Profiteering Off Personal Protection

[ViperJock]

A lot of people don't see that trying to keep the price from rising isn't just "not good"-- it actually works backwards.

But limiting price, the effect is a shortage. Some of you are old enough to remember the long lines for gas under the Nixon price control strategy. Why no lines in 2008 when oil hit $145/bbl? Because the price could raise and induce supply to meet the demand-- and constrain demand to help meet reduced supply.

The best thing for gun owners that like an AR is for the price to spike like this. Why? Because as long as there is both a high price AND they are legal, it's stimulating a huge supply. EVERY SINGLE maker of AR parts and .223 ammo is pumping out production as fast as humanly possible.

What happens afterward can only be good. Either a ban goes through and there's a nice quantity of pre-ban arms available, or the ban doesn't go through and overall prices come way down.

The faster the prices rise, the faster the fall when the reason for the rise (fear of ban, in this case) disappears.

JH

While I am totally for letting the market set the price I think the idea of "low prices allow a shortage" in terms of ARs is not valid. In terms of ammunition, probably is valid. Why? Because, like gas, a 1000rnd box of ammunition is divisible into multiple affordable parts.

In the case of ARs, the shortage is simply determined by production not meeting demand (which in turn drives the prices up) BUT say you have a sinlge higher priced item such as an AR. This item can only be purchased by one buyer (or collaborating buyers).

BUT, you say perhaps that buyer would buy 2 ARs if the price were lower. Possibly. But if the price stayed low perhaps the panic buying would decrease and people would only buy the 1 they need. Perhaps not. Either way, the supply decreases at the same rate. The question is only the number of buyers that have the opportunity to purchase. Further more, if an item increases in price to a point that purchasing is not possible, what does it matter if there is supply? there might as well not be any supply for the number of items a buyer can afford.

Thus the supply increases, the demand increases, and prices move downward until the demand once again balances with supply.

EXCEPT in the case of panic buying which creates variables in the system which cannot always be accounted for. in this case, often the increase in price fails fails to slow demand. And that is why no vendors can keep ARs or ammo on the shelf at the moment. There is always someone willing to pay any price to get what they "need."

The prices will come down when either the buyers are saturated or the panic ends. Until then the supply will be based soley on the production, not the price.

And I say good for the sellers who are able to make a dollar on what is often a low margin sale. I dare say, if the price of the goods and services the haters are selling suddenly increased in price they wouldn't be complaining. In fact, they would probably be telling everyone that their hard work was finally being rewarded appropriately and if you can't afford it, tough luck. Am I right?

 

[bwframe]

Disagree...

Much like the 2nd amendment, capitalism is one of the things that makes this a great country. Supply and Demand.

Why would one not raise the price of an item to what people currently value that item at.

Why would one disagree with others discussing pricing on a discussion forum?

 

[Hohn]

The problem I have with some of this stuff is when a Co. tries to sell things at the normal price and some one buys it and then turns around and tries to sell it for twice what he paid for it or more. That isn't legal, it is price gouging.

It's actually perfectly legal. Are you saying that if you find a rare piano at an estate sale and get it for $500, you shouldn't be allowed to restore and sell it for $50k?

Seems unreasonable to me.

Most of us are economic hypocrites because we are BOTH suppliers and demanders (consumer). In the first case, we want the highest price and in the second case, the lowest. In the first case, we want the fewest competitors ( *cough* labor unions), and in the second, we want as many as possible.

But capitalism works because it is a system of profit AND loss. Supply AND demand.


In other words, there's no such thing as "profiteering." If you made AR parts for a living, I bet you'd not consider it gouging. Heck, you'd be wise to raise your prices to limit demand.


There's a guy in MN who makes acoustic guitars-- great ones. When James Taylor and others showed up playing his guitars, he developed a backlog of orders that was getting bigger and bigger even at the $4500 base price. Once the wait got to be almost 3 years and used ones were selling for double of new, he finally raised the price to where he could start to catch up.

The new base price? Over $10k. He still gets orders at that price-- just at a lower rate.


Somewhat to viperjock's point, the guitar example is somewhat different. If you want one of these special Olson guitars, almost nothing else will substitute. Other consumers don't want an Olson per se, just a really nice guitar LIKE an Olson. Turned off by the high price, the buy another maker's guitar.

ARs somewhat commodities for many parts. There are several supplier of upper and lowers and all that, but not many would argue that one particular upper or lower is vastly superior to all others. Most folks would say there are several parts they'd be willing to use in their build.


In other words, the market forces still can work, and the scenario I outlined in a previous post remains valid.

 

[LarryC]

I've always been under the impression it ILLEGAL to purchase a firearm with the intent to sell? I have a hard time believing these people just have all these unfired ar's laying around. I say simply find the want to be gun dealers and put them out of business. I do a lot of buying, selling, trading, and understand that sometimes you come out a little ahead while getting to spend some time with a weapon. buying a new one just to mark it up is just rude, that's what dealers are for. this is not a whining rant. I don't need an ar or ak platform, but feel sorry for those who would like to get into 3 gun or a similar sport and can't get one. I also give credit to the guys that are selling these items at a normal price or slight mark up to help someone out, there's actually been a few on here recently.

They also wouldn't be as "scarce" if people weren't buying to resell. I just think it's funny there's no(that I've read) ar or ak platforms that say they've got 5000 plus rounds through them, they always say new in box or very low round count. which I understand that happens and maybe they are all surfacing at once? I don't know just kinda fishy to me.

The only thing dumber than the person pricing them is the people paying that and supporting them. shop around and see who has the lowest prices and order a new one.

It is NOT illegal to purchase a firearm with the intent to sell at a later date. If it were many of the people on the classifieds and collectors would be in real trouble. IT IS ILLEGAL to make a STRAW purchase - to purchase a firearm for someone else. Many people purchase firearms as investments, no law prevents anyone from doing that. As prices rise on some firearms, many collectors may sell that firearm in order to purchase another and enhance their collection. I do not normally sell any firearm but might if the price was high enough for me to purchase one I believed had more value. It is against the law for anyone to "Deal" in firearms without a license, but the term deal is spelled out in the ATF regulations as buying and selling enough firearms that it is a substantial portion of your income. Just about anyone here would buy a $300 or $400 shotgun offered at a yard sale for $150 even if they didn't want to keep the gun as it would be a good way to either make a profit in the future or as good trading material.

 

[IndyS3]

This whole argument is asinine. Most of you sound like a bunch of liberals running around screaming, "This isn't fair". So now, the only people who should be allowed to make money on guns are the manufacturer and the gun dealer? Last time I checked, an item is worth what someone will pay for it. This is how someone determines value. It matters not what that item was worth 4 weeks ago, rather what it is worth today. What a bunch of hypocrites. Someone can enjoy an activity and still make money on it. If you have some moral elitism that prevents you from making a profit, then feel good in your existential superiority and leave the rest of us entrepreneurs alone. I never thought I would live in a country where making a profit is demonized.

 

[6mm Shoot]

After the storm was over a guy bought a couple of generators out of state then took them up to New York to sell them. He was asking $300 or $400 above the price he paid for them. He was arrested for price gouging. It was posted on the news. He said that he thought he was doing a service and should have been paid for it.

Some of the oil co. have been sued for over pricing there gas. I have not heard how that came out in the courts.

 

[merotek]

After the storm was over a guy bought a couple of generators out of state then took them up to New York to sell them. He was asking $300 or $400 above the price he paid for them. He was arrested for price gouging. It was posted on the news. He said that he thought he was doing a service and should have been paid for it.

Some of the oil co. have been sued for over pricing there gas. I have not heard how that came out in the courts.

Any antigouging laws I can find deal only with gouging during Emergencies, this is not one, and have exceptions for increased cost of supply, there is.

 

[merotek]

Why would one disagree with others discussing pricing on a discussion forum?

So.... If i disagree I am no longer discussing? I do not think this word (discussion) means what you think it means