Chuck explains his Mile High pricing

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

I am quite familiar with what a personal attack is. And I am seeing it from both sides. We'll have to just disagree on this.

 

Don't just make the accusation, then, back it up with evidence.

 

Where have you seen a personal attack on rfoiii, specifically from myself?

 

If you make the accusation...you need to be prepared to back it up. That is fair, reasonable, and equitable.

 

Don't you agree?

 

Do you consider calling someone a 12 or 14 year old in this discussion a personal attack?

 

Not if they're acting that way

 

Thats a good out I guess. You can call anyone anything you like and say it wasn't a personal attack because that is how they were acting.

 

It depends...is saying someone is being a hypocrite a "personal attack"? If it's not true, it probably is (a personal attack), but what if it is true?

 

It all depends on context. One of the most effective ways of knowing when you are being personal is: are you using "you" in response?

 

"You think this." "You always/never say that." "You do this," "You are being that."

 

Those are good signs that the conversation has become about the people involved, rather than the topic.

 

 

 

[ttfitz]

 

So why shouldn't we criticize him for creating something that needlessly inflates his prices? Why shouldn't we criticize him for using marketing tactics in an effort to take advantage of those who don't know better? Why shouldn't we be critical of a business model is built around feeding his enormous ego and not around his supposed goal of "offering comics to the masses?"

 

If others can buy his BS on video and foam at the mouth at the opportunity to give him their money to sustain a vision no one asked for, why can't we do the opposite?

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but my opinion is you are welcome to do all of those things. I agree with some of them, disagree with others, but on the whole, if that was all that was said, I might have never posted in this thread. The one possible exception is the "take advantage of those who don't know better" part, but if stated correctly, it wouldn't bother me. (I also don't see the "massive ego" thing that much - sure, lots of time he toots his own horn, but reading the stories of the Church and MH2 collections don't read that way to me. Nobody said word-one about Buddy Sanders "massive ego" in his rather amusing statement about why HE was the biggest comic dealer around.)

 

Where I feel the need to speak up in regards to Chuck is when people go over the top, with over-inflated claims of what he is doing or has done, talk of ripping people off, motives that you just can't know, even demonstratively erroneous accusations.

 

But simple disagreement with his methods and practices? Sure, go nuts.

[COI]

Define radically overpay.

 

Without getting into dollars and cents, I've paid next years prices for this years books more than once. Sometimes 25-30% over what they are worth on expensive books.

 

 

Why? Were there no other books at a cheaper price available? Was it speculation and you were assuming the price was going to go up?

 

I'm just not understanding the concept of someone saying they would "radically overpay" for something and be happy about it.

 

Words like "overpay" or "overvalued", in the context of something like comic books which have no intrinsic value, lack any sort of logical content. Despite the fact that people love to misuse the term, comics aren't commodities. A small group decides that they'd rather have X book than Y amount of dollars, so they trade, and millions of dollars trade hands annually to pass old newsprint around...because emotions; prices fluctuate because emotions; people pay more for something than the last guy paid, or sometime sell at a loss to fund other purchases...because emotions. To say that you don't understand how someone can overpay for something and be happy presupposes that getting a book for what this hobby as a collective arbitrarily decides is a "good price" this week is a necessary condition to being satisfied with a purchase, which doesn't have to be the case at all.

[ttfitz]

Also, there is no way Chuck is selling Barney for $2.00. It's not a swipe at chuck but rather a reality of doing business. It needs someone to check it, grade it, inventory it, bag and board it, and price it. Maybe 10 minutes worth of work? Depends on how easy to use their inventory system is. But lets say 10 minutes. Assuming Chuck is paying only minimum wage to his worker, that is $8.23 in CO. So 1/6th of that is $1.37. Add in the acquisition cost, Chuck said his wife paid $0.50 for it, and the bag and board (lets call that $0.05 since I'm sure Chuck gets a great discount on those) and you are at $1.92. So that means if Chuck sold it for $2.00, he makes a grand total of 8 cents on the deal. That 8 cents has to go to pay for the following items Rent (property tax in his case) on the store/Storage location, Electricity for s

 

ame, HVAC for same, and finally the cost of staff. That is a lot to cover for that 8 cents. O and don't forget, Chucks profit. So either 1) That book is going to be priced much higher 2) Chuck paid much less to acquire (maybe a nickel a book sounds more likely to me) 3) Chuck is violating State law and paying his workers less than minimum wage (unlikely and highly doubt it)

 

Several years ago, Chuck stated he paid his workers $10 an hour, and some benefits. That was at least five years ago.

 

Just to be exact (since I just read this myself) - after you have worked at MH a year, he paid that. He didn't say what before that, at least where I was reading it.

