The bookselling racket (was: Collecting Dictionaries)
xerlome
> I have rarely spent much for them until recently since competition from bookdealing racketeers has artificially inflated prices and scarcified many desirable books.
my-wings wrote:
> Alice bookdealing...hopefully not a racketeer!
I know and like some bookdealers, but some of my views may offend some
who read them here. I am bound to speak my mind, so i can only hope
they won't take it personally.
I am primarily referring to used book dealers who buy from low cost
markets and mark the prices way up. The books were already available
to me (the user, the buying public) at an affordable price. Now, if i
want them, i need to pay serious money.
Since the recent boom in internet selling, which seems to be growing by
the day, so many professionals and amateurs alike have entered the
market that competition for cheap used books is extreme.
It is the rampant buying of already available low cost books for resale
that i call a racket, and this those who do it racketeers.
John A. Stovall wrote:
> Odd way to describe those who make our collecting possible.
Thrift stores and other low price markets have made my collecting
possible. Had the markest been what they are now when i began my
dictionary collection, it would not be anywhere near what it is today,
as i could never have afforded it.
> I for one am grateful to my many friends who are book dealer and have helped me grow my collections
I am more grateful to the thrift markets. I only go to the dealers as
a last resort when i can't find what i want, which i am doing more and
more out of desperation as the low cost markets are "cleaned up".
> "The booksellers are generous liberal-minded men." Samuel Johnson
Was he referring to resalers back then ?
This does not apply to all, but there is a common class of bookdealers
who see books primarily as commodities. They may not even read much
themselves, but they have learned to spot what will sell. I can spot
these sorts easily at thrift stores. There's something about the way
they look at books that tells me what they are looking for in them:
money.
ER Lyon
Evelyn C. Leeper
> ...
> I am primarily referring to used book dealers who buy from low cost
> markets and mark the prices way up. The books were already available
> to me (the user, the buying public) at an affordable price. Now, if i
> want them, i need to pay serious money.
>
> Since the recent boom in internet selling, which seems to be growing by
> the day, so many professionals and amateurs alike have entered the
> market that competition for cheap used books is extreme.
In part this is because it hardly pays to list books on the Internet
that cost more for shipping than for the book. I know at least one
local bookseller who listed only books above a certain price on the
Internet, and I suspect this is not uncommon. Checking the on-line
listings for another bookstore, I find nothing my Shakespeare priced
under $5, yet I know they have lots in the store. Why spend time
putting the low-end on line?
> It is the rampant buying of already available low cost books for resale
> that i call a racket, and this those who do it racketeers.
This is what dealers in every area have always done.
> John A. Stovall wrote
>
>>Odd way to describe those who make our collecting possible.
>
> Thrift stores and other low price markets have made my collecting
> possible. Had the markest been what they are now when i began my
> dictionary collection, it would not be anywhere near what it is today,
> as i could never have afforded it.
One might as well claim art dealers are racketeers because people have
decided to pay ridiculous amounts of money for art that at one time the
artist couldn't even sell.
>>I for one am grateful to my many friends who are book dealer and have helped me grow my collections
>
> I am more grateful to the thrift markets. I only go to the dealers as
> a last resort when i can't find what i want, which i am doing more and
> more out of desperation as the low cost markets are "cleaned up".
The thrift markets sold (and sell) books cheap because that is not their
main focus. They are more concerned with clothing and household goods,
and in many cases are running as a charity in any case.
> This does not apply to all, but there is a common class of bookdealers
> who see books primarily as commodities. They may not even read much
> themselves, but they have learned to spot what will sell. I can spot
> these sorts easily at thrift stores. There's something about the way
> they look at books that tells me what they are looking for in them:
> money.
They have always been there. And if they weren't, the thrift stores
would eventually throw away the books to make room for winter coats.
Sure, lots of dealers over-price their books. I see them in
bookfinder.com all the time. The good thing about the Internet is that
even if one dealer decides he wants to charge $200 for a book, one can
see if other dealers are selling it for $20. (We've all seen this, right?)
--
Evelyn C. Leeper
Complaint is the largest tribute heaven receives,
and the sincerest part of our devotion. --Jonathan Swift
my-wings
"xerlome" <xer...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1135763789.4...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> In "Collecting Dictionaries" thread i wrote:
>
>> I have rarely spent much for them until recently since competition from
>> bookdealing racketeers has artificially inflated prices and scarcified
>> many desirable books.
>
> my-wings wrote:
>
>> Alice bookdealing...hopefully not a racketeer!
>
> I know and like some bookdealers, but some of my views may offend some
> who read them here. I am bound to speak my mind, so i can only hope
> they won't take it personally.
>
Well, as long as you know what you're getting in to....
> I am primarily referring to used book dealers who buy from low cost
> markets and mark the prices way up. The books were already available
> to me (the user, the buying public) at an affordable price. Now, if i
> want them, i need to pay serious money.
>
I don't know how many thrift stores you visit, but it's highly unlikely that
you will be able to find every title you want and need by dropping into the
local Goodwill on the lucky day your special book happens to be there. Even
if all the books you wanted were available at those shops, then the price
you pay for not making the rounds regularly and first is the dealer's
premium for making it his business to seek out and find these books and make
them available to specialist collectors who want them.
No book dealer could survive by selling fifty-cent books for a dollar
(multiple jokes about penny sellers aside). The dealer has to become
knowledgeable and proficient at finding the hidden gems in plain sight and
then matching them to the appropriate market that will value them highly
enough for the dealer to survive and do it again another day.
Book dealers add other value to the transaction as well. For one thing, they
collectively visit many, many more thrift shops than you could and assemble
a stock that will let you have the exact title, in the exact condition, at
the exact time you want it. And it takes them years of living on starvation
wages and eating their mistakes to learn that skill.
Besides, it's a fallacy to think that book dealers get all of their stock
from thrift stores at pennies a book. Book dealers buy from estates, at
auction, on eBay, from walk-in customers if they have a brick and morter
store, and from other book dealers, either because the book is in their
specialty and they have customers for it, or because the other dealer didn't
make enough money to stay in business. A dealer may pay up to a third or
half of what they think they can sell a book for. So...that $200 title may
well have cost the book dealer $100 before it ever sees an on-line listing.
And out of the $100 profit that he might get (some day, after tying his
money up for years), most of that will go to pay the rent, insurance, and
other expenses of being in business.
> Since the recent boom in internet selling, which seems to be growing by
> the day, so many professionals and amateurs alike have entered the
> market that competition for cheap used books is extreme.
>
> It is the rampant buying of already available low cost books for resale
> that i call a racket, and this those who do it racketeers.
>
And yet (taking the other side from my comments above), the competition
among sellers has never been higher. There really and truly are sellers who
have huge amounts of stock listed on line for less than $1. Just plug any
common title into eBay to find perfectly nice hard-back first editions going
for literally pennies. There is no collusion among sellers to keep prices
artifically inflated. Just the opposite, in fact. Most of the out-of-print
sellers are small, independent businesses. They do the same kind of research
their customer's can do on line, and they price their titles to sell, based
on scarcity and condition.
What with a purchaser's ability to stalk eBay listings and compare prices
from multiple sellers on large book-search sites, the internet has made
this, in my opinion, the best time ever to be a collector. If there are
bargains to be found, you can find them on line.
> John A. Stovall wrote:
>
>> Odd way to describe those who make our collecting possible.
>
> Thrift stores and other low price markets have made my collecting
> possible. Had the markest been what they are now when i began my
> dictionary collection, it would not be anywhere near what it is today,
> as i could never have afforded it.
>
>> I for one am grateful to my many friends who are book dealer and have
>> helped me grow my collections
>
> I am more grateful to the thrift markets. I only go to the dealers as
> a last resort when i can't find what i want, which i am doing more and
> more out of desperation as the low cost markets are "cleaned up".
>
In your earlier post, I believe you said you had been at this for six years.
The internet has been "around" as a book-buying venue for most of that time.
I respectfully submit that what's changed in that time is not the advent of
preditory book dealers, but your own requirements.
Your collection has matured, and you've already found most of the "easy"
titles. You are now looking for the scarcer items, and naturally they are
going to cost more. You can wait years and years for them to show up in your
local Goodwill (an they probably never will), or you can go to a book
dealer, who has quite probably paid more than thrift store prices for that
particular book in the first place.
Welcome to the joys and aggravation of book collecting!
Alice
--
Book collecting terms illustrated. Occasional books for sale.
http://www.mywingsbooks.com/
xerlome
first clarify my view.
When we by a new book, we are paying numerous people who made the book
possible. We pay the writer, possibly an editor, illustrator, and/or
photographer, the publisher, the manufacturer and those who produce the
materials and machinery used to manufacture the book, and, finally,
cuts for the distributor and seller - as well as various people
employed along the way. Each gets no more than a single or double
digit percentage.
When a resaler picks up a used book for, say, a dollar, and then sells
it for the price of a new book or even higher, we are paying the dealer
a four (or even five) digit percent profit for buying and holding an
already available book after the original buyer has paid the legitimate
costs and later decided to donate it to a charity thrift store or
public library. Even $20.00 is a 2000% markup. I see this as a kind
of market theft.
So this is how resalers artificially inflate used book prices and
scarcify good books to serve only their own profit. This is not a
service to the general public, but only to the dealer and to the elite
buyer who doesn't have to compete with the mass of poorer people. This
further impoverishes low income buyers, establishing that it is only
the relatively well-to-do who may own these books.
I know for a fact that there are dealers of large turnover who buy up
books at low prices, attempt to sell them for a while, then take
leftovers to the dump rather than sell them cheap or donate them to
thrift stores. This makes sense to the dealers, of course, because
cheap books compete with their sales, whether they or a thrift store
sells them. Thrift store also dump books, but at least they are
cheaply available for a while and well picked over before they do.
I personally know of part time book dealers who work for thrift markets
and pre-sort the books that come in. I also personally know of
dealers who have insiders at libraries saving desirable items for them
before library sales. Particularly in the case of discards, this
practice is reprehensible in my view because the public largely pays
for the library and its books, and the sale is the public's last chance
to acquire them at a low cost.
I have often watched resalers at sales in a mad rush to grab the best
books ahead of the reading public (and other dealers, of course). As
one who buys for himself, my sympathies go to those who must compete
with them. I wish there were a way to allow the reading public plenty
of time to look over the already available low cost used books before
the profiteers get to them, but there is obviously no reasonable way to
control this in a free market.
I am not opposed to all bookselling, only certain practices which i
find abusive. As i have already said, i have liked used book dealers i
have known, and i can relate to what they do. As a matter of fact, i
have the bug in me that would have me join their ranks, and the
aptitude to do it. I may do so if i feel i can succeed without
compromising my principles. We vote by our actions for what we feel is
right and the kind of world we want to live in, which is why i feel i
cannot practice this kind of resaling.
ER Lyon
Todd T
xerlome wrote:
> I appreciate the thoughtful replies. I will reply to them, but will
> first clarify my view.
>
> When we by a new book, we are paying numerous people who made the book
> possible. We pay the writer, possibly an editor, illustrator, and/or
> photographer, the publisher, the manufacturer and those who produce the
> materials and machinery used to manufacture the book, and, finally,
> cuts for the distributor and seller - as well as various people
> employed along the way. Each gets no more than a single or double
> digit percentage.
>
> When a resaler picks up a used book for, say, a dollar, and then sells
> it for the price of a new book or even higher, we are paying the dealer
> a four (or even five) digit percent profit for buying and holding an
> already available book after the original buyer has paid the legitimate
> costs and later decided to donate it to a charity thrift store or
> public library. Even $20.00 is a 2000% markup. I see this as a kind
> of market theft.
>
While I sometimes feel the same frustration that you express,
ultimately I side with the dealers. I think a sizeable markup is fair,
and I also think that dealers add value, which I also should pay for.
The comparison to new books is not quite applicable. A new book will
be returned to the publisher for a refund if it sits for any length of
time on a new book seller's shelf. That seller takes little risk and
invests relatively little in inventory to have the book sit there for a
few weeks in hopes of a customer. A used book dealer, however, has no
such recourse, and therefore accrues a cost that I think you are not
accounting for: his/her money is tied up in that book until it sells.
(And in thousands more books, none of which earn interest sitting
there.) The fact that the donor paid the initial "legitimate" costs
becomes irrelevant once the book hits the used market and is subject to
the supply and demand levels therein.
When I add that to the dealer's other overhead costs, and the value of
the dealer spending his time to corral the book rather than me spending
mine, and the ability of the dealer to tell me more about the book,
steer me to other books of interest and keep eyes open for my wants, my
conclusion is that the profit is not obscene. It's worth it to pay the
higher, even much higher, price he ends up charging rather than try to
beat the dealer to the bargain. If I then cannot afford some things I
want, such is life for a collector. If I want them badly enough I'll
try to hunt them down myself and prepare for a long wait, and if not,
then I am not willing to pay the price and that's my decision and I
can't blame anyone.
All of this applies only to a tough book to find. If someone wants a
lot of money for a book that's easy to find much cheaper, then I'm not
going to pay what he wants, and odds are no one else will either and
the dealer will learn not to try that.
If i eat at a restaurant, I expect to pay a sizeable markup, not a
marginal one, for overhead and the owner's risk, plus value added by
chef's skills, whereas if I cook for myself I avoid all that but must
eat my own cooking. If I can't eat out every night, then I can't.
Just my humble opinion.
- Todd T.
Kris Baker
>
> When a resaler picks up a used book for, say, a dollar, and then sells
> it for the price of a new book or even higher, we are paying the dealer
> a four (or even five) digit percent profit for buying and holding an
> already available book after the original buyer has paid the legitimate
> costs and later decided to donate it to a charity thrift store or
> public library. Even $20.00 is a 2000% markup. I see this as a kind
> of market theft.
>
You're assuming that the new book dealer and used book
dealer invest the same amount of time and effort into selling
a book.
If I sell new books, I have to:
1 - order them from the publisher
2 - open the box and put them on the shelf
3 - return them for credit if they don't sell
If I sell used books, I have to:
1 - know possible locations they can be found
2 - go search those places (time, fuel, effort) or pay a scout
3 - pay for them (the $1 you claim I pay)
4 - bring them back and research each of them
5 - inspect them fully and then grade for condition
6 - in some cases, perform restoration/cleaning
7 - watch them sit on the shelf if they don't sell
8 - donate them back to the thrift store if they don't sell
You claim that some booksellers dump them in the trash;
that's possible. Many thrift stores have stopped accepting
common books as dictionaries, encyclopediae, Reader's
Digest anythings, National Geographics or the like.....
because no one will buy them.
At such time as thrift stores start to do more than
flip a price on them and put them on the shelf, watch
their prices soar. In fact, here, many do attempt to
sell ungraded books that "look old" for $25 and up.
Kris
BobFinnan.com
>You claim that some booksellers dump them in the trash; that's possible.
My local used book dealer (who, sadly, is going out of business) puts
his unwanted books out on his stoop and allows the locals to build up
their libraries for free!
...................................................
Bob Finnan
http://BobFinnan.com
...................................................
xerlome
> xerlome wrote:
>> I am primarily referring to used book dealers who buy from low cost
>> markets and mark the prices way up... Now, if i
>> want them, i need to pay serious money.
> In part this is because it hardly pays to list books on the Internet
> that cost more for shipping than for the book... Why spend time
> putting the low-end on line?
I'm sure that's true. But i doubt you are suggesting that the cheap
books they don't list are likely to be the ones i want - are you ?
Perhaps they are just the ones i, as a low income buyer, should settle
for.
>> It is the rampant buying of already available low cost books for resale
>> that i call a racket, and this those who do it racketeers.
> This is what dealers in every area have always done.
Obviously it is much worse now. As a buyer i have noticed dramatic
change in just the last few years. I used to regularly buy books for 3
for a dollar at a local Salvation Army Store, grat items, old and new,
every time i went. Now i rarely see any of that level of material. I
don't believe this is due to extreme increase of personal buying.
There are clearly vastly more resalers than a few years ago.
> One might as well claim art dealers are racketeers because people have
> decided to pay ridiculous amounts of money for art that at one time the
> artist couldn't even sell.
Where the practices i have described apply to other fields, then i
might feel the same way. I am primarily dealing with books. I surely
couldn't afford to expand to other areas, especially the way things are
going.
> The thrift markets sold (and sell) books cheap because that is not their
> main focus. They are more concerned with clothing and household goods,
> and in many cases are running as a charity in any case.
Thrift stores sell everything cheap, clothes included. I see clothing
resalers buying there, too. I'm not very picky about clothes, so i
don't notice the effect as much.
Yes, thrift store profits go to charity. As a source of goods for low
income people, they also serve as a kind of charity.
Over the last few years, more and more of these stores have started
"smart pricing" books, perhaps in response to the booming internet
resale industry. Often the prices are not so smart, though, but based
on what someone imagines is "worth something." I have noticed that
many stores are treating all dictionaries as if they are "hot." Some
trashy Collegiate 7th edition might cost as much as 5 or 10 dollars ( a
particularly egregious example). I was annoyed by this at first, but
now i appreciate that it at least discourages the resalers enough to
reserve items i want (something better than a Collegiate 7th, though.)
It is preferable to paying $20 or $50 or $100 or more to resalers.
>> there is a common class of bookdealers who see books primarily as commodities.
> They have always been there. And if they weren't, the thrift stores
> would eventually throw away the books to make room for winter coats.
Thrift stores do not throw out books before a lot of people have looked
at them. Sometimes i see the same stuff aound for years. I do not
believe that the sale of books at thrift stores (the ones bookdealers
would buy at least) depends upon bookdealers buying them. I am not one
of just some few people who buy books for themselves. And we would not
prefer to pay 10 or 100 times the thrift prices to the resalers. If
people will buy the books from the resalers, thrift markets surely can
sell them, too.
> The good thing about the Internet is that
> even if one dealer decides he wants to charge $200 for a book, one can
> see if other dealers are selling it for $20.
This is rare, you must admit. A range like $20 to $200 is not common
for identical books in equal condition. The high range is usually some
preposterously unreasonable price for the item. Yes, i've seen this.
I think there are some sellers who just hope some fool will come along.
I've often seen in book searches where someone is selling a used copy
of an in-print book for twice or more the current retail price of a new
copy of the same edition. I wrote to one of these sellers and asked
him why. He replied that he didn't know, he wasn't familiar with other
people's prices.
ER Lyon
xerlome
>> some of my views may offend some who read them here.
>> I am bound to speak my mind, so i can only hope
>> they won't take it personally.
>Well, as long as you know what you're getting in to....
You mean opening up a can of worms ? Stirring up a hornet's nest ?
I go offline for a couple of days and i see several more replies to me
since yours. Yes, i guess i have some idea. I won't have time for
much more, though.
>> I am primarily referring to used book dealers who buy from low cost
>> markets and mark the prices way up. The books were already available
>> to me (the user, the buying public) at an affordable price. Now, if i
>> want them, i need to pay serious money.
> I don't know how many thrift stores you visit, but it's highly unlikely that
> you will be able to find every title you want and need by dropping into the
> local Goodwill on the lucky day your special book happens to be there.
I used to go to numerous thrift stores every week, some more often than
that. I also went to library sales, flea markets and charity sales, as
well as yard/garage sales. It isn't one special book i look for, but
a whole class of books. I did very well finding excellent items
consistently, the kind that resalers charge $20 to even $100 or more
for. I still go, but the last year or two i have slacked off on thrift
stores because i seldom find such good items anymore. The lucky day
was most days before; now, of course, you are correct. Special sales i
do better at, probably because i'm pretty good at targeting what i
want, while the resalers are less specialized and their attention is
divided.
> Even if all the books you wanted were available at those shops, then the price
> you pay for not making the rounds regularly and first is the dealer's
> premium for making it his business to seek out and find these books and make
> them available to specialist collectors who want them.
So dealers charge this premium for the service of removing books from
low cost markets to serve a clientele which can afford the markups.
This makes it easier for the better heeled collectors to acquire the
books by eliminating competition from lower income collectors who also
want them.
> No book dealer could survive by selling fifty-cent books for a dollar.
Yeah, you'd have to sell a lot of them...
> The dealer has to become
> knowledgeable and proficient at finding the hidden gems in plain sight and
This is off the subject, totally irrelevant, but it came to me by free
association:
Some years ago, there was a little boy in my neighborhood who sometimes
liked to come and hang around me. One day, he came into my apartment
and was overjoyed when he spotted some money lying around. "Oh boy,
look what i found !" and he started to collect it and put it in his
pocket. I hated to have to explain it to him...
> then matching them to the appropriate market that will value them highly
> enough for the dealer to survive and do it again another day.
The appropriate market must be the one that can afford the new prices.
People with less money just don't value them enough.
> Book dealers add other value to the transaction as well. For one thing, they
> collectively visit many, many more thrift shops than you could and assemble
> a stock that will let you have the exact title, in the exact condition, at
> the exact time you want it.
But until recently, i have frequented many stores and sales in my area.
It takes no more time than frequenting the many bookstores in the
area. As for out of my area, meaning those i can only seach over the
internet, there is competition from buyers all over the world.
In any case, the prices the sellers charge make my goals virtually
impossible to afford. I'm lucky i started years ago, just in time. My
collection of dictionaries (and other word and language related books)
is somewhere around a thousand volumes (which does include roughly 30%
softbacks, and some duplication). At thrift prices, which were as low
as a dime when i started, i may have spent a thousand dollars total
apart from the ones i bought from dealers, mostly in the last year,
which probably adds at least another thousand (which i could barely
spare). Had i had to pay an average of only $10 per book for my
collection, i would have needed to spend about $10,000, vastly
unaffordable. But we all know $10 is a fantasy figure, as i could
rarely find anything i want at that price from dealers, especially when
you add shipping for internet sales and sales tax at stores.
> And it takes them years of living on starvation
> wages and eating their mistakes to learn that skill.
I can appreciate that possibility. But for the issues we're
discussing, the fact that one spends time learning something is beside
the point. A thief may take as much time learning to crack safes, but
he can't argue that to justify his trade. A rhetorical analogy, you
understand. Really.
> Besides, it's a fallacy to think that book dealers get all of their stock
> from thrift stores at pennies a book. Book dealers buy from estates, at
> auction, on eBay, from walk-in customers if they have a brick and morter
> store, and from other book dealers
Most of this is not what i have been taking issue with. To quote
myself:
"I am primarily referring to used book dealers who buy from low cost
markets and mark the prices way up."
> that $200 title may
> well have cost the book dealer $100 before it ever sees an on-line listing.
I may be wrong, but i suspect this doesn't happen very often.
> And out of the $100 profit that he might get (some day, after tying his
> money up for years), most of that will go to pay the rent, insurance, and
> other expenses of being in business.
Certainly a consideration from the dealers' point of view. But again,
beside the point. The safecracker has expenses, too, applying his
trade. Can't you hear him saying so ? Rhetorical, again.
>> Since the recent boom in internet selling, which seems to be growing by
>> the day, so many professionals and amateurs alike have entered the
>> market that competition for cheap used books is extreme.
> And yet (taking the other side from my comments above), the competition
> among sellers has never been higher. There really and truly are sellers who
> have huge amounts of stock listed on line for less than $1.
Like what ? Anything *i* want ? Roget's Thesaurus, perhaps ?
> Just plug any common title into eBay to find perfectly nice hard-back first editions
You'd better grab these common titles before i do, then ! I know you
want them as much as i do.
> going for literally pennies.
Plus shipping...
> There is no collusion among sellers to keep prices artifically inflated.
Buying from existing markets for marked-up resale *is* artificial
inflation.
> They do the same kind of research their customer's can do on line,
> and they price their titles to sell, based on scarcity and condition.
A scarcity they largely create.
> What with a purchaser's ability to stalk eBay listings and compare prices
> from multiple sellers on large book-search sites, the internet has made
> this, in my opinion, the best time ever to be a collector. If there are
> bargains to be found, you can find them on line.
I've tried eBay. I found a couple of things. Not for pennies, though.
A lot of work, too.
Take a typical example of a dictionary a collector would find
desirable: Webster's New International, 1st and 2nd editions. (Of
course, i've had copies of each in various versions for years, several
for between $1.00 and $5.00 each). Find me a good copy on eBay or ABE
for (oh, let's make it easy) $20.00 or less... Are you curious enough
to try ?
> In your earlier post, I believe you said you had been at this for six years.
I started to intensively build my dictionary collection in 1999. I had
already collected some before that, and i've been buying thrift books
for much longer.
> The internet has been "around" as a book-buying venue for most of that time.
> I respectfully submit that what's changed in that time is not the advent of
> preditory book dealers, but your own requirements.
Are you really telling me you don't think internet resaling has
exploded since the 90s ?
> Your collection has matured, and you've already found most of the "easy" titles.
This sounds plausible, but it i would give it about 10% application in
my case. (Okay, maybe 15%.)
I did get many of the common items years ago, though not all of them.
What i look for now is more of the same range as before, different
specialized dictionaries, this and that, even a few of those common
items, just like always. I just don't see them as often anymore. I
still haven't picked up many of those relatively common items, such as
"The Joys of Yinglish", a couple of the college dictionaries, etc.
> You are now looking for the scarcer items, and naturally they are
> going to cost more.
A few major items i would expect to have to pay a toll for, but dealer
prices are usually insane.
> You can wait years and years for them to show up in your
> local Goodwill (an they probably never will),
Not any more, at least.
Two or three years ago i broke down and bought Robert Hunter's 4
volume, 1894 "Encyclopedic Dictionary" from an online dealer. I was
silly, i paid too much, and it had worm holes in it. Shortly after
that i discovered a copy in a thrift store. That was one of my last
really great thrift store finds.
I used to find great items one after another. It looked like almost
anything would turn up eventually. Now not only do i rarely find them,
but i rarely see the ones i already have. I see some items selling
online for pretty good money that i used to see all the time in thrift
stores. I'm not kidding you. I don't even want to tell you the titles
because i wouldn't want to give anyone out there any big ideas.
> or you can go to a book dealer, who has quite probably paid more than
> thrift store prices for that particular book in the first place.
I suppose i wouldn't know. But i do know that they will grab a book
right out from under me if they can.
> Welcome to the joys and aggravation of book collecting!
Chasing the horizon ...
ER Lyon
my-wings
> my-wings wrote:
>
>>> some of my views may offend some who read them here.
>>> I am bound to speak my mind, so i can only hope
>>> they won't take it personally.
>
>>Well, as long as you know what you're getting in to....
>
> You mean opening up a can of worms ? Stirring up a hornet's nest ?
>
> I go offline for a couple of days and i see several more replies to me
> since yours. Yes, i guess i have some idea. I won't have time for
> much more, though.
>
I know what you mean. We've both said our piece, and it appears tht neither
has changed the other's mind. I tend to drop out of endless discussions
earlier rather than later. But I couldn't help but notice my knee-jerk
reaction to one thing you said:
>
> Two or three years ago i broke down and bought Robert Hunter's 4
> volume, 1894 "Encyclopedic Dictionary" from an online dealer. I was
> silly, i paid too much, and it had worm holes in it. Shortly after
> that i discovered a copy in a thrift store. That was one of my last
> really great thrift store finds.
>
We call them "brags" here....great books found for a fraction of the "going
rate." But the first thing that occurred to me was: If you've got two copies
now, why not sell the least desirable one on eBay? I'm sure that with your
knowledge of the field, you would write a fabulous description, and that
(plus good pictures) is really the key to success on eBay. I know this might
seem like dealing with the devil, but it's one of the ways that collectors
continue to be able to enhance their collections when the very affordable
titles have all been acquired.
At any rate, I'm glad you decided to join us here...your posts are
interesting and informative, and I'm enjoying reading about your dictionary
collecting experiences...
Todd T
xerlome wrote:
>
> Two or three years ago i broke down and bought Robert Hunter's 4
> volume, 1894 "Encyclopedic Dictionary" from an online dealer. I was
> silly, i paid too much, and it had worm holes in it. Shortly after
> that i discovered a copy in a thrift store. That was one of my last
> really great thrift store finds.
>
> I used to find great items one after another. It looked like almost
> anything would turn up eventually. Now not only do i rarely find them,
> but i rarely see the ones i already have. I see some items selling
> online for pretty good money that i used to see all the time in thrift
> stores. I'm not kidding you. I don't even want to tell you the titles
> because i wouldn't want to give anyone out there any big ideas.
>
Wow, I've never seen anything like that in any of the thrift stores
near me, not in 20 years. That's pretty cool. I can definitely
understand why having such experiences disappear would be a bitter pill
to swallow. I'd be pining too.
I suspect that it's not just dealers picking them up ahead of you. I
suspect that those who might have donated them before are now going
straight to eBay themselves as well.
In any event, the only solution would be to ask people to stop trying
to make a buck where they have discovered an opportunity to do so.
Painful or not, the odds are not in your favor. Maybe you could join
the party and turn over some of your collection at a profit on eBay
yourself. Maybe you could somehow spread the word that you are
interested in old dictionaries that are collecting dust in people's
attics in your town. Rather than letting the markup knock you out,
take advantage of the folks like me who will pay *you* the markup.
Selling things where they bring the most return is a pretty fundamental
process to be fighting. I hope you recover your lost joy in
collecting, one way or another.
- Todd T.
Allison Turner-
>
>Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:
>
>> xerlome wrote:
>> This is what dealers in every area have always done.
>
>Obviously it is much worse now. As a buyer i have noticed dramatic
>change in just the last few years. I used to regularly buy books for 3
>for a dollar at a local Salvation Army Store, grat items, old and new,
>every time i went. Now i rarely see any of that level of material. I
>don't believe this is due to extreme increase of personal buying.
>There are clearly vastly more resalers than a few years ago.
I think you should also take into consideration the shifting
market. As someone else has said, there are probably plenty
of people now who put their books on eBay instead of donating
them to thrift stores. And there are probably a lot of people
like you - not big dealers - who are buying up the very
inexpensive books from thrift stores and also putting them
online. I'm not a dealer, nor have I had a lot of experience
with them, but I wouldn't go blaming them entirely for the
shift you're seeing.
>Over the last few years, more and more of these stores have started
>"smart pricing" books, perhaps in response to the booming internet
>resale industry. Often the prices are not so smart, though, but based
>on what someone imagines is "worth something." I have noticed that
>many stores are treating all dictionaries as if they are "hot." Some
>trashy Collegiate 7th edition might cost as much as 5 or 10 dollars ( a
>particularly egregious example). I was annoyed by this at first, but
>now i appreciate that it at least discourages the resalers enough to
>reserve items i want (something better than a Collegiate 7th, though.)
>It is preferable to paying $20 or $50 or $100 or more to resalers.
Well, you know, I think it's perfectly reasonable of thrift
stores to "smart price" their books instead of selling them
four for a buck. One of our local stores has volunteers
working there, and donates all of their income to care for
the elderly. Why shouldn't they get $10 for a book instead
of $0.25, if people are willing to pay it?
I'm sorry, but my heart just doesn't bleed for collectors
like you (*and* me) who can no longer get an astonishing
deal every time we turn around. At least we're not 95 with
no one to care for us.
>> The good thing about the Internet is that
>> even if one dealer decides he wants to charge $200 for a book, one can
>> see if other dealers are selling it for $20.
>
>This is rare, you must admit.
Absolutely not.
>A range like $20 to $200 is not common
>for identical books in equal condition. The high range is usually some
>preposterously unreasonable price for the item. Yes, i've seen this.
>I think there are some sellers who just hope some fool will come along.
It _is_ incredibly common. The only times I *don't* see
it are for some of the books for which there just aren't
a lot of copies available. And that's only because (I
think) there aren't enough copies for sale to demonstrate
the typical $1 to $10 (or $20 to $200, or whatever) range.
As an example, I chose a title randomly that I remembered
seeing sell well (new) off the shelves when I worked for
a book distributor, and looked it up in addall. (You do
know about used.addall.com, don't you? *Excellent* place
to get a good idea of the price range of a book; I go there,
look at the prices, and see if I can beat them on eBay.)
Ironweed, by William Kennedy, paperback. Discounting the
two uncorrected proofs (going for $500 and $600, latter
signed), there are 300 listings for this book (which
probably means there are about 200 copies - several are
duplicates) and the price range is $0.49 to $45.63. Note
the nearly 10x range.
I see this *all* the time. I've gotten accustomed to
thinking that I should be paying at the bottom end of the
10x range; the top end is usually either people trying to
scam a large $ amount (as you seem to think is mostly
the case) or people who actually paid a fair percent of
that and are trying to recoup, or, sometimes, people who
have a book that actually is better than those priced at
the bottom end, but haven't made it clear in their listing.
Or those who are clueless about the fact that others are
selling the same title for 1/10 their price. I suspect
the last to be the case more often than not. That's their
problem; their book will just sit there and gather dust.
I see it all the time on eBay, too. I collect "Materia
Medica" books (medical books on drugs from 1800 to ~1920)
and I have frequently seen the same author's work, in
similar condition, selling for $5 and for $50. Or even
for $200 or so. In fact, there's one such on eBay right
now: Robert Bartholow's Materia Medica (I have two copies,
one I probably paid $5 for, and a much nicer one I think
I paid $20 for): three listings, $19.99, $36.00, and
$375.00. I think the last seller is nuts, personally,
but there's no law against making a fool of yourself
online. I also suspect that the $375 copy is no better
than the $19.99 copy (which ends in 4 hours and has, so
far, no bids; if I didn't already have two copies I'd
buy it). That fool with the high price has not
provided any pictures, so I don't entertain any high
expectation that he'll ever sell his copy.
>I've often seen in book searches where someone is selling a used copy
>of an in-print book for twice or more the current retail price of a new
>copy of the same edition. I wrote to one of these sellers and asked
>him why. He replied that he didn't know, he wasn't familiar with other
>people's prices.
My point. There are clueless sellers out there. It isn't
that there's a racket, or that they're trying to scam the
public (not most of them, anyway); they just haven't taken
the time to look around and see what their books are
actually worth.
So why don't you just ignore them? They're just fools;
not worth jacking up your blood pressure over.
-Allison
Allison Turner-
>
>Ironweed, by William Kennedy, paperback. Discounting the
>two uncorrected proofs (going for $500 and $600, latter
>signed), there are 300 listings for this book (which
>probably means there are about 200 copies - several are
>duplicates) and the price range is $0.49 to $45.63. Note
>the nearly 10x range.
uh. Oops. 100x range. But my point stands.
-Allison
you wouldn't know I teach math, would you?
David Ames
Well, I would have bet you don't teach typing.
David Ames
Allison Turner-
>
>Allison Turner- wrote:
>> you wouldn't know I teach math, would you?
>
>Well, I would have bet you don't teach typing.
Does anyone still teach 'typing'?
The computer science prof in our building has a
sign on the door that says "Department of
Typewriter Science."
-at
David Ames
Allison Turner- wrote:
> on 31 Dec 2005 12:28:45 -0800, David Ames stated:
> >
> >Allison Turner- wrote:
> >> you wouldn't know I teach math, would you?
> >
> >Well, I would have bet you don't teach typing.
>
> Does anyone still teach 'typing'?
Our young 'un took typing (required) in eighth grade.
Not sure if it was so called.
>
> The computer science prof in our building has a
> sign on the door that says "Department of
> Typewriter Science."
>
> -at
I like to tell people we have a printer with a keyboard.
David Ames
xerlome
> I think a sizeable markup is fair,
> and I also think that dealers add value, which I also should pay for.
I'm still perplexed by this mysterious "value" they add to books. I
can't tell the difference between a book from a thrift store and the
same one from a dealer. Unless you mean the feeling of greater
sacrifice you feel if you spend more for the latter. That i can relate
to.
> The comparison to new books is not quite applicable. A new book will
> be returned to the publisher for a refund if it sits for any length of
> time on a new book seller's shelf. ... A used book dealer, however, has no
> such recourse, and therefore accrues a cost that I think you are not
> accounting for: his/her money is tied up in that book until it sells.
What i have been specifically commenting on is high markups on books
already available to the public at low cost markets, such as thrift
stores. But you are right: the resaler risks money.
A resaler may buy 20 (or 10 or 15 or 30 ...) thrift store books for
$20.00. If one of them sells for $20.00, investment rescued. If that
is too great a risk, thrift store books may not be such a good
inventment.
At worst, thrift store book purchases are not going to break the bank,
anyway. If the books don't sell, reverting to the original thrift
price may salvage some of the cost.
> (And in thousands more books, none of which earn interest sitting there.)
Well, at the rate of inflation for used books, i'm not sure that is
quite true.
> The fact that the donor paid the initial "legitimate" costs
> becomes irrelevant once the book hits the used market and is subject to
> the supply and demand levels therein.
I guess i've never been able to accept "supply and demand" as some
ultimate moral principle, any more than "survival of the fittest."
They may both be natural laws, at a certain level, but does that mean
they need to be our core motivations as human beings ?
We (most of us) wouldn't beat someone up to get their money even if it
were legal, and we wouldn't try to beat the old lady into the "12 items
or less" checkout line with 15 items even if we could get away with it.
Do we really want to try to beat the poor to the bargains only to sell
them to the rich ?
It's a general practice of sellers to pull prices up to whatever the
market will bear. There's a profit graph, a curve showing what price
produces the greatest profit, based on numbers of sales times the
price. Competition, whether the number of units available is virtually
unlimited or very few, the time it takes to sell a unit, etc.,
influence the graph.
If maximum profit for the seller is the ultimate consideration, it
defines all other considerations by default, including what is sold,
who can buy it, how it affects the world we live in. On some issues
we're on the honor system.
Pardon me, i didn't mean to start writing a book. Anyway, whether one
believes in supply and demand as a principle to aspire to, or as a
lowest common denominator, or something in between, depends on one's
ideology, status, character, etc., and my theorizing probably won't
alter that.
> When I add that to the dealer's other overhead costs, and the value of
> the dealer spending his time to corral the book rather than me spending
> mine, and the ability of the dealer to tell me more about the book,
> steer me to other books of interest and keep eyes open for my wants, my
> conclusion is that the profit is not obscene. It's worth it to pay the
> higher, even much higher, price he ends up charging rather than try to
> beat the dealer to the bargain. If I then cannot afford some things I
> want, such is life for a collector. If I want them badly enough I'll
> try to hunt them down myself and prepare for a long wait, and if not,
> then I am not willing to pay the price and that's my decision and I
> can't blame anyone.
You are clearly a model client for the book dealer. Clearly, i am
not.
> If i eat at a restaurant, I expect to pay a sizeable markup, not a
> marginal one, for overhead and the owner's risk, plus value added by
> chef's skills, whereas if I cook for myself I avoid all that but must
> eat my own cooking. If I can't eat out every night, then I can't.
I don't eat at restaurants, although it's not only because i can't
afford to pay people to buy and prepare my food, serve me, and clean up
after me...
But if restaurants were buying up most of the affordable good food, i
might have to bite the bullet, i suppose. And i probably wouldn't be
as, shall we say, philosophical about it as you are when i have to sell
off most of my books to pay the added value of restaurant food, because
i'll be damned if i just say "oh, well" and eat leftover junk.
> Just my humble opinion.
I do sense your humility. I'm being serious. You don't find fault,
you make allowances. You like to trust in others, even to do and know
things for you. You are willing to pay. You accept your lot without
complaint or blame. You are more content with this world than i am.
If your post is a fair indication, i would imagine you have little
quarrel with the Patriot Act. And when our society slides into
totalitarianism, you'll take it quietly in stride, preferring not to
make waves, and probably go unnoticed living pretty much the same life
you do now. I, on the other hand, will probably be dead, or else in
prison for trying to buy the wrong books.
Please don't take me wrong: I can tell you are a good guy. I'm a good
guy too (even if i don't seem like it) but probably not as nice as you.
ER Lyon
Bud Webster
I've tried very hard to keep from replying to this thread, even when
you began to compare used booksellers to safecrackers. Thieves, in
other words.
I will say this, then no more: you have *no idea* what it takes in the
way of physical and financial resources to be able to operate a used
book service and make any kind of living at it. You don't. And, from
what I've seen of your posts, you're unlikely to ever understand it.
Whether this is because you're unable to, or are simply unwilling to
do so because paying a higher price is inconvenient to you, I neither
know nor care.
I know of not one single wealthy bookseller who got that way solely
from selling used books, no matter what their mark-up is. Not ONE. I
know many who, after decades of hard work and study, can support
themselves and their families, but they'd all be better off
financially if they'd gone into IT twenty-five years ago.
Quite the contrary, I know of hundreds and hundreds of booksellers who
could NOT make a living at it, either in brick-and-mortar shops or
on-line, because competition is so tough that they were unable to get
prices that would cover their expenses, and subsequently closed down
and sold off their stock. At thrift-store prices, I might add.
You know *nothing,* Mr. Lyon, about what it takes to be a bookseller.
xerlome
> "xerlome" wrote in message
>> When a resaler picks up a used book for, say, a dollar, and then sells
>> it for the price of a new book or even higher, we are paying the dealer
>> a four (or even five) digit percent profit for buying and holding an
>> already available book after the original buyer has paid the legitimate
>> costs and later decided to donate it to a charity thrift store or
>> public library. Even $20.00 is a 2000% markup. I see this as a kind
>> of market theft.
> You're assuming that the new book dealer and used book
> dealer invest the same amount of time and effort into selling
> a book.
You cut out the part where i mentioned the retailer as only one of many
on the chain of people paid for their part in creating the book and
making it available. I might better have left the distributor and
retailer out of the list and my point would have been clearer. Up to
that point, the cost of the book goes to those who actually create and
make the book. After that, it is primaily a matter of moving it
around. That can be pretty costly, but i'd like to see those costs
kept to a minimum.
> If I sell new books, I have to:
> 1 - order them from the publisher
> 2 - open the box and put them on the shelf
> 3 - return them for credit if they don't sell
That's true. And it's probably done by an employee on a salary who
gets paid either way. Right ?
> If I sell used books, I have to:
> 1 - know possible locations they can be found
I know how difficult that is. I generally look in the yellow pages to
find the locations of thrift stores (as well as used book stores). I
look in the paper for yard sales and other sales. Libraries post their
sales, etc.
> 2 - go search those places (time, fuel, effort)
All part of the added value. I understand. But if you have a store,
and i bring books to you and tell you i want extra money because i
added value when i invested my time, fuel, and effort finding the books
originally, and again bringing them to you, what would you say ?
a) That's fair. I'm always willing to pay for added value. Saves me
adding it myself.
b) Ha ! That's a good one ! - Hey Pat ! - Tell Pat what you just told
me.
c) I'll have to see your resaler's ID or i can't validate the added
value.
d) Would you be willing to sell me just the book and hold on to the
added value ?
e) Other (suggestions welcome).
> or pay a scout
A scout ! That's an idea, i'll have to try that ! A boy scout or a
girl scout on vacation, maybe they'd work for peanuts !
> 3 - pay for them (the $1 you claim I pay)
... or $2 or $3. Or 50 cents - but point taken. I can accept the
need to allow for thrift inflation.
> 4 - bring them back and research each of them
... to determine what price the market will bear...
> 5 - inspect them fully and then grade for condition
I usually spend a few seconds doing that at the thrift store.
Oh, i see: You are an online seller. You write up data and
descriptions. (I just do it in my head.)
> 6 - in some cases, perform restoration/cleaning
I do that a bit, too. Usually it's just removing the price sticker or
erasing the penciled price.
> 7 - watch them sit on the shelf if they don't sell
I know i'm being peevish in my frustration, but it might have been on
*my* shelf if you hadn't taken it.
> 8 - donate them back to the thrift store if they don't sell
I'm glad you do that. I sometimes do it, too. It's a charity, after
all.
What it breaks down to is that you are my competition. I don't want
you to get it first because i usually can't pay your price. You don't
want me to get it first because you want to sell it to someone with
more disposable income than i have.
> You claim that some booksellers dump them in the trash;
> that's possible.
I talked to one who does. I've been told by others about the practice.
> Many thrift stores have stopped accepting
> common books as dictionaries, encyclopediae, Reader's
> Digest anythings, National Geographics or the like.....
> because no one will buy them.
I've noticed some of this, too: a new style of cleaned up thrift store
But in the case of dictionaries, in the last couple of years i'm seeing
some thrift stores treating them as if they are *hot stuff*. *Any*
dictionary, even some little home and office type that has no more than
three words in it that an educated adult doesn't know (try opening to
random pages and pointing blindly to words and you'll see what i mean
!)
I've seen so many ordinary or trashy dictionaries on eBay that it makes
me wonder if eBayers are buying these dictionaries (well, at least a
notch better than what i just described). Perhaps the thrift strores
have noticed them disappearing fast and are trying to get in on the
action. Maybe dictionaries *are* hot. I probably shouldn't be saying
that here, though. I'm my own worst enemy...
> At such time as thrift stores start to do more than
> flip a price on them and put them on the shelf, watch
> their prices soar.
Oh, i hope they don't do that - i mean start putting a lot of added
value into them. I can never seem to find that added value.
> In fact, here, many do attempt to
> sell ungraded books that "look old" for $25 and up.
Yeah, but i leave those for the eBayers.
ER Lyon
xerlome
>> Kris Baker sez:
>> >You claim that some booksellers dump them in the trash; that's possible.
> My local used book dealer (who, sadly, is going out of business) puts
> his unwanted books out on his stoop and allows the locals to build up
> their libraries for free!
Yes, there's one around here that has a box outside which says "FREE".
I'll bet that actually brings customers.
Is he doing it because he's going out of business ? Or did it put him
out of business ?
ER Lyon
xerlome
> I tend to drop out of endless discussions earlier rather than later.
I should. I joined here primarily in the hope of exchanging some
information on my interest. Before 2000, i got caught up in a lot of
these dicussions - compulsive fun - the only computer game i ever
played. Feels like old times. Just a temporary binge, though...
[xerlome]:
>> i paid too much, and it had worm holes in it. Shortly after
>> that i discovered a copy in a thrift store. That was one of my last
>> really great thrift store finds.
> We call them "brags" here....great books found for a fraction of the "going rate."
Really, i'm not here to brag. I wanted to illustrate how good items
used to turn up more often for me in thrift stores.
> But the first thing that occurred to me was: If you've got two copies
> now, why not sell the least desirable one on eBay?
Thanks. Selling a few items on eBay is a possibility. I have a lot
of sorting to do eventually. On this item, first thing that comes to
mind is having to explain (as the seller didn't) that there are worm
holes in some of the volumes.
I tend to like to keep duplicates, sometimes so that i can use one as
much as i want without degrading the other. For the time being, i am
divided between two houses far apart, so i have dupicates of a bunch of
things so i am not separated from them. Then there's my goal to create
a non-circulating special collection for a library. This would be a
trust which would eventually include my entire collection. I'm working
out in my head how to go about this. A topic for another thread.
I'm considering another approach, too: Trading locally, with other
book users/collectors. That way, i'm not dealing with pricing or
shipping - or computers ( which tend to eat too much time, and i really
prefer not to spend much of my life at them). I've been thinking some
kind of book cooperative might be possible. Yet another thread...
ER Lyon
xerlome
> xerlome wrote:
>> Robert Hunter's 4 volume, 1894 "Encyclopedic Dictionary"
> Wow, I've never seen anything like that in any of the thrift stores
> near me, not in 20 years.
Really ?
It's not so surprising, though: 4 volumes with the word
"Encyclopedic" on them, sort of like some old Britannica volumes, not
especially spiffy looking. And when you open it up: just a damned
dictionary. "1894" in small numerals in an inconspicuous spot...
Oh, there i go giving away secrets to the resalers. I can't seem to
help it, i just tend to spill.
> I suspect that it's not just dealers picking them up ahead of you. I
> suspect that those who might have donated them before are now going
> straight to eBay themselves as well.
Could be some are doing that. I'm not sure most donators are that
sort, though.
> In any event, the only solution would be to ask people to stop trying
> to make a buck where they have discovered an opportunity to do so.
That''s right, the imperative to charge the most the market will bear.
It's in the fabric of our econonmic system. There are laws against
making a buck certain ways, but i don't see any reasonable way to
legislate against simply "taking advantage." I don't think i'd want
to, either, being an anarchist at heart.
> Maybe you could somehow spread the word that you are
> interested in old dictionaries that are collecting dust in people's
> attics in your town.
I'd like to do that, when i have time. I really do appreciate your
offering helpful ideas.
> Rather than letting the markup knock you out,
> take advantage of the folks like me who will pay *you* the markup.
You mean become a resaler ? I could get the markup ? Well... what
would you like ? It's a good offer. Could you give me some time to
think it over ? Thank you. I'll get back to you in a day or so. - -
No, no, now wait a minute here ! I don't need to think it over, i know
right now, and the answer is no ! No ! Doggone it ! You people
think the whole world revolves around you and your money ! Well, it
doesn't !
> Selling things where they bring the most return is a pretty fundamental
> process to be fighting.
Yes, i believe you are right. We make our own choices.
ER Lyon
xerlome
>on 31 Dec 2005 00:49:43 -0800, xerlome stated:
>> I used to regularly buy books for 3
>> for a dollar at a local Salvation Army Store, great items, old and new,
>> every time i went. Now i rarely see any of that level of material. I
>> don't believe this is due to extreme increase of personal buying.
>> There are clearly vastly more resalers than a few years ago.
> there are probably a lot of people
> like you - not big dealers - who are buying up the very
> inexpensive books from thrift stores and also putting them
> online.
I think you are right. Resalers, eBayers.
> I think it's perfectly reasonable of thrift
> stores to "smart price" their books instead of selling them
> four for a buck. One of our local stores has volunteers
> working there, and donates all of their income to care for
> the elderly. Why shouldn't they get $10 for a book instead
> of $0.25, if people are willing to pay it?
That works for me. A happy medium, under the circumstances. The
lowest end of the income scale get's the shaft, of course, but a lot of
unfortunates get some help, too. And the resalers are likely to leave
more books behind.
> I'm sorry, but my heart just doesn't bleed for collectors
> like you (*and* me) who can no longer get an astonishing
> deal every time we turn around. At least we're not 95 with
> no one to care for us.
I know. Right now i am full time caregiver for my elderly mother who
is seriously crippled and in pain with arthritis. She's feels sorry
for her old school friend who has to be in a nursing home. She often
quotes Garrison Keillor: "It could be worse." When she or i start to
complain about our lot, she finally says: "We should be glad we don't
live in Iraq."
I'm not as evolved as that yet. I still say, "That doen't mean i have
no complaint !"
>> A range like $20 to $200 is not common
>> for identical books in equal condition. The high range is usually some
>> preposterously unreasonable price for the item.
> It _is_ incredibly common. The only times I *don't* see
> it are for some of the books for which there just aren't
> a lot of copies available.
I can't argue with your examples. It must be different for different
types of books. I shouldn't try to make any general statements,
because nowadays i'm 90% looking for dictionaries and language books.
When i'm seeing a book offered commonly for $20 to $50, and then
there's someone who wants $225, i just dismiss it as preposterous.
When all i see for a long time is $175, $260, etc., then i see
something like $75, i might grab it thinking this may be the best i'll
see, maybe ever. I've given in to this 3 or 4 times. But with books
like these, i'm not seeing any $20.
> Ironweed, by William Kennedy, paperback.
> the price range is $0.49 to $45.63.
For a common paperback. Weird
>> I've often seen in book searches where someone is selling a used copy
>> of an in-print book for twice or more the current retail price of a new
>> copy of the same edition.
> So why don't you just ignore them? They're just fools;
> not worth jacking up your blood pressure over.
I can see why it may seem as if i suffer from high blood pressure. The
truth is, i'm not as rabid as i sound.
ER Lyon
xerlome
> Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived.
> This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Jan 7, 3:36 pm).
> On 31 Dec 2005 00:49:43 -0800, in rec.collecting.books "xerlome" wrote:
>> Thrift stores do not throw out books before a lot of people have looked
>> at them. Sometimes i see the same stuff aound for years.
> I guess that every thrift store in my area is an exception then. All
> of them mark the books in some way (stickers or writing in the books)
> and toss them into the trash after 1-4 weeks (the length of time
> depends on the individual store).
I guess stores and regions differ. I don't get around to all the
thrift stores in the world. In this area (around a big city) a lot of
them are as i have described. I have lately seldom visited stores in
the area where i used to live, so things may have changed there.
>> I do not
>> believe that the sale of books at thrift stores (the ones bookdealers
>> would buy at least) depends upon bookdealers buying them.
> Then your beliefs clash with the regional directors for the Salvation
> Army and Goodwill thrifts stores local to me. They tried to raise
> prices, the booksellers complain and stop buying en masse, the sales
> drop, the managers drop the changes. Now, before making any changes,
> they ask the people that they recognize as dealers if they will still
> shop at their stores if changes are made before making those changes.
That's interesting. So, the sales drop following price hikes is due to
sellers leaving, and not to others or buyers in general leaving ?
Just hypothetically, i wonder what would happen if resalers (of all
levels) stopped buying books in thrift stores. Would the books just
sit there forever (or be thrown out) because readers and collectors
prefer to buy them from resalers for 10, 20, 100 times the price ? Or
would people catch on that there are lots of great books to be had at
these stores (which used to be bought up by the sellers) and shop there
more ? What would be the effect of the fact that these particular
books would then not be available from the resalers ?
>> I am not one
>> of just some few people who buy books for themselves. And we would not
>> prefer to pay 10 or 100 times the thrift prices to the resalers. If
>> people will buy the books from the resalers, thrift markets surely can
>> sell them, too.
> The thrift stores actually PREFER to sell to resellers, since the odds
> are much better that they will clear a large section of shelf space in
> one transaction.
So, resalers *do* buy large numbers of thrift store books ?
I'm seeing views in posts both that they *do* and that they *don't*.
They aren't really buying of most of the good low-cost books, so i
shouldn't blame them for the dearth.
They clear whole sections of shelf space, so the thrift stores keep
their prices low for them.
I don't know which it is. Is it both ?
> Bill
--
> Meg: Thank you Jesus
> Jesus: That wasn't me it was. .
> Some Hindu God: It is okay. I am used to it.
On the general subject of knowing what or who it is we are talking
about:
Terms used in this thread for those who sell books (primarily used)
include bookdealers (book dealers), dealers, booksellers (book
sellers), sellers, resellers, and (my preference as an overall term for
those who buy to sell) resalers. I prefer "booksellers" when we talk
about both new and used, unless context is clear, but i associate the
term more with "new."
Any other considerations ?
ER Lyon
xerlome
> I've tried very hard to keep from replying to this thread, even when
> you began to compare used booksellers to safecrackers. Thieves, in
> other words.
I was afraid someone might read it that way. It's not uncommon for
people to take rhetorical analogies literally. But this is not the
purpose of an analogy, which is to eccentuate a principle which is then
reapplied to the original subject without transferring its literal
content.
In this case, there was discussion about the basis for the relatively
high resale prices. One or more writers suggested that the expenses of
resaling justify the exponential markups. But since what was being
discussed was whether there was a need in the market for the resale at
all, as in moving an item from one market to another, the expenses of
resaling had nothing to do with that issue.
So an example that demonstrates that principle clearly, which may have
been more subtle and thus missed in the present context, serves to
spark recognition of the point being made in the issue at hand. "You
can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink" is, of course,
not about horses or water. Nor is this about safecrackers or thieves.
Much earlier, i did use the term "market theft" to characterize high
markup resaling, and later softened it to "taking advantage." I can
appreciate that my views may be felt as attacks. That's not what they
are in my mind. I am raising issues and discussing views.
> I will say this, then no more: you have *no idea* what it takes in the
> way of physical and financial resources to be able to operate a used
> book service and make any kind of living at it. You don't.
Actually, i know enough to realise that i probably wouldn't make it. I
hope i am not generally misunderstood to believe that it isn't a lot of
work or that there aren't costs and risks. This is not what this
thread is about as far as i'm concerned. It's about issues related to
removing low-cost items from one market to sell them high in another.
I can appreciate that you don't agree with my views. .
> And, from
> what I've seen of your posts, you're unlikely to ever understand it.
> Whether this is because you're unable to, or are simply unwilling to
> do so because paying a higher price is inconvenient to you, I neither
> know nor care.
Change "inconvenient" to "impossible." At least virtually so in my
circumstances.
.
> I know of not one single wealthy bookseller who got that way solely
> from selling used books, no matter what their mark-up is. Not ONE.
I am wondering if you believe i suggested that booksellers generally
get wealthy. I recall that i suggested (in a rhetorical way) that
buying cheap items from an existing market to sell them high in another
is tantamount to depriving the poor to sell to the rich. So the
resaler may not be rich, but is tageting a relatively well-heeled
clientele.
> I know many who, after decades of hard work and study, can support
> themselves and their families, but they'd all be better off
> financially if they'd gone into IT twenty-five years ago.
I understand. I would have been better off collecting books 25 years
ago.
> Quite the contrary, I know of hundreds and hundreds of booksellers who
> could NOT make a living at it, either in brick-and-mortar shops or
> on-line, because competition is so tough that they were unable to get
> prices that would cover their expenses, and subsequently closed down
> and sold off their stock. At thrift-store prices, I might add.
I don't doubt any of that. Independent business is tough.
I like bookstores. They are fun to look at, even if i can't buy much.
I also like book dealers and enjoy talking to them. I may even have
chatted with you at some point, i don't know.
ER Lyon
fundoc
> Do we really want to try to beat the poor to the bargains only to sell
> them to the rich ?
Are you poor? Or do you only think that beating the poor to the bargains is
"moral" when it results in another trophy for your shelf?
Allison Turner-
>
>Todd T wrote:
>> I think a sizeable markup is fair,
>> and I also think that dealers add value, which I also should pay for.
>
>I'm still perplexed by this mysterious "value" they add to books. I
>can't tell the difference between a book from a thrift store and the
>same one from a dealer. Unless you mean the feeling of greater
>sacrifice you feel if you spend more for the latter. That i can relate
>to.
Allow me to give you a very clear example of added value.
I have, currently on my shelves, 28 older texts on
Pharmacognosy (the scientific study of medicinal plants
and the drugs derived from them). I also have a few
works written in the last ten years or so, but I'm not
counting those as the classic works I'm collecting.
I have been collecting these titles for perhaps eight
years or so, and have purchased exactly *one* of these
at a used book store. I have never seen any others,
not at thrift stores, library sales, other used book
stores, the local yearly rummage sale, flea markets,
garage sales, etc. All of the rest I bought online,
mostly from dealers I found through used.addall.com or
from ebay.
I do not expect, ever, to find one at a thrift store.
I suppose there's the remote chance that I might,
similar to the single one I found in that bookstore
about an hour and a half east of me. But I am
absolutely not going to depend on combing the thrift
stores to find me the few that I don't have.
The dealers (and ebay sellers, whether they're grand-
mothers selling stuff from their attics, or big dealers)
have added significant value to the book. Sure, it'd
be nice to get one for a buck. But I'm perfectly
willing to pay $20 instead (or even, perhaps, $80 or
so, depending; I spent $112 on a classic three volume
german set in June that I have only seen at a library
otherwise) because the reality is that I will never see
these titles if dealers don't find them for me, or if
they don't appear, out of someone's garage, on ebay.
(Tangent: one of the things I like about ebay is that
anyone can sell me a book there; I have access to
people's attics that never would be the case otherwise,
and they get the money directly from me for their book.)
As others have mentioned, you've undoubtedly worked your
way past all of the abundant, cheap dictionaries. Now
what you want are the ones that generally wouldn't show
up at your local thrift store (although they sound like
they're still more common than my p'cog books). If you
want them, they're rarer, and you have to either trust
to luck (that you'll eventually run across them), or
pay the added value to a dealer who has found them for
you.
What I don't get is why you're whining because you can
no longer get the astonishing deals you've gotten in the
past. You really lucked out, man. You purchased a
thousand titles before the market shifted with the advent
of internet access - before everyone had a computer and
access to the titles you snatched up for 50 cents.
Now things are different, and the grandmother in Hoboken
who wants a copy of the dictionary she had as a kid can
find it online, because a dealer picked it up from the
thrift store before you saw it. Now you need to sit back,
slow down, appreciate your vaste library acquired at a
fraction of the current price, and carefully assess what,
of the higher-priced end of the market, you want to get
to round out your collection.
-Allison
michael adams
> in message news:dpbm5...@drn.newsguy.com...
> on 1 Jan 2006 21:47:40 -0800, xerlome stated:
> >I'm still perplexed by this mysterious "value" they add to books. I
> >can't tell the difference between a book from a thrift store and the
> >same one from a dealer.
Just as you can't tell the difference between a bottle of water
you happen to find buried in the sand in the desert, just as you're
on the point of dying of thirst, and all the identical bottles of
water on the shelf in your local supermarket, right?
In the case of the book, the difference is in the cost of the time
you'll need to spend, to find that particular book in a thrift store
in the first place.
a) Spend 20 hours at $4 per hour, or 10 hours at $8 per hour etc.
scouring thrift stores to eventually locate a copy of Blogg's Dictionary
priced at $1. Total cost £81.
As compared with -
b) Spend half an hour at $8 per hour (including phone charges),
phoning around specialist dealers (or using the Internet for free)
to locate a copy of Bloggs Dictionary priced at $40. Total cost $48.
michael adams
...
Kris Baker
Most of those yellow page thrift store listings are out of date.
If you're depending upon your local area to fulfill your needs,
you are fortunate to do so. Last year, I travelled to nine
states seeking and buying (not all books), and five of those
trips have not broken even yet.
>
>> 2 - go search those places (time, fuel, effort)
>
> All part of the added value. I understand. But if you have a store,
> and i bring books to you and tell you i want extra money because i
> added value when i invested my time, fuel, and effort finding the books
> originally, and again bringing them to you, what would you say ?
> a) That's fair. I'm always willing to pay for added value. Saves me
> adding it myself.
> b) Ha ! That's a good one ! - Hey Pat ! - Tell Pat what you just told
> me.
> c) I'll have to see your resaler's ID or i can't validate the added
> value.
> d) Would you be willing to sell me just the book and hold on to the
> added value ?
> e) Other (suggestions welcome).
e) I'd negotiate a fair price for both of us, and kiss your feet.
Even though I sell only online, I'd much rather have people show
up at my door with items "ready to sell", than to have to take
time away from selling to bookscout.
>
>> or pay a scout
>
> A scout ! That's an idea, i'll have to try that ! A boy scout or a
> girl scout on vacation, maybe they'd work for peanuts !
Oh, pl0nk. This is useless. You claim to know all about
bookselling, but have no idea what a scout is.
Kris
Bud Webster
bookseller. Nothing in your reply to me indicates anything else.
Booksellers are NOT in business to assure you a cheap and steady
source of whatever you're collecting. They - we - are in business to
be in business, to make a living, however precarious. If that means I
buy cheap and sell high, so be it. If it means that those people who
are unable to pay my prices can't do so, that's a damn shame, but if I
sell to them at prices they can afford, how long will I realistically
be able to do so? What good would I do them to be in business for six
months? Or three? In the meantime, what do I tell my landlord? My
wife, my children? They should be proud of me because I'm selling
rare books at bottom-of-the-barrel prices so poor collectors can have
a more valuable estate to leave their children than I can?
I've been doing without certain specific items in my own collection(s)
for more years than I care to think about. Does this mean that the
sellers who have those books for sale at prices I can't meet are
thieves? And, yes, you chose the comparison, Mr Lyon, not me or
anyone else. Whether or not you will admit to it, you placed
booksellers like me and many others here in the same category as those
who break open safes for their living. In other words, THIEVES.
There have been times when I've bought books for a few dollars that
were worth, on the open market, several hundreds. Did I sell them for
$5, and be satisfied with $3 profit? I did NOT, and neither would any
other knowledgeable bookseller. I might not charge top whack for it,
but if selling a book that cost me $2, and is worth $300, for $200
enables me to keep other worthy, if not as "hot", books in inventory
so that more collectors can find what they want on my shelves, then
that's what I do to remain in business.
I will say it again, one last time: YOU KNOW NOTHING about what it
takes to be a bookseller, and you have little room to criticize.
I'm done with this now, and you should be.
Todd T
xerlome wrote:
>
> > I suspect that it's not just dealers picking them up ahead of you. I
> > suspect that those who might have donated them before are now going
> > straight to eBay themselves as well.
>
> Could be some are doing that. I'm not sure most donators are that
> sort, though.
I wouldn't be shocked. With the emergence of eBay, lots of folks of
all stripes are trying to augment their income, and looking everywhere
for stock to offer. One result is people selling stuff they know
nothing about, for ridiculous prices in both directions, and with
incorrect descriptions etc.
>
>
> > Rather than letting the markup knock you out,
> > take advantage of the folks like me who will pay *you* the markup.
>
> You mean become a resaler ? I could get the markup ? Well... what
> would you like ? It's a good offer. Could you give me some time to
> think it over ? Thank you. I'll get back to you in a day or so. - -
>
> No, no, now wait a minute here ! I don't need to think it over, i know
> right now, and the answer is no ! No ! Doggone it ! You people
> think the whole world revolves around you and your money ! Well, it
> doesn't !
>
I didn't mean to insult or coopt you. I have never for a moment
considered that the world revolves around my money or anything else
having to do with me. I meant it as a friendly suggestion. I just
don't see the idea as immoral. You would be selling your knowledge of
dictionaries, along with the books themselves. Like millions of honest
folks, you would be trying to solve a lack of sufficient funds by
trying to earn money for a service you can offer.
If your point is that anyone who thinks in these terms is worthy of
resentment, and that any attempt to better one's financial state must
perforce harm others and be immoral, then I do not see the point of
complaining about this little part of the system, when it's only just
like the rest of the system that apparently embitters you.
Todd T
xerlome wrote:
> Todd T wrote:
> > I think a sizeable markup is fair,
> > and I also think that dealers add value, which I also should pay for.
>
> I'm still perplexed by this mysterious "value" they add to books. I
> can't tell the difference between a book from a thrift store and the
> same one from a dealer. Unless you mean the feeling of greater
> sacrifice you feel if you spend more for the latter. That i can relate
> to.
>
The dealers that I work with know as much or more about the books I
want as I do, often considerably more, and thus I learn quite a bit
from them They also have led me to books I would not otherwise have
found, both by filling me in personally and simply by putting stock on
their shelves or catalogs for me to discover. Also, my time is worth
something to me, and for me to cover all of the bases they do for
possible finds would mean that my collection would have to supercede
family, job, everything else. How much of this applies to you I cannot
say. For me and for my particular collecting interests, these are
serious considerations.
> > The comparison to new books is not quite applicable. A new book will
> > be returned to the publisher for a refund if it sits for any length of
> > time on a new book seller's shelf. ... A used book dealer, however, has no
> > such recourse, and therefore accrues a cost that I think you are not
> > accounting for: his/her money is tied up in that book until it sells.
>
> What i have been specifically commenting on is high markups on books
> already available to the public at low cost markets, such as thrift
> stores. But you are right: the resaler risks money.
>
> A resaler may buy 20 (or 10 or 15 or 30 ...) thrift store books for
> $20.00. If one of them sells for $20.00, investment rescued. If that
> is too great a risk, thrift store books may not be such a good
> inventment.
>
> At worst, thrift store book purchases are not going to break the bank,
> anyway. If the books don't sell, reverting to the original thrift
> price may salvage some of the cost.
Good point. I expanded the scope of the discussion - you are focused
on books with low cost to the dealer in terms of acquisition. But
there's still all those other costs - the investment isn't rescued
until everything sunk into getting to the thrift store, paying an
employee to mind the shop in the meantime, paying to have the shop,
etc. are all covered.
> I guess i've never been able to accept "supply and demand" as some
> ultimate moral principle, any more than "survival of the fittest."
> They may both be natural laws, at a certain level, but does that mean
> they need to be our core motivations as human beings ?
>
> We (most of us) wouldn't beat someone up to get their money even if it
> were legal, and we wouldn't try to beat the old lady into the "12 items
> or less" checkout line with 15 items even if we could get away with it.
> Do we really want to try to beat the poor to the bargains only to sell
> them to the rich ?
I don't speak of supply and demand as a moral principle. If books were
sold nowhere but thrift stores, the people who want the books would be
there in droves and you would still not find your finds. All
moralizing apart, you are competing against a set of other collectors,
and they too will buy the inexpensive copies first (all else being
equal), leaving only costly copies, so limited supply and high demand
lead to high prices.
Aside: If a book dealer trying to get the most return is immoral, is
buying only cheap copies unfair to the book dealer who is barely
getting by? Should buyers, as a social boon, seek these out and buy
their stock for whatever they ask and forgo bargains? Logically,
what's the difference?
>
>
> > Just my humble opinion.
>
> I do sense your humility. I'm being serious. You don't find fault,
> you make allowances. You like to trust in others, even to do and know
> things for you. You are willing to pay. You accept your lot without
> complaint or blame. You are more content with this world than i am.
>
Sure I trust others to do and know things for me. What the hell is in
books, after all, if not knowledge being passed on from others?
Doesn't mean I trust anyone who comes along, but otherwise life would
be overwhelming. It's availing myself of what is out there for me, not
meekly letting the world steamroller me.
You mistake appreciation for how something benefits me for complacency.
I don't take my position because I prefer not to think, nor to please
book dealers. I take it because I have thought about it considerably.
I get more out of book collecting by acting this way than I would by
refusing to.
>
> If your post is a fair indication, i would imagine you have little
> quarrel with the Patriot Act. And when our society slides into
> totalitarianism, you'll take it quietly in stride, preferring not to
> make waves, and probably go unnoticed living pretty much the same life
> you do now. I, on the other hand, will probably be dead, or else in
> prison for trying to buy the wrong books.
I guess my post is not fair indication. The picture you paint of me
being a vanilla straight-arrow milquetoast is pretty funny to me; of
course, you don't know me. Is it OK for a long haired heavy metal fan
who reads weird fiction, favors legalized marijuana and gay rights and
wilderness preservation and gun regulation and votes Democrat 2/3 of
the time to disagree with you on economics, or must I ruffle every
societal feather to earn my wings? I do make a pretty poor liberal,
but I'd make a really lousy Nazi.
>
> Please don't take me wrong: I can tell you are a good guy. I'm a good
> guy too (even if i don't seem like it) but probably not as nice as you.
>
>
I don't have any problems with you or your bringing up these issues,
and you don't seem like an unpleasant fellow. I think though that your
complaint ultimately leads either to a position that (a) businessmen,
including those selling non-essential items, should be castigated for
failing to either leave material for, or sell at a loss to, those who
can't pay the price they would logically charge; or, (b) the whole
capitalist system is immoral. I just can't get to either place
starting from a lack of book bargains at thrift stores.
- Todd T.
Allison Turner-
>The picture you paint of me
>being a vanilla straight-arrow milquetoast is pretty funny to me; of
>course, you don't know me. Is it OK for a long haired heavy metal fan
>who reads weird fiction, favors legalized marijuana and gay rights and
>wilderness preservation and gun regulation and votes Democrat 2/3 of
>the time to disagree with you on economics, or must I ruffle every
>societal feather to earn my wings? I do make a pretty poor liberal,
>but I'd make a really lousy Nazi.
Marry me?
-Allison
oh, wait. wrong newsgroup.
David Ames
xerlome wrote:
>
> Yes, there's one around here that has a box outside which says "FREE".
> I'll bet that actually brings customers.
>
> Is he doing it because he's going out of business ? Or did it put him
> out of business ?
>
> ER Lyon
There was such a store in Harvard Square. In the end they couldn't
keep up with rents in a gentrified neighborhood. One box of books
doesn't amount to much.
David Ames
xerlome
> Are you poor? Or do you only think that beating the poor to the bargains is
> "moral" when it results in another trophy for your shelf?
Yes, i am poor by the standards of the USA where i live, though not by
most third world standards. If i told you my income, you might not
believe me because most people would think it is too low to get by on.
As such, i have been eligible for public assistance for many years, but
i do not seek it because i choose not to be on the take from the
government/taxpayers.
I buy all my clothes at thrift stores and yard sales except an
occasional package of common cotton sport socks or boxer shorts,
preferably seconds. During the season. i largely eat from my garden
and wild berries. For later, i keep my winter squash, wild apples, and
other storable food. I have no health insurance, but am into a health
diet and lifestyle and can't conceive of being overweight. I drive a
26 year old car which i take good care of and sleep in when i need
accomodation away from home.
Apart from the necessities of subsistence, books are the only things
i've spent any significant money on for many years (i bought a used
computer a few years ago for $165.), and for this i have given up many
things most Americans take for granted, such as movies (i haven't gone
to a theater for about twenty years, with the exception of
"Manufacturing Consent" in 1994, which i fell asleep on because i was
so tired from working that day) and i frankly don't miss them. Which
brings us to the second part of your question:
For me books are not trophies, unlike many collectors (those who can
afford trophies). They are tools to use, and i plan to use them for
the rest of my life. I value having a personal library of reading
material and references. Until recently, i rarely spent any "real"
money on books. In the last year or so, however, i have spent
something approaching a thousand dollars on my dictionary collection,
sliced out of my modest securuty bank account, because i was determined
to acquire certain English dictionaries i was missing which are
historically essential or cover additional vocabulary and usage
information.
My purpose is to have immediate access to the information i need for
study and the preparation of several books i have conceived of writing
or compiling. Due to necessary demands on my time, and the need to
derive an income by other means, these goals may take many years or
never be realized, but i am inspired to work on them. I also plan to
leave my collection in trust to a library for public use, as well as
possibly work with a library to start such a collection within my
lifetime.
The moral consideration constrains me from making a practice of buying
books i don't want from certain markets for the purpose of resale at
high markups. I do buy some items i believe have intrinsic (regardless
of market) value, often duplicates of ones i have, with the idea of
trading with others who share similar interests.
This is most probably far more than you or anyone else actually wanted
to know about me. In fact, i suspect your question was rhetorical and
you didn't believe it required an answer. It is interesting, though,
that anyone would believe that the validity of a moral consideration
depends on my or any other particular person's practice or sincerity.
ER Lyon
xerlome
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.collecting.books/msg/902e24b7ba410d32
[xerlome]:
>> I'm still perplexed by this mysterious "value" they add to books. I
>> can't tell the difference between a book from a thrift store and the
>> same one from a dealer.
> Allow me to give you a very clear example of added value.
(I am taking the liberty of editing a piece of your comment in a way i
think sums up your point (flawed syntax aside). Correct me if i'm
wrong):
< The dealers ... have added significant value to the book ... because
the reality is that I will never see these titles if dealers don't find
them for me ... >
What you are talking about is not the value of the book, but the value
to you of a service. I'm only talking about the book.
I have been accustomed serving myself. Now with so many people around
who want to be of service, the slimmer pickings make it harder for me
to do so.
I have no quarrel with most of what you have said in your post.
There's no doubt the markets are different now and the realities make
it necessary to change our approch to acquiring what we want. I have
recognized this need and have been acting upon it. So, what you are
doing and suggesting is what i am doing. Yes, it is frustrating to me
as a person of meager means to see the availability of low cost books
phasing out due to what appears to be a rampant trend in resaling.
What i'm doing here is pointing to and questioning some of what i see
happening and its implications.
ER Lyon
xerlome
Please, someone, explain this to Todd so i don't have to !
[Todd T]:
>>> Rather than letting the markup knock you out,
>>> take advantage of the folks like me who will pay *you* the markup.
[xerlome]:
>> You mean become a resaler ? I could get the markup ? Well... what
>> would you like ? It's a good offer. Could you give me some time to
>> think it over ? Thank you. I'll get back to you in a day or so. - -
>> No, no, now wait a minute here ! I don't need to think it over, i know
>> right now, and the answer is no ! No ! Doggone it ! You people
>> think the whole world revolves around you and your money ! Well, it
>> doesn't !
[Todd T]:
> I didn't mean to insult or coopt you. I have never for a moment
> considered that the world revolves around my money or anything else
> having to do with me. I meant it as a friendly suggestion.
I only ever see movies on TV...
xerlome
> Most of those yellow page thrift store listings are out of date.
Where do *you* live ?
> If you're depending upon your local area to fulfill your needs,
> you are fortunate to do so.
It is true, i don't travel much to buy books. It adds too much value.
(Or is it "subtracts" ?)
> Last year, I travelled to nine
> states seeking and buying (not all books), and five of those
> trips have not broken even yet.
So, you are not certain yet whether all that driving and gas added
enough value, but you hope so.
>> if you have a store,
>> and i bring books to you and tell you i want extra money because i
>> added value when i invested my time, fuel, and effort finding the books
>> originally, and again bringing them to you, what would you say ?
> e) I'd negotiate a fair price for both of us, and kiss your feet.
That's good, but you needn't kiss my feet.
> Even though I sell only online, I'd much rather have people show
> up at my door with items "ready to sell", than to have to take
> time away from selling to bookscout.
Most of the books i buy are as ready to sell as they'll ever be.
That's why i bought them. I'll bet if you looked at my collection,
you'd never be able to tell the difference between those i bought at
thrift stores and those i bought from a resaler.
>>> or pay a scout
>> A scout ! That's an idea, i'll have to try that ! A boy scout or a
>> girl scout on vacation, maybe they'd work for peanuts !
> Oh, pl0nk. This is useless. You claim to know all about
> bookselling, but have no idea what a scout is.
No ! I never claimed to know all about bookselling.
But i should never attempt a pun. I'm no good at it.
ER Lyon
fundoc
Sorry man, I didn't realize you were clinically fucking insane. Do carry on.
BobFinnan.com
>I'm done with this now, and you should be.
I agree, the reponses to this troll have gone on wayyyyyyyyyyy too
long.
...................................................
Bob Finnan
http://BobFinnan.com
...................................................
Kris Baker
"Wildwood" <wildw...@pipeline.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:ch7mr1li3q478ki5f...@4ax.com...
> On 2 Jan 2006 23:49:05 -0800, in rec.collecting.books "xerlome"
> <xer...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>I also plan to
>>leave my collection in trust to a library for public use,
>
> sold at a Friends of The Library sale... probably to book dealers on
> preview night.
>
> Bill
Yup. You just can't give them books and expect them to display
them eternally with your name prominently displayed UNLESS you
also give them a few million dollars to house the collection, and
hire permanent curators.
Kris
Kris Baker
"Wildwood" <wildw...@pipeline.com.invalid> wrote in message
> On 1 Jan 2006 23:20:05 -0800, in rec.collecting.books "xerlome"
> <xer...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Todd T wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Rather than letting the markup knock you out,
>>> take advantage of the folks like me who will pay *you* the markup.
>>
>>You mean become a resaler ? I could get the markup ? Well... what
>>would you like ? It's a good offer. Could you give me some time to
>>think it over ? Thank you. I'll get back to you in a day or so. - -
>>
>>No, no, now wait a minute here ! I don't need to think it over, i know
>>right now, and the answer is no ! No ! Doggone it ! You people
>>think the whole world revolves around you and your money ! Well, it
>>doesn't !
>>
>
>
> Bill
....as other newsgroups found out.
Kris
xerlome
> I will say it again: you have NO IDEA what it takes to be a
> bookseller. Nothing in your reply to me indicates anything else.
I thought "Independent business is tough" pretty much summed it up.
Doesn't it ? That seems to be the gist of all you are saying here.
Believe it or not, i'm familiar with this. That's one of the reasons
i'm "poor." I attempted a marketing business of my own, and it has not
panned out as yet. What i'm talking about is small farming. Garlic is
my main crop.
For a while it looked as if i were making progress and this would be
the year i broke through. Then we had this cold wet spring that didn't
clear up until July. By then, the damage was done and i lost half my
crop to molds that had set in and developed in storage. Nobody pays
for the spoiled crop. I call that a setback. I could have chosen
something easier. I haven't given up because it is a passion of mine
and i believe in it. Time will tell...
>Booksellers are NOT in business to assure you a cheap and steady
> source of whatever you're collecting. They - we - are in business to
> be in business, to make a living, however precarious. If that means I
> buy cheap and sell high, so be it. If it means that those people who
> are unable to pay my prices can't do so, that's a damn shame, but if I
> sell to them at prices they can afford, how long will I realistically be
> able to do so?
It's dog-eat-dog, isn't it ? Marketing is competitive. I compete by
making my product the best and charging the lowest price. I have to
try to beat my competion to the buyers who usually take first come. I
think about this. I don't even know who they are most of the time.
Sometimes i'll go to a market and they'll tell me they've already
bought what they need. Even if i wanted to, i couldn't get anywhere
charging added value for the exrta time it takes me to sell.
Are we really so different ?
> What good would I do them to be in business for six
> months? Or three? In the meantime, what do I tell my landlord? My
> wife, my children? They should be proud of me because I'm selling
> rare books at bottom-of-the-barrel prices so poor collectors can have
> a more valuable estate to leave their children than I can?
That's a good point: Someone else may make the money, or somebody's
children, so it might as well be you as them.
Actually, i have been waiting for someone to offer an argument along
the same line, the only one i find cogent enough to struggle with
myself: That there's a 50 - 50 (or a 30 - 70, or a 70 - 30 ...) chance
that it will be a resaler who buys the cheap item if i (or you) don't.
> I've been doing without certain specific items in my own collection(s)
> for more years than I care to think about. Does this mean that the
> sellers who have those books for sale at prices I can't meet are
> thieves?
Leaving the "thieves" idea aside, it means you and they are playing the
same game, so you understand each other.
Someone once told me: "If you can't afford to buy it, you can't afford
to keep it." In other words, if you buy something for two dollars
which could sell for two hundred, but your income does not allow you to
buy such an item for two hundred, then you must sell it because you are
making the choice between the item and the money just as much as if you
saw the item in the market for the higher price in the first place. If
i accept this very cogent suggestion, it means i can't have anything
that's "worth" $200 even if i find it for 10 cents.
So i find this book for a dime, and i think "oh, boy" and i buy it,
and the ghost of this person comes over to me and says "I'm sorry, but
this book is too valuable. You won't be able to keep it." "But it
only cost 10 cents, and i've been wanting this for a long time !"
"Well, that can't be helped. You see, there's this other person over
here with $200 burning a hole in his pocket who kind of wants it. Do
*you* have $200 dollars burning a hole in *your* pocket ? I thought
not."
Then i walk away with my book ...
> Whether or not you will admit to it, you placed
> booksellers like me and many others here in the same category as those
> who break open safes for their living. In other words, THIEVES.
I don't know that i can explain rhetorical analogy any better than i
already did.
> There have been times when I've bought books for a few dollars that
> were worth, on the open market, several hundreds. Did I sell them for
> $5, and be satisfied with $3 profit? I did NOT, and neither would any
> other knowledgeable bookseller. I might not charge top whack for it,
> but if selling a book that cost me $2, and is worth $300, for $200
> enables me to keep other worthy, if not as "hot", books in inventory
> so that more collectors can find what they want on my shelves, then
> that's what I do to remain in business.
You struggle with these issues youself, which is probably why you have
reacted so passionately to some of what i've said. You're trying to
make a living, stay in business, there may be compromises, you may have
to step on people's toes, that's life, that's the breaks ... but you do
think about it, as i've see elsewhere as well.
> I will say it again, one last time: YOU KNOW NOTHING about what it
> takes to be a bookseller, and you have little room to criticize.
I'm glad you explained your reasons for saying this.
> I'm done with this now, and you should be.
You are right, of course. I should be spending my time more
productively. (Maybe i should be listing all those books i "can't
afford to keep" on eBay.) But i do enjoy these conversations. It's
been years since i engaged in internet discussions. It's just a visit.
ER Lyon
xerlome
[xerlome]
>> I also plan to
>> leave my collection in trust to a library for public use,
> Or, as is becoming more and more common, the donated books will be
> sold at a Friends of The Library sale... probably to book dealers on
> preview night.
I've thought about that, which is why i decided it would have to be a
trust. It would be an actual legal contract which would disallow
anything like that. It would stipulate exactly how the books would be
handled and under what circumstances they could be removed and to
where, etc.
ER Lyon
xerlome
[xerlome]
> >I'm still perplexed by this mysterious "value" they add to books. I
> >can't tell the difference between a book from a thrift store and the
> >same one from a dealer.
> Just as you can't tell the difference between a bottle of water
> you happen to find buried in the sand in the desert, just as you're
> on the point of dying of thirst, and all the identical bottles of
> water on the shelf in your local supermarket, right?
I understand that this is a rhetorical analogy. I don't believe you'd
actually buy up all the bottled water (to "add value" to it) and then
wait for people to crawl on their bellies to you. Please help me
explain this to Mr Webster.
> In the case of the book, the difference is in the cost of the time
> you'll need to spend, to find that particular book in a thrift store
> in the first place.
When you have little money, you might choose to spend time rather than
(not be able to) pay someone else to do it for you.
When someone else performs this service for an as yet unknown buyer, it
determines that the buyer will not be you.
> a) Spend 20 hours at $4 per hour, or 10 hours at $8 per hour etc.
> scouring thrift stores to eventually locate a copy of Blogg's Dictionary
> priced at $1. Total cost £81.
Would you tell me how to get the £ sign on the keyboard ?
> As compared with -
> b) Spend half an hour at $8 per hour (including phone charges),
> phoning around specialist dealers (or using the Internet for free)
> to locate a copy of Bloggs Dictionary priced at $40. Total cost $48.
It is true that for some people, all time is money. It's only true if
you would have been paid for the time. In the case above, i would not
actually be spending £81 the first way, nor would i be saving the
difference between £81 and $48 (whatever that is) in the second.
By the way, i'm still looking for Bloggs Dictionary. I would prefer
not to spend either £81 or $48. Any leads ?
ER Lyon
xerlome
> Sorry man, I didn't realize you were clinically fucking insane. Do carry on.
If you really believed that, you would not have said so here.
At least most people wouldn't.
ER Lyon.
xerlome
i'll have to leave some for later, i need to go to bed soon.
Todd T wrote:
> my time is worth
> something to me, and for me to cover all of the bases they do for
> possible finds would mean that my collection would have to supercede
> family, job, everything else. How much of this applies to you I cannot
> say.
I understand. You want the service, and you can afford it.
> I don't speak of supply and demand as a moral principle. If books were
> sold nowhere but thrift stores, the people who want the books would be
> there in droves and you would still not find your finds.
That's an interesting thought !
This is only hypothetical, so i'm not here declaring that this is what
should or even could be. But if your scenario were true, there would
be zillions of thrift stores, which would diffuse the crowd of
customers competing, as they are in the markets as they exist.
Everyone would have an equal chance.
> All moralizing apart, you are competing against a set of other collectors,
> and they too will buy the inexpensive copies first (all else being
> equal), leaving only costly copies, so limited supply and high demand
> lead to high prices.
Well, i don't want to continue to harp on this at length, but i would
at least *be* in the competion. Enough, though.
>> If your post is a fair indication, i would imagine you have little
>> quarrel with the Patriot Act...
> I guess my post is not fair indication.
I thought you might offer some insight.
> The picture you paint of me
> being a vanilla straight-arrow milquetoast is pretty funny to me;
I thought so.
> of course, you don't know me.
But i'm getting to, ain't i ?
> Is it OK for a long haired heavy metal fan
> who reads weird fiction, favors legalized marijuana and gay rights and
> wilderness preservation and gun regulation and votes Democrat 2/3 of
> the time
Hold on. It makes a difference what you vote the other third of the
time. Republican ? Libertarian ? Green ?
> to disagree with you on economics, or must I ruffle every
> societal feather to earn my wings?
I have every confidence in you, Clarence !
> I do make a pretty poor liberal, but I'd make a really lousy Nazi.
That's what we're here to determine, sir.
> I don't have any problems with you or your bringing up these issues,
> and you don't seem like an unpleasant fellow.
Thanks. That's gracious of you. You *will* earn your wings.
> your complaint ultimately leads either to a position that
> (a) businessmen,including those selling non-essential items,
> should be castigated for failing to either leave material for,
> or sell at a loss to, those who can't pay the price they would logically charge;
No, it's not going to happen, at least not unless or until we evolve
into some kind of cooperative system. People will have to want that
for it to ever happen. I sure wouldn't want some polit bureau
dictating it.
I don't feel as if i've castigated anyone. But i think about the
effects of our actions, mine as well as others. Some of it is
uncomfortable to think about, especially if it involves things we
depend on.
> or, (b) the whole
> capitalist system is immoral. I just can't get to either place
> starting from a lack of book bargains at thrift stores.
Oh, come on ! You can get anywhere from anything ! You just follow
it wherever it goes.
I don't know that any system is immoral, but any can be misused. And
the systems we create say something about us.
I'll get back to you.
ER Lyon
Bud Webster
[much unbelievable codswallop snipped]
>You are right, of course. I should be spending my time more
>productively. (Maybe i should be listing all those books i "can't
>afford to keep" on eBay.) But i do enjoy these conversations. It's
>been years since i engaged in internet discussions. It's just a visit.
Oh, JESUS.
michael adams
> > In the case of the book, the difference is in the cost of the time
> > you'll need to spend, to find that particular book in a thrift store
> > in the first place.
> When you have little money, you might choose to spend time rather
> than (not be able to) pay someone else to do it for you.
...
When you have little money, you'd don't have any choice.
And that's just your first sentence.
It's not really looking very promising is it ?
hint:not having enough money can be a perennial problem in life.
So what else is new?
What other startling insights do you intend to share with the Group ?
< groans all round plus massive snippage >
...
> Would you tell me how to get the Ł sign on the keyboard ?
...
At a guess
Use a UK keyboard - hardware, set the keyboard to UK English - software
and then use [shift] 3.
In the old days under CP/M and early DOS, UK users had to jump through
hoops to print pound signs in some programs which more often came out
as hash # symbols. Now they all moan about Windows instead. Plus ca
change blah, blah, blah.
I can type both pound and dollar sign, and in OE the currency symbols in
this post were all showing as dollar signs on my display dollar - $
or now pound - Ł
michael adams
> ER Lyon
John R. Yamamoto-Wilson
> >You mean become a resaler ? I could get the markup ? Well... what
> >would you like ? It's a good offer. Could you give me some time to
> >think it over ? Thank you. I'll get back to you in a day or so. - -
> >
> >No, no, now wait a minute here ! I don't need to think it over, i know
> >right now, and the answer is no ! No ! Doggone it ! You people
> >think the whole world revolves around you and your money ! Well, it
> >doesn't !
Wildwood commented:
> *yawn* Performance art is so much more fulfilling when it's on stage.
Actually, it's a movie. If you're American, I'm surprised you didn't
recognise it (George Bailey [James Stewart] refusing to sell out to
Potter in It's a Wonderful Life, 1946).
Matthew Hill
on such terms?
Matthew Hill
fundoc
> fundoc wrote:
>
>> Sorry man, I didn't realize you were clinically fucking insane. Do carry
>> on.
>
> If you really believed that, you would not have said so here.
Really. Where would I have said it? In your spaceship?
> At least most people wouldn't.
Have you considered the idea that someone who lives in his car subsisting on
wild berries so that he can spend his meager garlic farmer earnings on out
of date dictionaries that he scouts up at the Goodwill might not be the best
judge of what "most people" would or wouldn't do?
Evelyn C. Leeper
Well, unless you give them a *lot* of money to maintain the collection
as well, the chances are they'll refuse the bequest. (There has been
much discussion of this at science fiction conventions regarding how to
dispose of collections.)
Call a couple of your target libraries and ask them before assuming this
will work.
--
Evelyn C. Leeper
Civilization is a movement, not a condition;
it is a voyage, not a harbor. -Arthur Toynbee
Todd T
Allison Turner- wrote:
>
> Marry me?
>
>
> -Allison
> oh, wait. wrong newsgroup.
:-) I certainly would, only bigamy is too weird even for me.
- Todd T.
Allison Turner-
My friends call it polyamory, though even with a different
name it isn't legal. But it isn't really my thing, either.
-Allison
xerlome
while before she needs help to the bathroom.
Todd T wrote:
> With the emergence of eBay, lots of folks of all stripes are
> trying to augment their income, and looking everywhere
> for stock to offer.
Yup, it's quite natural, perfectly understandable. I get this picture
in my mind of all these people scrambling around. I'm probably a big
fool for not getting in on it. I do run around for stuff for myself,
at least, competing with the middle men, eliminating them in my
equation. I could probably be a middle man myself and make money to
buy even more. I don't blame people for thinking i'm crazy not to.
> One result is people selling stuff they know nothing about,
> for ridiculous prices in both directions, and with incorrect
> descriptions etc.
Yup. I sent detailed information to the eBayer who's selling that
so-called "original 1828 Webster" quite a few days ago, but i checked
and the same phoney description is still posted. So, if i had beat
him or her to this item, *i* could have posted it and told everyone
what a trashy item it is. (Just kidding, since people don't seem to be
able to tell.)
> You would be selling your knowledge of
> dictionaries, along with the books themselves. Like millions of honest
> folks, you would be trying to solve a lack of sufficient funds by
> trying to earn money for a service you can offer.
I should be a dictionary consultant. Do you think i could make a
living doing this ? I could explain the relative virtues of the
different dictionaries, discuss users' special needs, and match them up
to just the right one ! I'll need a shingle.
> If your point is that anyone who thinks in these terms is worthy of
> resentment, and that any attempt to better one's financial state must
> perforce harm others and be immoral, then I do not see the point of
> complaining about this little part of the system, when it's only just
> like the rest of the system that apparently embitters you.
Oh, there's something wrong with the whole world, seems to me. You may
be right, i should be talking about more critical issues. But not here
in the book collecting group, do you think ?
It may seem otherwise, but i don't actually feel personally resentful
or morally judgmental. I have a whole bunch of ideas i feel like
expressing, it comes naturally. I can't expect everyone reading my
diatribes to "get it" that i like to get into these issues with people
in this way. Hey, i just sort of barged in here (if there's really any
validity to the "virtual" allusion) and spouted off in your group. You
have been remarkably easygoing about it, stayed with it, and come up
with more cogent arguments than anyone here, in my opinion. Like the
following:
> If a book dealer trying to get the most return is immoral, is
> buying only cheap copies unfair to the book dealer who is barely
> getting by? Should buyers, as a social boon, seek these out and buy
> their stock for whatever they ask and forgo bargains? Logically,
> what's the difference?
Good insight ! Why shouldn't we want to support the struggling dealer
as much as any other struggling person, if it comes down to an issue
like that ? Removing the element of preferable prices when value
(cost) is not added, this is logical.
>> I do sense your humility. I'm being serious. You don't find fault,
>> you make allowances. You like to trust in others, even to do and know
>> things for you. You are willing to pay. You accept your lot without
>> complaint or blame. You are more content with this world than i am.
> Sure I trust others to do and know things for me. What the hell is in
> books, after all, if not knowledge being passed on from others?
Quite true !
> Doesn't mean I trust anyone who comes along, but otherwise life would
> be overwhelming. It's availing myself of what is out there for me, not
> meekly letting the world steamroller me.
> You mistake appreciation for how something benefits me for complacency.
> I don't take my position because I prefer not to think, nor to please
> book dealers. I take it because I have thought about it considerably.
> I get more out of book collecting by acting this way than I would by
> refusing to.
I really appreciate your telling me all this ! If you think i'm being
condescending in saying this, be assured i am not. You are articulate
and you communicate well. I'm not knocking anyone else when i say
this, i just particularly like your style.
And you put up with it when i played with the picture that your writing
conjured for me:
>> If your post is a fair indication, i would imagine you have little
>> quarrel with the Patriot Act.
How *do* you feel about this issue, if you don't mind telling me ?
>> And when our society slides into
>> totalitarianism, you'll take it quietly in stride, preferring not to
>> make waves, and probably go unnoticed living pretty much the same life
>> you do now. I, on the other hand, will probably be dead, or else in
>> prison for trying to buy the wrong books.
I love the way you responded to this !
> I guess my post is not fair indication. The picture you paint of me
> being a vanilla straight-arrow milquetoast is pretty funny to me; of
> course, you don't know me.
That is so true. I have long realised that it is unlikely or rare that
people can know each other through this medium, or even to know we are
who or what we say we are. For all i know, you are fiction, but i
like the way you present yourself:
> Is it OK for a long haired heavy metal fan
> who reads weird fiction, favors legalized marijuana and gay rights and
> wilderness preservation and gun regulation and votes Democrat 2/3 of
> the time to disagree with you on economics, or must I ruffle every
> societal feather to earn my wings? I do make a pretty poor liberal,
> but I'd make a really lousy Nazi.
You can disagree with me about anything !
What weird fiction are you talking about ? Do you like Barth, or is he
too tame ?
Anyway, i know that in a discussion, when people stop really engaging
with substance, and start making wisecracks, and calling someone crazy
or a troll, whether they actually believe it or not, the thread is
probably pretty much finished. Just as well for me, as i probably
don't have so much time anyway. Thanks for hanging in there, Todd, and
reply if you like. Hope to talk to you again.
Really, i've enjoyed talking with everyone, thanks for all your
replies.
ER Lyon
xerlome
michael adams replied:
> Use a UK keyboard - hardware, set the keyboard to UK English - software
> and then use [shift] 3. ...
Thanks. Some years ago, i had a long list of commands, some way of
using shift, alt and/or ctrl + keyboard characters, which produced many
alternative characters, including £. (Can't find it.) I don't know
if it was part of Windows, but i recall that i didn't need to add any
software or hardware. The fact that my word pad will take the £ says
it's in there.
ER Lyon
xerlome
> xerlome wrote:
> > No, no, now wait a minute here ! I don't need to think it over, i know
> > right now, and the answer is no ! No ! Doggone it !
> Wildwood commented:
> > *yawn* Performance art is so much more fulfilling when it's on stage.
> Actually, it's a movie. If you're American, I'm surprised you didn't
> recognise it (George Bailey [James Stewart] refusing to sell out to
> Potter in It's a Wonderful Life, 1946).
Thanks ! I have never quite learned or accepted the apparent reality
in these internet discussions that humor (at least when i attempt it)
is very often missed or mistaken.
ER Lyon
Allison Turner-
>
>>> Would you tell me how to get the =A3 sign on the keyboard ?
>
>michael adams replied:
>
>> Use a UK keyboard - hardware, set the keyboard to UK English - software
>> and then use [shift] 3. ...
>
>Thanks. Some years ago, i had a long list of commands, some way of
>using shift, alt and/or ctrl + keyboard characters, which produced many
>if it was part of Windows, but i recall that i didn't need to add any
>it's in there. =20
Just so's y'all know, that symbol that I assume you are
seeing as a British Pound sign comes across on my mac as
a question mark. Until I reply, that is. Now, above,
it's three characters: =A3.
I know that in the word processing field, what you always
want to do is find the "insert symbol" command, and search
the available symbols (either in the typeface you're using,
or in the symbol font - no other obscure fonts). I don't
know that usenet, however, will work that way. Unless
someone comes up with a complete revamp of usenet, you're
stuck with the ASCII set. Speaking of which, is there no
BritPound sign in ASCII?
-Allison
Jack Campin - bogus address
> seeing as a British Pound sign comes across on my mac as
> a question mark. Until I reply, that is. Now, above,
> Unless someone comes up with a complete revamp of usenet,
> you're stuck with the ASCII set. Speaking of which, is
> there no BritPound sign in ASCII?
xerlome's post contains three lines in the header which tell
newsreader programs more intelligent than yours to interpret
the =A3 as a pound sign. Those lines are
: Mime-Version: 1.0
: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Works fine with my newsreader (MT-NewsWatcher on MacOS 9.1).
I've never heard of the newsreader you're using (Direct Read
News 4.64) and it doesn't look like I'm missing much.
I am impressed that xerlome managed to get such sensible
behaviour out of Google Groups. On the few occasions when
I've used it, it just made me want to bash my head through
the screen in despair.
============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk ==============
Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/> for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975
stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557
Allison Turner-
>
>> Just so's y'all know, that symbol that I assume you are
>> seeing as a British Pound sign comes across on my mac as
>> a question mark. Until I reply, that is. Now, above,
>> it's three characters: =A3. [...]
>> Unless someone comes up with a complete revamp of usenet,
>> you're stuck with the ASCII set. Speaking of which, is
>> there no BritPound sign in ASCII?
>
>xerlome's post contains three lines in the header which tell
>newsreader programs more intelligent than yours to interpret
>the =A3 as a pound sign. Those lines are
>
>: Mime-Version: 1.0
>: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
>Works fine with my newsreader (MT-NewsWatcher on MacOS 9.1).
>I've never heard of the newsreader you're using (Direct Read
>News 4.64) and it doesn't look like I'm missing much.
Ah - clearly I should go back to NewsWatcher. I've been
reading from my newsfeed's web pages (Newsguy) for a few
years, now, because I was bouncing around different states,
and couldn't always get my email and newsreading configured
in each place, without dialing long-distance. Now that I've
settled down, again, it shouldn't be a problem.
NewsWatcher is a much better program than the slap-dash
web interface my feed put together for us lazy types. I
hope they make it for OSX, though I could always run an
older version in "classic" (OSX's rough approximation of
OS-9).
>I am impressed that xerlome managed to get such sensible
>behaviour out of Google Groups. On the few occasions when
>I've used it, it just made me want to bash my head through
>the screen in despair.
I only go to Google Groups to look up stuff that's older
than newsguy holds on to - six weeks, I think it is. So I
don't generally have any need for it, but when I do go there
it works ok.
-Allison
Cathy Krusberg
> Thanks. Some years ago, i had a long list of commands, some way of
> using shift, alt and/or ctrl + keyboard characters, which produced many
> alternative characters, including Ł. (Can't find it.)
On Windows, alt + 0163 on the numeric keypad
produces Ł . (Be sure num lock is on.)
Mac probably has an equivalent command
involving the command key.
Other high-bit ASCII characters can be produced
with similar alt + number combinations. You can
also produce regular keyboard characters this way
(as I've had to do when a regular alphabetic key
was sticking).
Cathy Krusberg
vhd1...@isp.com
Allison Turner-
>
>xerlome wrote:
>
>> Thanks. Some years ago, i had a long list of commands, some way of
>> using shift, alt and/or ctrl + keyboard characters, which produced many
>> alternative characters, including Ł. (Can't find it.)
>
>On Windows, alt + 0163 on the numeric keypad
>produces Ł . (Be sure num lock is on.)
>Mac probably has an equivalent command
>involving the command key.
And it shows up on my screen correctly, too.
Cool. On my mac, the correct keys appear to be
option + 3. Does the character Ł look right to
you?
My experience has been that while a character
may come out right in some systems, it just
doesn't in all of them. But perhaps option+3
maps directly to the correct ASCII character.
I know the alt + number sets do.
>Other high-bit ASCII characters can be produced
>with similar alt + number combinations. You can
>also produce regular keyboard characters this way
>(as I've had to do when a regular alphabetic key
>was sticking).
There must be a complete catalog of what the
keystrokes are for each character, somewhere on
the web; I used to have one, many years ago.
-Allison
Allison Turner-
>
>on Fri, 06 Jan 2006 08:08:55 -0500, Cathy Krusberg stated:
>>
>>xerlome wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks. Some years ago, i had a long list of commands, some way of
>>> using shift, alt and/or ctrl + keyboard characters, which produced many
>>
>>On Windows, alt + 0163 on the numeric keypad
>>Mac probably has an equivalent command
>>involving the command key.
>
>And it shows up on my screen correctly, too.
>Cool. On my mac, the correct keys appear to be
>you?
>
>My experience has been that while a character
>may come out right in some systems, it just
>doesn't in all of them. But perhaps option+3
>maps directly to the correct ASCII character.
>I know the alt + number sets do.
Drat. Now they all look like question marks on
my screen, even though they were fine before I
posted. So just sending the ASCII character
through my mac system changed it. What a mess
of a system.
-at
Jack Campin - bogus address
>> sure num lock is on.) Mac probably has an equivalent command
>> involving the command key.
> And it shows up on my screen correctly, too. Cool. On my mac,
> the correct keys appear to be option + 3. Does the character Ł
> look right to you?
It does (as the Windows one did), but it's something of a fluke,
as your message didn't have a character encoding specified in the
header. If your newsreader knows how to encode and decode 8-bit
characters as ASCII you have a better chance that other people
will read them the same way as you.
John R. Yamamoto-Wilson
>On Windows, alt + 0163 on the numeric keypad
>produces £ . (Be sure num lock is on.)
I get a backward L (｣) when I do that (whether the num lock is on or
off). What I usually do is open Microsoft Word and use the symbol table
on the insert tab. Copying the GBP symbol from there gives £.
At least, ｣ looks like a backward L and £ looks like the symbol for
GBP on *my* system. What do others see?
michael adams
"John R. Yamamoto-Wilson" <jo...@rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in message
news:1136556368....@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Cathy Krusberg wrote:
>On Windows, alt + 0163 on the numeric keypad
>produces Ł . (Be sure num lock is on.)
____________________________________________________
>I get a backward L (?) when I do that (whether the num lock is on or
> off). What I usually do is open Microsoft Word and use the symbol table
> on the insert tab. Copying the GBP symbol from there gives Ł.
> At least, ? looks like a backward L
I see what you posted there, as a rectangle which is slightly higher than
its wide - ( a tall square)
> and Ł looks like the symbol for GBP on *my* system. What do others see?
I see what you posted there a traditional pound sign as well - the symbol
for GPB
However your post is showing as HTML, rather than plain text in OE 6
although the plaintext charset is given in the properties as utf-8.
h.t.h. ( joke )
I get the traditional pound sign when using [ALT] 0163.
michael adams
...
michael adams
news:1136556368....@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Cathy Krusberg wrote:
>On Windows, alt + 0163 on the numeric keypad
>produces Ł . (Be sure num lock is on.)
____________________________________________________
>I get a backward L (?) when I do that (whether the num lock is on or
> off). What I usually do is open Microsoft Word and use the symbol table
> on the insert tab. Copying the GBP symbol from there gives Ł.
> At least, ? looks like a backward L
I see what you posted there, as a rectangle which is slightly higher than
its wide - ( a tall square)
[ additional material - now reading my own reply here in OE6:the square
has changed to a question mark and the HTML has changed back to plain
text - which doesn't always happen when replying to a HTML original.
One might even suspect that the original question was a troll -
perish the thought.]
Andy Dingley
wrote:
>I don't know how many thrift stores you visit, but it's highly unlikely that
>you will be able to find every title you want and need by dropping into the
>local Goodwill on the lucky day your special book happens to be there.
That's why I like working in Bath so much. 15 shops on my regular
lunchtime round, and the locals are sufficiently literate that I'd
usually buy something in every shop and get a "find" twice a week 8-)
So do I _really_ want to take a job in Aztec West (soulless hellhole
office-park) ?
Kris Baker
"Andy Dingley" <din...@codesmiths.com> wrote in message
news:6ck0s1hdfjl7cmme1...@4ax.com...
No.
My regular routes start either 45 or 30 miles away from home, and
offer up either 11 or 8 stops....totalling about 220 miles each. I
bought a Prius to save on gas for those trips, but it eats up tires
so fast (and cost so much more) that I'll never recoup that.
I might emigrate to Bath.
Kris