Again, it's all about supply and demand. If someone spends $650 for a Glock 19, then a year later decides they want to sell it because they decided they like the CZ more, the price is whatever it will take to make them part with a the earlier gun. I'm guessing that with few exceptions, everyone of us would sell any one of our guns if offered the right price.
Let's say you are at the range with that brand new Glock 19 and you are just loving every trigger pull. You paid $650 for it. The guy next to you notices how much you like that gun and offers to buy it from you. The value of that gun is whatever you will take for it and he is willing to give you. If he really wants to buy the gun and you really don't want to sell it, then the value at that moment might be $1200 if that is what the guy is willing to offer in order to get it.
There is nothing wrong with a seller asking for whatever price they want, if that price is what it will take to get them to give the gun up. That is capitalism. There is nothing wrong with a buyer not buying a gun if they don't think it's worth the price. There is also nothing wrong with a buyer offering more than it's worth to get the seller to sell.
It only becomes a problem when things we must buy are manipulated by groups to fix a price. The idea that someone is doing something wrong by pricing their gun higher than a buyer wants to spend is simply wrong. A seller can price their gun for whatever they feel it will take to make them part with it. If someone buys it, then they priced it right.
Remember, the price being asked is simply what it will take to make the seller part with what he/she owns. Also remember that there are folks out there that don't have a problem spending $300 for dinner, so the idea of a $700 Glock seems Ok. If your fishing for big fish, you use a bigger hook.
Let's say you are at the range with that brand new Glock 19 and you are just loving every trigger pull. You paid $650 for it. The guy next to you notices how much you like that gun and offers to buy it from you. The value of that gun is whatever you will take for it and he is willing to give you. If he really wants to buy the gun and you really don't want to sell it, then the value at that moment might be $1200 if that is what the guy is willing to offer in order to get it.
There is nothing wrong with a seller asking for whatever price they want, if that price is what it will take to get them to give the gun up. That is capitalism. There is nothing wrong with a buyer not buying a gun if they don't think it's worth the price. There is also nothing wrong with a buyer offering more than it's worth to get the seller to sell.
It only becomes a problem when things we must buy are manipulated by groups to fix a price. The idea that someone is doing something wrong by pricing their gun higher than a buyer wants to spend is simply wrong. A seller can price their gun for whatever they feel it will take to make them part with it. If someone buys it, then they priced it right.
Remember, the price being asked is simply what it will take to make the seller part with what he/she owns. Also remember that there are folks out there that don't have a problem spending $300 for dinner, so the idea of a $700 Glock seems Ok. If your fishing for big fish, you use a bigger hook.
Last edited: