I know for a FACT that you will almost NEVER recoup more than 25% of your initial outlay when buying jewelry at "retail". >>
I would love to hear your wife's side of this argument! Jewelry isn't normally bought as an "investment" to be resold for a profit. You probably never recoup more than 25% from the retail price of toilet paper either.
I know for a FACT that you will almost NEVER recoup more than 25% of your initial outlay when buying jewelry at "retail". >>
I would love to hear your wife's side of this argument! Jewelry isn't normally bought as an "investment" to be resold for a profit. You probably never recoup more than 25% from the retail price of toilet paper either. >>
I get preowned (but not scratched/abused) 14kt and 18kt gold jewelry from Arthur Knight coins in Hobart, Indiana for melt + $1.50 /gram. With a deal like that, I dont mind spending $500-$600 every couple months on her jewelry, and guess what? She doesnt mind either! And Rob, its not about buying jewelry as an "investment" to sell at a profit later. Its about trying to not get fvcked when you make the initial outlay. A 300% markup is getting fvcked!
That means $1,000,000.00 in goods/services get moved, and the vendor rakes $30,000.00.
If "markup" means net-profit, that is not necessarily terrible. If "markup" means something else, then it is definitely extremely terrible. >>
It means gross profit. It's the mark up from cost to sale price. BTW, I can't remember an order anywhere near as small as 1 mil. 100 mil is considered small.
When you deal in multi-billions per quarter, it works out just fine. "Definately exteremely terrible" is laughable. >>
Of course you are calculating all your expenses, including your salary, into your "costs". Using the same accounting, a dealer paying $5 per ounce for silver and selling at $10 could tack on $4.50 per ounce to cover expenses and say his profit is only $.50 per ounce. But only big companies get to do that, right? There's that hypocrisy again. >>
NO!!
All expenses come from that 3% gross. Your "accounting" voodoo has nothing to do with what I am talking about.
After all expenses, the net is obviously less.
I have no idea what you are talking about regarding hypocrisy.
When dealing in large numbers and being competitive, the net can appear to be a small number in terms of percentage.
That doesn't make it a small number by any means.
"Lenin is certainly right. There is no subtler or more severe means of overturning the existing basis of society(destroy capitalism) than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose." John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
Comments
<< <i>
I know for a FACT that you will almost NEVER recoup more than 25% of your initial outlay when buying jewelry at "retail". >>
I would love to hear your wife's side of this argument! Jewelry isn't normally bought as an "investment" to be resold for a profit. You probably never recoup more than 25% from the retail price of toilet paper either.
<< <i>
<< <i>
I know for a FACT that you will almost NEVER recoup more than 25% of your initial outlay when buying jewelry at "retail". >>
I would love to hear your wife's side of this argument! Jewelry isn't normally bought as an "investment" to be resold for a profit. You probably never recoup more than 25% from the retail price of toilet paper either.
I get preowned (but not scratched/abused) 14kt and 18kt gold jewelry from Arthur Knight coins in Hobart, Indiana for melt + $1.50 /gram. With a deal like that, I dont mind spending $500-$600 every couple months on her jewelry, and guess what? She doesnt mind either!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>"...average around a 3% markup..."
/////////////////////////////////////
That means $1,000,000.00 in goods/services get moved,
and the vendor rakes $30,000.00.
If "markup" means net-profit, that is not necessarily terrible. If "markup"
means something else, then it is definitely extremely terrible. >>
It means gross profit. It's the mark up from cost to sale price. BTW, I can't remember an order anywhere near as small as 1 mil. 100 mil is considered small.
When you deal in multi-billions per quarter, it works out just fine. "Definately exteremely terrible" is laughable. >>
Of course you are calculating all your expenses, including your salary, into your "costs". Using the same accounting, a dealer paying $5 per ounce for silver and selling at $10 could tack on $4.50 per ounce to cover expenses and say his profit is only $.50 per ounce. But only big companies get to do that, right? There's that hypocrisy again. >>
NO!!
All expenses come from that 3% gross. Your "accounting" voodoo has nothing to do with what I am talking about.
After all expenses, the net is obviously less.
I have no idea what you are talking about regarding hypocrisy.
When dealing in large numbers and being competitive, the net can appear to be a small number in terms of percentage.
That doesn't make it a small number by any means.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff