The bookselling racket (was: Collecting Dictionaries)

xerlome wrote:


I suspect that it's not just dealers picking them up ahead of you. I
suspect that those who might have donated them before are now going
straight to eBay themselves as well.

Could be some are doing that. I'm not sure most donators are that
sort, though.

I wouldn't be shocked. With the emergence of eBay, lots of folks of
all stripes are trying to augment their income, and looking everywhere
for stock to offer. One result is people selling stuff they know
nothing about, for ridiculous prices in both directions, and with
incorrect descriptions etc.



Rather than letting the markup knock you out,
take advantage of the folks like me who will pay *you* the markup.

You mean become a resaler ? I could get the markup ? Well... what
would you like ? It's a good offer. Could you give me some time to
think it over ? Thank you. I'll get back to you in a day or so. - -

No, no, now wait a minute here ! I don't need to think it over, i know
right now, and the answer is no ! No ! Doggone it ! You people
think the whole world revolves around you and your money ! Well, it
doesn't !


I didn't mean to insult or coopt you. I have never for a moment
considered that the world revolves around my money or anything else
having to do with me. I meant it as a friendly suggestion. I just
don't see the idea as immoral. You would be selling your knowledge of
dictionaries, along with the books themselves. Like millions of honest
folks, you would be trying to solve a lack of sufficient funds by
trying to earn money for a service you can offer.

If your point is that anyone who thinks in these terms is worthy of
resentment, and that any attempt to better one's financial state must
perforce harm others and be immoral, then I do not see the point of
complaining about this little part of the system, when it's only just
like the rest of the system that apparently embitters you.

xerlome wrote:
Todd T wrote:
I think a sizeable markup is fair,
and I also think that dealers add value, which I also should pay for.

I'm still perplexed by this mysterious "value" they add to books. I
can't tell the difference between a book from a thrift store and the
same one from a dealer. Unless you mean the feeling of greater
sacrifice you feel if you spend more for the latter. That i can relate
to.


The dealers that I work with know as much or more about the books I
want as I do, often considerably more, and thus I learn quite a bit
from them They also have led me to books I would not otherwise have
found, both by filling me in personally and simply by putting stock on
their shelves or catalogs for me to discover. Also, my time is worth
something to me, and for me to cover all of the bases they do for
possible finds would mean that my collection would have to supercede
family, job, everything else. How much of this applies to you I cannot
say. For me and for my particular collecting interests, these are
serious considerations.


The comparison to new books is not quite applicable. A new book will
be returned to the publisher for a refund if it sits for any length of
time on a new book seller's shelf. ... A used book dealer, however, has no
such recourse, and therefore accrues a cost that I think you are not
accounting for: his/her money is tied up in that book until it sells.

What i have been specifically commenting on is high markups on books
already available to the public at low cost markets, such as thrift
stores. But you are right: the resaler risks money.

A resaler may buy 20 (or 10 or 15 or 30 ...) thrift store books for
$20.00. If one of them sells for $20.00, investment rescued. If that
is too great a risk, thrift store books may not be such a good
inventment.

At worst, thrift store book purchases are not going to break the bank,
anyway. If the books don't sell, reverting to the original thrift
price may salvage some of the cost.

Good point. I expanded the scope of the discussion - you are focused
on books with low cost to the dealer in terms of acquisition. But
there's still all those other costs - the investment isn't rescued
until everything sunk into getting to the thrift store, paying an
employee to mind the shop in the meantime, paying to have the shop,
etc. are all covered.

I guess i've never been able to accept "supply and demand" as some
ultimate moral principle, any more than "survival of the fittest."
They may both be natural laws, at a certain level, but does that mean
they need to be our core motivations as human beings ?

We (most of us) wouldn't beat someone up to get their money even if it
were legal, and we wouldn't try to beat the old lady into the "12 items
or less" checkout line with 15 items even if we could get away with it.
Do we really want to try to beat the poor to the bargains only to sell
them to the rich ?

I don't speak of supply and demand as a moral principle. If books were
sold nowhere but thrift stores, the people who want the books would be
there in droves and you would still not find your finds. All
moralizing apart, you are competing against a set of other collectors,
and they too will buy the inexpensive copies first (all else being
equal), leaving only costly copies, so limited supply and high demand
lead to high prices.

Aside: If a book dealer trying to get the most return is immoral, is
buying only cheap copies unfair to the book dealer who is barely
getting by? Should buyers, as a social boon, seek these out and buy
their stock for whatever they ask and forgo bargains? Logically,
what's the difference?



Just my humble opinion.

I do sense your humility. I'm being serious. You don't find fault,
you make allowances. You like to trust in others, even to do and know
things for you. You are willing to pay. You accept your lot without
complaint or blame. You are more content with this world than i am.


Sure I trust others to do and know things for me. What the hell is in
books, after all, if not knowledge being passed on from others?
Doesn't mean I trust anyone who comes along, but otherwise life would
be overwhelming. It's availing myself of what is out there for me, not
meekly letting the world steamroller me.

You mistake appreciation for how something benefits me for complacency.
I don't take my position because I prefer not to think, nor to please
book dealers. I take it because I have thought about it considerably.
I get more out of book collecting by acting this way than I would by
refusing to.


If your post is a fair indication, i would imagine you have little
quarrel with the Patriot Act. And when our society slides into
totalitarianism, you'll take it quietly in stride, preferring not to
make waves, and probably go unnoticed living pretty much the same life
you do now. I, on the other hand, will probably be dead, or else in
prison for trying to buy the wrong books.

I guess my post is not fair indication. The picture you paint of me
being a vanilla straight-arrow milquetoast is pretty funny to me; of
course, you don't know me. Is it OK for a long haired heavy metal fan
who reads weird fiction, favors legalized marijuana and gay rights and
wilderness preservation and gun regulation and votes Democrat 2/3 of
the time to disagree with you on economics, or must I ruffle every
societal feather to earn my wings? I do make a pretty poor liberal,
but I'd make a really lousy Nazi.


Please don't take me wrong: I can tell you are a good guy. I'm a good
guy too (even if i don't seem like it) but probably not as nice as you.



I don't have any problems with you or your bringing up these issues,
and you don't seem like an unpleasant fellow. I think though that your
complaint ultimately leads either to a position that (a) businessmen,
including those selling non-essential items, should be castigated for
failing to either leave material for, or sell at a loss to, those who
can't pay the price they would logically charge; or, (b) the whole
capitalist system is immoral. I just can't get to either place
starting from a lack of book bargains at thrift stores.

- Todd T.

on 2 Jan 2006 16:32:15 -0800, Todd T stated:

The picture you paint of me
being a vanilla straight-arrow milquetoast is pretty funny to me; of
course, you don't know me. Is it OK for a long haired heavy metal fan
who reads weird fiction, favors legalized marijuana and gay rights and
wilderness preservation and gun regulation and votes Democrat 2/3 of
the time to disagree with you on economics, or must I ruffle every
societal feather to earn my wings? I do make a pretty poor liberal,
but I'd make a really lousy Nazi.

Marry me?


-Allison
oh, wait. wrong newsgroup.

xerlome wrote:

Yes, there's one around here that has a box outside which says "FREE".
I'll bet that actually brings customers.

Is he doing it because he's going out of business ? Or did it put him
out of business ?

ER Lyon

There was such a store in Harvard Square. In the end they couldn't
keep up with rents in a gentrified neighborhood. One box of books
doesn't amount to much.

David Ames

fundoc wrote:

Are you poor? Or do you only think that beating the poor to the bargains is
"moral" when it results in another trophy for your shelf?

Yes, i am poor by the standards of the USA where i live, though not by
most third world standards. If i told you my income, you might not
believe me because most people would think it is too low to get by on.
As such, i have been eligible for public assistance for many years, but
i do not seek it because i choose not to be on the take from the
government/taxpayers.

I buy all my clothes at thrift stores and yard sales except an
occasional package of common cotton sport socks or boxer shorts,
preferably seconds. During the season. i largely eat from my garden
and wild berries. For later, i keep my winter squash, wild apples, and
other storable food. I have no health insurance, but am into a health
diet and lifestyle and can't conceive of being overweight. I drive a
26 year old car which i take good care of and sleep in when i need
accomodation away from home.

Apart from the necessities of subsistence, books are the only things
i've spent any significant money on for many years (i bought a used
computer a few years ago for $165.), and for this i have given up many
things most Americans take for granted, such as movies (i haven't gone
to a theater for about twenty years, with the exception of
"Manufacturing Consent" in 1994, which i fell asleep on because i was
so tired from working that day) and i frankly don't miss them. Which
brings us to the second part of your question:

For me books are not trophies, unlike many collectors (those who can
afford trophies). They are tools to use, and i plan to use them for
the rest of my life. I value having a personal library of reading
material and references. Until recently, i rarely spent any "real"
money on books. In the last year or so, however, i have spent
something approaching a thousand dollars on my dictionary collection,
sliced out of my modest securuty bank account, because i was determined
to acquire certain English dictionaries i was missing which are
historically essential or cover additional vocabulary and usage
information.

My purpose is to have immediate access to the information i need for
study and the preparation of several books i have conceived of writing
or compiling. Due to necessary demands on my time, and the need to
derive an income by other means, these goals may take many years or
never be realized, but i am inspired to work on them. I also plan to
leave my collection in trust to a library for public use, as well as
possibly work with a library to start such a collection within my
lifetime.

The moral consideration constrains me from making a practice of buying
books i don't want from certain markets for the purpose of resale at
high markups. I do buy some items i believe have intrinsic (regardless
of market) value, often duplicates of ones i have, with the idea of
trading with others who share similar interests.

This is most probably far more than you or anyone else actually wanted
to know about me. In fact, i suspect your question was rhetorical and
you didn't believe it required an answer. It is interesting, though,
that anyone would believe that the validity of a moral consideration
depends on my or any other particular person's practice or sincerity.

ER Lyon

Allison Turner wrote:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...2e24b7ba410d32

[xerlome]:
I'm still perplexed by this mysterious "value" they add to books. I
can't tell the difference between a book from a thrift store and the
same one from a dealer.

Allow me to give you a very clear example of added value.

(I am taking the liberty of editing a piece of your comment in a way i
think sums up your point (flawed syntax aside). Correct me if i'm
wrong):

The dealers ... have added significant value to the book ... because
the reality is that I will never see these titles if dealers don't find
them for me ...

What you are talking about is not the value of the book, but the value
to you of a service. I'm only talking about the book.

I have been accustomed serving myself. Now with so many people around
who want to be of service, the slimmer pickings make it harder for me
to do so.

I have no quarrel with most of what you have said in your post.
There's no doubt the markets are different now and the realities make
it necessary to change our approch to acquiring what we want. I have
recognized this need and have been acting upon it. So, what you are
doing and suggesting is what i am doing. Yes, it is frustrating to me
as a person of meager means to see the availability of low cost books
phasing out due to what appears to be a rampant trend in resaling.
What i'm doing here is pointing to and questioning some of what i see
happening and its implications.

ER Lyon

Oh, i despair...

Please, someone, explain this to Todd so i don't have to !

[Todd T]:
Rather than letting the markup knock you out,
take advantage of the folks like me who will pay *you* the markup.

[xerlome]:
You mean become a resaler ? I could get the markup ? Well... what
would you like ? It's a good offer. Could you give me some time to
think it over ? Thank you. I'll get back to you in a day or so. - -

No, no, now wait a minute here ! I don't need to think it over, i know
right now, and the answer is no ! No ! Doggone it ! You people
think the whole world revolves around you and your money ! Well, it
doesn't !

[Todd T]:
I didn't mean to insult or coopt you. I have never for a moment
considered that the world revolves around my money or anything else
having to do with me. I meant it as a friendly suggestion.

I only ever see movies on TV...

Kris Baker wrote:

Most of those yellow page thrift store listings are out of date.

Where do *you* live ?

If you're depending upon your local area to fulfill your needs,
you are fortunate to do so.

It is true, i don't travel much to buy books. It adds too much value.
(Or is it "subtracts" ?)

Last year, I travelled to nine
states seeking and buying (not all books), and five of those
trips have not broken even yet.

So, you are not certain yet whether all that driving and gas added
enough value, but you hope so.

if you have a store,
and i bring books to you and tell you i want extra money because i
added value when i invested my time, fuel, and effort finding the books
originally, and again bringing them to you, what would you say ?

e) I'd negotiate a fair price for both of us, and kiss your feet.

That's good, but you needn't kiss my feet.

Even though I sell only online, I'd much rather have people show
up at my door with items "ready to sell", than to have to take
time away from selling to bookscout.

Most of the books i buy are as ready to sell as they'll ever be.
That's why i bought them. I'll bet if you looked at my collection,
you'd never be able to tell the difference between those i bought at
thrift stores and those i bought from a resaler.

or pay a scout

A scout ! That's an idea, i'll have to try that ! A boy scout or a
girl scout on vacation, maybe they'd work for peanuts !

Oh, pl0nk. This is useless. You claim to know all about
bookselling, but have no idea what a scout is.

No ! I never claimed to know all about bookselling.

But i should never attempt a pun. I'm no good at it.

ER Lyon

"xerlome" wrote in message
oups.com...
fundoc wrote:

Are you poor? Or do you only think that beating the poor to the bargains
is
"moral" when it results in another trophy for your shelf?

Yes, i am poor by the standards of the USA where i live, though not by
most third world standards. If i told you my income, you might not
believe me because most people would think it is too low to get by on.
As such, i have been eligible for public assistance for many years, but
i do not seek it because i choose not to be on the take from the
government/taxpayers.

I buy all my clothes at thrift stores and yard sales except an
occasional package of common cotton sport socks or boxer shorts,
preferably seconds. During the season. i largely eat from my garden
and wild berries. For later, i keep my winter squash, wild apples, and
other storable food. I have no health insurance, but am into a health
diet and lifestyle and can't conceive of being overweight. I drive a
26 year old car which i take good care of and sleep in when i need
accomodation away from home.

Apart from the necessities of subsistence, books are the only things
i've spent any significant money on for many years (i bought a used
computer a few years ago for $165.), and for this i have given up many
things most Americans take for granted, such as movies (i haven't gone
to a theater for about twenty years, with the exception of
"Manufacturing Consent" in 1994, which i fell asleep on because i was
so tired from working that day) and i frankly don't miss them. Which
brings us to the second part of your question:

For me books are not trophies, unlike many collectors (those who can
afford trophies). They are tools to use, and i plan to use them for
the rest of my life. I value having a personal library of reading
material and references. Until recently, i rarely spent any "real"
money on books. In the last year or so, however, i have spent
something approaching a thousand dollars on my dictionary collection,
sliced out of my modest securuty bank account, because i was determined
to acquire certain English dictionaries i was missing which are
historically essential or cover additional vocabulary and usage
information.

My purpose is to have immediate access to the information i need for
study and the preparation of several books i have conceived of writing
or compiling. Due to necessary demands on my time, and the need to
derive an income by other means, these goals may take many years or
never be realized, but i am inspired to work on them. I also plan to
leave my collection in trust to a library for public use, as well as
possibly work with a library to start such a collection within my
lifetime.

The moral consideration constrains me from making a practice of buying
books i don't want from certain markets for the purpose of resale at
high markups. I do buy some items i believe have intrinsic (regardless
of market) value, often duplicates of ones i have, with the idea of
trading with others who share similar interests.

This is most probably far more than you or anyone else actually wanted
to know about me. In fact, i suspect your question was rhetorical and
you didn't believe it required an answer. It is interesting, though,
that anyone would believe that the validity of a moral consideration
depends on my or any other particular person's practice or sincerity.

Sorry man, I didn't realize you were clinically ****ing insane. Do carry on.

Bud Webster sez:
I'm done with this now, and you should be.

I agree, the reponses to this troll have gone on wayyyyyyyyyyy too
long.

.................................................. ..
Bob Finnan
http://BobFinnan.com
.................................................. ..