John Baymore on fri 16 jul 99
------------------
=22Price fixing=22........ oops.....my goodness, Wendy=21 Not a great =
choice of
words.... but a real attention getter =3Cg=3E. Seemed to work =3Cg=3E.
I too think that part of Wendy Rosen's =22plea=22 might have been a bit
misunderstood.
What I think she is saying is that, looked at in the big picture....on the
average........, claywork in the US is severly underpriced in general.
That as a group, we would do ourselves a favor if we all looked more
realistically at our profit margins and our own hourly pay rates. I think
she feels that the traffic WILL bear a little higher prices...... and that
the overall pottery market would BENEFIT from some higher pricing. She is
in a pretty good position to judge the general pottery market....with what
she does for a living.
I think that is absoulutely true....we should, as a group, be charging
more. With minimum wage over =245.00 per hour, MacDonalds (around here)
paying =246.50 an hour for unskilled burger flippers, car mechanics getting
=2445 per hour, plumbers getting =2470 per hour, a 15 minute doctor's office
visit costing about a hundred, and so on........... I think we tend to sell
ourselves a bit short on the money game. I know I tend to....but have
been actively fighting it of late. As Tom Peters says, ........perception
is the only reality for a customer. If there is percieved value, then
there is real value. Price is one definite indicator of =22value=22.
If we don't think we're worth it, and that our work has intrinsic value,
why would the public?
Yes.... ultimately the success of this STILL comes back a bit to the public
aesthetic education and preception business...... but we can still creep
things up a tad, I would think. I'm currently working on creeping =3Cg=3E.
Creep. Creep.
As to Warren MacKenzie and his =22school=22 depressing US prices...... I =
gotta
agree with the comment that 99.99999999999 percent of Americans would say,
=22Warren Who?=22. His adherence to some of the concepts of the mingei
philosophy may be (said =22may=22....I don't know this for sure) depressing
prices right in his local neighborhood..... but not too much farther
afield. I happen to think Mac's work is killer..... and if he makes a
conscious decision to sell at lower prices and can afford to..... I guess
=22more power to him=22. I am not one for anyone =22DICTATING=22 pricing to
anyone.
The general =22perceived value=22 placed on functional ceramics by the =
public
in the US is low. While in Japan, I was fortunate to visit with
Shimaoka-sensei, and became well aquainted with his prices there. (Through
the roof=21) About three weeks after I left Mashiko, sensei was coming to
Boston to the Pucker gallery to have an exhibition. I, of course, went to
see sensei and his show. The prices he set on the exhibition were quite a
bit lower than his =22Japan=22 prices. Still WAY higher than the top US
functional potters would even THINK to charge for totally functional pieces
of a particular scale. Of course we are talking Living National Treasure
=3Cg=3E. But the point is that even HE felt he had to lower his prices =
here.
I understand that some Japanese collectors flew over from Japan to purchase
pieces at the cheaper price. Even with airfare and lodging..... it was a
bargain.
If you want to see Shimaoka's work to get an idea of what it looks like
.........I think the Pucker has his stuff up on their web site....at
http://mproductions.com/pucker/catalogues.htm
Quick example of his pricing at the Pucker in Boston:
Yunomi (the standard day-to-day tea cup) =24800.00 to =241200.00
Chawan (tea ceremony teabowl) =244800.00
Ash Tray =24850.00
54 cm dia. Bowl =2430000.00 (This was an absolute STEAL=21) Yes, the
zeros are correct =3Cg=3E.
20cm tall Pitcher =243200.00
Set of six 18 cm plates =242000.00
US Dinner-sized plates =242400.00
Vases run sort of =2410000 to =2417000.00
It is important to note that even at these prices, many Americans were
purchasing pots. It was a very =22hopping=22 opening. You might say that
Shimaoka-sensei would be at the =22top of the heap=22 on the functional =
pricing
structure. But still, wouldn't you think that if he can lower his prices
from Japan and still command =242400.00 in the US for a dinner plate.... =
that
the lesser known of us might, on the average, be able to charge a little
more than =2425.00 for one?
How much work can you, as a single person, make in a year? How much per
year do you yourself need to =22take home=22? These days, you don't have to=
be
employed as a rocket scientist to make about a =2450,000.00 a year salary.
If you are REALLY skilled at what you do.... that is certainly a reasonable
payback for your efforts. So I'll use, between hourly rate and
profit,....... =2450,000.00 a year as a target. Divide by the number of
saleable pots you can actually produce in a year into that salary and you
get your average pot price........not including overhead, cost of mateials,
and so on. Do a little juggling to adjust the average for the nature of
teh pots .....mugs to giant vases or bowls or whatever....... and you get
an idea of some hourly wage and proifit figures. Then add production
costs. Bet if you figure it out something based on that kind of scenario,
most of us are underpricing.
A very false way to look at pricing is to time yourself making something
and discover you can throw them at a rate of 2 dozen per hour, wax and
glaze them about the same, and than add materials cost and a tad for
overhead costs like heat, lights, office supplies and the like. If ALL
you did was that........ you were your employee and you got paid to do that
8 hours a day and ONLY that......you 'd probably be OK on the price you
came up with. But it is the overall production per year that is important.
You do LOTS of stuff related to pottery that isn't actual making. You
gotta' get paid for that time too.
Anyway...... sincerly hoping that US pottery prices will eventually rise,
and doing what I can =3Cg=3E.
BEst,
....................john
John Baymore
River Bend Pottery
22 Riverbend Way
Wilton, NH 03086 USA
603-654-2752
JBaymore=40compuserve.com
John.Baymore=40GSD-CO.COM
=22Earth, Water, and Fire climbing kiln firing workshop Aug. 20-29,1999
-one space available=22
mel jacobson on fri 3 aug 12
a clayart friend that is a business professional sent this to me.
just advice.
but, as i said last week, i do not discuss my pricing or what
others charge. that is personal and legal.//////////////
email from friend.
I was concerned when I saw discussion on pricing workshops on
Clayart, so I wrote my association management mentor to confirm that
this is a really bad practice. His words are below:
I believe you are correct. The organization can't entertain a
discussion among producers about prices. They could contract with a
3rdparty to do a pricing study and report it back, but producers
can't talk about what they might charge with each other. I doubt
anyone would take a potters' group to task on this, but it seems like
a risk that's not a good one to take.
My words, now...
Bottom line, you as moderators need to ban all discussions of pricing
(whether of pots, workshops, whatever) since they could be anti-trust
violations. I'm not an attorney, so this is not legal advice, but it
is sound advice. Make it a policy for your moderators to delete any
such discussions.
Let participants know that pricing discussions, which could lead to
charges of price-fixing, are totally verboten. I don't know what
your liability might be, but it's not a risk I'd want to take.
Check with your attorney if you doubt this.
http://www.visi.com/~melpots/
clayart page below:
http://www.visi.com/~melpots/clayart.html
http://www.21stcenturykilns.com/
Paul Herman on sat 4 aug 12
Phil,
I think you may have a point, citing the First Amendment. Here's what
it is:
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is
part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any
law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free
exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on
the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably
assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of
grievances.>
It seems we can say/write what we please, no?
best wishes,
Paul Herman
Great Basin Pottery
Doyle, California US
www.greatbasinpottery.com/
On Aug 4, 2012, at 4:22 PM, pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET wrote:
> The 1st Amendment may also apply...( to conditions of people
> participating
> in a public or private discussion, even if the discussion happens to
> concern
> wages, recompense, remunerations for services endered or in
> transactions of
> whatever sort.
>
> Corporations discussing similar things, among themselves, in a private
> situation, may or may not be the same.
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "douglas fur"
>
>
>> How would"intent" to price-fix be established? I think a synopsis of
>> opinions from the last go-round we had about prices would sound
>> like "This
>> is what I do. You can do what you want."
>> In general I think the clayart model is a sharing of experience and
>> opinions. We travel under the banner of "artistic freedom". That we
>> could
>> get together and decide to do anything one way is antithetical to
>> clayart.
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 8:49 PM, mel jacobson
>> wrote:
>>
>>> a clayart friend that is a business professional sent this to me.
>>> just advice.
>>> but, as i said last week, i do not discuss my pricing or what
>>> others charge. that is personal and legal.//////////////
>>>
>>> email from friend.
>>
pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET on sat 4 aug 12
Nice expansion Ben...good mentions...quite so!
Yeah, makes sense to me - one might observe one's Right to 'Free =3D
Speech', and, at the same time, be guilty of flubbing some specific =3D
performance clause of a Civil Contract ( for that matter, like them now =3D
old Guys who were at 'Roswell' or 'Wright Field' or 'Montauk' or other =3D
places back when, who, well, might indeed have 'saw' things of interest =3D
and oddness, and, who more than maybe got 'debriefed' in a hard way and =3D
so on, who all these years later, the liver spotted Hands just tremble =3D
or clench, and they get dry in the throat and all the Veins stick out on =
=3D
their Fand Neck, or they have to grab on to a Chair Back to steady =3D
themselves, if you ask them, "Well, uhhh, what-all did you see there =3D
Pops? What was up with that whole deal, anyway?" - and, they are =3D
forbidden to say...sixty odd years later, the 'debriefing' still =3D
holds...and terrified of what would happen to them, if they did 'say', ) =
=3D
and, be liable for damages or restitution or ( worse, or ) whatever it =3D
may be, to satisfy the claimed 'damages' or whatever claims or =3D
provisions had been agreed to with the now 'injured party'.=3D20
If I had it all to do over again another ten or fifteen times...one of =3D
those times, I'd have been a Cop, a Homicide investigator, and, then, =3D
after a couple decades of those two, and all one could learn with that, =3D
then been a "Laywer".
Man, would that be fun! ( Or, for me, it would, definitely...and, I =3D
would love all of it, and, once a Lawyer, never lack worthwhile issues =3D
to investigate on my own Dime, interesting questions to study and dig =3D
into, and things to file 'ritcheous' Class Action or other Suits or =3D
Criminal related cases to try and take to the Supreme Court if possible, =
=3D
too...while having the wit and savvy, of how-things-( really)-work, TO =3D
do so.
I doubt any greater Evil has infested and drained off the vitality and =3D
ethos and character of the 'American Dream' than 'Commerce Clauses' and =3D
how they have been insinuated then implimented insideously and =3D
dishonestly, and then gradually played, and, played illegally in many =3D
instances, played and bullied, and bullied with often, a very, very =3D
'heavy' Hand, too.
Civil Contracts people never knew they had, Unilateral Contracts to =3D
which people become party by implied consent, and never agreed to =3D
informedly, among it's webs and glistening Fanged Spiders...
Man there's GOLD in them thar Hills!!!
Wish I could be a part of carrying a Pick and Shovel to have some fun =3D
with digging it out.
Oh well...
Sigh...
Phil
L v
----- Original Message -----=3D20
From: Ben Morrison=3D20
To: pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET ; Clayart@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG=3D20
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2012 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: price fixing
Absolutely true pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET. Only caveat to the 1st amendment =3D
about wages, etc. is when you sign a formal contract for employment, =3D
these usually contain a non disclosure agreement which includes wages or =
=3D
compensation. In this case even if someone has signed one of those and =3D
broken it here, it's really no concern except to that person with the =3D
non disclosure agreement. When corporations with significant control of =3D
a market, for instance say all the CEO's of the top 5 grocery suppliers =3D
in the US all get together to discuss prices, it's against the law. Not =3D
that the law stops them from doing it.=3D20
-Ben
Ben Morrison on sat 4 aug 12
I'm not an attorney, nor am I a moderator. However what's been said on here=
=3D
at least that I have seen doesn't constitute an anti trust lawsuit. The fr=
=3D
ank discussion of prices and theory behind pricing is not the same as a neg=
=3D
otiation for price fixing. Maybe Mel saw something I didn't which has cause=
=3D
d him to sound the alarm on this issue. I'm not saying the next step in tha=
=3D
t conversation couldn't be price fixing, it certainly could. I personally d=
=3D
on't see any issue in discussing best business practices including how good=
=3D
s and services are marketed to the public as long as it stops at the discus=
=3D
sion stage. But again, I'm not a Clayart moderator or an attorney.=3D0A=3D0=
ATha=3D
t next step of collusion or conspiracy to fix prices is actually a pretty i=
=3D
n depth process. Take a look at OPEC, they try to fix the price of oil on a=
=3D
regular basis. The reason why they fail is because they are all cheaters, =
=3D
and they cheat on each other just as much as they try to cheat the customer=
=3D
. They meet every time prices fall and they all come to an agreement on how=
=3D
they are going to stick it to the west by slowing oil flow and driving up =
=3D
prices. Yet every time, they all break their own rules and flood the market=
=3D
anyway. It's the tragedy of the commons over and over again. The market di=
=3D
ctates prices right up until the point someone takes freedom of entry to th=
=3D
e marketplace away. In fact I see little reason for anti trust legislation =
=3D
in the US at all. There's only been a few times in the US that it's been ne=
=3D
cessary to use the law. We live in a much bigger world than J.D. Rockefelle=
=3D
r and his Crony's. The only place I could even see a case for
anti-trust even being made today is in the banks. This of course will not =
=3D
happen because banks are an extension of government. They use government ba=
=3D
cked treasury notes, upon the direction of government appointed officials t=
=3D
o control the monetary system. Now if we did that with our pottery business=
=3D
es we'd all be in prison.=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A-Ben=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A________________=
____________=3D
____=3D0A From: mel jacobson =3D0ATo: Clayart@LSV.CERAMI=
CS.O=3D
RG =3D0ASent: Friday, August 3, 2012 8:49 PM=3D0ASubject: price fixing=3D0A=
=3D0Aa =3D
clayart friend that is a business professional sent this to me.=3D0Ajust ad=
vi=3D
ce.=3D0Abut, as i said last week, i do not discuss my pricing or what=3D0Ao=
ther=3D
s charge.=3DA0 that is personal and legal.//////////////=3D0A=3D0Aemail fro=
m frie=3D
nd.=3D0A=3D0AI was concerned when I saw discussion on pricing workshops on=
=3D0ACl=3D
ayart, so I wrote my association management mentor to confirm that=3D0Athis=
i=3D
s a really bad practice.=3DA0 His words are below:=3D0A=3D0AI believe you a=
re cor=3D
rect. The organization can't entertain a=3D0Adiscussion among producers abo=
ut=3D
prices. They could contract with a=3D0A3rdparty to do a pricing study and =
re=3D
port it back, but producers=3D0Acan't talk about what they might charge wit=
h =3D
each other. I doubt=3D0Aanyone would take a potters' group to task on this,=
b=3D
ut it seems like=3D0Aa risk that's not a good one to take.=3D0A=3D0AMy word=
s, now=3D
...=3D0A=3D0ABottom line, you as moderators need to ban all discussions of =
pric=3D
ing=3D0A(whether of pots, workshops, whatever) since they could be anti-tru=
st=3D
=3D0Aviolations.=3DA0 I'm not an attorney, so this is not legal advice, but=
it=3D
=3D0Ais sound advice.=3DA0 Make it a policy for your moderators to delete a=
ny=3D
=3D0Asuch discussions.=3D0A=3D0ALet participants know that pricing discussi=
ons, w=3D
hich could lead to=3D0Acharges of price-fixing, are totally verboten.=3DA0 =
I do=3D
n't know what=3D0Ayour liability might be, but it's not a risk I'd want to =
ta=3D
ke.=3D0A=3D0ACheck with your attorney if you doubt this.=3D0A=3D0A=3D0Ahttp=
://www.vis=3D
i.com/~melpots/=3D0Aclayart page below:=3D0Ahttp://www.visi.com/~melpots/cl=
ayar=3D
t.html=3D0Ahttp://www.21stcenturykilns.co=
m/
John Britt on sat 4 aug 12
mel,
I am sorry but that is stupid!
You can and should talk about pricing. There is no price fixing. In potte=
=3D
ry ---
PLEASE!
Discussing pricing - what is customary or normal - is not price fixing. Y=
=3D
ou should=3D20
get a new lawyer because he/she doesn't know what they are talking about=
=3D
.
Potters should charge what they can get but $200 - $500 is a normal amoun=
=3D
t.
Apple price fixes, not potters.
john britt pottery
mel jacobson on sat 4 aug 12
i am just passing along an opinion.
things are different when you sit in this chair, and
now that i own this list, hmmm. and, things are very different
on the internet today. everything is monitored, by someone.
and, there is a kook around every corner with an `ax` the grind.
it is only stupid until someone sends you a letter, or
knocks on your door. the world has changed a great
deal in the past decade. i bit if dicussion is not unworthy.
it never hurts to pass on an opinion.
it is always stupid until it affects you...or you.
or me. then listen to the howls.
mel
http://www.visi.com/~melpots/
clayart page below:
http://www.visi.com/~melpots/clayart.html
http://www.21stcenturykilns.com/
Eric Ciup on sat 4 aug 12
Absolutely ludicrous! There are no criteria for becoming a potter or
even a "Master" potter. The field is completely open. Clayart is not an
organization it is a discussion group. We can't agree on the meaning of
Craft, can you imagine us fixing the price of workshops or coffee cups?
I'm going to go out on a limb here and announce that my coffee cups are
$17 retail $8.50 wholesale F.O.B. the studio and I will give a workshop
for minimum wage, travel expenses, and supper. I love giving advice!!
> a clayart friend that is a business professional sent this to me.
> just advice.
> but, as i said last week, i do not discuss my pricing or what
> others charge. that is personal and legal.//////////////
>
> email from friend.
>
> I was concerned when I saw discussion on pricing workshops on
> Clayart, so I wrote my association management mentor to confirm that
> this is a really bad practice. His words are below:
>
> I believe you are correct. The organization can't entertain a
> discussion among producers about prices. They could contract with a
> 3rdparty to do a pricing study and report it back, but producers
> can't talk about what they might charge with each other. I doubt
> anyone would take a potters' group to task on this, but it seems like
> a risk that's not a good one to take.
>
> My words, now...
>
> Bottom line, you as moderators need to ban all discussions of pricing
> (whether of pots, workshops, whatever) since they could be anti-trust
> violations. I'm not an attorney, so this is not legal advice, but it
> is sound advice. Make it a policy for your moderators to delete any
> such discussions.
>
> Let participants know that pricing discussions, which could lead to
> charges of price-fixing, are totally verboten. I don't know what
> your liability might be, but it's not a risk I'd want to take.
>
> Check with your attorney if you doubt this.
>
>
> http://www.visi.com/~melpots/
> clayart page below:
> http://www.visi.com/~melpots/clayart.html
> http://www.21stcenturykilns.com/
James Freeman on sat 4 aug 12
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 11:49 PM, mel jacobson wrote:
a clayart friend that is a business professional sent this to me.
Bottom line, you as moderators need to ban all discussions of pricing
(whether of pots, workshops, whatever) since they could be anti-trust
violations. I'm not an attorney, so this is not legal advice, but it
is sound advice. Make it a policy for your moderators to delete any
such discussions.
Mel, others...
I am sure your correspondent means well, but with all due respect to them,
I believe they are incorrect.
There are essentially three practices addressed by anti-trust laws, bid
rigging, price fixing, and market division. All three require collusion
amongst market participants.
Bid rigging is not applicable to us, as we do not submit competitive bids
to produce a fungible product. Bid rigging might come into play when, say,
a company requests bids to pave a certain parking area with a given depth
of asphalt mixed to a given density. In this case, each of us as producers
of paving would be producing an identical product. In such a case, it
would be illegal for us to make any agreements pertaining to pricing of the
bids or as to who will submit the lowest bid.
Market division is not applicable to us, as no one has discussed anything
even remotely related to such. Market division might occur if there were
discussion related to which of our workshop presenters would be allowed to
operate in given markets. For example, if the discussion were focused on
potter A only doing workshops in Michigan, potter B operating only in Ohio,
et cetera. Nothing even remotely like this has occurred. Also, workshops
are not fungible products in any possible way. One would learn entirely
different things in, say, Antoinette's workshop on her delicate porcelain
works versus Tony's workshop on big pots or Vince's workshop on neriage.
Price fixing would seem to be the only area of anti-trust law that could
even remotely affect us, but even a cursory analysis reveals that it is not
an issue. If the various workshop presenters on our forum had been
discussing a plan to all charge the same fee for workshops, there might be
a problem, but nothing even close to this has occurred.
Even if we had done something overt such as trying to decide that we would
all charge $24 for a mug, I still don't think there would be an issue since
none of our mugs are the same, none of us has any power to control the
market, and because the market is vast, diverse, and presents no barriers
to entry. Here is a relevant passage from the US Justice Department:
While collusion can occur in almost any industry, it is more likely to
occur in some industries than in others. An indicator of collusion may be
more meaningful when industry conditions are already favorable to
collusion.
-
Collusion is more likely to occur if there are few sellers. The fewer
the number of sellers, the easier it is for them to get together and agr=
ee
on prices, bids, customers, or territories. Collusion may also occur whe=
n
the number of firms is fairly large, but there is a small group of major
sellers and the rest are "fringe" sellers who control only a small fract=
ion
of the market.
-
The probability of collusion increases if other products cannot easily
be substituted for the product in question or if there are restrictive
specifications for the product being procured.
-
The more standardized a product is, the easier it is for competing firms
to reach agreement on a common price structure. It is much harder to agr=
ee
on other forms of competition, such as design, features, quality, or
service.
-
Repetitive purchases may increase the chance of collusion, as the
vendors may become familiar with other bidders and future contracts prov=
ide
the opportunity for competitors to share the work.
-
Collusion is more likely if the competitors know each other well through
social connections, trade associations, legitimate business contacts, or
shifting employment from one company to another.
-
Bidders who congregate in the same building or town to submit their bids
have an easy opportunity for last-minute communications
Here is a link to the relevant document:
http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/guidelines/211578.htm
In conclusion, no one on ClayArt has colluded, and collusion is likely not
even possible. I believe that discussion of pricing is fair, valid, and
legal, and should remain entirely unrestricted.
By the way, while I have only presented a few workshops, I have never even
set a price. When asked what my fee would be, I simply replied that
whatever the venue's standard going rate was would be just fine. I have
yet to be disappointed. And, I charge $15 for my mugs; except I don't make
mugs.
All the best.
...James
James Freeman
"Talk sense to a fool, and he calls you foolish."
-Euripides
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com/resources
June Perry on sat 4 aug 12
I have to agree with John that sharing information on what some people get =
or ask for workshops is not price fixing. There is no collusion involved in=
people just talking about what they currently get, or who paid them what f=
ee, or who offers what fees for workshops.
In my youth I was a Ford Model and the agency had head sheets showing photo=
s of the models in the agency and their hourly fees, which varied at that t=
ime from $50 to $60 an hour. Some may have been $40. I don't remember the l=
ow scale. It was in t he mid 60's - a long time ago! LOL
If the model was booked a lot the agency raised the fee, which they did for=
me. Or the model had the option of raising or lowering their own fee. Ever=
yone knew what everyone else was getting. Other agencies pretty much operat=
ed the same way.
Price fixing involves a group of sellers getting together and agreeing not =
to undersell each other, or some other fixing of a price for goods or servi=
ces to control the market and protect their interests. That isn't occurring=
on Clayart.
Till later,
June Perry
(Finally getting the studio close to being ready after a cross country move=
).
----- Original Message -----
mel,
I am sorry but that is stupid!
You can and should talk about pricing. There is no price fixing. In pottery=
---
PLEASE!
Discussing pricing - what is customary or normal - is not price fixing. You=
should
get a new lawyer because he/she doesn't know what they are talking about.
Potters should charge what they can get but $200 - $500 is a normal amount.
Apple price fixes, not potters.
john britt pottery
--
Warm regards,
June
http://www.shambhalapottery.com
http://www.shambhalapottery.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sodasaltfiring/
Randall Moody on sat 4 aug 12
Ben had it correct when he said, "The frank discussion of prices and theory
behind pricing is not the same as a negotiation for price fixing."
--
Randall in Atlanta
http://wrandallmoody.com
Paul Herman on sat 4 aug 12
Mel,
I think your "advisor" is full of baloney.
You are exhibiting the classic form of the concern troll.
This is from wikipedia:
The concern troll posts in Web forums devoted to its declared point of
view and attempts to sway the group's actions or opinions while
claiming to share their goals, but with professed "concerns". The goal
is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group.
Congratulations!
Paul Herman
Great Basin Pottery
Doyle, California US
www.greatbasinpottery.com/
On Aug 4, 2012, at 4:32 AM, mel jacobson wrote:
> i am just passing along an opinion.
>
> things are different when you sit in this chair, and
> now that i own this list, hmmm. and, things are very different
> on the internet today. everything is monitored, by someone.
> and, there is a kook around every corner with an `ax` the grind.
>
> it is only stupid until someone sends you a letter, or
> knocks on your door. the world has changed a great
> deal in the past decade. i bit if dicussion is not unworthy.
>
> it never hurts to pass on an opinion.
> it is always stupid until it affects you...or you.
> or me. then listen to the howls.
> mel
> http://www.visi.com/~melpots/
> clayart page below:
> http://www.visi.com/~melpots/clayart.html
> http://www.21stcenturykilns.com/
Lee on sat 4 aug 12
I've been online since 1984. This "price fixing" issue has nothing
to do with the current discussion. Folks new to presenting are only
asking for general advice. I've seen nothing like an agreement
expressed.
It has been my experience that the litigation we have to be
aware of. is from mentally unstable people with financial means.
I've seen them threaten and/or initiate law suits against list owners.
They do this even if they have no chance of winning, but defending
against it can cost the list owner legal fees they cannot bear.
Check out section 230 of the Communication Decency Act of 1996:
https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/230
--
Lee Love in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
"Ta tIr na n-=3DF3g ar chul an tI=3D97tIr dlainn trina ch=3DE9ile"=3D97tha=
t is, "T=3D
he
land of eternal youth is behind the house, a beautiful land fluent
within itself." -- John O'Donohue
John Britt on sat 4 aug 12
Price fixing involves collusion and intent and there is none here. The only
collusion with potters ( one of the lowest paid groups besides dancers) is
who can get paid the least.
john britt pottery
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 9:19 AM, June Perry wrote:
> I have to agree with John that sharing information on what some people ge=
t
> or ask for workshops is not price fixing. There is no collusion involved =
in
> people just talking about what they currently get, or who paid them what
> fee, or who offers what fees for workshops.
>
> In my youth I was a Ford Model and the agency had head sheets showing
> photos of the models in the agency and their hourly fees, which varied at
> that time from $50 to $60 an hour. Some may have been $40. I don't rememb=
er
> the low scale. It was in t he mid 60's - a long time ago! LOL
>
> If the model was booked a lot the agency raised the fee, which they did
> for me. Or the model had the option of raising or lowering their own fee.
> Everyone knew what everyone else was getting. Other agencies pretty much
> operated the same way.
>
> Price fixing involves a group of sellers getting together and agreeing no=
t
> to undersell each other, or some other fixing of a price for goods or
> services to control the market and protect their interests. That isn't
> occurring on Clayart.
>
> Till later,
> June Perry
> (Finally getting the studio close to being ready after a cross country
> move).
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> mel,
>
> I am sorry but that is stupid!
>
> You can and should talk about pricing. There is no price fixing. In
> pottery ---
> PLEASE!
>
> Discussing pricing - what is customary or normal - is not price fixing.
> You should
> get a new lawyer because he/she doesn't know what they are talking about=
.
>
> Potters should charge what they can get but $200 - $500 is a normal amoun=
t.
>
> Apple price fixes, not potters.
>
> john britt pottery
>
> --
> Warm regards,
> June
> http://www.shambhalapottery.com
> http://www.shambhalapottery.blogspot.com
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sodasaltfiring/
>
--
Regards,
John
John Britt Pottery 154 Sparks Road Bakersville NC 28705
AWESOME VIDEOS - OK NOT TOTALLY AWESOME BUT GOOD AND FREE:
http://www.youtube.com/user/johnbrittpottery
AWESOME BLOG: http://ncclayclub.blogspot.com
WEBPAGE: www.johnbrittpottery.com
Paul Lewing on sat 4 aug 12
On Aug 4, 2012, at 4:08 AM, John Britt wrote:
I am sorry but that is stupid!
You can and should talk about pricing. There is no price fixing. In
pottery ---
PLEASE!
Discussing pricing - what is customary or normal - is not price
fixing. You should
get a new lawyer because he/she doesn't know what they are talking
about.
Potters should charge what they can get but $200 - $500 is a normal
amount.
John is absolutely right. All the advice on prices was about like
John's last sentence here- a wide range. Not exactly a fixed price.
And I said quite clearly in my post where I listed my prices that I
was willing to negotiate. Meaning I don't even have a fixed price for
me, much less for anyone else. In order for it to be price fixing,
everybody who does workshops would have to get together and agree on a
price. Never happen. Of course there are crazies out there who will
sue over anything, but let's get real here. This is no more price
fixing than it is price fixing for you to go to your local craft fair
when you decide to make mugs for the first time, to see what others
are charging for mugs.
Paul Lewing
www.paullewingtile.com
www.paullewingart.com
Paul Lewing on sat 4 aug 12
I may have been a bit wrong on my last post. I mentioned this subject
to my wife, who is a massage therapist. She says it's illegal for one
massage therapist to tell another massage therapist what they charge.
