|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next] | ||||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
This is not a discussion of greater rights or wrong it is about if it is a moral thing to price magic at whatever the creator wants. It is not starving people or a thought experiment. Those are a dodge.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
bishthemagish Inner circle 6013 Posts |
People don't have to buy magic like they need food. Magic is a hobby for the most part. As I said above it is a hobby that can be self liquidating or pay for itself. However I feel that few in magic choose this road. I feel that this point has been missed completely.
Do a show - make money - buy magic - do a show - make money - buy magic.
Glenn Bishop Cardician
Producer of the DVD Punch Deal Pro Publisher of Glenn Bishop's Ace Cutting And Block Transfer Triumphs |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Or just have a hobby. Either way don't tell others what to sell for. Glenn used yo have some great DVD for sale. (I say used because I am not sure if they are still available. ) Nobody but Glenn can decide what that information is worth for him to part with. You can decide it is too high a price for you to pay. But that is another thing entirely.
As Glenn pointed out it is not food. Also as for your discussions of morals and ethics and food and starving people I say the following. You may feel a moral responsibility but that is all based on your morals. You sit in judgment of others morals which is your right. I never said I would or would not give food but only said I am not morally obligated to. You have no idea if I would or not yet you are happy to judge anyhow. This is the problem when your only apparent goal is to seize moral high ground. It is also why discussions are impossible because you want to read into them and not simply read them. That was not a response to you Glenn.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
Terrible Wizard Inner circle 1973 Posts |
People have clearly misunderstood the reasons why I introduced those examples, which had nothing to do with the pricing of magic but were rebuttals and counter challenges to those who used 'people can whatever they want in business' style arguments in their arguments against my points. I was simply showing the inanity of such positions, not in any way equating magic pricing with food! I think people need to pay more careful attention to how this discussion has developed and when and what I posted.
So, Danny, it is not a dodge - it's simply that you haven't paid enough attention to the way the argument has flowed. But this is tiring, and getting further and further adrift from the main point, and becoming more and more antagonistic. So I will leave with a clear summary of my position on all things that have been discussed and leave people to agree, disagree or have the last word as is their wont: A) there is such a thing as ethical business practices B) it is unethical to vastly inflate the sale price of goods, especially if you are not the originator of the product, without strong justification C) it is a good principle in business to offer an honest product at an honest price D) selling shoddily made and/or dangerous or unfit for purpose goods is unethical E) manipulative and/or misleading advertising is unethical F) having greed for excessive profits as a prime motivator in business is unethical G) withholding certain goods and services in certain contexts is unethical Specifically regarding magic: A) there is a problem in magic concerning exposure and the cheapening of the art, which is connected to the mass marketing of magic secrets and props B) increasing the sale price to reduce the availability of magic secrets is not an effective or ethical way to manage the problem C) the problem is better managed by selective sales, not indiscriminate price hikes which a blunt and damaging tool D) artists should be concerned with their art form, both for their own benefit and for the benefit of others E) to justify pice hikes by claiming to respect the art whilst not considering selective sales and who you are selling to is hypocritical and silly F) to justify price hikes by claiming that sellers can do what they want is palpable nonsense and ethically naive G) selective selling needn't be as hard to manage as some suppose, but it requires the co-operation of the sellers H) if people who sell magic secrets don't consider who it is they are selling to then are perpetuating the very problem they complain about, which is hypocritical and silly |
|||||||||
Pop Haydn Inner circle Los Angeles 3691 Posts |
If I invent a routine or trick, and am willing to sell it to anyone, but at a ridiculously high price--that is not unethical in my mind. It would only be worth parting with it for an outrageous amount. Only someone who values the routine a great deal would be willing to pay such a price. It is a way of saying, it isn't for sale for anything less than this.
Most of my routines are in print or on video for what I consider to be very reasonable prices. But my Magnetized Water routine is relatively new, and very representative of my brand, and I wouldn't really want anyone else to do it. For an outrageous offer, I might consider it. This has more to do with calculations in my own mind of what the value of the routine is to me. It has nothing to do with what the market will bear, or what is a "fair" asking price. A fair price is what I say it is. |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Terrible Wizard have you ever offered anything for sale?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
Pop Haydn Inner circle Los Angeles 3691 Posts |
There are considerations on the bottom level, too. I can't make any money unless the retail price of my product is at least five times my cost of production. This has to do strictly with product cost, and without any consideration to value of the goods.
