RaverX wrote on 2020-09-20, 15:02:
Yes, there are quite a few who have a good job. Who's stopping you to get such a job? […]
Miphee wrote on 2020-09-20, 08:46:
There is a difference between a billionare and a guy with a good job and a 6 figure income. The latter is more common than you think and it's impossible to tell who's wealthy here and who isn't.
Yes, there are quite a few who have a good job. Who's stopping you to get such a job?
darry wrote on 2020-09-20, 09:01:
Another variable is expenses. Somebody with no mortgage, spouse, kids, student loans, car loan, etc and who lives with his or her parents (increasingly common these days), will not need a 6 figure income to be able to afford lots of subjectively overpriced retro stuff .
And the point is? You are complaining that you have a mortgage and a car loan and some other guy doesn't? You're living alone or with your wife and you have a care, the other guy doesn't.
I really don't understand this. I get it, you might be a little "pissed off" when you see some guys that inherited a huge amount of money, but if you see a guy that works hard and has a good job and you envy/blame him? Come on, do it yourself.
I am not complaining and am not "pissed" at those who have more available resources than I do, but I do empathize with those who are getting financially squeezed out of the hobby. I was simply stating that many variables affect a person's ability and hence willingness to pay for retro stuff .
We all have constraints or advantages, some of which we have chosen, others not so much . Some of us also have multiple hobbies that require money, others concentrate on one .
My point is that being rich or not is not necessarily the deciding factor on whether or not one is both willing and able to spend a subjectively "too high" amount of money on a given item . Impatience, for example, also plays a role .
To illustrate that let's consider a hypothetical item that regulatly pops on Ebay for around amount X, but one or more sellers have it for twice that, say amount Y . Obviously the units selling for X will sell first and, if demand is high, the value of X will increase over time . If there are times when items selling for Y are the only ones available, because those selling for X are temporarily all sold, anybody having both the means and willingness (impatience) to pay Y rather than waiting for an item selling for closer to X to appear will have contributed to increasing prices and perveived value significantly . IMHO, this is the sort of scenario (and similar variants) that we should try avoid contributing to as it ends up costing all of us more in the long run .
Obviously, this is just my opinion and don't expect everyone to agree . Of course, people are free to choose to buy what they want at any price they are able to pay and for whatever reason, I will not judge them for it .
a) Multiple variables affect ability and willingness to pay and potentially "overpay".
b)IMHO, certain buying habits can cause prices to rise faster than they otherwise would have .