, stable retail environments have led us to believe that prices should not fluctuate - that any variation in price beyond some menial percent is evidence of foul-play. Nope. It is the free market. When times are uncertain, prices can and should reflect that reality!

For anyone who complains about the heightened prices, I issue the following challenge; Are you willing to sell the firearms and ammo that you have at the price you previously paid? Without exception I have received a resounding 'NO'. This is an instinctive recognition that the value of that good is higher, even if only temporarily.

Our markets are remarkably stable the majority of the time. Sadly this leads many to have an unrealistic expectation of stability and a resulting tendency to assign motives in circumstances where those unrealistic expectations are not met.

You have the right to attack Cheaper than Dirt - but it says more about you than it does about them.

Johny5, even though I don't post often, good on you. Well said in a well thought way.

 

[WebSnyper]

I won't speak for Mike, though I suspect he may agree. It is not that anyone questions your right to take your business wherever you choose. That's not the issue. Its the visceral reaction that people have and the vocal response that accompanies it that leaves others cold.

Do y'all not see the irony? Yes, you do have the right to take your business elsewhere. Do that.

What I've seen in the past is - people get to the point that they CANNOT take their business elsewhere, because the so-called 'gougers' are the only ones who are able to maintain a stock. Why are they able to maintain a stock? It is because they are setting their prices north of the market price. This is the only way to locate the appropriate price in a free market - raise the price until demand and supply are back in balance.

I have never bought anything from Cheaper than Dirt. I am not affiliated with them in any way. But, I grow weary of watching the relentless attacks on their business by those who appear to have little working knowledge of how goods are traded in a free market. Our experiences in modern-day, stable retail environments have led us to believe that prices should not fluctuate - that any variation in price beyond some menial percent is evidence of foul-play. Nope. It is the free market. When times are uncertain, prices can and should reflect that reality!

For anyone who complains about the heightened prices, I issue the following challenge; Are you willing to sell the firearms and ammo that you have at the price you previously paid? Without exception I have received a resounding 'NO'. This is an instinctive recognition that the value of that good is higher, even if only temporarily.

Our markets are remarkably stable the majority of the time. Sadly this leads many to have an unrealistic expectation of stability and a resulting tendency to assign motives in circumstances where those unrealistic expectations are not met.

You have the right to attack Cheaper than Dirt - but it says more about you than it does about them.

I agree with this, and have not been particularly vocal about CtD. (responding since you quoted me) CtD had other business practices years ago that precluded my doing any business with them (as you say because there were better alternatives during normal market conditions). Also, since the products they deal in are ones that I have been able to purchase during normal market conditions. I do not find myself needing to utilize their services during abnormal market times, like now.

I'm also not the guy who repeatedly shops at Walmart, and gets bent when they want to check my receipt, posts about it online, etc. If I don't like their practices, I go elsewhere.

Their items, their rules, their reputation. I'm all for capitalism, and free market (no "but" in that statement.)

CtD will do what they need to do to stay in business. If consumers were rational they would respond appropriately. However most consumers do not act rationally (whether in times of stress or not). Neither shouting from the rooftops about unfair treatment nor buying crazy amounts at crazy prices is rational behavior. If the market were rational on both ends, these things would resolve themselves.

 

[Bookmark]

While I agree that this is how a free market functions (very well stated Johny5 BTW), in this instance I think what sticks in many peoples craw is that it seems to be the same internet retailer each time. They could at least pass around the "high water mark" duties

 

[nonobaddog]

I won't speak for Mike, though I suspect he may agree. It is not that anyone questions your right to take your business wherever you choose. That's not the issue. Its the visceral reaction that people have and the vocal response that accompanies it that leaves others cold.

Do y'all not see the irony? Yes, you do have the right to take your business elsewhere. Do that.

What I've seen in the past is - people get to the point that they CANNOT take their business elsewhere, because the so-called 'gougers' are the only ones who are able to maintain a stock. Why are they able to maintain a stock? It is because they are setting their prices north of the market price. This is the only way to locate the appropriate price in a free market - raise the price until demand and supply are back in balance.

I have never bought anything from Cheaper than Dirt. I am not affiliated with them in any way. But, I grow weary of watching the relentless attacks on their business by those who appear to have little working knowledge of how goods are traded in a free market. Our experiences in modern-day, stable retail environments have led us to believe that prices should not fluctuate - that any variation in price beyond some menial percent is evidence of foul-play. Nope. It is the free market. When times are uncertain, prices can and should reflect that reality!

For anyone who complains about the heightened prices, I issue the following challenge; Are you willing to sell the firearms and ammo that you have at the price you previously paid? Without exception I have received a resounding 'NO'. This is an instinctive recognition that the value of that good is higher, even if only temporarily.

Our markets are remarkably stable the majority of the time. Sadly this leads many to have an unrealistic expectation of stability and a resulting tendency to assign motives in circumstances where those unrealistic expectations are not met.

You have the right to attack Cheaper than Dirt - but it says more about you than it does about them.

I agree with most of this except for the bold part.
Price gouging should be legal. Many states have laws against it but I don't think these laws are a good idea. So much for the legal part.
Many arguments state this is just the "free market" operating. While really it is a temporary anomaly in the market where it is no longer "free" at all. It is operating temporarily in the realm of a monopolistic market. In some ways it is closer to a socialist economy than a capitalist economy. Instead of the sole supplier of goods being the government we have the sole supplier being a business that takes advantage of being the sole supplier the same way a socialist government takes advantage of their monoploy.

It comes down to morality. There is no requirement at all to have good morals but in America we pride ourselves on "coming together" in times of hardship, on helping our fellow man and doing the "right" thing. Price gouging is morally ugly. It should certainly be legal but if a business is willing to be morally ugly to make a temporary profit at the expense of his fellow man in a catastrophe then he is trading his reputation for that profit. That is his choice and he can enjoy the profit and what comes with it. There is nothing at all wrong about complaining about high prices, price gouging, sore feet or the weather.

It definitely says more about the business than it does about those who complain about it.

 

[WebSnyper]

While I agree that this is how a free market functions (very well stated Johny5 BTW), in this instance I think what sticks in many peoples craw is that it seems to be the same internet retailer each time. They could at least pass around the "high water mark" duties

Once could argue that's how they are able to continue to stay in business, and taking it to an extreme (that I would not), that they are performing a duty by continuing to have stock when others do not, in such times. I'm not arguing that, but you could.

 

[WebSnyper]

It definitely says more about the business than it does about those who complain about it.

It kind of says different things about each party.

 

[johny5]

While I agree that this is how a free market functions (very well stated Johny5 BTW), in this instance I think what sticks in many peoples craw is that it seems to be the same internet retailer each time. They could at least pass around the "high water mark" duties

Thanks for your kind remarks. I agree with you that it would be nice if other retailers shared this responsibility, but that obligation belongs to those retailers, not CTD. But I also understand their reluctance to engage in behavior that would dramatically reduce the length and severity of these shortages, given the way that CTD is pilloried on forums like this one.

I've pointed this out previously on other parts of the interwebs - the price-per-round that we might find prohibitive, given that many here purchase rounds in the thousands -is completely reasonable to someone who only needs enough to ensure their family's protection. $50 for a box of 9mm to protect your family is better than the alternative of being unable to locate any. If all retailers kept the low prices, there would be no option for those who truly needed the ammo and were willing to pay.

For the record - I prefer $0.09 per round. Who doesn't?

I like this forum and this community. I think most on here are thoughtful about the impact of their comments. I would just like to encourage everyone to take a moment to think about some other facets of the ammo pricing/shortage topic and re-direct their fire accordingly. To put it in the parlance of this thread - adjust your craw. LOL

Welcome any responses. Exchanges like this help me maintain my sanity in the face of cabin fever.

