Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] FS: Zuiko 100 F2 lens

Subject: Re: [OM] FS: Zuiko 100 F2 lens
From: "Bruce Kolber" <bkolber@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 19:19:11 -0400
Well....I think Gary is correct about knowing what the data points relate to in 
terms of condition.  If you have 2 lenses and one is "New in box with all 
packaging" and goes for $700 and the second is Exc+ (a nice lens) and goes for 
$500.....an "average" price really isn't $600.....it's close to the $500 
because that is actually the "average" condition of most of the lenses you will 
see.  
Bruce Kolber
St. Petersburg, FL  33715
USA
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: ClassicVW@xxxxxxx 
  To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2001 7:07 PM
  Subject: Re: [OM] FS: Zuiko 100 F2 lens



  Maybe I'm figuring it wrong myself, but I don't see anything particularly 
  troubling from Mark's posting. If Skip's lenses range from Ex+ to LNIB, and 
  we're talking $408 to $482, I would interpolate it that Mark is rating his 
  lens (by his asking price) as roughly 1/2 way between Ex+ and LNIB. I don't 
  see any reason to knock the whole posting and that way of setting a price. If 
  I see lenses at a seller's table ranging from $408 to $482, and the seller 
  places one more on the table priced at $450, aren't we to assume it's a 
  middle-of-the-road condition example? And who's to say WHAT we're judging 
  condition on? When I think of condition, it's 'cosmetics' I'm talking, 
  because I assume the lens' 'functionality condition' is perfect. But that's 
  me, and I'd better ask the seller to be sure we're on the same page, and 
  that's exactly what a buyer should do of Mark or any other seller. ASK ASK 
  ASK. Which is why I (now) avoid eBay like the plague, unless I'm a bit 
  familiar with the seller. 

  George S. 

  >Gary Reese wrote: 


    But how can folks look at Skip's data set and set a price: 
    "taking the condition of the lens into account?" 
    This isn't the first time I've seen this assumption stated by a seller. 

    Two of the data points in Skip's set were Like New in Box. The other 
    three were KEH=Ex+ condition.  Of course, those cosmetic condition 
    grades aren't told in the data set and are also my "expectations of 
    condition" rather than what the buyer might think after seeing the 
    lens.  One can argue that Mark's 100mm f/2 fits into that condition 
    range pretty nicely.  But it just as easily could have missed the mark 
    and who's to know?  The standard deviation on the data was a wide $408 
    to $482, since it had only 5 datapoints, further eroding confidence in 
    the average. 





<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz