hjcjones Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 It is noticeable that whenever markets are controlled, whether under communism or for example wartime rationing, a black market soon arises. If people want or need something, they will find a way to get it, and others will find a way to supply it. That's human nature. It may not always be edifying or even moral, but its how things work. There was a thread a while back, which I can't be bothered to search for, where someone made much the same complaint. As I recall, he aspired to be a professional player, and was complaining that he couldn't afford the high-quality instrument he felt he needed - which he felt he deserved. Whilst there was some sympathy with his situation, it was pointed out that this raised the difficulty of deciding who was most deserving. Who would decide this? Would you have to pass an exam before you were considered worthy of a Jeffries or a Wheatstone or a Dipper, or would you only be allowed a Stagi? If you didn't reach the required standard, would your instrument be taken off you and allocated to a better player? It's not workable in free societies. A market based on money certainly has its faults, but it works freely and without interference. For those of us for whom it's a hobby, we have to apportion our resources and we have to accept that some things, whether concertinas or Ferraris, may be beyond us. If we aim to become professionals, we have to accept that we have to raise the money to equip ourselves, just as a plumber or carpenter has to find the money to buy his tools to set himself up in business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLucas Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 I'm always amazed at how much people entrenched in capitalism see this "free market" as natural. What's natutal about it?It's what happens if you leave people to their own devices. No politicians or social engineers are required (if that's the word!) to make it happen. Hence natural.If you leave people to their own devices, don't they sometimes investigate when things look suspicious, to make sure there's no monkey business? And try to come up with ways to keep unscrupulous folks from taking advantage of others? So isn't that natural too? We are definitely treading on the edge of that philosophical domain that is often labelled "politics". But we got here because at least some folks think it's relevant to concertinas, in particular to the pricing of concertinas. Dirge, your definition looks clear, but are you ignoring some of its significant consequences, as Boney suggests? One thing that many people "naturally" do when left to their own devices is attempt to interfere with the leaving of other people to their own devices. They form cliques, social clubs, criminal gangs, political parties, churches, internet forums, and yes... governments! (Magna Carta? American Revolution? French Revolution? League of Nations? ... They don't always succeed in their aims.) In the economic sector, they produce trade blocs and monopolies, taxes and tariffs and subsidies to manipulate the "free" market, trade unions, laws to establish and protect "intellectual property", and "pirate" enterprises to evade those protections. No, the term "free market" as commonly used by both its supporters and detractors, has a far more restricted meaning than Dirge's definition. The "free market" supposedly functions through the univeral "law" of supply and demand. As far as I can tell, that principle really is univeral. But as with "left to their own devices", the Devil is in the details. Both supply and demand are dependent on many factors, and great efforts are often made to manipulate both supply and demand by influencing various of those factors. E.g., OPEC will restrict oil production (supply) in order to drive prices up, while the advertising industry exists solely for the purpose of manipulating demand. Back to concertinas. When I got my first concertina (in the 1970's), the "market price" of an English concertina was more than double that of an "equivalent" anglo, though at the time anglos seemed to be in much shorter supply. Today the reverse is true. An anglo may sell for more than double the price of an "equivalent" English, even though there seem to be far more anglos for sale. How did that happen? The demand for concertinas of all types has increased, but due to the explosion of interest in the concertina in Irish music, the demand for anglos has experienced a similar explosion. I will largely credit/blame Noel Hill for that. He didn't set out to increase the price of concertinas, but he did strive -- quite successfully -- to increase the popularity of the concertina. (Noel is hardly the only image of the concertina's popularity today, but the others would be far less evident if it hadn't been for his groundbreaking effort.) And thanks both to this increased popularity and to the internet, there has actually been a huge increase in the available supply of concertinas of all sorts. That word "available" is crucial. There were apparently a great many concertinas in the possession of people who didn't play them but knew neither that there was a demand nor how to sell them. The internet has increased the flow of information about demand and also provided (particularly through eBay) a marketplace which is universally accessible. The result is, in fact, a much "freer" market in concertinas than existed previously. It may be that the prices of concertinas for sale today are beyond the means of some would-be buyers, but at least they are for sale. From the time I first became interested in the Crane duet, it took me 10 years of searching before I found one for sale, and in that time I only encountered two people who played Crane, and they only occasionally. Compare that to the number of Cranes sold by Chris Algar or on eBay just in this past year, and the number of Concertina.net members who play Cranes. And collectors? If they're having an impact, it's almost certainly less than in the past. And I'll admit that I myself own more concertinas than one, but if my purchases have had any effect on market prices, I think it would be to lower them. For most of my acquisitions I was lucky enough to pay less than what I believed to be the "market price" at the time I bought them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hjcjones Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 If you leave people to their own devices, don't they sometimes investigate when things look suspicious, to make sure there's no monkey business? And try to come up with ways to keep unscrupulous folks from taking advantage of others? So isn't that natural too? In the world of concertinas, I suspect that there have been more cases of knowledgable buyers taking advantage by acquiring instruments cheaply from sellers who aren't aware of their true value, rather than sellers taking advantage of buyers. Some years ago I met someone who claimed to have bought his Jeffries for 50p. Ironically, anyone finding grandad's concertina in the attic is now likely to go on the internet to find what it's worth, and will very likely end up here. We will gladly tell them it's true value. So we, the concertina.net community, are also guilty of talking prices up, if only by improving information in the market. It's partly our fault that 50p Jeffries are now even rarer than they were in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 Well fine except that's not what I said. Azalin doubted that free market buying and selling could be described as 'natural' and I explained why I thought it was a reasonable word to use. That's all. I don't think you can quote me, answer your own different question and expect the last word as well. Well, my own point was, "free markets" are never really free, and involve some sense of morality. Ever heard of bank bailouts and greedy bankers? Now, the bankers are being accused of taking actions deemed immoral to abuse this "free market". Also, if the market was so free, we would not have the US government rushing to regulate Wall Street. I really don't buy the use of "natural" in this "free market" thingy, and I also think morality should be part of dealing with concertinas as much as anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yankeeclipper Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 (edited) "free markets" are never really free, and involve some sense of morality. Ever heard of bank bailouts and greedy bankers? Now, the bankers are being accused of taking actions deemed immoral to abuse this "free market". Also, if the market was so free, we would not have the US government rushing to regulate Wall Street. I really don't buy the use of "natural" in this "free market" thingy, and I also think morality should be part of dealing with concertinas as much as anything else. For more than 30 years, federal CRA laws, under the rubric of "morality", have been intervening in the housing market, mandating loans to people who were poor credit risks. Result: roughly 3.4 million homes are expected to go into foreclosure by the end of 2009. I shudder to think of the consequences if government "morality" were applied to the concertina market. The issue in this thread appears to be one of who "deserves" a good concertina (and by implication, who does not). Is this morality, or is it covetousness? Who "deserves" that instrument if the better player simply inherited wealth, while the lesser player labored long and hard to save up for it? Anyone has the right to judge the quality of my concertina (and my playing) - but no one has the right to take it from me because he's a better player. Edited October 29, 2009 by yankeeclipper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLucas Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 "free markets" are never really free, and involve some sense of morality. Ever heard of bank bailouts and greedy bankers? Now, the bankers are being accused of taking actions deemed immoral to abuse this "free market". Also, if the market was so free, we would not have the US government rushing to regulate Wall Street. I really don't buy the use of "natural" in this "free market" thingy, and I also think morality should be part of dealing with concertinas as much as anything else.For more than 30 years, federal CRA laws, under the rubric of "morality", have been intervening in the housing market, mandating loans to people who were poor credit risks. Roughly 3.4 million homes are expected to go into foreclosure by the end of 2009. I shudder to think of the consequences if government "morality" were applied to the concertina market. Hmm. As long as I didn't take out a loan to buy a concertina, then I wouldn't be one of those foreclosed, but by going to foreclosure auctions I might get some very nice instruments very cheap. How soon can we get the government working on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 Well, I can't disclose details, but let's say that the economic downturn worked in my favor in acquiring a good concertina... but I must admit I'm pretty much in debt since then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hjcjones Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 Well, my own point was, "free markets" are never really free, and involve some sense of morality. Ever heard of bank bailouts and greedy bankers? Now, the bankers are being accused of taking actions deemed immoral to abuse this "free market". Also, if the market was so free, we would not have the US government rushing to regulate Wall Street. I really don't buy the use of "natural" in this "free market" thingy, and I also think morality should be part of dealing with concertinas as much as anything else. I thought your complaint was that free markets don't involve a sense of morality. Within a free market, some individuals may choose to act morally, but others are utter crooks. Legislators may enact laws to attempt to regulate the markets, but if they go too far then both buyers and sellers will seek ways to circumvent these laws, such is the power of the market. I'm not saying it's perfect, but like democracy, it's the least worst. In the concertina world I think it is probable that most people do act with a sense of morality. We're a fairly small community and feel we know one another - in a lot of cases we do actually know other members in the real world, or at least know where to find them. That sort of relationship makes it less likely that we will try to cheat one another. Nevertheless, there are still people out there who will, as the number of ebay scams testifies. I don't think there's realistic way of controlling concertina prices, other than letting the market take its course. It seems to be only the market for anglos, and C/G anglos in particular, which generates this response, and it seems to be driven by demand from the ITM sector. Perhaps in time that will settle down. Perhaps the cost imbalance will see people turning to EC or duet instead, and in a few years time we'll see threads from duettists complaining about the price of their instruments. What seems to have been overlooked is that it is now much easier to acquire an instrument. When I started out, even if you had the money it was very difficult to find instruments for sale. There were only a handful of dealers, and none of them as well-established as they are now. There wasn't the network that we have now with c.net - I knew only a couple of other players. It really was a matter of luck if a suitable instrument turned up. Now you have only to turn to this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yankeeclipper Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 Well, I can't disclose details, but let's say that the economic downturn worked in my favor in acquiring a good concertina... Are you suggesting, M. Azalin, that you took advantage of someone's financial distress to acquire a concertina below market value? Where's the morality in that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 (edited) Well, I can't disclose details, but let's say that the economic downturn worked in my favor in acquiring a good concertina... Are you suggesting, M. Azalin, that you took advantage of someone's financial distress to acquire a concertina below market value? Where's the morality in that? Nope, I possibly had to wait less than I would have otherwise, but nothing to do with prices. I don't even own a vintage concertina anyway. By the way, if you're going to start assuming things and distorting the facts to prove some of your obscure points, I'm certainly not going to take part of this. Edited October 29, 2009 by Azalin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts