Worked in a store once

[EighthAveLocal]

The way I'm perciving it is the store is trying to buy it low just to make a profit off of it. Then there is me, I'm buying it low to enjoy and play the guitar.

[TenHairlessCats]

Originally Posted by GeneK

Well, your little old lady is also "selling something they don't know anything about (and haven't tried to find out)," so what's the distinction? If the little old lady is selling her guitar at a yard sale and not to the store, THEN you think it's okay to take advantage of her?

ETA: I am addressing the original poster of this comment, not muscmp. This thread is confusing.

Nothing more satisfying than ripping off little old ladies. But we should probably have another 9 pages of thread debate about what "ripping off" actually means.

[Wengr]

Originally Posted by TenHairlessCats

Nothing more satisfying than ripping off little old ladies.

I think getting a prewar martin basically for free, is definitely more satisfying.

[Ted @ LA Guitar Sales]

Originally Posted by fuman

...But let me ask you this: You're driving out in the country, come on a small town or a yard sale or something. You're on business or whatever, so you have $500 in your pocket. And they have a guitar. Why, it's a pre-war martin. And there's a price on the headstock. It could be a fake, but you know a lot about guitars, and it looks genuine.

It's for sale: $350.

Do you buy it? Or do you say, "Hey, that's a really valuable guitar you have there. Probably worth more than $20,000."

This is a great question of course but in truth the OP lost me with the 10% commission the store was supposedly paying their sales staff, how is that even possible? Also, how is it that he didn't get fired when he blew the buy for the store? Not only does he get to keep his job but he gets to take home a guitar he purchased wholesale using the stores account.

Oh well, what do I know.

[EighthAveLocal]

Originally Posted by Ted @ LA Guitar Sales

This is a great question of course but in truth the OP lost me with the 10% commission the store was supposedly paying their sales staff, how is that even possible? Also, how is it that he didn't get fired when he blew the buy for the store? Not only does he get to keep his job but he gets to take home a guitar he purchased wholesale using the stores account.

Oh well, what do I know.

It must have been nice in those times.

[RedJoker]

Originally Posted by muscmp

i believe he meant to post this in his original posting instead.


"Well, I wasn't going to name the store - thought it'd be "furthering an agenda" type thing. But since you asked, it was Kincaid's is Music in Springfield, Ohio. Jackass's name was Larry Music. He was in his 50's twenty years ago, so I'm sure he's retired by now. Definitely from the store and maybe from this earth as well.

play music!

Whoa. I grew up in Springfield and left about 20 years ago.

[mot]

Nice guys pay a fair price.

Is Larry a scoundrel? I don't know, but I do know that I sleep well at night and can look at myself in the mirror without shirking.

Caveat emptor, caveat vendit, caveat lector, whatever!

Teach your children well so they will know that there are scoundrels out there, but also show them by example how to do the right thing.

[TenHairlessCats]

While I can see some ethical argument about a store not letting a customer know the potential street value of an instrument, I in no way think the store has any obligation to offer a fixed amount.

If someone came in with a guitar that sold regularly for $2000 on ebay and the store employee said, "Yes, these can go for around $2000 on ebay, but we're only willing to pay $500 for it", there's definitely nothing wrong with that.

[fuman]

Originally Posted by frankmcr

You have a guitar that's worth $1000. You sell it to somebody for $1000. You have $1000 in your pocket.

A music store has a guitar that's worth $1000. They bought from you for $600. They sell it to somebody for $1000. The music store has $400 in its pocket.

After they pay their rent, insurance, salaries, commission, absorb breakage and damage losses from careless customers. . .

[bohemian]

Though I would not have attempted to take advantage of the customer as related in the OP's opening post,... as the owner I would have fired the employee.

Also.. no offense to the OP, I do not buy your story (ies)... why? Too much story and not at all logical. Just my opinion.


Years ago when I was a Field Service Manager for Mercedes Benz of North America ( factory rep).. I walked into a pawn shop ( which I now avoid as best I can except when looking for button accordeons or violins and bows as pawn shops are clueless) in Chico Calif where they take advantage of impoverished desperate college students...

A kid of about 14 and his mother walk in with what appears to be an archtop case. Daddy died in an auto accident and they were doing what they could to survive, which included bailing of his possessions.

The kid put the guitar on the counter.. The pony tailed, too many earrings counter guy popped it open and said.." oh I thought it was something better,
but because it's in such good shape, I'll give you $400."

What was the guitar ? A genuine, older, mint condition White Falcon ( as is collected by Neil Young who has over 20) in the original case.

You bet I busted in.. Addressing the lizard behind the counter.. I suggested he give them a break.. he scowled and upped the ante to $800..
they smelled a rat , the kid grabbed the guitar, cased it and bolted.

