On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Hans Franke wrote:
> > Aaron Nabil <nabil_at_SpiritOne.com>
> > I scrap (well, actually throw away) a HUGE amount of stuff rather than
> > "sell it for less than I think it's worth". No, I'm not in the
> > business, I'm just a hobbiest, but if I can have valid reasons for
> > throwing things away instead of selling them at a lower price (or giving
> > them away), I can certainly imagine that they do too. It's uncalled for
> > ascribing "poor character" to people unless you also happen to be a mind
> > reader, they might have perfectly valid reasons for doing what they do.
>
> A perfectly healthy state of mind of one person may be total
> insanity to another, and your expression may need some additional
> backup to be considered by most people. Throwing away goods
> istead of selling is more damaging to the vendor than selling
> at a lower price (even when lower than the cost to produce) .
> This is valid for most economic situations, eventualy except
> communist systems and EU buerocracy.
Again, ascribing "state of mind" to people just because they don't
volunteer their rationale to you is silly. You aren't the one making
the decision, they don't have an obligation to you to "explain
themselves" to you.
As a general rule, you can expect people to act in their own best
interest. If someone thinks that reducing the price is in their interest,
that's what they will do. If they think throwing it in the dumpster is in
their best interest, that's what they will do.
I'm not sure which of my expressions needs backup, but first and foremost,
it's my stuff, I don't need to "explain" my actions, you can trust that
being a reasonable person I'm going to act in my best interests. As for
throwing away things being "less damaging" than selling them, I'll
include a couple illustrations from "real life" to show how that it may
not be the case. But what is important is that this isn't intended as an
exautive list, I'm simply pointing out that people can have valid reasons
for what they do even if they don't share them with you.
Local high-tech company T has a surplus sales store, but instead of
selling their own equipment at the store, they scrap it and only get
a tiny fraction of the value back. They do this to avoid competing with
their own new products.
Hobbiest A has acquired most of the remaining sets of a particular test
set that is in high demand on the surplus market. He has a large number
of junk units that he could sell on Ebay or to other users for a few
hundred dollars, but they would get fixed up and sold in competition with
his really nice units (worth $1000), so he throws them away instead.
And I'll make one up...
Vendor X hauls a bunch of stuff down to VCF n, some of which he sells.
People are interested in what he has, but aren't willing to pay what he
thinks are reasonable prices. He has a warehouse of the stuff, realizes
that there is going to be a VCF n+1 and that the same people will be there
and the value of his warehouse of stuff will only go up. If he gives his
stuff away, those will simply be sales he won't make next year, and he may
be creating the impression that if you wait long enough everything will be
"free" or "any offer accepted" at the end, thus driving down sales and
prices even further. So he throws things in the dumpster, taking care to
smash them extra hard on the way in.
That's a prefectly reasonable rationale, and the Vendor X doesn't become
any more "unreasonable" or less "sane" or "logical" becuase he didn't
hand out a leaflet explaining what he was doing.
--
Aaron Nabil
Received on Wed Oct 18 2000 - 18:13:22 BST