or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Random fashion thoughts
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Random fashion thoughts - Page 5430

post #81436 of 99157
Following up briefly on the discussion of prices and particularly Lanvin .... Their ss12 collection had some very expensive tees, including one made of python leather and the "oversize leather bonded t-shirt of calfskin & jersey cotton" spoilered below, which was priced at £2015 (USD $3,043.25).

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

Two showed up on eBay, both listed as NWT, and when they ended today the top bids (i.e. actual market value, I guess) were quite low, considering.



I'm not trying to make any particular point here, but given Lanvin's cachet and the widespread popularity of leather I guess I expected higher bids.
post #81437 of 99157
would totally wear that shirt
post #81438 of 99157
for python leather it is a pretty good price
post #81439 of 99157
Must have been a giant python, to get a leather piece that large.
post #81440 of 99157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggskip View Post

I don't agree with this at all. If somebody pays X and another person is willing to pay Y > X from the first person that acquired the item, then the products were priced inefficiently to begin with and the initial purchaser is taking advantage of a market arbitrage reflecting this inefficiency. If the final purchaser wanted the item at price X they should have devoted more of their own resources to accomplishing this. Instead, they those to value their time more than their money and their actions reflect this.

This would be true, except that your scenario is highly inaccurate and does not address the issues of living on, you know, Earth. For example, the final purchaser may simply live in a different timezone. Does this mean that people who live on the West Coast all value their time more than those who live on the East Coast, who in turn value their time less than those who live in Europe? Should vendors then decrease the price throughout the day to discount for this? Your analysis only holds in an idealized, open, market.
post #81441 of 99157

i got a linen t shirt at h&m

 

jasmine green tea is really good

post #81442 of 99157
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Guy View Post

This would be true, except that your scenario is highly inaccurate and does not address the issues of living on, you know, Earth. For example, the final purchaser may simply live in a different timezone. Does this mean that people who live on the West Coast all value their time more than those who live on the East Coast, who in turn value their time less than those who live in Europe? Should vendors then decrease the price throughout the day to discount for this? Your analysis only holds in an idealized, open, market.

Isn't this just the opposite of the argument you used to justify why it was okay for somebody to flip purchases from a B&M store? If I'm not willing to be awake when a sale starts just because I live in LA vs. NYC, aren't the people who are awake and purchase all the goods before I get up providing a service?

Edit: And I get it, your point is that people in different time zones shouldn't have to place different priorities on their time, but the reality of it is that there are inherent advantages and disadvantages to living anywhere.
Edited by Biggskip - 7/13/13 at 3:06pm
post #81443 of 99157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggskip View Post

Isn't this just the opposite of the argument you used to justify why it was okay for somebody to flip purchases from a B&M store? If I'm not willing to be awake when a sale starts just because I live in LA vs. NYC, aren't the people who are awake and purchase all the goods before I get up providing a service?

No, because there is no onerous impediment to my purchasing the goods, unlike trying to purchase something from a B&M store, on the opposite side of the country, that is not set up for e-commerce, and in many cases, will not ship. Try calling Century 21 and asking them "So, could you please tell me whether you have any Margiela, and what you have, and the sizes and prices?" In the B&M case, the person the West Coast would be being provided a service. In the online case, it's not a service. It's imposition of a burden. Additionally, the online retailer suffers from decreased exposure, which hurts them. Online retailers actually recognize this, which is why so many flash sales start at noon eastern time. Expecting that someone to be ready to shop at 9 a.m. is not unreasonable. Expecting people to be up and ready to shop at 5 a.m., is.
post #81444 of 99157
Kind of see where LA guy is coming from since you are making money from something that is available to everyone, but I wouldn't say that's intrinsically wrong. Other then the decreased exposure the vendor is getting the same amount of money if a reseller buys it or another individual buys it. They lost money from under pricing the item and either a reseller profits on that mistake or a buyer does. It's not like the buyer is getting fucked over, they're just paying a price closer to the market price, they're not actually loosing, they're just not winning. Could see it as profiting off the vendors inability to price discriminate. To get rid of all of one of there items the vendor might need to sell the item at the sale price even though some people would be willing to pay a higher price for it. In the end the people who would only pay the lower price still only pay the lower price and the people who are willing to pay a higher price pay a higher price. Could even be a benefit to the vendor if someone was to buy all of one of their items to resell since they have their money faster and now theres no risk of the stuff not selling, basically like underwriting.
post #81445 of 99157
I've sold some of my gently used, web store -purchased ties to Singaporeans on b&s, who then resold them for a profit on arcane markets unknown and unavailable to me. I don't feel wounded by this. And if I objected on the grounds that the Singaporeans were violating some shifting notion of community, then I, like everyone here, was free not to participate. I don't see why there has to be a scumbag in each scenario.
.

Edited by noob - 7/13/13 at 5:08pm
post #81446 of 99157
So who's in Australia... Help a brother out.
post #81447 of 99157
I understand where you guys are coming from, but the arguments break down easily. Stores (e-tailers or B&M) price things for a variety of reasons, not just "to get market value". For example, pricing might be a PR strategy. Or it might be a loss leader. The more sophisticated stores often place limits on the number of items that any individual can buy, for that very reason.

Of course, the vendor can always just cancel an order, I suppose. There is no obligation for a vendor to sell something to the first taker.
post #81448 of 99157
Schneider wilderness print shirt arrived, its great. Nice thick brushed cotton, cool prints, great subtle shadow plaid etc...Only the tree portion of the print is like velvet, which is really noisy and weird feeling...
post #81449 of 99157
I have an academic interest in market design, and the term for this is "repugnant transaction". From a purely economic standpoint, such transactions are welfare improving. Site is willing to sell at price x, agent a is willing to buy at price x, agent b is willing to buy at price y. In the end everybody gains some welfare, this is obvious through revealed preference.

The caveat is that some folks find some transactions repugnant or morally objectionable, even if nobody is harmed. Classic examples are people buying horse meat or dog meat for consumption. Another is selling a kidney for money. Both parties are willing and benefit from the transaction, but somebody else may find it morally questionable.
post #81450 of 99157
Quote:
Originally Posted by afixedpoint View Post

The caveat is that some folks find some transactions repugnant or morally objectionable, even if nobody is harmed. Classic examples are people buying horse meat or dog meat for consumption. Another is selling a kidney for money. Both parties are willing and benefit from the transaction, but somebody else may find it morally questionable.

I don't think there is any question how the dog sees it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Random fashion thoughts