I have several products for sale on my website that we couldn't afford to wholesale because the retail cost would have to be higher than the market would bear. We can only sell these at a retail price on our own website and still make money--our retail price is really the wholesale price, and we are our own jobber. We can only make the price reasonable and still make a profit by using direct sales alone. This cuts into volume a lot, and spreads the profit over a long time period. Qualifying customers would add a lot of time and effort to selling. It would cut into both sales and profits. Raising the price to a qualifying level does that pretty well. If it is bought by a wealthy collector instead of a poor performer, that may actually be better for me. I would have made money on my routine and not gained another competitor doing it. I am a performer--I make my living by my work and creations. I have nothing to gain by sharing my work with my competitors unless it is the income from selling it. The "value" of my keeping the routine for myself as opposed to selling it is my calculation alone. |
|||||||||
KC Cameron Inner circle Raleigh, North Carolina 1944 Posts |
TW,
Life is not fair, too bad, let's get over it and get on with living. It sounds like you are taking a religious college's philosophy class . . . and you have a lot to learn. The questions you are asking are fine to discuss, and apply them on yourself - not on others. You say "complex" and "difficult" a lot. Those are code words for "I don't know." Ethics & morals are subjective, and as such do not exist except in our own minds. Everything is a matter of perspective. The issue I see is that you believe in absolutes, which most people do. The problem is one person's "absolutes" do not reflect on society. We may have some "absolutes" we share as a society, but most are merely a matter of perspective which can shift rapidly within an individual's life and thought. What happens when one person's or group's "absolutes" collide with another's? Wars. Religious wars. Witch hunts. Political parties. Racism. Slavery. Stop assuming everyone comes from the same perspective, or there is a "right" and "wrong" perspective. |
|||||||||
Terrible Wizard Inner circle 1973 Posts |
*TW would love to respond, but as noted he has left the discussion. Incidentally, Cameron, TW is not taking a college class, though he is a college lecturer. He's sure he has much to learn about ethical philosophy, and he thinks you've seriously misread him. Lol.*
|
|||||||||
KC Cameron Inner circle Raleigh, North Carolina 1944 Posts |
It seems like everyone misreads you, which suggests the problem is in your delivery or your own understanding.
|
|||||||||
wwhokie1 Special user 512 Posts |
Sometimes people are just wrong, they do the wrong thing, and there is no perspective that can make it right.
I have done things that were good, I have done things that were bad. I might like to find a perspective that would allow me to redefine the bad as good, but that just doesn't work. Admit our faults and failings and deal with them. Take responsibility and expect others to do the same. Is it bad to withhold food from a starving person because they cannot afford it? yes. Is it bad to withhold a magic routine from someone who cannot afford it? No. Is it bad to not lower the price so they can afford it? no. Consider. Who determines what is affordable. For one person, affordable may be $200. For Another person $20 may be too expensive. With the logic of making it available at an affordable price we must ethically and logically just give it away. No one can afford every magic trick; therefore, we must necessarily and ethically, according to the argument, make it available at a price they can afford which would then be nothing. The logic fails. So does the ethics. |
|||||||||
Pop Haydn Inner circle Los Angeles 3691 Posts |
Why would I have a responsibility to insure that my future or present competitors have a chance to use my work at a price they can afford in order to compete with me?
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Quote:
On Nov 20, 2014, KC Cameron wrote: I have noticed that when someone has a position like this it is ALWAYS everyone else who is not smart enough to understand their brilliance.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
bishthemagish Inner circle 6013 Posts |
Again I don't see magic as a "must have". The price is the price and considering the expense of putting something out on the market - I feel that magic is not very expensive at all.
Glenn Bishop Cardician
Producer of the DVD Punch Deal Pro Publisher of Glenn Bishop's Ace Cutting And Block Transfer Triumphs |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
If you consider the often decades of time spent refining it is dirt cheap.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
bishthemagish Inner circle 6013 Posts |
I always considered the LePaul book as one of the great books on card magic because it had a lot of stuff in it that LePaul used in his act. However perhaps because I think that most magicians today are a or a collector and they are interested in collecting secrets. Not performing. They don't seem to care if a magician (like myself) spent years of stage time working out a routine.
They don't even respect my years in the business. They also seem to not care about the investment it took to produce DVDs. The hours and hours spent shooting video (with the pain of nerve damage). Or the hours and hours spent burning them and packaging them and sending them off in the mail. However magicians that do magic to pay the bills and put food on the table. They are different and they understand the value of a tested magic routine or idea. And they look at purchasing something as an investment that is going to pay off for them if they add it to their act.
Glenn Bishop Cardician
Producer of the DVD Punch Deal Pro Publisher of Glenn Bishop's Ace Cutting And Block Transfer Triumphs |
|||||||||
Bill Hallahan Inner circle New Hampshire 3222 Posts |
Terrible Wizard wrote:
Quote:
People have clearly misunderstood the reasons why I introduced those examples, which had nothing to do with the pricing of magic but were rebuttals and counter challenges to those who used 'people can whatever they want in business' style arguments in their arguments against my points. I was simply showing the inanity of such positions, not in any way equating magic pricing with food! I think people need to pay more careful attention to how this discussion has developed and when and what I posted. Unethical? Perhaps in some cases if it's a medical product, or something people need to survive. It is definitely not unethical to raise the price of a magic item, particularly if the price is being intentionally raised to limit sales. I paid $18.00 for a manuscript that was just a few printed pages. It probably cost him a few cents to print the document in volume. It was a card routine. Given that the performer was giving me a script and ideas that took him decades to arrive at, I feel I ripped him off! This is show business, and words and ideas that work are priceless. Quote:
C) it is a good principle in business to offer an honest product at an honest price A very high price is not necessarily a dishonest price. It might be an unfair prices, but if you decide that, don't buy it. Quote:
D) selling shoddily made and/or dangerous or unfit for purpose goods is unethical I agree with that. Quote:
E) manipulative and/or misleading advertising is unethical I agree with that too. There's one seller here who wrote in an advertisement, "no matter what they choose" in a routine that uses a psychological force that definitely would not be 100% certain. He rationalized this by stating it was the audience perspective, although of course someone purchasing that wouldn't know that, and it might mess up their plans for the routine. That seller lost my business forever, and he doesn't even know I decided that. (Until perhaps now). Don't purchase from sellers who do that, and it will solve the problem. Quote:
F) I agree greed is bad, but I disagree that profits can be excessive for long. Buyers aren't stupid. There are review forums. The first few people who are scammed will often post reviews. And, the point of most businesses is to maximum profit! To maximize profit, the price should be set by the intersection between the supply and demand curves. Too high a price limits sales and decreases profit. Too low a price reduces profit. That's not unethical, that's just good business. As mentioned already, in magic there is an additional factor where the creator might want to raise the price even higher and reduce sales in order to reduce the number of magicians performing a routine. Again, this is show business, and exclusivity, or even just limiting exclusivity to a few magicians, can make the routine much more valuable. Quote:
G) withholding certain goods and services in certain contexts is unethical I agree only in the context of medical items and other things people need to live. Withholding magical items is not unethical at all! In fact, if a creator decides not to sell their idea to anyone at all, and be the only one to perform something, that's entirely within their rights. Specifically regarding magic: Quote:
A) there is a problem in magic concerning exposure and the cheapening of the art, which is connected to the mass marketing of magic secrets and props While this is a problem, this is a timeless problem. It tends not to affect those at the top very much. Quote:
B) increasing the sale price to reduce the availability of magic secrets is not an effective or ethical way to manage the problem It is totally ethical to limit the sales by increasing the price! Where did you get the idea that is unethical? Again, if I created somthing, I'd be within my rights not to sell it at all, and if I decided to sell the item or idea at a high price, it would be perfectly ethical. Terrible Wizard wrote: Quote:
C) the problem is better managed by selective sales, not indiscriminate price hikes which a blunt and damaging tool Selective sales would mean the seller doesn't advertise to the general public. That is already done by some creators who only advertise in magic magazines. However, even then some items are priced high to eliminate those who aren't serious. Nobody is "entitled" to anyone elses performance idea or item, and the creator has the right to set whatever price they wish. If you can't afford it, or you think it's too high, don't purchase it. Any other method to get the item, including name-calling, is just a form of extortion. It's theirs, not yours! Terrible Wizard wrote: Quote:
D) artists should be concerned with their art form, both for their own benefit and for the benefit of others Artists should be primarily concerned with their audiences, not their "art form", whatever that means. In magic, it does not advance the art form to have everyone performing the same routine. Terrible Wizard wrote: Quote:
E) to justify pice hikes by claiming to respect the art whilst not considering selective sales and who you are selling to is hypocritical and silly Again, this is just name-calling. It's not hypocritical, because there is no hypocrisy. It's not silly because show business exclusivity is not unethical, and nor is maximizing profit. Terrible Wizard wrote: Quote:
