There are always going to be people who think that profit should always be less than the market will bear, which is just wrong. Those same people who may be speculating, just as easily might be engaged in regular trade and they would have bought those guns in August or September anyway, regardless of the political environment. None of us has any way of knowing. But even if it were pure speculation, somebody please show me how speculation is immoral. They can't possibly charge more than fair market value now, can they? The market determines the price. If they are charging TOO much today, then they won't sell them now, will they? If they don't charge enough, then they are not performing their fiduciary responsibilities then, ARE they? There is no moral obligation for a seller to take a paper loss because he sold something for less than he could have charged. If he wants to do that, fine. But there is no moral burden for him to do it. And beyond that, you don't really have a clue as to when those sellers bought those rifles, so you don't really know if they paid lower prices, or the newer higher prices. You just don't. And I would ask anyone who is complaining about pricing today, "If you bought an extra AR15 two years ago for $800 and decided to sell it today, and someone offered you $1200 for it today, would you take the $1200, or would you insist on only taking the $800 you had in it? I think I know what the answer is, and so do you. The bottom line is, it's not exploitation, because nobody is forcing the buyer to buy. If that $800 AR goes unsold for long enough at $1200, then you might decide to lower the price by $100 to sweeten the deal and get it off your hands. Welcome to the free market.tbrown wrote:What's your definition of "profiteering"? If I bought AAPL stock for $530 Friday, was the seller profiteering if he paid $100 four years ago? $325 in June 2011? If I buy a house for $200,000 this month, is the seller profiteering he he bought the house for $100,000? Am I profiteering if he bought the house for $275,000 during the bubble?mr surveyor wrote:note my use of the word "profiteering". I'm betting the majority of those folks walking around hawking their AR's remembered the rush in 2008-2009. They probably bought these in August or September at what we would consider "finally normal" prices, speculating on making a huge profit in the coming post election market...which has come.C-dub wrote:Interesting. I wonder why these folks are selling. Are they selling because it is a seller's market? Are they selling before the ban so they don't have to register anything? Or are they selling one of their rifles to help fund ammo for one or two others?mr surveyor wrote:a buddy called me this morning to see if I wanted to go to the Longview show with him..... uuuhhhh, no, not on your life! He called me a couple hours later and said the line to get in, 30 minutes after opening, was extremely long. He said there were probably 30-40 guys "in line" with AR's on their shoulders for sale and overheard three of them telling potential buyers a price of $2500. Lots of profiteering going on amongst our ranks. What was Emanuel's statement... "never let a good tradgedy go to waste" (paraphrased)? I find it disheartening that we are being led by the very people we so despise, to do this to ourselves.
I'm curious about your definition because based on what I hear from some people the past couple of weeks, one man's profiteering is another man's free market.
We need to stop focusing on blaming small business people for the state of the market, and START focusing on blaming the commies in government who created this situation in the first place! If they weren't such treasonous snakes, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
Jesus wept.