 

[johny5]

I agree with most of this except for the bold part.
Price gouging should be legal. Many states have laws against it but I don't think these laws are a good idea. So much for the legal part.
Many arguments state this is just the "free market" operating. While really it is a temporary anomaly in the market where it is no longer "free" at all. It is operating temporarily in the realm of a monopolistic market. In some ways it is closer to a socialist economy than a capitalist economy. Instead of the sole supplier of goods being the government we have the sole supplier being a business that takes advantage of being the sole supplier the same way a socialist government takes advantage of their monoploy.

It comes down to morality. There is no requirement at all to have good morals but in America we pride ourselves on "coming together" in times of hardship, on helping our fellow man and doing the "right" thing. Price gouging is morally ugly. It should certainly be legal but if a business is willing to be morally ugly to make a temporary profit at the expense of his fellow man in a catastrophe then he is trading his reputation for that profit. That is his choice and he can enjoy the profit and what comes with it. There is nothing at all wrong about complaining about high prices, price gouging, sore feet or the weather.

It definitely says more about the business than it does about those who complain about it.

Anyone who has ammo is free to sell it on the open market. As I stated before, whenever someone claims 'gouging' - I ask them if they would be willing to part with their current supply at the previous retail price. I've not had one single person take me up on that offer. To them I say - 'You're gouging!'.

It is not a monopoly. It is a constrained market. Demand far exceeds the supply. In any free market, the response to this is for the price to rise to the point that it sufficiently reduces demand. This restores balance and helps maintain the predictability we've all become accustomed to.

I'd bet that if I stopped by your place and offered you $10 a round for 9mm, you'd probably take me up on it. Does that make you a shameless opportunist? Nope. It makes you a participant in a free market.

 

[nonobaddog]

Anyone who has ammo is free to sell it on the open market. As I stated before, whenever someone claims 'gouging' - I ask them if they would be willing to part with their current supply at the previous retail price. I've not had one single person take me up on that offer. To them I say - 'You're gouging!'.

It is not a monopoly. It is a constrained market. Demand far exceeds the supply. In any free market, the response to this is for the price to rise to the point that it sufficiently reduces demand. This restores balance and helps maintain the predictability we've all become accustomed to.

I'd bet that if I stopped by your place and offered you $10 a round for 9mm, you'd probably take me up on it. Does that make you a shameless opportunist? Nope. It makes you a participant in a free market.

If someone came to me that needed some 9mm to protect their family I would give them some for free if I believed they were honest and sincere.
I would not charge your $10 a round to anybody - not even you. I would give you 50 rounds of bulk 9mm for that though. That is more than I paid but still not price gouging.

 

[Joniki]

If someone came to me that needed some 9mm to protect their family I would give them some for free if I believed they were honest and sincere.
I would not charge your $10 a round to anybody - not even you. I would give you 50 rounds of bulk 9mm for that though. That is more than I paid but still not price gouging.

This^^^

My neighbor was here yesterday to see if I had any shotgun ammo. I gave him a box of OO buck.

 

[johny5]

If someone came to me that needed some 9mm to protect their family I would give them some for free if I believed they were honest and sincere.
I would not charge your $10 a round to anybody - not even you. I would give you 50 rounds of bulk 9mm for that though. That is more than I paid but still not price gouging.

Excellent - in that case you would be positively contributing to the supply, relieving demand, and placing downward pressure on the market clearing price. I would (and have) done the same. However, I do not condemn others for taking a different approach. I tend to hold terms like 'morally ugly' back for the rare occasions where they are truly applicable. Otherwise they lose their meaning and we start to run out of words to use when evil really shows its face.

One additional observation - your post includes the clause "..if I believed they were honest and sincere". This is much easier in a face-to-face transaction with a known individual for a set amount of ammo determined by you, the giver. It's applicability to an online retailer with a significant stockpile, unable to perform vetting, is limited at best. When they sell at low prices, they present an arbitrage opportunity. This is one of the main drivers of shortages. Maintaining low prices in the primary market only enable the 'flippers', sustains the secondary market, and prolongs the shortages.

Excuse my passion on this topic. I'm a staunch defender of the free market - don't mean to get carried away...