Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I started reading 2000AD when I was 8 or 9 and got into Warhammer when I was 11. I think it's easy to underestimate kids and think they won't be able to deal with stuff but I understood what the Imperium represented and that Judge Dredd wasn't the good guy from that age, and I don't think seeing a bit of violence did me any real harm.

Not sure how it couldn't be a win in its current format. The model you get for the year subscription would cover the cost of the sub. The shows so far are excellent and while there obviously isn't an extensive library yet as long as they regularly add to it and include a model every year I'm not sure how you aren't getting a $60 value.

Asmodios wrote:
Not sure how it couldn't be a win in its current format. The model you get for the year subscription would cover the cost of the sub. The shows so far are excellent and while there obviously isn't an extensive library yet as long as they regularly add to it and include a model every year I'm not sure how you aren't getting a $60 value.

I think a lot of it comes down to how much you value the non-animated show content. GW may retail their character models at £25+ but if you don't think that's what they're worth the value proposition isn't the same. Also, if you don't actually need that model it's not exactly brilliant value. Maybe if they also build up a library of exclusive models as annual sub rewards that would eventually be great value for most people but I don't think they've even confirmed the exclusive model is going to be a thing after year 1, unless I missed something.

Slipspace wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Not sure how it couldn't be a win in its current format. The model you get for the year subscription would cover the cost of the sub. The shows so far are excellent and while there obviously isn't an extensive library yet as long as they regularly add to it and include a model every year I'm not sure how you aren't getting a $60 value.

I think a lot of it comes down to how much you value the non-animated show content. GW may retail their character models at £25+ but if you don't think that's what they're worth the value proposition isn't the same. Also, if you don't actually need that model it's not exactly brilliant value. Maybe if they also build up a library of exclusive models as annual sub rewards that would eventually be great value for most people but I don't think they've even confirmed the exclusive model is going to be a thing after year 1, unless I missed something.

Bringo!

If someone doesn't actually want a Vindicare or Sigmork, the value is $0.

 phandaal wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Not sure how it couldn't be a win in its current format. The model you get for the year subscription would cover the cost of the sub. The shows so far are excellent and while there obviously isn't an extensive library yet as long as they regularly add to it and include a model every year I'm not sure how you aren't getting a $60 value.

I think a lot of it comes down to how much you value the non-animated show content. GW may retail their character models at £25+ but if you don't think that's what they're worth the value proposition isn't the same. Also, if you don't actually need that model it's not exactly brilliant value. Maybe if they also build up a library of exclusive models as annual sub rewards that would eventually be great value for most people but I don't think they've even confirmed the exclusive model is going to be a thing after year 1, unless I missed something.

Bringo!

If someone doesn't actually want a Vindicare or Sigmork, the value is $0.

How would the value be zero even if you didn't want them? You still have a physical model you can sell even if discount priced. Then you have access to the app, shows, battle reports, and painting tutorials..... I find it disingenuous to say the value of all of those is $0 much less than $60. the run time of the shows even at the first week of launch well exceeds the run time of a movie you would have to pay to see and id say the quality is better than 95% of what Hollywood puts out. Obviously, if you don't see the value then don't get it but based on what you receive (even just at launch) it's easy to see how it's worth $60 to most people. When they first announced I thought it would be their typical overpriced product but for once they actually delivered something that is easily worth the price.

It’s almost as if value is entirely subjective.

Me? I’m happy with it - but I’m still getting as much benefit from it as others, because the “older” 40k books in the Vault I already own, and have of course read. The only real benefits to me of having online access to them?

1. I can read them in the pub, on my iPad. Without anyone knowing what I’m actually reading.

2. I can read them without having to disturb the Star Wars figures which stand in front of them on my bookshelf.

But for someone who hasn’t read them? They can extract a level of value I don’t receive.

To me. It’s £50 a year. That’s a little more than a night in the pub, or two particularly lavish takeaways. To others? Too steep. They may simply not be able to spare that once a year - which means they’re going to be paying more than I. It’s not for you or I to tell anyone how deep or shallow their pockets should be.

Asmodios wrote:

How would the value be zero even if you didn't want them? You still have a physical model you can sell even if discount priced. Then you have access to the app, shows, battle reports, and painting tutorials..... I find it disingenuous to say the value of all of those is $0 much less than $60.

If someone does not want/need something, then that thing does not have value to them. This is not a controversial statement, nor is it disingenuous - value is subjective.

In the case of selling the model, people may not want or need the money, or they may not think it offsets enough of the cost of the service to warrant consideration. Just two examples off the top of my head.

Also have to consider the opportunity cost of the time spent using Warhammer+ compared to the time someone could spend doing something else. If someone wants to spend time doing something besides watching the shows on Warhammer+ (for whatever reason), then those shows also do not have value for them.

None of this is intended as an indictment on anyone who does think Warhammer+ is worth their time and/or money by the way.

Asmodios 800581 11209433 wrote:
How would the value be zero even if you didn't want them? You still have a physical model you can sell even if discount priced. Then you have access to the app, shows, battle reports, and painting tutorials..... I find it disingenuous to say the value of all of those is $0 much less than $60. the run time of the shows even at the first week of launch well exceeds the run time of a movie you would have to pay to see and id say the quality is better than 95% of what Hollywood puts out. Obviously, if you don't see the value then don't get it but based on what you receive (even just at launch) it's easy to see how it's worth $60 to most people. When they first announced I thought it would be their typical overpriced product but for once they actually delivered something that is easily worth the price.

Easy. The moment people get it the model is going to be for sell cheaper from recasters. The w40k app is, as of right now, not very good. I can't even get to run on it properly on my phone. I can watch battle reports for free on YT, and I don't have infinite time to watch them anyway, so there is more to watch, then what I can watch right now. And finaly my army is already painted, I don't need a tutorial for painting. So for me the value would come from maybe reading the old WD, but to be honest in the time relegated tor reading I would rather read a book. With something like D+, you get access to movies you want to watch, which you know are good and more then one person per family is going to want to watch them.

On top of that all the movies GW puts on their web site can be watched for free, a few days later. So while I can imagine some people may think the Warhammer+ thing is good, it is not for me. And it won't be up until GW starts puting rules that are only going to be accesible if you have their app or if they somehow make using the app obligatory to pay. Then buying the subscription is going to make sense.

 phandaal wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

How would the value be zero even if you didn't want them? You still have a physical model you can sell even if discount priced. Then you have access to the app, shows, battle reports, and painting tutorials..... I find it disingenuous to say the value of all of those is $0 much less than $60.

If someone does not want/need something, then that thing does not have value to them. This is not a controversial statement, nor is it disingenuous - value is subjective.

In the case of selling the model, people may not want or need the money, or they may not think it offsets enough of the cost of the service to warrant consideration. Just two examples off the top of my head.

Also have to consider the opportunity cost of the time spent using Warhammer+ compared to the time someone could spend doing something else. If someone wants to spend time doing something besides watching the shows on Warhammer+ (for whatever reason), then those shows also do not have value for them.

None of this is intended as an indictment on anyone who does think Warhammer+ is worth their time and/or money by the way.

I mean that is literally a controversial statement.... If I do not want a 75 inch TV but someone drops it off at my door it isn't without value. It might not be the $1000 it retails for but it certainly has a value on the market. This goes for every model GW sells. I might not like DE but if someone drops the starter box on my doorstep it still has value. It might not have as much value to me but it isn't $0. This goes for the 2 models GW is offering they will have a standard market price as soon as they ship and people begin to sell them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:

Asmodios 800581 11209433 wrote:
How would the value be zero even if you didn't want them? You still have a physical model you can sell even if discount priced. Then you have access to the app, shows, battle reports, and painting tutorials..... I find it disingenuous to say the value of all of those is $0 much less than $60. the run time of the shows even at the first week of launch well exceeds the run time of a movie you would have to pay to see and id say the quality is better than 95% of what Hollywood puts out. Obviously, if you don't see the value then don't get it but based on what you receive (even just at launch) it's easy to see how it's worth $60 to most people. When they first announced I thought it would be their typical overpriced product but for once they actually delivered something that is easily worth the price.

Easy. The moment people get it the model is going to be for sell cheaper from recasters. The w40k app is, as of right now, not very good. I can't even get to run on it properly on my phone. I can watch battle reports for free on YT, and I don't have infinite time to watch them anyway, so there is more to watch, then what I can watch right now. And finaly my army is already painted, I don't need a tutorial for painting. So for me the value would come from maybe reading the old WD, but to be honest in the time relegated tor reading I would rather read a book. With something like D+, you get access to movies you want to watch, which you know are good and more then one person per family is going to want to watch them.

On top of that all the movies GW puts on their web site can be watched for free, a few days later. So while I can imagine some people may think the Warhammer+ thing is good, it is not for me. And it won't be up until GW starts puting rules that are only going to be accesible if you have their app or if they somehow make using the app obligatory to pay. Then buying the subscription is going to make sense.

"The moment people get it the model is going to be for sell cheaper from recasters" is the only part i bothered to read because you proved my point. "cheaper from recasters" still means it has a value that is greater then $0.

No, it means that people are going to be buying it from them instead of me. I would have to sell the model at the recaster price or lower, meaning I am actually losing money, because if you do not know, a recast character does not cost more then the subscription.

Ah and lets not forget that, I would have to find someone locally who wants to buy the model from me. If not, then I don't have a pay pal or credit card, so ebaying it is out of question, but even if it was doable, it now involves me paying for postal. And knowing my local post, it is a hit or miss game with sending anything insured from here.

I mean that is literally a controversial statement.... If I do not want a 75 inch TV but someone drops it off at my door it isn't without value.

I can give you a life example of such a situation. My uncle got a TV and playstation, when I was a kid and he was a late teen, while he worked in the US.He told my aunt, he got it for free. All he had to pay was transport to Poland, which he did. Imagine his suprise to find out that electricity in the US is different, then in europe, and him not being able to hook either of the things on, without blowing them up. And he couldn't sell it to anyone else in the country either. So very much something that is free or almost free, which you can't use or don't want to use, can have a worth of zero. It can even have a negative value. The same uncle bought a car in the US, waited 6 months for it to be shiped. Then it broke, and he found out that his cool car from the 70s has the closest place with parts and the knowladge to repair it in UK. It didn't matter that the car was very cheap, what matters is that 9 years later it still stand in my aunt garage taking up space.

Asmodios wrote:

I mean that is literally a controversial statement.... If I do not want a 75 inch TV but someone drops it off at my door it isn't without value. It might not be the $1000 it retails for but it certainly has a value on the market. This goes for every model GW sells. I might not like DE but if someone drops the starter box on my doorstep it still has value. It might not have as much value to me but it isn't $0. This goes for the 2 models GW is offering they will have a standard market price as soon as they ship and people begin to sell them.

This is going nowhere, so just a friendly bit of advice: try to understand how different people can see different (or no) value in the same thing. You can't fight someone into valuing something the same way you do.

 Da Boss wrote:
I started reading 2000AD when I was 8 or 9 and got into Warhammer when I was 11. I think it's easy to underestimate kids and think they won't be able to deal with stuff but I understood what the Imperium represented and that Judge Dredd wasn't the good guy from that age, and I don't think seeing a bit of violence did me any real harm.

*Thinking back to watching Alien/s at 11, and The Guyver and Resevior Dogs not long after that. . .

Karol wrote:
No, it means that people are going to be buying it from them instead of me. I would have to sell the model at the recaster price or lower, meaning I am actually losing money, because if you do not know, a recast character does not cost more then the subscription.

Ah and lets not forget that, I would have to find someone locally who wants to buy the model from me. If not, then I don't have a pay pal or credit card, so ebaying it is out of question, but even if it was doable, it now involves me paying for postal. And knowing my local post, it is a hit or miss game with sending anything insured from here.

I mean that is literally a controversial statement.... If I do not want a 75 inch TV but someone drops it off at my door it isn't without value.

I can give you a life example of such a situation. My uncle got a TV and playstation, when I was a kid and he was a late teen, while he worked in the US.He told my aunt, he got it for free. All he had to pay was transport to Poland, which he did. Imagine his suprise to find out that electricity in the US is different, then in europe, and him not being able to hook either of the things on, without blowing them up. And he couldn't sell it to anyone else in the country either. So very much something that is free or almost free, which you can't use or don't want to use, can have a worth of zero. It can even have a negative value. The same uncle bought a car in the US, waited 6 months for it to be shiped. Then it broke, and he found out that his cool car from the 70s has the closest place with parts and the knowladge to repair it in UK. It didn't matter that the car was very cheap, what matters is that 9 years later it still stand in my aunt garage taking up space.

But the model has a tangible value. The model's value is not zero(which was the original claim). Read my original post I said people will have their own definition of value and will or will not purchase the product but the value of the physical model is not zero. The original claim was that if someone doesnt want the model the models value is $0..... this simply isnt true because we know that the market rate for the model will be above $0. You obviously believe this to be true because you wouldnt take the time to recast something valued at $0

Asmodios wrote:

But the model has a tangible value. The model's value is not zero(which was the original claim). Read my original post I said people will have their own definition of value and will or will not purchase the product but the value of the physical model is not zero. The original claim was that if someone doesnt want the model the models value is $0..... this simply isnt true because we know that the market rate for the model will be above $0. You obviously believe this to be true because you wouldnt take the time to recast something valued at $0

OK, maybe I get it now.

Did my post come off like I'm saying that someone not wanting the model means the model has no price on the open market?

If someone doesn't want the model (for any combination of reasons), then the value of that model to them is $0. Make sense?

 phandaal wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

I mean that is literally a controversial statement.... If I do not want a 75 inch TV but someone drops it off at my door it isn't without value. It might not be the $1000 it retails for but it certainly has a value on the market. This goes for every model GW sells. I might not like DE but if someone drops the starter box on my doorstep it still has value. It might not have as much value to me but it isn't $0. This goes for the 2 models GW is offering they will have a standard market price as soon as they ship and people begin to sell them.

This is going nowhere, so just a friendly bit of advice: try to understand how different people can see different (or no) value in the same thing. You can't fight someone into valuing something the same way you do.

I said in my original post that it will be worth different amounts to different people..... But the model isn't worth $0. That's simply just an untrue statement. Even if your perceived value is $0 this item will carry a price higher than $0 on the open market meaning that its value is not $0. In my post, you quoted I mentioned perceived value compared to market value. The truth of is that the value of the vindicator or ork isn't $0 no matter how you value it because there is currently a market for the item

 phandaal wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

But the model has a tangible value. The model's value is not zero(which was the original claim). Read my original post I said people will have their own definition of value and will or will not purchase the product but the value of the physical model is not zero. The original claim was that if someone doesnt want the model the models value is $0..... this simply isnt true because we know that the market rate for the model will be above $0. You obviously believe this to be true because you wouldnt take the time to recast something valued at $0

OK, maybe I get it now.

Did my post come off like I'm saying that someone not wanting the model means the model has no price on the open market?

If someone doesn't want the model (for any combination of reasons), then the value of that model to them is $0. Make sense?

Yes, it makes perfect sense... Thats why this statement will be disputed.

Asmodios 800581 11209488 wrote:

But the model has a tangible value. The model's value is not zero(which was the original claim). Read my original post I said people will have their own definition of value and will or will not purchase the product but the value of the physical model is not zero. The original claim was that if someone doesnt want the model the models value is $0..... this simply isnt true because we know that the market rate for the model will be above $0. You obviously believe this to be true because you wouldnt take the time to recast something valued at $0

If it can't be used and it can't be sold, and trying to sell it to some place else is impossible or costs too much, then the value of the thing is zero. Just because my mom has a box of anti tuberculosis medicin in he drawer, and somewhere in the world there is someone with money, but without medicin, does not suddenly rise the value of the medicin.
Value is only created when two people interact. Just having something does not mean it has any value. If you are in a forest and suddenly a sow with boarlings charges at you, then all the money, phones etc you have in your pocket are worth exactly zero at that very moment. Which in real life we see applied by GW by them using a very intersting rate of british pound exchange rate.

Karol wrote:

Asmodios 800581 11209488 wrote:

But the model has a tangible value. The model's value is not zero(which was the original claim). Read my original post I said people will have their own definition of value and will or will not purchase the product but the value of the physical model is not zero. The original claim was that if someone doesnt want the model the models value is $0..... this simply isnt true because we know that the market rate for the model will be above $0. You obviously believe this to be true because you wouldnt take the time to recast something valued at $0

If it can't be used and it can't be sold, and trying to sell it to some place else is impossible or costs too much, then the value of the thing is zero. Just because my mom has a box of anti tuberculosis medicin in he drawer, and somewhere in the world there is someone with money, but without medicin, does not suddenly rise the value of the medicin.
Value is only created when two people interact. Just having something does not mean it has any value. If you are in a forest and suddenly a sow with boarlings charges at you, then all the money, phones etc you have in your pocket are worth exactly zero at that very moment. Which in real life we see applied by GW by them using a very intersting rate of british pound exchange rate.

So your holding that this model in our current society will be worth $0 on release? I mean are we all in a forest being attacked by animals currently? or are we sitting behind computers posting on the internet about a company that regularly sells characters for $30-$60. A company that's characters are worth enough money to as you stated before break the law counterfeiting. So you are arguing that some guy in china can't wait to rip off a model with a market value of $0. I'll have to call up Disney and let them know that all the movies they sell in stores are actually worth $0 because someone put them on the internet for free and i don't want a copy of starwars.... they are gonna be really pissed when i break the news to them. Ill also make sure to put a note in my phone to message all the sellers of these models in the future that they actually have a value of $0

Vatsetis wrote:

 phandaal wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

But the model has a tangible value. The model's value is not zero(which was the original claim). Read my original post I said people will have their own definition of value and will or will not purchase the product but the value of the physical model is not zero. The original claim was that if someone doesnt want the model the models value is $0..... this simply isnt true because we know that the market rate for the model will be above $0. You obviously believe this to be true because you wouldnt take the time to recast something valued at $0

OK, maybe I get it now.

Did my post come off like I'm saying that someone not wanting the model means the model has no price on the open market?

If someone doesn't want the model (for any combination of reasons), then the value of that model to them is $0. Make sense?

Yes, it makes perfect sense... Thats why this statement will be disputed.

Looks like you were right!

 phandaal wrote:

Vatsetis wrote:

 phandaal wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

But the model has a tangible value. The model's value is not zero(which was the original claim). Read my original post I said people will have their own definition of value and will or will not purchase the product but the value of the physical model is not zero. The original claim was that if someone doesnt want the model the models value is $0..... this simply isnt true because we know that the market rate for the model will be above $0. You obviously believe this to be true because you wouldnt take the time to recast something valued at $0

OK, maybe I get it now.

Did my post come off like I'm saying that someone not wanting the model means the model has no price on the open market?

If someone doesn't want the model (for any combination of reasons), then the value of that model to them is $0. Make sense?

Yes, it makes perfect sense... Thats why this statement will be disputed.

Looks like you were right!

I never argued this post you made. Yes, your perceived value of an item can be $0. I responded and am still arguing about the original claim which was that if you didn't want a model then the model is worth $0... which you seem to recognize is not true.