[Logan510]

 

I am quite familiar with what a personal attack is. And I am seeing it from both sides. We'll have to just disagree on this.

 

Don't just make the accusation, then, back it up with evidence.

 

Where have you seen a personal attack on rfoiii, specifically from myself?

 

If you make the accusation...you need to be prepared to back it up. That is fair, reasonable, and equitable.

 

Don't you agree?

 

Do you consider calling someone a 12 or 14 year old in this discussion a personal attack?

 

Not if they're acting that way

 

Thats a good out I guess. You can call anyone anything you like and say it wasn't a personal attack because that is how they were acting.

 

It depends...is saying someone is being a hypocrite a "personal attack"? If it's not true, it probably is (a personal attack), but what if it is true?

 

It all depends on context. One of the most effective ways of knowing when you are being personal is: are you using "you" in response?

 

"You think this." "You always/never say that." "You do this," "You are being that."

 

Those are good signs that the conversation has become about the people involved, rather than the topic.

 

 

 

Exactly.

[Bookery]

Anyway... back on topic. I'll actually give my opinion of MH... though keep in mind I've never dealt with them personally.

 

I don't see a problem with their pricing cheap stuff well "over market". If they want to stock thousands and thousands of admittedly "low interest" issues, it makes sense to charge for it. If their price is $10 for a comic that might be found in $1 bins at conventions, that might be a good price for me if all I need is one or two of these books to fill my runs, and I don't want to burn gas and time going to conventions, flea markets, multiple stores, etc., looking for them.

 

On the other hand, I think his pricing scheme falls apart on premium items... an Avengers #1 can be found every week on eBay, or at every major dealer's site. So there is no reason to pay $5000 for a copy everyone else charges $2000 for. But I also suspect these are "show" items and not really meant for sale. If he gets several of these in stock, I suspect some of them get quietly sold at much reduced levels... I think he prices some things high just to claim that they are among the many issues he stocks. It's an advertising mechanism more than a real attempt to sell them.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Sure, RMA can beat a dead horse with the best of them... but I appreciate he at least tries to approach an argument rationally. .

 

Damned by faint praise!

 

 

 

Personally, there's all sorts of good glue that can be beaten out of horses that is often overlooked.

 

[Jeffro.]

You all need a hug

[wombat]

 

I am quite familiar with what a personal attack is. And I am seeing it from both sides. We'll have to just disagree on this.

 

Don't just make the accusation, then, back it up with evidence.

 

Where have you seen a personal attack on rfoiii, specifically from myself?

 

If you make the accusation...you need to be prepared to back it up. That is fair, reasonable, and equitable.

 

Don't you agree?

 

Do you consider calling someone a 12 or 14 year old in this discussion a personal attack?

 

Not if they're acting that way

 

Thats a good out I guess. You can call anyone anything you like and say it wasn't a personal attack because that is how they were acting.

 

It depends...is saying someone is being a hypocrite a "personal attack"? If it's not true, it probably is (a personal attack), but what if it is true?

 

It all depends on context. One of the most effective ways of knowing when you are being personal is: are you using "you" in response?

 

"You think this." "You always/never say that." "You do this," "You are being that."

 

Those are good signs that the conversation has become about the people involved, rather than the topic.

 

 

 

I can only give my opinion. In my book it was a personal attack.

 

And again its a good out to say its not a personal attack "if its true".

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

I should be glad logical reasoning isn't formally taught in public school; otherwise message boards wouldn't be this much fun.

 

It used to be.

 

 

(I would say "and I'm trying!", but that would get me accused of trying to be a teacher... )

[ttfitz]

Also, wouldn't Chuck's buying the warehouse be preferable to renting it anyway? Even if takes 10 years to break even, he's been in business for 40 years & surely is planning to be in business more than a decade more.

 

The feeling I get about this particular thing is that a purchase required a sizable down payment, while a rental would not. Yes, the purchase is better over the long run, but he's always apparently dealing with cash-flow difficulties, so having to come up with the down payment was more of a problem. He apparently sold the last of his personal copies from the Church collection to raise the funds.

[COI]

 

I am quite familiar with what a personal attack is. And I am seeing it from both sides. We'll have to just disagree on this.

 

Don't just make the accusation, then, back it up with evidence.

 

Where have you seen a personal attack on rfoiii, specifically from myself?

 

If you make the accusation...you need to be prepared to back it up. That is fair, reasonable, and equitable.

 

Don't you agree?

 

Do you consider calling someone a 12 or 14 year old in this discussion a personal attack?

 

Not if they're acting that way

 

Thats a good out I guess. You can call anyone anything you like and say it wasn't a personal attack because that is how they were acting.

 

It depends...is saying someone is being a hypocrite a "personal attack"? If it's not true, it probably is (a personal attack), but what if it is true?

 

It all depends on context. One of the most effective ways of knowing when you are being personal is: are you using "you" in response?

 

"You think this." "You always/never say that." "You do this," "You are being that."

 

Those are good signs that the conversation has become about the people involved, rather than the topic.

 

 

 

That doesn't really work when it comes to behaviors because a statement like "you are behaving badly" can be both true and a personal attack, true and not a personal attack, untrue and a personal attack, or untrue and not a personal attack.

 

Like you said, context. But yes, generally when someone says you always/never, it's usually a personal attack because 1) it can't be reasonably determined that someone always/never behaves in a particular way and 2) those kinds of universals usually imply that the person is incapable of behaving in a way that the attacker perceives to be good or rational.

[ttfitz]

He can try and justify his prices all he wants. In the long run, its simply not a viable business strategy and the more warehouses he uses and the larger his stock gets, the more unsustainable it becomes. How he has managed to survive up to this point is a mystery to me, but the one thing I am absolutely certain about is that his survival will only get harder and harder from here on out. the internet continues to give people more and more options for obtaining comics at relatively decent prices.

 

There is a very good reason why you really don't see this sort of business model anywhere else in the world. Its simply not a viable business strategy, or a very smart buiness strategy. If he were to get rid of 75% of his stock, go down to a single warehouse and provide a top notch internet store that had decent prices, he could be FAR more successful.

 

He's had out-there prices for a very long time (which includes a time when all those other alternatives for purchase existed), and continues to grow, so I'm not sure you are right about this, but only time will tell.

 

I think what might be missing in your assessment is not taking what he says at face value - he doesn't define "successful" at this the same way you (and most of the business community) does. If he is speaking truthfully, he's not looking to make a lot of money. If he did what you suggest, he'd probably make more money, sure, but since that's the exact opposite of what he is trying to do, he'd be less successful.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

I am quite familiar with what a personal attack is. And I am seeing it from both sides. We'll have to just disagree on this.

 

Don't just make the accusation, then, back it up with evidence.

 

Where have you seen a personal attack on rfoiii, specifically from myself?

 

If you make the accusation...you need to be prepared to back it up. That is fair, reasonable, and equitable.

 

Don't you agree?

 

Do you consider calling someone a 12 or 14 year old in this discussion a personal attack?

 

Not if they're acting that way

 

Thats a good out I guess. You can call anyone anything you like and say it wasn't a personal attack because that is how they were acting.

 

It depends...is saying someone is being a hypocrite a "personal attack"? If it's not true, it probably is (a personal attack), but what if it is true?

 

It all depends on context. One of the most effective ways of knowing when you are being personal is: are you using "you" in response?

 

"You think this." "You always/never say that." "You do this," "You are being that."

 

Those are good signs that the conversation has become about the people involved, rather than the topic.

 

 

 

I can only give my opinion. In my book it was a personal attack.

 

Still, even after Bookery explained to you that he genuinely thought that rfoiii might actually BE an adolescent...? His explanation meant nothing, the context meant nothing, what you saw it as is what mattered, not what actually was....?

 

Wow. Tough crowd.

 

 

And again its a good out to say its not a personal attack "if its true".

 

 

And again, it depends on the context. Applying a blanket "if it's true" doesn't make it a personal attack, and it doesn't NOT make it a personal attack. It depends on context, always.

 

Going forward, you should probably be more clear, since it wasn't "both sides" (which, in that specific case, at that specific time, was myself and rfoiii) who were making "personal attacks."

 

That's fair, isn't it...?

 

And there really aren't just "two sides." Each person is unique, and brings their OWN side to any discussion. There are as many sides, and more, to a discussion as there are people.

[wombat]

One positive for me from this thread. I had no idea what the Church Collection was and its history. Always happy to learn.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

I am quite familiar with what a personal attack is. And I am seeing it from both sides. We'll have to just disagree on this.

 

Don't just make the accusation, then, back it up with evidence.

 

Where have you seen a personal attack on rfoiii, specifically from myself?

 

If you make the accusation...you need to be prepared to back it up. That is fair, reasonable, and equitable.

 

Don't you agree?

 

Do you consider calling someone a 12 or 14 year old in this discussion a personal attack?

 

Not if they're acting that way

 

Thats a good out I guess. You can call anyone anything you like and say it wasn't a personal attack because that is how they were acting.

 

It depends...is saying someone is being a hypocrite a "personal attack"? If it's not true, it probably is (a personal attack), but what if it is true?

 

It all depends on context. One of the most effective ways of knowing when you are being personal is: are you using "you" in response?

 

"You think this." "You always/never say that." "You do this," "You are being that."