I met them outside and gave them a couple suggestions, none of which included pawn shops or local dealers.

This may be meddling , but what's the objective..(I have no loyalty to pawnshops)...
Make sure no ones takes advantage of another... and don't try to personally capitalize on the situation.

[bohemian]

Yesterday a friend calls me from Vancouver Wa.. he used to live here in the State of Jefferson.

He is a very good guitar player who knows very little about guitars.

I have advised him dozens of times to call me before he gets into another "deal"..

He did not.

He tells me he went into a really "friendly" local music shop where he found what was represented as a 1970's "law suit" all solid wood Takamine Dreadnought.

He liked the neck and playability but did not have the $400.
What he did have was a very fine Ltd edition Alvarez Yairi 25th Anniversary por some such thing.., soild east indian
very finely made, perfect condition guitar. I have played it and liked it very much.. wider than usual nut. 1 23/32. Original well made case.

The store talked up the rarity and the Martin sued Takamine story etc...
He asked about the duller tone but they said that was because of the dead strings. If he traded them they would throw in some strings.

He liked the neck, bought the story and traded. He got it home and changed the strings. It did not seem to make a difference in the tone.

What he got.

A July 23rd , 1985 laminated mahogany backs and sides, laminated top Takamine with a non original case and two sets of Marquis strings.

He is unhappy.

Know something about instruments, if not bring someone along or make a call BEFORE you commit.

Know thy dealer and trust that a dealer is out for their best interest, not yours. There are few exceptions.

[frankmcr]

Originally Posted by fuman

After they pay their rent, insurance, salaries, commission, absorb breakage and damage losses from careless customers. . .

Yep.

See Post # 57.

[bohemian]

"Okay. How much is left of that $400 after paying the rent, the utilities, insurance, and the employees? Come on Frank, you can't be serious. "

'After they pay their rent, insurance, salaries, commission, absorb breakage and damage losses from careless customers. . . "

You left out "shrinkage" which is, more often than not, employee generated.

Impossible to calculate.. but as with car dealers, the majority of profit ( gross and net) comes from used cars, not from new product.. with the exception of the parts department which typically makes 40% gross profit.

But, hypothetically, I would think profit on the above described quote and guitar..$400 is right at 40% gross profit...........I would bet $350 or more, and that would be net.... 35% net, and that is obscene.

I have zero problem with businesses making money and no objection to pay less to a customer for used than they would get from a direct sale, but $600 against $1000. .. and typically you get less from a street sale than a product would be from a dealer. So in reality we may be talking about something worth $1200 from a dealer, not $1000.

[GSM]

Originally Posted by frankmcr

You have a guitar that's worth $1000. You sell it to somebody for $1000. You have $1000 in your pocket.

MINUS what you originally paid, right? So, if you bought it new, you end up with negative $500 (-$500) in your pocket. If you bought it used, maybe you'll break even.

Originally Posted by frankmcr

A music store has a guitar that's worth $1000. They bought from you for $600. They sell it to somebody for $1000. The music store has $400 in its pocket.

No, the music store has $1,000 in its pocket, just like the private seller above, right? MINUS the $600 they paid = LESS invested into it, equalling a larger profit.

I'm confused: Does "money in your pocket" mean actual bills in your possession or PROFITS made? Because your analogy is unclear. If we're talking about two different entities making a one thousand dollar sale, they both have a thousand dollar (dolla) bills (ya'll) in their respective pockets.

The music store made more profits, because of their lower initial investment. The way you worded it sounded like the private seller has a huge advantage in your hypothetical situation, which they do not.

[penguin71]

When selling used to a store vs. trying to sell it on your own, what are you really getting? You're getting a known sales amount immediately. What is the store getting? A used instrument that may or may not need some minor repairs at a set cost with no guarantee about the ultimate resale price. They are taking all of the risk. You are taking none of the risk. Selling a used guitar to a store is the funamental example of the inherent relationship between risk and reward. Low risk generally returns low rewards, whereas high risk generally returns high rewards.

Now, to the story at hand... a $20k pre-war Martin that a guy is trying to buy for a pittance and taking advantage of the information gap that would have existed 20 years ago - that's a tough one. If it had happened today when the information gap is virtually non-existant between buyers and sellers (given ubiquitous access to the internet), the situation may be viewed much differently.

And as for those who would "take advantage" of the seller with no knowledge at the rural garage sale but take umbrage with "taking advantage" of someone at a store in the city, I am having difficulty understanding what the difference is between the two scenarios (not being snarky - genuinely don't see the difference). In both cases, you have an uninformed seller not understanding the potential value of what they are selling. Am I missing something?