Asmodios wrote:

So your holding that this model in our current society will be worth $0 on release? I mean are we all in a forest being attacked by animals currently? or are we sitting behind computers posting on the internet about a company that regularly sells characters for $30-$60. A company that's characters are worth enough money to as you stated before break the law counterfeiting. So you are arguing that some guy in china can't wait to rip off a model with a market value of $0. I'll have to call up Disney and let them know that all the movies they sell in stores are actually worth $0 because someone put them on the internet for free and i don't want a copy of starwars.... they are gonna be really pissed when i break the news to them. Ill also make sure to put a note in my phone to message all the sellers of these models in the future that they actually have a value of $0

If you ever find yourself saying "So what you're saying is..." followed by the most bonkers ridiculous thing you can come up with, the answer is always No, that is not what they are saying.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Asmodios wrote:

I never argued this post you made. Yes, your perceived value of an item can be $0. I responded and am still arguing about the original claim which was that if you didn't want a model then the model is worth $0... which you seem to recognize is not true.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but you're arguing about something that no one is saying. I am the person who made that post and I've already told you that it was not meant to imply that there is no market value for an item just because one person doesn't want it. The other people you're arguing with are saying the same thing as me.

I would say, as a limited Edition Model from GW, that would usually cost 50€, its normal selling price would 100€

given that a season of any show costs 40€ on release as BR, the total amount of money you get from GW is 300€

so with a subscription of 55€, you save in 245€
so it is totally worth it


on the other hand, if I just want the stuff that was previously free or costed 10€
I have to pay 45€ extra
so paying more but actually getting less as the digital army books are no more because of that
this is not worth the price

 phandaal wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

So your holding that this model in our current society will be worth $0 on release? I mean are we all in a forest being attacked by animals currently? or are we sitting behind computers posting on the internet about a company that regularly sells characters for $30-$60. A company that's characters are worth enough money to as you stated before break the law counterfeiting. So you are arguing that some guy in china can't wait to rip off a model with a market value of $0. I'll have to call up Disney and let them know that all the movies they sell in stores are actually worth $0 because someone put them on the internet for free and i don't want a copy of starwars.... they are gonna be really pissed when i break the news to them. Ill also make sure to put a note in my phone to message all the sellers of these models in the future that they actually have a value of $0

If you ever find yourself saying "So what you're saying is..." followed by the most bonkers ridiculous thing you can come up with, the answer is always No, that is not what they are saying.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Asmodios wrote:

I never argued this post you made. Yes, your perceived value of an item can be $0. I responded and am still arguing about the original claim which was that if you didn't want a model then the model is worth $0... which you seem to recognize is not true.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but you're arguing about something that no one is saying. I am the person who made that post and I've already told you that it was not meant to imply that there is no market value for an item just because one person doesn't want it. The other people you're arguing with are saying the same thing as me.

No that is literally what you wrote. You then posted you didn't mean that so i stopped replying when you admitted that what you wrote was wrong (even if it wasnt what you intended). This other poster is now currently arguing your original post

Asmodios wrote:

No that is literally what you wrote. You then posted you didn't mean that so i stopped replying when you admitted that what you wrote was wrong (even if it wasnt what you intended). This other poster is now currently arguing your original post

My original post was not wrong, just want to be clear on that.

I wanted to be polite and offer clarification, because you were arguing over what you thought I said.

People are saying that something can have a value of $0 to an individual for a wide variety of reasons. That's all they've ever been saying. Go back and read the posts - it's right there in black and white.

Now I have to ask, because at this point it seems like you are deliberately misinterpreting what people are saying: are you actually arguing because people aren't agreeing that whatever comes with Warhammer+ is enough to justify the purchase for them?

Ok.. so my dakka membership was more than worth it. I would be getting into WH plus for the connection with the hobby, the sense of community that comes with being in the know about current events in the hobby. Right now dakka does that for me well enough, isolated as I am here. But in future I think that this is something that would hold value enough for me. I might be sending the model to Phandaal though…

 jeff white wrote:
I might be sending the model to Phandaal though…

Finally, the reverse psychology gambit pays off!

 phandaal wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

No that is literally what you wrote. You then posted you didn't mean that so i stopped replying when you admitted that what you wrote was wrong (even if it wasnt what you intended). This other poster is now currently arguing your original post

My original post was not wrong, just want to be clear on that.

I wanted to be polite and offer clarification, because you were arguing over what you thought I said.

People are saying that something can have a value of $0 to an individual for a wide variety of reasons. That's all they've ever been saying. Go back and read the posts - it's right there in black and white.

Now I have to ask, because at this point it seems like you are deliberately misinterpreting what people are saying: are you actually arguing because people aren't agreeing that whatever comes with Warhammer+ is enough to justify the purchase for them?

"If someone doesn't actually want a Vindicare or Sigmork, the value is $0."
As written this post is 100% wrong. Just because someone doesn't want the item its value is not $0. Just because I don't want a Porsche the value of a Porsche is not $0. That is not how value works and it's not what you posted. You later posted what you intended to write but that is not what you wrote. I said in my original post that people's perception of value will decide if they get the item or not. The only argument was about your reply to my post that was a false statement as written.

Asmodios wrote:
That is not how value works and it's not what you posted.

this is exactly how value works and the whole western philosophy of the free market is build around it, that the value of something is only based and how much others want it

if no one wants a products, the price will be decreased because the price does not reflect the value it has for the customers

so if you don't want a Porsche, the value of the Porsche is Zero and nothing more, if you would still buy a Porsche for half the price, than its value is half the price
this does not change just because someone else would be double to price to get one because he really wants one

Asmodios wrote:


"If someone doesn't actually want a Vindicare or Sigmork, the value is $0."
As written this post is 100% wrong. Just because someone doesn't want the item its value is not $0. Just because I don't want a Porsche the value of a Porsche is not $0. That is not how value works and it's not what you posted. You later posted what you intended to write but that is not what you wrote. I said in my original post that people's perception of value will decide if they get the item or not. The only argument was about your reply to my post that was a false statement as written.

As written, the post was open for you to interpret in the silliest way possible in order to argue about nothing.

By all means, keep saying that thing you think we are all saying and stating how ridiculous it is. We all agree with you - it's a ridiculous thing to say. That's why nobody said it.

Anyway, you know what they say about the biggest fool being the one who follows, so you'll have to keep going on this merry-go-round without me.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kodos wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
That is not how value works and it's not what you posted.

this is exactly how value works and the whole western philosophy of the free market is build around it, that the value of something is only based and how much others want it

if no one wants a products, the price will be decreased because the price does not reflect the value it has for the customers

so if you don't want a Porsche, the value of the Porsche is Zero and nothing more, if you would still buy a Porsche for half the price, than its value is half the price
this does not change just because someone else would be double to price to get one because he really wants one

He's claiming we're saying that the thing has objectively zero value for anyone ever, anywhere, because one person doesn't want it. Yes, it's silly, but if he would actually engage with what people are saying he wouldn't be able to fight about it.

Best to pull the ripcord now.

(Still accepting free Vindicares and Sigmorks, BTW. If all goes according to plan I'll be swimming in valueless plastic before the day is out!)

 kodos wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
That is not how value works and it's not what you posted.

this is exactly how value works and the whole western philosophy of the free market is build around it, that the value of something is only based and how much others want it

if no one wants a products, the price will be decreased because the price does not reflect the value it has for the customers

so if you don't want a Porsche, the value of the Porsche is Zero and nothing more, if you would still buy a Porsche for half the price, than its value is half the price
this does not change just because someone else would be double to price to get one because he really wants one

You just contradicted yourself in your post
"if no one wants a products, the price will be decreased"
"so if you don't want a Porsche, the value of the Porsche is Zero and nothing more"
Your first statement openly acknowledges a marketplace. If nobody in a marketplace wants the item then the item is $0 not if I don't want an item. Me wanting or not wanting a Porsche does not change its value to $0. Its value is based on the market not simply my perceived value. The entire western philosophy is not based on an individuals percieved value but that of a marketplace.