The Corroseum forum (new design under construction)

I just stressed that to avoid any misunderstandings. Wasn't sure whether caminantenocturno's post (who quoted you) was a general answer to Priamos' first post which was the one that kickstarted the discussion. It's not a big problem if we clarify things a little bit more every now and then.

Ernest Thesiger wrote:

LethylSteel wrote:an apple and an egg

Eh?

Probably a literal translation of a german idiomatic expression meaning very cheap ...

ION BRITTON wrote:I just stressed that to avoid any misunderstandings. Wasn't sure whether caminantenocturno's post (who quoted you) was a general answer to Priamos' first post which was the one that kickstarted the discussion. It's not a big problem if we clarify things a little bit more every now and then.

I got your intention and I certainly have no problem with clarifying things every now and then ...

caminantenocturno wrote:

Ernest Thesiger wrote:

LethylSteel wrote:an apple and an egg

Eh?

Probably a literal translation of a german idiomatic expression meaning very cheap ...

exactly. translation site proposes "for a song" which i never heard of. maybe would've been as misleading in the discussion as well..

http://dict.leo.org/?lp=ende&from=fx3&s ... und+ein+ei

The dude who got the nitefire 7" isn't a metalhead.

hload wrote:The dude who got the nitefire 7" isn't a metalhead.

'Collector' and 'metalhead' can be defined in various ways, but IMO it is very easy to be both at once. Most metalheads (i.e., people who enjoy metal music) end up obtaining personal copies, on some format or another, of a significant amount of metal music. This is simply b/c metal music is not heard often on traditional music outlets (TV and radio). Thus, in order to hear it, you have to get it for yourself. Thus, they can be considered collectors in a general sense. This dynamic is changing somewhat since people can now easily access music through new outlets like Pandora, Youtube, etc, where they can hear non-mainstream music without having to purchase it. And some metalheads will never own many albums, cds, mp3s, etc due to financial and space constraints. So not every metalhead collects, but I think it's pretty common to be both.

If you use the word 'collector' in the more excclusive sense of someone owning thousands of items, or spending thousands of dollars on metal, or someone tracking down expensive obscurities, well, only a small number of metalheads are collectors in that sense.

Let's look at it the other way too: how many people collect metal records who are not metalheads? There always seem to be lots of accusations/rumors of 'poseurs' buying up metal records and just treating them like stocks- buy low, sell high, don't even know, or care, what the product is. But how many people are REALLY doing that? I may be wrong, but I think people overestimate how many 'metal stock brokers' are active out there. Metal vinyl is, in the grand scheme of things, a very small, fringe market with no mainstream appeal, so there is a relatively small number of people you can sell to. Also, metalheads & 'real' metal collectors are a notoriously poor bunch; we consider items to be getting pricey when they hit 20 euros, which is PEANUTS in many collectibles' markets. Thus, anyone looking to build a retirement portfolio or make a living by wheeling and dealing is not going to invest in Metal Vinyl; they're going to invest in other commodities that have a larger market and are thus easier & more profitable to sell. You can make some money at it, sure, but compared to working in real estate, the stock market, antique furniture, jewelry, etc, the amount of money is paltry.

So, if there are only a handful of 'metal stock brokers' out there, then everyone else who is collecting records must be doing it for some other reason. Some options:
1- they like the music and thus qualify as a metalhead + a collector
2- they don't like the music and are just buying it compulsively (i.e., hoarding stuff without a real need or reason for it). This has to be really rare when it comes to metal records.
3- they don't like the music but want to fit into the subculture and thus are doing it to 'fit in'. I think this is also pretty rare in reality. If you don't enjoy the music, why would you want to fit into a subcullture that revolves around that music? I'm not saying that it never happens- it does sometimes- but I don't think it is as common as some people claim. Are there really thousands and thousands of kids out there bidding up copies of 'Persecution Mania' who only want it so they can try to impress the hot chick in the 'Maiden T-shirt and tight jeans at school?

-------------

Re: do buyers and sellers have to be upfront about a fair price for an item... I've always considered it both parties' responsibility to know what they are doing. If you pay too much or sell an item too cheap, that's your fault for not knowing what you are doing. If I find a member of HAWT CHEEKZ today and he offers to sell me his last 2 copies of their old "Hawt in the Crackz' single for $5 each, am I obligated to tell him they're worth $200 each? IMO no, I am not obligated to do so. The exception would be if I told him flat-out that the records were worth nothing, knowing I could turn around and sell them easily for $200 apiece. Lying is one thing, but buying/selling something for an outrageous price (high or low) doesn't mean you did something dirty IMO.

There's my 2 cents. Have fun.

nightsblood wrote:'Collector' and 'metalhead' can be defined in various ways, but IMO it is very easy to be both at once. Most metalheads (i.e., people who enjoy metal music) end up obtaining personal copies, on some format or another, of a significant amount of metal music. This is simply b/c metal music is not heard often on traditional music outlets (TV and radio). Thus, in order to hear it, you have to get it for yourself. Thus, they can be considered collectors in a general sense. This dynamic is changing somewhat since people can now easily access music through new outlets like Pandora, Youtube, etc, where they can hear non-mainstream music without having to purchase it. And some metalheads will never own many albums, cds, mp3s, etc due to financial and space constraints. So not every metalhead collects, but I think it's pretty common to be both.

If you use the word 'collector' in the more excclusive sense of someone owning thousands of items, or spending thousands of dollars on metal, or someone tracking down expensive obscurities, well, only a small number of metalheads are collectors in that sense.

Let's look at it the other way too: how many people collect metal records who are not metalheads? There always seem to be lots of accusations/rumors of 'poseurs' buying up metal records and just treating them like stocks- buy low, sell high, don't even know, or care, what the product is. But how many people are REALLY doing that? I may be wrong, but I think people overestimate how many 'metal stock brokers' are active out there. Metal vinyl is, in the grand scheme of things, a very small, fringe market with no mainstream appeal, so there is a relatively small number of people you can sell to. Also, metalheads & 'real' metal collectors are a notoriously poor bunch; we consider items to be getting pricey when they hit 20 euros, which is PEANUTS in many collectibles' markets. Thus, anyone looking to build a retirement portfolio or make a living by wheeling and dealing is not going to invest in Metal Vinyl; they're going to invest in other commodities that have a larger market and are thus easier & more profitable to sell. You can make some money at it, sure, but compared to working in real estate, the stock market, antique furniture, jewelry, etc, the amount of money is paltry.

So, if there are only a handful of 'metal stock brokers' out there, then everyone else who is collecting records must be doing it for some other reason. Some options:
1- they like the music and thus qualify as a metalhead + a collector
2- they don't like the music and are just buying it compulsively (i.e., hoarding stuff without a real need or reason for it). This has to be really rare when it comes to metal records.
3- they don't like the music but want to fit into the subculture and thus are doing it to 'fit in'. I think this is also pretty rare in reality. If you don't enjoy the music, why would you want to fit into a subcullture that revolves around that music? I'm not saying that it never happens- it does sometimes- but I don't think it is as common as some people claim. Are there really thousands and thousands of kids out there bidding up copies of 'Persecution Mania' who only want it so they can try to impress the hot chick in the 'Maiden T-shirt and tight jeans at school?

-------------

Re: do buyers and sellers have to be upfront about a fair price for an item... I've always considered it both parties' responsibility to know what they are doing. If you pay too much or sell an item too cheap, that's your fault for not knowing what you are doing. If I find a member of HAWT CHEEKZ today and he offers to sell me his last 2 copies of their old "Hawt in the Crackz' single for $5 each, am I obligated to tell him they're worth $200 each? IMO no, I am not obligated to do so. The exception would be if I told him flat-out that the records were worth nothing, knowing I could turn around and sell them easily for $200 apiece. Lying is one thing, but buying/selling something for an outrageous price (high or low) doesn't mean you did something dirty IMO.

There's my 2 cents. Have fun.

I agreee 100% with you.

I collect Coins and Banknotes.
Just started with Stamps also...
Stanley Gibbons>>Scott

ION BRITTON wrote:

LethylSteel wrote:Or like the guy who bought the last Iron Cross (Florida) LP's from the band in the 90's for an apple and an egg and a few months/year later a band member asked a collector about the value of the record and he said 500 $!!

If that guy knew the price of the LP and never told the band anything about it or he didn't try in some way to play it fair by for example giving them a percentage of what he sold later (I assume at least 20x the price he bought them), that's downright fucking dirty for me. I understand not everyone sees it this way, but that's how I do.

Created a new topic, btw.

Ok I totally understand now. Yes, tactics like that really are dirty.

nightsblood wrote:'Collector' and 'metalhead' can be defined in various ways, but IMO it is very easy to be both at once. Most metalheads (i.e., people who enjoy metal music) end up obtaining personal copies, on some format or another, of a significant amount of metal music. This is simply b/c metal music is not heard often on traditional music outlets (TV and radio). Thus, in order to hear it, you have to get it for yourself. Thus, they can be considered collectors in a general sense. This dynamic is changing somewhat since people can now easily access music through new outlets like Pandora, Youtube, etc, where they can hear non-mainstream music without having to purchase it. And some metalheads will never own many albums, cds, mp3s, etc due to financial and space constraints. So not every metalhead collects, but I think it's pretty common to be both.

If you use the word 'collector' in the more excclusive sense of someone owning thousands of items, or spending thousands of dollars on metal, or someone tracking down expensive obscurities, well, only a small number of metalheads are collectors in that sense.

Let's look at it the other way too: how many people collect metal records who are not metalheads? There always seem to be lots of accusations/rumors of 'poseurs' buying up metal records and just treating them like stocks- buy low, sell high, don't even know, or care, what the product is. But how many people are REALLY doing that? I may be wrong, but I think people overestimate how many 'metal stock brokers' are active out there. Metal vinyl is, in the grand scheme of things, a very small, fringe market with no mainstream appeal, so there is a relatively small number of people you can sell to. Also, metalheads & 'real' metal collectors are a notoriously poor bunch; we consider items to be getting pricey when they hit 20 euros, which is PEANUTS in many collectibles' markets. Thus, anyone looking to build a retirement portfolio or make a living by wheeling and dealing is not going to invest in Metal Vinyl; they're going to invest in other commodities that have a larger market and are thus easier & more profitable to sell. You can make some money at it, sure, but compared to working in real estate, the stock market, antique furniture, jewelry, etc, the amount of money is paltry.

So, if there are only a handful of 'metal stock brokers' out there, then everyone else who is collecting records must be doing it for some other reason. Some options:
1- they like the music and thus qualify as a metalhead + a collector
2- they don't like the music and are just buying it compulsively (i.e., hoarding stuff without a real need or reason for it). This has to be really rare when it comes to metal records.
3- they don't like the music but want to fit into the subculture and thus are doing it to 'fit in'. I think this is also pretty rare in reality. If you don't enjoy the music, why would you want to fit into a subcullture that revolves around that music? I'm not saying that it never happens- it does sometimes- but I don't think it is as common as some people claim. Are there really thousands and thousands of kids out there bidding up copies of 'Persecution Mania' who only want it so they can try to impress the hot chick in the 'Maiden T-shirt and tight jeans at school?

-------------

Re: do buyers and sellers have to be upfront about a fair price for an item... I've always considered it both parties' responsibility to know what they are doing. If you pay too much or sell an item too cheap, that's your fault for not knowing what you are doing. If I find a member of HAWT CHEEKZ today and he offers to sell me his last 2 copies of their old "Hawt in the Crackz' single for $5 each, am I obligated to tell him they're worth $200 each? IMO no, I am not obligated to do so. The exception would be if I told him flat-out that the records were worth nothing, knowing I could turn around and sell them easily for $200 apiece. Lying is one thing, but buying/selling something for an outrageous price (high or low) doesn't mean you did something dirty IMO.

There's my 2 cents. Have fun.

Very Nice Sir.

nightsblood wrote:If I find a member of HAWT CHEEKZ today and he offers to sell me his last 2 copies of their old "Hawt in the Crackz' single for $5 each, am I obligated to tell him they're worth $200 each?

Ok, I'm officially taking wagers on how long it'll take before the band Hawt Cheekz starts to appear on people's want lists.

Other than that, I agree with nightie, 100%.

Top Want..

And I am sure someone on here already did a Google search

Piotr Sargnagel wrote:

ION BRITTON wrote:If that guy knew the price of the LP and never told the band anything about it or he didn't try in some way to play it fair by for example giving them a percentage of what he sold later (I assume at least 20x the price he bought them), that's downright fucking dirty for me. I understand not everyone sees it this way, but that's how I do.

Created a new topic, btw.

Ok I totally understand now. Yes, tactics like that really are dirty.

I honestly cannot understand this. So it's always the buyer's obligation to tell the seller how much the item is worth? Hardly. Outright lying is dirty, but accepting a seller's set price, or offering a below market value price to someone who has no clue about the market value isn't necessarily dirty.

glockose wrote:Top Want..

And I am sure someone on here already did a Google search

I already have a spare copy. Anyone wanna trade?