 

Those are good signs that the conversation has become about the people involved, rather than the topic.

 

 

 

That doesn't really work when it comes to behaviors because a statement like "you are behaving badly" can be both true and a personal attack, true and not a personal attack, untrue and a personal attack, or untrue and not a personal attack.

 

Granted.

 

Like you said, context. But yes, generally when someone says you always/never, it's usually a personal attack because 1) it can't be reasonably determined that someone always/never behaves in a particular way and 2) those kinds of universals usually imply that the person is incapable of behaving in a way that the attacker perceives to be good or rational.

 

Yes.

[RockMyAmadeus]

One positive for me from this thread. I had no idea what the Church Collection was and its history. Always happy to learn.

 

Oh, it's wonderful. I've only had Church slabs in my hands, never actual raw copies...and I could still feel the history.

 

Chuck's story behind it, taken with whatever grains of salt one thinks is appropriate, is quite the thrilling adventure.

 

Can you imagine? He had just about everything. "Finest known" is true for the vast, vast majority of the collection.

 

[shadroch]

Also, there is no way Chuck is selling Barney for $2.00. It's not a swipe at chuck but rather a reality of doing business. It needs someone to check it, grade it, inventory it, bag and board it, and price it. Maybe 10 minutes worth of work? Depends on how easy to use their inventory system is. But lets say 10 minutes. Assuming Chuck is paying only minimum wage to his worker, that is $8.23 in CO. So 1/6th of that is $1.37. Add in the acquisition cost, Chuck said his wife paid $0.50 for it, and the bag and board (lets call that $0.05 since I'm sure Chuck gets a great discount on those) and you are at $1.92. So that means if Chuck sold it for $2.00, he makes a grand total of 8 cents on the deal. That 8 cents has to go to pay for the following items Rent (property tax in his case) on the store/Storage location, Electricity for s

 

ame, HVAC for same, and finally the cost of staff. That is a lot to cover for that 8 cents. O and don't forget, Chucks profit. So either 1) That book is going to be priced much higher 2) Chuck paid much less to acquire (maybe a nickel a book sounds more likely to me) 3) Chuck is violating State law and paying his workers less than minimum wage (unlikely and highly doubt it)

 

Several years ago, Chuck stated he paid his workers $10 an hour, and some benefits. That was at least five years ago.

 

Just to be exact (since I just read this myself) - after you have worked at MH a year, he paid that. He didn't say what before that, at least where I was reading it.

That was how many years ago, since you just read it?

[RockMyAmadeus]

Nobody said word-one about Buddy Sanders "massive ego" in his rather amusing statement about why HE was the biggest comic dealer around.)

 

Well...if it helps, I thought it.

[wombat]

 

I am quite familiar with what a personal attack is. And I am seeing it from both sides. We'll have to just disagree on this.

 

Don't just make the accusation, then, back it up with evidence.

 

Where have you seen a personal attack on rfoiii, specifically from myself?

 

If you make the accusation...you need to be prepared to back it up. That is fair, reasonable, and equitable.

 

Don't you agree?

 

Do you consider calling someone a 12 or 14 year old in this discussion a personal attack?

 

Not if they're acting that way

 

Thats a good out I guess. You can call anyone anything you like and say it wasn't a personal attack because that is how they were acting.

 

It depends...is saying someone is being a hypocrite a "personal attack"? If it's not true, it probably is (a personal attack), but what if it is true?

 

It all depends on context. One of the most effective ways of knowing when you are being personal is: are you using "you" in response?

 

"You think this." "You always/never say that." "You do this," "You are being that."

 

Those are good signs that the conversation has become about the people involved, rather than the topic.

 

 

 

I can only give my opinion. In my book it was a personal attack.

 

Still, even after Bookery explained to you that he genuinely thought that rfoiii might actually BE an adolescent...? His explanation meant nothing, the context meant nothing, what you saw it as is what mattered, not what actually was....?

 

Wow. Tough crowd.

 

 

And again its a good out to say its not a personal attack "if its true".

 

 

And again, it depends on the context. Applying a blanket "if it's true" doesn't make it a personal attack, and it doesn't NOT make it a personal attack. It depends on context, always.

 

Going forward, you should probably be more clear, since it wasn't "both sides" (which, in that specific case, at that specific time, was myself and rfoiii) who were making "personal attacks."

 

That's fair, isn't it...?

 

And there really aren't just "two sides." Each person is unique, and brings their OWN side to any discussion. There are as many sides, and more, to a discussion as there are people.

 

I guess that depends on if someone believes the reasoning someone gives.

 

And I'm pretty sure when I made that post the comment I am questioning was made. My intent wasn't to call anyone specifically out since in my opinion I thought there were multiple people who were making the attacks.