F) to justify price hikes by claiming that sellers can do what they want is palpable nonsense and ethically naive Again, that argument is just name-calling. It is clearly not unethical for creators to sell their item at whatever price they want. If they overprice the item, either fewer people or no people will purchase the item. The latter case might be what they want. There is nothing unethical about them wanting that, nor does that hurt their audience. Terrible Wizard wrote: Quote:
G) selective selling needn't be as hard to manage as some suppose, but it requires the co-operation of the sellers How would you feel about selective selling that excluded you? By the way, selective selling can be illegal. A public company might be required to sell to anyone who has the money, lest they be sued. I know of someone who sued because they couldn't purchase amateur radio equipment. The seller refused to sell to them because the customer didn't have an amateur radio license. The store lost, because the court ruled that it was only illegal for the buyer to use the radio, not to buy it. I think the court ruled this way because they might get a license later or use the item for a gift). In any event, your entire thesis that sellers don't have the right to have total control about the price their item is sold at is flawed. Only the seller has the right to determine the price. It's not unethical to set a high price. Terrible Wizard wrote: Quote:
H) if people who sell magic secrets don't consider who it is they are selling to then are perpetuating the very problem they complain about, which is hypocritical and silly Again, your argument is just name-calling. You don't state "why" they are hypocritical or "why" it is silly. You would do much better if you left the name-calling out of your arguments when you don't support the idea. I do take it that you probably mean that too many people get access to a secret if there is no selective audience. The only legal way to limit sales is to either contact people in private, or to set the price high. Both are done in magic. It's not unethical, it's a good idea! Again, the development cost for an illusion or a routine also has to be considered. That can be priceless. Now, I do agree, there are sellers who sell at too high a price, for me anyway, but I solve the issue by not purchasing the item, and I perform something else. I don't attack them! And, there are sellers who sell junk that they misrepresent as good. That is unethical. They deserve bad reviews and they usually get them. But, your thesis that high prices and maximizing profit are inherently unethical is false. It comes across that you are just upset you can't get what you want. Perhaps that's not the real reason, but I can think of no other reason why it would bother you that a creator would want to control the dissemination of their works the way they desire. The own the item or idea, it's theirs, and nobody else is entitled to it.
Humans make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to create boredom. Quite astonishing.
- The character of ‘Death’ in the movie "Hogswatch" |
|||||||||
Terrible Wizard Inner circle 1973 Posts |
*TW is not upset, but he has a different ethical framework. Another time and he'll be happy to explain where you are incorrect in the above post.*
|
|||||||||
Michael Baker Eternal Order Near a river in the Midwest 11172 Posts |
The difference lies between "want" and "need". Nobody "needs" the secret of a magic trick. If I possess such a secret and you "want" it, it is not unethical for me to set any price on it that I wish. You might consider it unethical to pay such a price, but then that's between you and your own conscience. Think of it as pre-buyer's remorse, that conflict that makes you fear the actual thing. You are simply debating in your own mind, the item's value TO YOU. All the whining in the world about ethics would have no bearing on my own perceived value of it. You "want" it. I have it. I hold all the cards, and none of them has a bent corner called "ethics".
If I "want" to sell it, that is different than "needing" to sell it. Price is more likely to become negotiable, the more "need" is in my motivation. Still, that choice is mine. If you "want" it, but cannot obtain it, you have a choice to accept that fact, or become the poster child for "The Fox and the Grapes II - the blame shifter".
~michael baker
The Magic Company |
|||||||||
Pop Haydn Inner circle Los Angeles 3691 Posts |
If you have a different ethical framework than the rest of us here, Terrible Wizard, then you have not done a very good job of explaining or justifying it. I think you will have a hard time showing Bill he is incorrect if you don't do a better job of defending the statements you have already made.
I have to say it sounds condescending and flippant when you tell Bill you will "explain to him why he is incorrect" at a later time. He took the time to answer each of your statements individually. You should be willing to respond in kind. You can start by telling us by what reasoning the creator should limit his price and/or his sales? What compels him to this other than his own good business judgement? When you say "ethics" compels him, then you need to give us the reasoning behind such an ethical choice. Your saying "It is good" is not a reason. I don't see how you can lecture in ethics on a college level and use such arguments. The only thing I "owe" my artform/competitors is the art that I create and perform. I don't owe them my time and effort to teach and explain it. I don't "owe" the "art" my approval for others to copy my work. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Food for thought » » Are we ripping each other off? (4 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.1 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |