Value (was Re: Ken Slusser

From: Chuck McManis <cmcmanis_at_mcmanis.com>
Date: Wed Oct 24 14:43:38 2001

At 12:08 PM 10/24/01, "Merch" wrote:
> Where do you live, Chuck? those rates would get me good living
> for the next couple of *years*!

Sunnyvale California, the heart of Silicon Valley, where a 3 bedroom house
that's about 72" from the neighbors house, has 1500 square feet, no yard,
and "needs work", was sold in 2000 for $650,000.

(yes, it got that bad, yes there is much, much pain around here these days)

And in case it wasn't obvious, in my message I was being a bit facetious in
that $10K/week would be a great wage (even after taking $1K - $2K out for
expenses). So why doesn't this guy want to live that life? Or perhaps the
inventory really can't be sold for $100K, perhaps it can only be sold
quickly for $10K (making your wages about $150/week after expenses)

Its the thing that bothers me about the discussions of "worth" on this list
and elsewhere, the time component. Sure if you have the one part someone
needs to survive when they need it, it is "worth" a ton of money to them.
If on the other hand nobody needs or wants the part you have then its
"worth" is $0.03/lb as scrap. Note: I don't know Ken and in no way am I
impugning his reputation so while this came up in the context of what he
has to offer, it isn't directed at him! I have experience that it is not
uncommon for someone to use the "time critical" value of something's worth
vs its actual current worth, in order to inflate the value of a
transaction. Stock brokers do this when suggesting that a stock "will be
worth $X" and so "$Y is a reasonable investment."

As I try to keep my hobby "income impact neutral" for some reasonable
window, the value proposition of this stuff is an area that I am quite
interested in.

--Chuck
Received on Wed Oct 24 2001 - 14:43:38 BST