Cash price vs trade value

OP, one thing that also can come into play with trades is a (potentially) significant reduction in sales tax.

For instance, years back I traded my Acura in toward an Explorer. I received $7000 in trade-in value, but I had already worked the dealer down to actual cost plus $500 on the sale (since I knew via edmunds.com that he was getting another $750 in factory incentive money for the sale; it was the end of the month; it was a rainy Sunday...).

In theory, I could have sold the car for $8500 to $9000.

That would have required advertising costs, some delays, and letting people test drive the car - which could induce risks ranging from attracting some psycho, to just getting a bad driver who damages the car during the test drive.

But, to top it off, sales tax in that area at that time was about 9%. Sales Tax is paid on net purchase price. My (then) $25,000 SUV was actually being sold to me for $18,000 - so I was making $630 in net tax not required.

Suddenly, my $7630 isn't too far from the lower end $8500, and I haven't had to advertise, haven't had to wait, haven't had to run any risks whatever.

Now, translate the concept into gun purchases and trade-ins, vs listing and selling one's own then buying, and it's similar.

Then again, I have been relatively successful selling guns I no longer want on gunbroker, so odds are I'd just sell another gun or two, then pay the lower cash price.
 
DNS ... I appreciate your taking the effort to change my point of view.

I don't know how many times you think you need to repeat yourself. I know I'm getting a little tired of restating how it appears from my world.


Link to an example?
Click to expand...

I found a couple examples on Texas Gun Trader dot com. But I'm not going to link because it very well could be some one on here and I don't want any individual thinking I'm picking on them.

But I will say, they are not hard to find ... cash value $750 trade value $900.


How about this ...

If you have a gun you are wanting to trade, I will automatically and artificially inflate the value of my offered trade by 15% so that everything remains reasonably equal. Fair enough?

For everyone else, I'll be 100% at FMV.

:cool:
 
You seem even more confused. How about instead of making up bogus examples that you actually provide some real proof of your believed shady deals. You say you fear the people may be members here. You have nothing to fear by that. If that is the case, they have made offers on a public venue and so they have nothing to hide. That YOU think the deal is shady is your opinion, but contrary to your belief, it is a common, established, often used business practice. You have nothing to fear by posting a link that you don't understand. That you keep flipflopping around in your descriptions does not help. You need to provide actual examples about which you have expressed a lack of comprehension.

Otherwise, you just appear to be complaining about imaginary things and they are imaginary because you won't cite any real examples.
 
Horse tradin and hagglin... He is thinking, "Did you come here to buy?"... and/or conversely, You're thinking, "Did he come here to sell?"

For some people, that's the thing. Horse tradin... Screwing, er, I mean, selling to someone for profit. For others, a good deal is a good deal and both parties win. Used is used. New is new but might be used. What I want is what I want and I know how much that is worth to me. YMMV. As does the seller/trader.

People who inflate to trade are looking for the PT Barnum kind of buyer... and those kind of people are out there. Know the value of the thing, or things as it were (yours and his) have cash ready and of course be ready to walk away with a smile on your face from unscrupulous types.

The age old phrase "Caveat Emptor" rings true for a reason, be it horses, antiques or firearms. Such is life.
 
You seem even more confused. How about instead of making up bogus examples that you actually provide some real proof of your believed shady deals. You say you fear the people may be members here. You have nothing to fear by that. If that is the case, they have made offers on a public venue and so they have nothing to hide. That YOU think the deal is shady is your opinion, but contrary to your belief, it is a common, established, often used business practice. You have nothing to fear by posting a link that you don't understand. That you keep flipflopping around in your descriptions does not help. You need to provide actual examples about which you have expressed a lack of comprehension.

Otherwise, you just appear to be complaining about imaginary things and they are imaginary because you won't cite any real examples.
Click to expand...

There is no reason for a personal attack.

Chill out and be respectful. I chose to respect how others conduct business. That doesn't make me a liar or a complainer.

Again, I appreciate your POV ... it doesn't mean I have to share it.


People who inflate to trade are looking for the PT Barnum kind of buyer...
Click to expand...

Exactly ...
 
It could be that.

It could also be that they figure they will end up selling the trade-in gun, and don't know what they will get for it on the sale, so they are hedging their bets.

If one could offer a trade-in that the seller wanted for himself, as opposed to something the seller intended to sell or barter at a later time, then one might get a better trade-in value.
 
Mitchntx

Hi Mitch,
Your question about the difference between cash sale and trade value is a good one. I've seen the same kind of posting on Texas Gun Trader web site, and I always imagine some poor country boy sitting on a porch wittling on a stick trying to solve this riddle.

I remember distintively in my first lecture in economics class the professor talked about a barter economy (before money) where people spent a lot of time trying to determine relative value ie: two fish vs a loaf of bread. The conclusion is that there is no answer to relative value because it varies from individual to individual, their supply of a good and their demand for another good. If you introduce spoilage and portability factors it gets even more complicated. This is why money is used by every culture on the planet.


The bottom line is: forget the trade value listing and the only value that matters is cash value.
 
Last edited:
There is no reason for a personal attack.

Chill out and be respectful. I chose to respect how others conduct business. That doesn't make me a liar or a complainer.

Again, I appreciate your POV ... it doesn't mean I have to share it.
Click to expand...

No personal attack. By your own statements, you have stated that you don't comprehend and because you don't, you have made accusations of the deals being shady. You have also expressed having a double standard for pricing, but don't think others should do that. If they do it, they are shady. If you do it, it is appropriate.

Since you won't provide an actual example of what you are talking about, we have no way of knowing what you are basing your accusasations.

You seem so worried about being given more for a trade-in without ever considering if the object being sold is being sold for a fair price. If the object beind sold is being sold for a fair price, why would you complain about being offered more for a trade-in? Either way, the seller has posted a cash price for which he wants to sell his item. He is willing to accept X cash or offer somebody incentive if they can provide him with a gun he wants. The option for the bonus % for a trade-in is still GOOD BUSINESS.

Maybe you are fearful that the selling might make too much on the deal somehow? Exactly how is it that the seller is being shady. The prices are stated. Either you take the deal or you don't. There is NOTHING dishonest in what the seller is doing, but that is exactly what you are implying when you are saying that you think what they are doing is shady.

Since you say you don't share my opinion, how about explaining exactly how it is that the deal is shady. What actual indications do you have that the seller is doing something wrong? The parameters are stated up front.
 
Some of us just like to barter. I'm fortunate that I have a good job and enough income to meet my needs. I'm not wealthy but I don't need cash.

I do agree with the OP that posting two prices is a little odd.

As a matter of fact, since I don't sell many guns and do trade a few, I feel that posting any price is counter-productive and will usually decline to do so.

Relative value is not at all difficult to determine between two (even as many as three) individuals: If I want what you have to offer and you want what I have to trade, we're good to go, sometimes with minor adjustments.

I have a personal trade policy in which either party, if unhappy, can return to zero with the unhappy party paying all shipping and fees to return so. I've never felt I was involved on either end of any shadiness.

If you've got something to trade, PM me :cool:.

Best,

Will
 
DSN ... give it a rest, dude.
Find another cause, please.
You seem to be fixated on proving me wrong.
You are going over the line.
This is only the internet and not real life.

Have a great day!


Hi Mitch,
Your question about the difference between cash sale and trade value is a good one. I've seen the same kind of posting on Texas Gun Trader web site, and I always imagine some poor country boy sitting on a porch wittling on a stick trying to solve this riddle.

I remember distintively in my first lecture in economics class the professor talked about a barter economy (before money) where people spent a lot of time trying to determine relative value ie: two fish vs a loaf of bread. The conclusion is that there is no answer to relative value because it varies from individual to individual, their supply of a good and their demand for another good. If you introduce spoilage and portability factors it gets even more complicated. This is why money is used by every culture on the planet.


The bottom line is: forget the trade value listing and the only value that matters is cash value.
Click to expand...

Thanks ... :cool:
 
Mitch,
I believe that one of the reasons people invoke "trade value" gimickry is because it is so vexing and invariably confuses everyone. From a sales point a confused buyer is less likely to act rationally (with reason) and therefore is more likely to make an a bad deal.

As someone else pointed out earlier in the tread, when people start talking trade value, just get up and walk out.
 
I still have no idea what the thread topic is. Very confusing Mitch.

If I were this confused with a seller's approach, I simply would choose not to do business. The FFL dealer who has a store has to come out ahead of the game in a trade or paying cash for a sellers gun/trade. Otherwise he won't remain in business long unless it is for something special that the dealer really wants (usually for himself).

Highest prices paid for guns? Highest trade values in exchange for guns in stock? Sounds like a gold buyer. Market +10%... (Define market price) Gimicks.
 
Not shady at all - simply offering multiple deal possibilities. Once again, a good business practice in order to try to make a deal happen. They are showing a willingness to negotiate more than one way.
 
for sale for $500 or trade value $575
Click to expand...

Makes sense to me. Basically as the "seller" you want a certain cash price or a higher "value" in a trade situation for your gun. Establishing "value" is subject to some discussion.
 
22rimfire said:
I still have no idea what the thread topic is. Very confusing Mitch.
Click to expand...

It has certainly taken a twist for the bizzare, hasn't it. :D


Makes sense to me. Basically as the "seller" you want a certain cash price or a higher "value" in a trade situation for your gun. Establishing "value" is subject to some discussion.
Click to expand...

I'll try once again ...

Makes sense, but what's the point?

If I have something to trade, I will inflate the value of what I have accordingly.

I would be foolish not to. So why even go there?

If both owners agree that the trade is good, then value is relative and the actual number is immaterial. Fully understand that part and maybe that is the subtle point this whole train wreck is about.
 
Last edited:
I think the point is that the trade goods have to be valued more than the cash price for a deal to be considered since inorder to liquidate the "trade goods" it will take time and effort before "cash" is seen. The value is subject to the buyer and sellers agreement and I don't think you can inflate them for the deal.
 
I think the point is that the OP is accusing sellers of being shady for offering a lower price for cash... which is odd, because a lot of sales (cars, gas, houses) are just that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top