DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

Touting

HeavensAbove

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2016
Messages
627
Reactions
471
Location
Dunfermline, Scotland
Mods should stop allowing "touting" of drones and parts on here. RRP should be the maximum. If there are any taxes, shipping or transfer costs, then that could be allowed.

I've seen an $89 battery with a price on here of $290!

Discouraging this practice should also make it less appealing to crooks coming in here attempting to score, and it would cool the inflated market elsewhere if there weren't silly prices on the drone forum.

I'm not against capitalism by the way, but there's a marketplace for profiteering and it's not amongst peers in a community forum.


Sent from my iPad using MavicPilots
 
  • Like
Reactions: SkyHigh Pryo
The classifieds section is a benefit of the forum for members to buy & sell items. It is not mandatory for anyone to use. The forum does not control the pricing, the sellers do. This is the nature of capitalism, people will pay what they feel is fair. If you see something you would like, but the price is to high, then just pass it by, just like you would anywhere else. The best way to discourage it is to not purchase items you feel are to high a price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: erkme73 and kiteboy
I fully comprehend the nature of capitalism, however, as this is your marketplace (for the benefit of your members) you are in a position to regulate it.

You are able, if you so wish, to put in place checks and balances to mitigate what is not capitalism, but blatant profiteering.

If a member wishes to pay over the odds for anything it is indeed their choice. However, if they end up finding out they have been ripped off (i.e. the advertised price was MUCH greater than the RRP, or they get scammed) then this devalues your classifieds marketplace.

Just a simple addition, like requiring the seller to publish the RRP for what they are selling may be enough. Or to avoid wasting members time, the asking price could be displayed in the header. This avoids members needlessly clicking on over-inflated priced items cluttering the space.

I fully agree that I can "walk on by", as you suggest, and not purchasing removes the heat from the pricing and thereby in an ideal world regulates this itself. However not all humans are rational and when faced with a must have, and a lack of supply, then price and value reasoning goes out the window...

You can of course choose to ignore my suggestions, it is your forum after all, but I am sure there are a number of folks who will agree with me.
 
I fully comprehend the nature of capitalism, however, as this is your marketplace (for the benefit of your members) you are in a position to regulate it.

You are able, if you so wish, to put in place checks and balances to mitigate what is not capitalism, but blatant profiteering.

If a member wishes to pay over the odds for anything it is indeed their choice. However, if they end up finding out they have been ripped off (i.e. the advertised price was MUCH greater than the RRP, or they get scammed) then this devalues your classifieds marketplace.

Just a simple addition, like requiring the seller to publish the RRP for what they are selling may be enough. Or to avoid wasting members time, the asking price could be displayed in the header. This avoids members needlessly clicking on over-inflated priced items cluttering the space.

I fully agree that I can "walk on by", as you suggest, and not purchasing removes the heat from the pricing and thereby in an ideal world regulates this itself. However not all humans are rational and when faced with a must have, and a lack of supply, then price and value reasoning goes out the window...

You can of course choose to ignore my suggestions, it is your forum after all, but I am sure there are a number of folks who will agree with me.

No one is requiring you to participate in the classifieds. I also don't think it's the mods to regulate what people ask for or what others want to pay. And if you dont already have your mavic, you've wastes more than enough time on this forum anyways, so clicking on an extra post isn't going to cost you anything you haven't already spent in wasted time. On the up side, these prices should be dropping soon.
 
No one is requiring you to participate in the classifieds. I also don't think it's the mods to regulate what people ask for or what others want to pay. And if you dont already have your mavic, you've wastes more than enough time on this forum anyways, so clicking on an extra post isn't going to cost you anything you haven't already spent in wasted time. On the up side, these prices should be dropping soon.

Eh? I am droneless, it doesn't mean that I have nothing better to do with my finite minutes here on Earth.

I don't buy the don't participate argument. If you are looking for something, say on Amazon or Ebay, do you look at every item or do you "sort by price"?
 
Some people will find anything to complain about.
See what I did there?
 
I have no problem with someone making money on selling something, it is the way of the world. What I do have a problem with is the people whos first post on here is "buy my drone for $xxxx.xx'.. That to me is just showing that you dont care about the hobby, you are only trying to sell n profit. Good for you, but go to EBay of Craigslist and post. That is the type of posts that I would lime to see either deleted or a standard put in place.

The other thing that bothers me is another thread that started off by say how much $$ they made and profited off the sales. Then they said what they did with sum of the money, which was buying their cousin one. I, personally would have been more likey to hit the 'like' button just hearing about the last part. Tostart off gloating about how much profit they made turned me off. Congrats to them for getting them one, but just say that.

Once again just my 2 cents n still awaiting my bird.

SkyHigh Pyro Eye flying above
 
I fully comprehend the nature of capitalism, however, as this is your marketplace (for the benefit of your members) you are in a position to regulate it.

You are able, if you so wish, to put in place checks and balances to mitigate what is not capitalism, but blatant profiteering.

If a member wishes to pay over the odds for anything it is indeed their choice. However, if they end up finding out they have been ripped off (i.e. the advertised price was MUCH greater than the RRP, or they get scammed) then this devalues your classifieds marketplace.

Just a simple addition, like requiring the seller to publish the RRP for what they are selling may be enough. Or to avoid wasting members time, the asking price could be displayed in the header. This avoids members needlessly clicking on over-inflated priced items cluttering the space.

I fully agree that I can "walk on by", as you suggest, and not purchasing removes the heat from the pricing and thereby in an ideal world regulates this itself. However not all humans are rational and when faced with a must have, and a lack of supply, then price and value reasoning goes out the window...

You can of course choose to ignore my suggestions, it is your forum after all, but I am sure there are a number of folks who will agree with me.

I have a great suggestion. Stop whining.
 
I bought from DJI. I waited. I didn't get impatient and pay some blood sucking price.
Everyone here has the same choices to make.
Make the choices and live with it but don't hang your desires around everybody else's necks.
 
And people shouldn't hang their profits around everyones neck also. State what good you did n leave it. 2 way street no matter which side you drive on

SkyHigh Pyro Eye flying above
 
True capitalism uses profit as its sole motive. Thus, it is profiteering. Some call it greed. Whatever you call it, it is absolutely necessary, and works best unregulated.

When profits are high, it draws in competitors which will naturally and automatically increase supply, and thus lower the price/profit. Trying to regulate or suppress the profit margin on a producer or supplier will have predictable, but often unintended consequences. If someone is willing to pay $200+ for an $89 battery that they can't find elsewhere, do you think they would appreciate you interfering with their ability to do so? What if that buyer is about to leave for a once-in-a-lifetime trip and that $200 battery is his only option?

Likewise, that guy who's going to extra efforts to obtain the batteries and offer them up for >$200 might not do so if he can't charge what the unregulated free market will bear. Thus, all those who people who would have been able to get an expensive battery, now can get a less expensive NOTHING.

As hurricane Sandy approached the NE coast, many states implemented anti-price-gouging laws which severely punished those willing to truck in supplies from distant locations to sell at free market rates. Whether it was gas for $20/gal, or $100 plywood, at least those caught unprepared had (expensive) options. But with price controls in effect, no one wanted to haul in the extra material - so what was the result? Shortages of everything imaginable.

Do you think the senior citizen who needs power to run his oxygen generator would prefer $20/gal gas to $2/gal NOTHING? Sure, it's more expensive, but it's there to be purchased.

You cannot claim that you are for capitalism while in the same breath state that you want to limit profits (aka profiteering). These are mutually exclusive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Exception
True capitalism uses profit as its sole motive. Thus, it is profiteering. Some call it greed. Whatever you call it, it is absolutely necessary, and works best unregulated.

When profits are high, it draws in competitors which will naturally and automatically increase supply, and thus lower the price/profit. Trying to regulate or suppress the profit margin on a producer or supplier will have predictable, but often unintended consequences. If someone is willing to pay $200+ for an $89 battery that they can't find elsewhere, do you think they would appreciate you interfering with their ability to do so? What if that buyer is about to leave for a once-in-a-lifetime trip and that $200 battery is his only option?

Likewise, that guy who's going to extra efforts to obtain the batteries and offer them up for >$200 might not do so if he can't charge what the unregulated free market will bear. Thus, all those who people who would have been able to get an expensive battery, now can get a less expensive NOTHING.

As hurricane Sandy approached the NE coast, many states implemented anti-price-gouging laws which severely punished those willing to truck in supplies from distant locations to sell at free market rates. Whether it was gas for $20/gal, or $100 plywood, at least those caught unprepared had (expensive) options. But with price controls in effect, no one wanted to haul in the extra material - so what was the result? Shortages of everything imaginable.

Do you think the senior citizen who needs power to run his oxygen generator would prefer $20/gal gas to $2/gal NOTHING? Sure, it's more expensive, but it's there to be purchased.

You cannot claim that you are for capitalism while in the same breath state that you want to limit profits (aka profiteering). These are mutually exclusive.

Profiteering is not the same as profiting. You seem to be discombobulating the two terms. This Mavic situation is NOT the same as a free competitive market. It is a lucky bag where there has been a order lottery. If profiteering is unrestricted (refer to £7k Fly More advertised on Amazon), then this encourages more speculators to "buy a ticket" and this exacerbates the supply problem. Which is my angle, not the price or profit itself, but the ultimate short term effect on the market conditions.

Your analogy of the senior citizen needing oxygen and being forced to pay way over market value, because the only parasites able to transport to him/her are lowlife scum, is a good one. I would suggest that anyone able to sleep at night having profiteered out of someone needing a product to survive has a fairly wonky moral compass. Would you deny that Government (aka the people) intervention, and purchase of life saving supplies by compulsory purchase, would not be a good thing in such a scenario? However, unless a Mavic was being purchased as a search and rescue aid, I realise that your example is not applicable to what is ostensibly a luxury product.

I again state that I AM a capitalist, I work in the private sector (our company is regulated by government, although described as deregulated), own shares, and let property, and this is NOT capitalism we are talking about here, but blatant profiteering.

We will just need to agree to disagree on this I think. Possibly the complete ineptness of the world's largest retailer (excepting possibly Alibaba) in failing to fulfil my order, and p***ing me off to the max, has clouded my judgement ;-)








Sent from my iPad using MavicPilots
 
Profiteering is not the same as profiting. You seem to be discombobulating the two terms. This Mavic situation is NOT the same as a free competitive market. It is a lucky bag where there has been a order lottery. If profiteering is unrestricted (refer to £7k Fly More advertised on Amazon), then this encourages more speculators to "buy a ticket" and this exacerbates the supply problem. Which is my angle, not the price or profit itself, but the ultimate short term effect on the market conditions.

Your analogy of the senior citizen needing oxygen and being forced to pay way over market value, because the only parasites able to transport to him/her are lowlife scum, is a good one. I would suggest that anyone able to sleep at night having profiteered out of someone needing a product to survive has a fairly wonky moral compass. Would you deny that Government (aka the people) intervention, and purchase of life saving supplies by compulsory purchase, would not be a good thing in such a scenario? However, unless a Mavic was being purchased as a search and rescue aid, I realise that your example is not applicable to what is ostensibly a luxury product.

I again state that I AM a capitalist, I work in the private sector (our company is regulated by government, although described as deregulated), own shares, and let property, and this is NOT capitalism we are talking about here, but blatant profiteering.

We will just need to agree to disagree on this I think. Possibly the complete ineptness of the world's largest retailer (excepting possibly Alibaba) in failing to fulfil my order, and p***ing me off to the max, has clouded my judgement ;-)








Sent from my iPad using MavicPilots

Then disagree we shall. Profit is profit. A lot of profit, or gross amounts of profit is not suddenly profiteering. If it were, who decides where the line between reasonable profits and profiteering occurs?

The MP situation, whether speculators participate or not, is 100% free market. If someone is "lucky" or better prepared, has better foresight, or is quicker than the average customer and they're able to capitalize on that, good for them. Those that weren't fast enough will learn to be better prepared next time, or they will drive a competitor to create a better, more competitive product with a better supply stream to strip demand from DJI. It is precisely what drives capitalism.

As far as those greedy people who will only deliver o2 if the profits large enough, SO WHAT? Are you suggesting people should provide supplies at a loss? Because shipping them from hundreds of miles away to the high demand areas without raising the price to cover the additional costs - that's exactly what happens.

Price fixing, rationing, profit limiting, anti speculation... All of these are catchphrase terms used to describe the polar opposite of capitalism. They don't work, and they only have predictable unintended consequences. The only area where I think regulations should exist is when businesses use government and regulations to fix the system to their advantage thereby establishing obstacles to market entry for competitors.
 
Then disagree we shall. Profit is profit. A lot of profit, or gross amounts of profit is not suddenly profiteering. If it were, who decides where the line between reasonable profits and profiteering occurs?

The MP situation, whether speculators participate or not, is 100% free market. If someone is "lucky" or better prepared, has better foresight, or is quicker than the average customer and they're able to capitalize on that, good for them. Those that weren't fast enough will learn to be better prepared next time, or they will drive a competitor to create a better, more competitive product with a better supply stream to strip demand from DJI. It is precisely what drives capitalism.

As far as those greedy people who will only deliver o2 if the profits large enough, SO WHAT? Are you suggesting people should provide supplies at a loss? Because shipping them from hundreds of miles away to the high demand areas without raising the price to cover the additional costs - that's exactly what happens.

Price fixing, rationing, profit limiting, anti speculation... All of these are catchphrase terms used to describe the polar opposite of capitalism. They don't work, and they only have predictable unintended consequences. The only area where I think regulations should exist is when businesses use government and regulations to fix the system to their advantage thereby establishing obstacles to market entry for competitors.

I'll end on an analogy which is probably more suitable given that the Mavic issue is similar due to there being a finite supply, and shows where your "true capitalism" can end in injustice.

A ticket tout creates a software program to buy as many tickets as it can from one final gig from Madonna (before she hangs up her pointy coned leotard). It manages to purchase 100% of all the tickets, the second they go online. He is then able to sell every ticket at an average of £900 for a £90 ticket - a 900% markup.

If my thinking is correct, you see no issue with this as the fellow has shown cunning entrepreneurial-ship. Those that would have liked to purchase a £90 ticket should wise up and create their own program. Market forces are dictating the true value of the ticket anyway, so tough luck to those lifelong true fans? Money talks. There is no solution necessary as there is no problem? Greed is good.

The way I see it - that ISN'T capitalism. It is criminal. Akin to Goldfinger irradiating the Fort Knox gold supply. Government needs to act, making this behaviour an offence, or forcing the ticket retailer to put measures in to prevent it happening through regulation. However, this wouldn't be allowed to happen in your capitalist panacea?







Sent from my iPad using MavicPilots
 
Hey I love my mavic but if someone wants to pay me twice what I paid for it just to have one now I'd be happy to wait for another from dji.


Sent from my iPhone using MavicPilots
 
I'll end on an analogy which is probably more suitable given that the Mavic issue is similar due to there being a finite supply, and shows where your "true capitalism" can end in injustice.

A ticket tout creates a software program to buy as many tickets as it can from one final gig from Madonna (before she hangs up her pointy coned leotard). It manages to purchase 100% of all the tickets, the second they go online. He is then able to sell every ticket at an average of £900 for a £90 ticket - a 900% markup.

If my thinking is correct, you see no issue with this as the fellow has shown cunning entrepreneurial-ship. Those that would have liked to purchase a £90 ticket should wise up and create their own program. Market forces are dictating the true value of the ticket anyway, so tough luck to those lifelong true fans? Money talks. There is no solution necessary as there is no problem? Greed is good.

The way I see it - that ISN'T capitalism. It is criminal. Akin to Goldfinger irradiating the Fort Knox gold supply. Government needs to act, making this behaviour an offence, or forcing the ticket retailer to put measures in to prevent it happening through regulation. However, this wouldn't be allowed to happen in your capitalist panacea?







Sent from my iPad using MavicPilots

No, where someone has an unfair advantage, or is able to game the system through an exploit to which no one else has access to, then that is NOT capitalism. I didn't reference Ticket Master here (but did in another similar thread several weeks ago). Such a setup is quite different that an what is occurring with the MP or the supplies during hurricane sandy.

For the TM scalping process to compare, all
the materials and MP would have to be sold by a single seller only. And before they are made available to the public, that seller would have to allow a single user to purchase up 100% of the inventory.

That clearly didn't happen, and thus is not a fair comparison. To do so would be collusion, which is (and should be) illegal.

Instead, anyone with determination, persistence, motivation, and foresight had an equal opportunity to get the MP. Since there was limited supply, and not everyone can be a winner, those that were successful and obtained one (or more) legally and without unfair advantage, have the right to do with those that they bought as they see fit. It is pure capitalism at play.

The early bird gets the worm. Everyone had the opportunity to be that early bird. It's just that most don't want to get up that early. And those that did, ought to have the right to be rewarded for doing so without encountering an artificially imposed profit/purchase limit.

Now if DJI had instructed their sellers to limit purchases to X per household, that would be a reasonable manufacturer-imposed restriction that is entirely up to them. That is something they probably should have done to placate people like you who feel the process is unfair.
 
Drug dealers, Lotto winners, and the generally filthy rich don't mind paying 10x for something they want.

Furby was a $2,000 prize back in the day. No one is being taken advantage IMO.

I appreciate your opinion albeit nmine is the total opposite.

Even though I don't agree, I will respect your viewpoint and will not demean or be rude to you.

Good day sir. ;-)
 
  • Like
Reactions: erkme73
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,599
Messages
1,554,243
Members
159,603
Latest member
refrigasketscanada