Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth
With the Wagner you'd be depriving someone of life-changing money and IMO the disparity between purchase price and value is unconscionable. Here, you just got a very good deal on a piece in the scheme of things not that big.
|
An interesting line of inquiry comes to mind from this comment.
Assuming buyer and seller are people for whom the card is a life-changing windfall, and there is no nefarious conduct on the part of the buyer--let's say the card is in a lot of junk that the buyer purchases at a flea market--why is the seller's quality of life more important than the buyer's? How is that decision determined? Is that a universal rule and if so, how was it determined?
Are the relative circumstances of the buyer and seller relevant? For example, would it change the analysis if the seller was a billionaire and the buyer had a family he was struggling to feed? Would it matter if the seller found the card in the trash and was thrilled to get his asking price for it?
Why is a 10x disparity ($2500 card for $250) OK but a 10,000x not? Is there a bright line demarcation for this and if so, how is it derived? Isn't whatever number we use ultimately just as random as any other?
Isn't this sort of deal precisely the goal of every good capitalist, to make as much money as possible? As a capitalist society, shouldn't we applaud someone who recognizes value and makes a mint?
Is the raw number itself the problem rather than the concept? Say I fish a $50,000 card out of a $0.50 box, is the analysis the same? What if I pay $50,000 for a $1,000,000 card? Is that better?
I remain troubled by the idea that the buyer can purchase the card in an arms' length transaction yet still get called out.
10-17-2023, 07:09 PM
Similar Threads
Hybrid Mode
