Posted By:
Bill ToddJeff asked, "When you buy a house isn't it fair game to know what the house was previously sold for?"
Jeff,
Fair game? Sure. Relevant? Not at all. (Though many people think it is. In economics and business it's called the "Sunk Cost" fallacy.)
I guess Jared's real question is, "What's the point?"
Let's say someone bought a card three years ago for $200, and the market for similar cards has risen substantially since then--to around $500. Is there any chance they would then say, "Well, I only paid $200 for it, so I can let you have it for $300"? Not likely.
In my experience--on both sides of the table--the seller brings the original purchase price into the discussion only when they're trying to either:
Impress the potential buyer with how "close" they're working, or
Somehow cover their butt for overpaying in the first place.
(There's also the possibility that it's their really bad attempt at small talk.)
I'm not that easily impressed, especially if the seller is making a point to tell me how he screwed up.
The only person who might be swayed by the statement is an uneducated buyer. "Well, if HE paid X for it, then it must be worth at least X+."
At any rate, I just ignore it. I don't get offended by it, any more than I would by an other lapse in logical thought.
Bill