Strong-Dog wrote:The only way to stop flippers permanently is for Spyderco to directly price the Mules at the highest price someone would be willing to pay for them.
No, that's just the most straightforward way. There are other ways to do this, and that is what this thread is about. Spyderco prices them this way so that they can get in the hands of knife users, not sit on ebay in lots of 10, so this is not an illogical discussion to have.
It appears that at this point, all potential solutions are too onerous or too expensive for Spyderco, and I think people are OK with that, I know I am. I just don't think we need people arguing against discussing potential fixes as though they're impossible.
You're right, let me re-phrase. The only way to stop flippers permanently is for Spyderco to directly price the Mules at the highest price someone would be willing to pay for them, and make them full production. Notice the key word permanently. There are other ways to stop SOME flippers, but the only way the get rid of them permanently is the solution in bold.
You could literally have government pass a law saying "flipping" the Mules is illegal, and couple that with preorders and other restrictions, and still people would flip them. When there is a demand, people provide a supply. The ONLY way to stop flippers is to get rid of the demand.
*EDIT* To people that haven't read the full thread, I am in no way suggesting this. I am saying this to show how stupid complaining about flippers is, when you consider what would have to be done to get rid of them.
Well, one sure fire way would be to require registration to the forum to purchase, and then every sprint/mule/etc purchased gets engraved with your screen name on the blade. That way at least we'd know who to point fingers and throw rocks at when they show up on ebay
Evil D wrote:Well, one sure fire way would be to require registration to the forum to purchase, and then every sprint/mule/etc purchased gets engraved with your screen name on the blade. That way at least we'd know who to point fingers and throw rocks at when they show up on ebay
Yup. I've been thinking the engraving of screen name or initials. After all, the Mule Team is for steel junkies, not flippers?
Evil D wrote:Well, one sure fire way would be to require registration to the forum to purchase, and then every sprint/mule/etc purchased gets engraved with your screen name on the blade. That way at least we'd know who to point fingers and throw rocks at when they show up on ebay
Yup. I've been thinking the engraving of screen name or initials. After all, the Mule Team is for steel junkies, not flippers?
Sorry - I'm just not that interested in having a knife linked to my screen name........especially if it ever got stolen and used for something nefarious. It also makes no sense if you ever decide to gift it to someone else down the road or even decide to sell it at some point if you end up not really liking the steel that you've just experimented with?
I don't think that an engraving of "Suckbangblow" would be too saleable after the fact and even "Horseloverfat" initially was looking to change his name.
Estne Spyderco in toga, an solum tibi libet me videre? :eek:
Google est amicus! :D
Evil D wrote:Well, one sure fire way would be to require registration to the forum to purchase, and then every sprint/mule/etc purchased gets engraved with your screen name on the blade. That way at least we'd know who to point fingers and throw rocks at when they show up on ebay
Yup. I've been thinking the engraving of screen name or initials. After all, the Mule Team is for steel junkies, not flippers?
Sorry - I'm just not that interested in having a knife linked to my screen name........especially if it ever got stolen and used for something nefarious. It also makes no sense if you ever decide to gift it to someone else down the road or even decide to sell it at some point if you end up not really liking the steel that you've just experimented with?
I don't think that an engraving of "Suckbangblow" would be too saleable after the fact and even "Horseloverfat" initially was looking to change his name.
Not that it matters because none of it will change, but the whole point is to stop the mass resale for individual profit. That means curbing resale for anyone that wants it as a perfect display piece.
I'd like to suggest maybe redesigning the mule team to the ugliest damned design ever conceived, but one that cuts like a demon. That would cut off all but the most hardcore steep junkies. On the other hand, the basic design of the mule team is what got me into spyderco to begin with. So nevermind.
Looks like we just have to live with flippers gaming the system and find a way to get in before they do on our own. For RWL34 and some of these others, maybe they'll be slow, but Lord help us all when the Maxamet and 4V blades come out. The internet itself will melt down.
They who dance are thought mad by those who do not hear the music.
Strong-Dog wrote:Basically, if you're mad about flippers and are logically consistent, you also have to be mad at both Spyderco's low pricing, and buyers who are willing to spend more money on the Mules than you. I feel this is ridiculous, ...
What's ridiculous is not putting the blame squarely on the flipper's shoulders.
Just like game scalpers. Do you blame the players? Or the people who watch? The fault lies squarely on the people who's greed makes them do objectionable things. What you are suggesting is, to a certain extent, similar to blaming the victims of a theft, rather than the thieves themselves.
Spyderco sells the mules as a favor to knife afis. That flippers takes advantage of their pricing is no fault of Spydercos. What they are doing is taking advantage of both the Spyderco's pricing and the buyers demand. They insinuate themselves into the chain of supply and demand. The most that you can say about their activities is that it is legal. Is is ethical? Or morally correct? Well, that's part of what we are discussing here.
Last edited by chuck_roxas45 on Sun Jan 11, 2015 4:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Strong-Dog wrote:Basically, if you're mad about flippers and are logically consistent, you also have to be mad at both Spyderco's low pricing, and buyers who are willing to spend more money on the Mules than you. I feel this is ridiculous, ...
What's ridiculous is not putting the blame squarely on the flipper's shoulders.
Just like game scalpers. Do you blame the players? Or the people who watch? The fault lies squarely on the people who's greed makes them do objectionable things. What you are suggesting is, to a certain extent, similar to blaming the victims of a theft, rather than the thieves themselves.
Spyderco sells the mules as a favor to knife afis. That flippers takes advantage of their pricing is no fault of Spydercos. What they are doing is taking advantage of both the Spyderco's pricing and the buyers demand. They insinuate themselves into the chain of supply and demand. The most that you can say about their activities is that it is legal. Is is ethical? Or morally correct? Well, that's part of what we are discussing here.
LOL. Your example would make perfect sense, except theft victims don't engage in a voluntary transaction with the thief.
The second thing I bolded in your statement is agreeing with exactly what I said in my post above. Spyderco's pricing, flippers, and the buyers demand for the Mules are all to "blame". You can't have one without the other in this scenario. Spyderco's pricing attracts flippers, and they are attracted because Spyderco's product attracts buyers. It's a cycle. Just as you want flippers to just stop flipping, someone could just as easily petition for buyers not to buy from the flippers, or for Spyderco to raise their prices. Only one of these is possible in the real world however, which goes back to my solution in the above post.
Evil D wrote:LOL the screen name thing was a joke....I figured that was blatantly obvious. Guess not.
Sorry - I didn't realize you were joking :o since I've also heard that option being expressed in the past....... and the proponents of such an approach in those cases were totally serious in their proposition :eek:
Estne Spyderco in toga, an solum tibi libet me videre? :eek:
Google est amicus! :D
"Just like game scalpers. Do you blame the players? Or the people who watch? The fault lies squarely on the people who's greed makes them do objectionable things."
Really? No I don't blame the players, that's a horrible example. That is parallel to blaming Spyderco's employees who build the knives, it makes no sense. Also, the people that watch? I'm assuming you mean attend, and most people who go to sporting events don't buy from scalpers. The "problem" in this scenario is the limited availability of seats, which leads to a higher demand then supply for seats from fans, which leads to scalpers selling seats for their real market value, which isn't always the same as what the stadium or league sells them for.
Don't you think you should learn some economics before you get butthurt about voluntary transactions?
Also, not everyone here has such a massive issues with flippers like you do, so generalities based on your personal viewpoints don't really help further your cause. You may feel like flipping Mules is morally wrong, objectionable, unethical, etc., but the thing is 1.) You can't stop it from happening. 2.) Your opinion is subjective. and 3.) Your opinion is just that, YOUR opinion.
I'll be waiting for you to respond accusing me of flipping Mules.
Last edited by Strong-Dog on Sun Jan 11, 2015 5:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Strong-Dog wrote:
LOL. Your example would make perfect sense, except theft victims don't engage in a voluntary transaction with the thief.
The second thing I bolded in your statement is agreeing with exactly what I said in my post above. Spyderco's pricing, flippers, and the buyers demand for the Mules are all to "blame". You can't have one without the other in this scenario. Spyderco's pricing attracts flippers, and they are attracted because Spyderco's product attracts buyers. It's a cycle. Just as you want flippers to just stop flipping, someone could just as easily petition for buyers not to buy from the flippers, or for Spyderco to raise their prices. Only one of these is possible in the real world however, which goes back to my solution in the above post.
Not at all but the victims as with Spyderco has no say in what the thief or the flipper is doing. Can Spyderco say to the flipper "don't flip this"?
There's nobody else to blame but the flipper. He's setting the prices and his markup after all. You think the buyer won't pay lower prices is that's what the flipper sets them at? Do you think the flipper is doing what he does out of the goodness of his heart?
Last edited by chuck_roxas45 on Sun Jan 11, 2015 5:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
No screen name but, what about initials?
Certainly, it would be up to the buyer not to let it get stolen. And if it does file a report with the police. Could this not work? The Mule Teams are for steel junkies after all right? If you want to gift it later, then just explain the situation.
Strong-Dog wrote:
LOL. Your example would make perfect sense, except theft victims don't engage in a voluntary transaction with the thief.
The second thing I bolded in your statement is agreeing with exactly what I said in my post above. Spyderco's pricing, flippers, and the buyers demand for the Mules are all to "blame". You can't have one without the other in this scenario. Spyderco's pricing attracts flippers, and they are attracted because Spyderco's product attracts buyers. It's a cycle. Just as you want flippers to just stop flipping, someone could just as easily petition for buyers not to buy from the flippers, or for Spyderco to raise their prices. Only one of these is possible in the real world however, which goes back to my solution in the above post.
Not at all but the victims as with Spyderco has no say in what the thief or the flipper is doing. Can Spyderco say to the flipper "don't flip this"?
There's nobody else to blame but the flipper. He's setting the prices and his markup after all. You think the buyer won't pay lower prices is that's what the flipper sets them at?
Are you serious? The victim's say is their voluntary choice in whether or not they buy the knife! And no, of course Spyderco can't tell people what they can or cannot do with their own property.
Now, somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but out of the 18 Mule team runs, only two of those sold out super quickly. That means that the other 16 runs sat on shelves for a while (the Cobalt Special took what seemed like forever to sell out). That means that 89% of the Mule runs had no problems for people to buy them. Seems like people are making a mountain out of a molehill. The fact that MT19 is still sitting on shelves ought to show that the problems with MT17 and MT18 were fairly isolated events.
The way Spyderco currently sells Mules seems to have worked fairly well in the past, albeit with a couple bumps in the road, but I don't see how making them more expensive with a needlessly complex "solution" will help future runs overall. If anything, the added costs will make the ones sitting on the shelf sit even longer, providing even less incentive for Spyderco to continue the program.
I didn't read all posts on this thread so this might have been suggested already. How about only allowing an order from forum members who have been active before the announcement of the release?
Sure, there may be some flippers with more than one user here, but to stay active throughout and be on a different ip when loggig in with those accounts would be somewhat of a hassle and deterrent. Plus, one slip up at anytime before or after, would match the accounts with the same ip and remove the duplicate from the list. This could even warrant a ban of all associated ip's from the forum. Not foolproof, but it would require a lot more work on the flippers end.
Any knives that are left over after the initial active user forum buy would then be a free for all. That actually should happen a week or two later. Then, anyone who finds a flipped knife for sale could report it and info like address, name, etx could be documented for future use by Spyderco.
Last edited by Adrenaline_6 on Sun Jan 11, 2015 5:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Strong-Dog wrote:
Are you serious? The victim's say is their voluntary choice in whether or not they buy the knife! And no, of course Spyderco can't tell people what they can or cannot do with their own property.
You are being disingenous here. In a con, the victim hands over his cash willingly. A con man is still a thief.
