I am really sick of hearing these "one strike and you're out" attacks against local businesses.
If you don't like the comic at $20, (a) don't buy it there; (b) send a note to the guy in charge - he's way more reachable, i have a feeling, than the a-holes at your national bank, your national credit card, your national gasoline station, your national fast food chain...
but for feck's sake... i just rediscovered Newbury Comics back in December and picked up some well priced media gifts for friends and family... and forgot how LUCKY boston is to have such a thing still in existence when most shops of that sort have been crammed out of existence by online sellers. I don't spend much money there, but I like what the store is. They have also brought a huge number of bands very close to their audiences by sponsoring in-store events (about the only place other than NYC and -maybe- LA you're ever going to have that happening), and carry stuff that other retailers won't.
Come on, stop pulling out the elephant guns on the easy targets. it's not sporting.
Hell, I've exchanged emails with Mike Dreese, personable owner of Newbury Comics, myself. If this guy truly has beef, he should stop whining and go straight to the top. Although as others have pointed out, the fact that his complaint is really simply that NC is doing the same thing he wants to do means that even if he did talk to Dreese, he'd probably laugh in the guy's face. He doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Newbury Comics is one of the best record store chains in the country. We're insanely lucky to have it.
The difference is that milk and bread during the blizzard of 78 was almost certainly something that someone would need to survive. That blizzard is why so many people over the age of 30 are traumatized everytime it is going to snow more then a foot.
This is a comic book, anyone who buys it for more then 5 dollars is a moron for doing it, but if Newbury Comics can command that price so be it. So many Spiderman fans are Obama fans, and its already gotten so much press I think the thinking goes that it will be worth alot of money someday. Problem is all these people spending 20 bucks on a comic will put it in little baggies and hold it and protect it. 25 years from now when they go to cash in they will find out that the comic is worth 20 bucks at most (with inflation the price would have went down versus spending the 20 bucks on a CD, financial CD not a music CD) because there will be a steady supply of fresh copies of that particular comic. Whenever someone says something is a collectors item it normally isnt...
I don't have numbers to show that this was the case in this instance, but the theory (basic supply and demand, but with a crunchy blizzard topping) is reasonably solid...
By raising prices during the blizzard, the stores were able to prevent a few greedy customers from hoarding the constrained, essential goods (french toast ingredients) so that those few - or people from other stores - didn't clean them out and leave their customers with nothing... making the store overall less appealing for any spending at all.
I'm not saying what they did was particularly noble, only that the only reliable way to reduce unnecessary consumption to that which is essential, rather than that which is possible, is to raise prices (quantity limits don't work when someone is determined to sneak around them)... and may have been protective of the store's overall interests as well.
In the everyday observable world, we do have the examples of all-you-can-eat buffets plastered with "Please take all you care to eat, but eat all you take" signs vs. Brazilian buffets that charge by the pound and have no need for such signs.
But if the purpose of the price gouging during the blizzard was to prevent a few people from buying all the food, they could have accomplished the same thing by limiting the quantity each person was allowed to buy. If I had to guess, I'd say they price gouged to make more money.
I said that hoarders generally find a way to hoard anyway. To elaborate: a viable strategy is to send the kids in one at a time to each buy the allotted two gallons of milk, two loaves of bread, and two cartons of eggs... or to be even more blatant and just put them all in line, each holding a $10 bill and basket of constrained stuff.
I also acknowledged that the motives were probably not noble, but intended that an outcome (however unintended) may have been protective of some people, as well as of the interests of the store generally (keeping it from becoming depleted of these goods which may have caused people to not go there for other less-panic-driven items)
Finally, back to supply-demand-survival, if the store was unable to receive incoming shipments, then it was rational to raise the prices, in order to cover the cost of being open during a time when there were probably fewer sales than usual and no indication of when things would return to normal. Groceries go through food like little birds - they are constantly restocking.
No one needed bread and milk to survive three days at home. People wanted bread and milk. Raising prices in emergencies does serve to limit hoarding, and spread the availability of the product. If that gallon of milk is so important to people, then they should be willing to pay a higher price to buy it. It works for the retailer, and works for the customers as a group. It doesn't work for the selfish hoarders, who are the loudest complainers.
It was more like a week that we were stuck at home, and while we didn't need bread and milk to survive, we did need food.
Most people hadn't stocked up on anything before the Blizzard of '78, so some really were running low on food.
My family was fine, but did go buy some food, but mostly we walked to the store to get out of the house and for the fun of it. I don't remember any price gouging in my neighborhod though.
Thats the story I heard, and something about the National Guard closing off some streets as well. Many people in my old neighberhood would shop for a few days at a time (like the old times) so running out of food was a possibility. They still did that in the summer time, but in the winter they all had all sorts of food on hand in case of emergency. Back then people at the local store wouldnt price gouge because I think the neighbors would never talk to the owner again, it helped that he lived above the store so being looked down upon meant more then just losing a few customers, it meant being pushed to the side on all social occasions as well.
In his comments, he acknowledges that he wanted the issue because he was hoping it would be worth something someday. He's outraged, however, that its already worth something today. Basically, he wants to make an obscene profit off the comic book, but HOW DARE Newbury Comics do so. HOW DARE they infringe on his scalping by charging market value for a collectible. The nerve!
Someone else made the remark in his comments and I misread the context and thought it was the OP. While I still find the complaint baseless on much the same grounds, he may not have been blatantly hypocritical about it.
I tend to do my shopping a little bit at a time, hence providing me with necessary staples (i. e. eggs, milk, bread, pasta, cheese, and I often make a pot of spaghetti sauce, American Chop Suey, or Chile con Carne to have on hand and freeze portions of) so that I'm able to avoid the long lines and mass hysteria at the grocery store when a big snowstorm threatens to hit thisr area.
I actually got a copy of the Spiderman/Obama issue at Newbury Comics for the cover-price of $3.99. What Red appears to be complaining about is the pricing of a variant issue (saw a couple there for $19.99).
Variant issues are pretty common these days. They tend to have a different cover or extra content not found in the regular run...basically making them instant collectibles for nerds like myself. They're released at the same time as the regular edition, but printed in super-limited quantities...maybe 1 for every 100 copies of the regular edition. They'll have the same cover price as the regular run printed on the cover, but they're designed to command a higher price upon release based on market interest. Probably cost Newbury a fair amount more than $3.99 to acquire them.
That makes alot of sense to me. Newbury Comics doesnt strike me as the sort of place that would change prices and gouge customers anyway. They may not be corporate but they are not just a mom and pop store that can just go change the price by hand whenever they feel like it.
Comments
oh, come on
I am really sick of hearing these "one strike and you're out" attacks against local businesses.
If you don't like the comic at $20, (a) don't buy it there; (b) send a note to the guy in charge - he's way more reachable, i have a feeling, than the a-holes at your national bank, your national credit card, your national gasoline station, your national fast food chain...
but for feck's sake... i just rediscovered Newbury Comics back in December and picked up some well priced media gifts for friends and family... and forgot how LUCKY boston is to have such a thing still in existence when most shops of that sort have been crammed out of existence by online sellers. I don't spend much money there, but I like what the store is. They have also brought a huge number of bands very close to their audiences by sponsoring in-store events (about the only place other than NYC and -maybe- LA you're ever going to have that happening), and carry stuff that other retailers won't.
Come on, stop pulling out the elephant guns on the easy targets. it's not sporting.
Reachable
Hell, I've exchanged emails with Mike Dreese, personable owner of Newbury Comics, myself. If this guy truly has beef, he should stop whining and go straight to the top. Although as others have pointed out, the fact that his complaint is really simply that NC is doing the same thing he wants to do means that even if he did talk to Dreese, he'd probably laugh in the guy's face. He doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Newbury Comics is one of the best record store chains in the country. We're insanely lucky to have it.
To be fair
That's not price gouging. More like supply and demand.
The difference is that milk
The difference is that milk and bread during the blizzard of 78 was almost certainly something that someone would need to survive. That blizzard is why so many people over the age of 30 are traumatized everytime it is going to snow more then a foot.
This is a comic book, anyone who buys it for more then 5 dollars is a moron for doing it, but if Newbury Comics can command that price so be it. So many Spiderman fans are Obama fans, and its already gotten so much press I think the thinking goes that it will be worth alot of money someday. Problem is all these people spending 20 bucks on a comic will put it in little baggies and hold it and protect it. 25 years from now when they go to cash in they will find out that the comic is worth 20 bucks at most (with inflation the price would have went down versus spending the 20 bucks on a CD, financial CD not a music CD) because there will be a steady supply of fresh copies of that particular comic. Whenever someone says something is a collectors item it normally isnt...
Price increase during the blizzard could have also saved people
I don't have numbers to show that this was the case in this instance, but the theory (basic supply and demand, but with a crunchy blizzard topping) is reasonably solid...
By raising prices during the blizzard, the stores were able to prevent a few greedy customers from hoarding the constrained, essential goods (french toast ingredients) so that those few - or people from other stores - didn't clean them out and leave their customers with nothing... making the store overall less appealing for any spending at all.
I'm not saying what they did was particularly noble, only that the only reliable way to reduce unnecessary consumption to that which is essential, rather than that which is possible, is to raise prices (quantity limits don't work when someone is determined to sneak around them)... and may have been protective of the store's overall interests as well.
In the everyday observable world, we do have the examples of all-you-can-eat buffets plastered with "Please take all you care to eat, but eat all you take" signs vs. Brazilian buffets that charge by the pound and have no need for such signs.
But
But if the purpose of the price gouging during the blizzard was to prevent a few people from buying all the food, they could have accomplished the same thing by limiting the quantity each person was allowed to buy. If I had to guess, I'd say they price gouged to make more money.
I addressed the issue of quantity limits
I said that hoarders generally find a way to hoard anyway. To elaborate: a viable strategy is to send the kids in one at a time to each buy the allotted two gallons of milk, two loaves of bread, and two cartons of eggs... or to be even more blatant and just put them all in line, each holding a $10 bill and basket of constrained stuff.
I also acknowledged that the motives were probably not noble, but intended that an outcome (however unintended) may have been protective of some people, as well as of the interests of the store generally (keeping it from becoming depleted of these goods which may have caused people to not go there for other less-panic-driven items)
Finally, back to supply-demand-survival, if the store was unable to receive incoming shipments, then it was rational to raise the prices, in order to cover the cost of being open during a time when there were probably fewer sales than usual and no indication of when things would return to normal. Groceries go through food like little birds - they are constantly restocking.
No one needed bread and milk
No one needed bread and milk to survive three days at home. People wanted bread and milk. Raising prices in emergencies does serve to limit hoarding, and spread the availability of the product. If that gallon of milk is so important to people, then they should be willing to pay a higher price to buy it. It works for the retailer, and works for the customers as a group. It doesn't work for the selfish hoarders, who are the loudest complainers.
More like a week
It was more like a week that we were stuck at home, and while we didn't need bread and milk to survive, we did need food.
Most people hadn't stocked up on anything before the Blizzard of '78, so some really were running low on food.
My family was fine, but did go buy some food, but mostly we walked to the store to get out of the house and for the fun of it. I don't remember any price gouging in my neighborhod though.
Thats the story I heard, and
Thats the story I heard, and something about the National Guard closing off some streets as well. Many people in my old neighberhood would shop for a few days at a time (like the old times) so running out of food was a possibility. They still did that in the summer time, but in the winter they all had all sorts of food on hand in case of emergency. Back then people at the local store wouldnt price gouge because I think the neighbors would never talk to the owner again, it helped that he lived above the store so being looked down upon meant more then just losing a few customers, it meant being pushed to the side on all social occasions as well.
"But I wanted to price gouge!"
In his comments, he acknowledges that he wanted the issue because he was hoping it would be worth something someday. He's outraged, however, that its already worth something today. Basically, he wants to make an obscene profit off the comic book, but HOW DARE Newbury Comics do so. HOW DARE they infringe on his scalping by charging market value for a collectible. The nerve!
Oh the gall!
How DARE they mess with his profit margin like that!
I don't see the "worth something someday" quote in the article
Was it removed or am i totally missing the reference amid the clutter and Ricardo Montalban references?
My mistake
Someone else made the remark in his comments and I misread the context and thought it was the OP. While I still find the complaint baseless on much the same grounds, he may not have been blatantly hypocritical about it.
Stocking up on food:
I tend to do my shopping a little bit at a time, hence providing me with necessary staples (i. e. eggs, milk, bread, pasta, cheese, and I often make a pot of spaghetti sauce, American Chop Suey, or Chile con Carne to have on hand and freeze portions of) so that I'm able to avoid the long lines and mass hysteria at the grocery store when a big snowstorm threatens to hit thisr area.
(No subject)
Um, that's a variant
Quick nerd-out clarification...
I actually got a copy of the Spiderman/Obama issue at Newbury Comics for the cover-price of $3.99. What Red appears to be complaining about is the pricing of a variant issue (saw a couple there for $19.99).
Variant issues are pretty common these days. They tend to have a different cover or extra content not found in the regular run...basically making them instant collectibles for nerds like myself. They're released at the same time as the regular edition, but printed in super-limited quantities...maybe 1 for every 100 copies of the regular edition. They'll have the same cover price as the regular run printed on the cover, but they're designed to command a higher price upon release based on market interest. Probably cost Newbury a fair amount more than $3.99 to acquire them.
That makes alot of sense to
That makes alot of sense to me. Newbury Comics doesnt strike me as the sort of place that would change prices and gouge customers anyway. They may not be corporate but they are not just a mom and pop store that can just go change the price by hand whenever they feel like it.