However, this is kind of stupid since all massage therapists have web
sites that list their prices, so there's no need for anyone to
actually ask. This is a state law, though, and may not be the case
everywhere.
Seems to me it won't ever be possible for workshop teachers to fix
prices. There's just too much variety in subject, duration,
reputation, and a whole bunch of other things. If there ever could be
price fixing, it would be among big-name venues who would fix prices
on what they pay all their workshop leaders.
Paul Lewing
www.paullewingtile.com
www.paullewingart.com
douglas fur on sat 4 aug 12
How would"intent" to price-fix be established? I think a synopsis of
opinions from the last go-round we had about prices would sound like "This
is what I do. You can do what you want."
In general I think the clayart model is a sharing of experience and
opinions. We travel under the banner of "artistic freedom". That we could
get together and decide to do anything one way is antithetical to clayart.
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 8:49 PM, mel jacobson wrote:
> a clayart friend that is a business professional sent this to me.
> just advice.
> but, as i said last week, i do not discuss my pricing or what
> others charge. that is personal and legal.//////////////
>
> email from friend.
>
> I was concerned when I saw discussion on pricing workshops on
> Clayart, so I wrote my association management mentor to confirm that
> this is a really bad practice. His words are below:
>
> I believe you are correct. The organization can't entertain a
> discussion among producers about prices. They could contract with a
> 3rdparty to do a pricing study and report it back, but producers
> can't talk about what they might charge with each other. I doubt
> anyone would take a potters' group to task on this, but it seems like
> a risk that's not a good one to take.
>
> My words, now...
>
> Bottom line, you as moderators need to ban all discussions of pricing
> (whether of pots, workshops, whatever) since they could be anti-trust
> violations. I'm not an attorney, so this is not legal advice, but it
> is sound advice. Make it a policy for your moderators to delete any
> such discussions.
>
> Let participants know that pricing discussions, which could lead to
> charges of price-fixing, are totally verboten. I don't know what
> your liability might be, but it's not a risk I'd want to take.
>
> Check with your attorney if you doubt this.
>
>
> http://www.visi.com/~melpots/
> clayart page below:
> http://www.visi.com/~melpots/**clayart.htmlclayart.html>
> >
> http://www.**21stcenturykilns.com/
>
JRodgers on sat 4 aug 12
Now that is funny!
John
On 8/4/2012 12:11 PM, John Britt wrote:
> The only
> collusion with potters ( one of the lowest paid groups besides dancers) i=
s
> who can get paid the least.
pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET on sat 4 aug 12
The 1st Amendment may also apply...( to conditions of people participating
in a public or private discussion, even if the discussion happens to concer=
n
wages, recompense, remunerations for services endered or in transactions of
whatever sort.
Corporations discussing similar things, among themselves, in a private
situation, may or may not be the same.
----- Original Message -----
From: "douglas fur"
> How would"intent" to price-fix be established? I think a synopsis of
> opinions from the last go-round we had about prices would sound like "Thi=
s
> is what I do. You can do what you want."
> In general I think the clayart model is a sharing of experience and
> opinions. We travel under the banner of "artistic freedom". That we could
> get together and decide to do anything one way is antithetical to clayart=
.
>
> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 8:49 PM, mel jacobson wrote:
>
>> a clayart friend that is a business professional sent this to me.
>> just advice.
>> but, as i said last week, i do not discuss my pricing or what
>> others charge. that is personal and legal.//////////////
>>
>> email from friend.
>>
>> I was concerned when I saw discussion on pricing workshops on
>> Clayart, so I wrote my association management mentor to confirm that
>> this is a really bad practice. His words are below:
>>
>> I believe you are correct. The organization can't entertain a
>> discussion among producers about prices. They could contract with a
>> 3rdparty to do a pricing study and report it back, but producers
>> can't talk about what they might charge with each other. I doubt
>> anyone would take a potters' group to task on this, but it seems like
>> a risk that's not a good one to take.
>>
>> My words, now...
>>
>> Bottom line, you as moderators need to ban all discussions of pricing
>> (whether of pots, workshops, whatever) since they could be anti-trust
>> violations. I'm not an attorney, so this is not legal advice, but it
>> is sound advice. Make it a policy for your moderators to delete any
>> such discussions.
>>
>> Let participants know that pricing discussions, which could lead to
>> charges of price-fixing, are totally verboten. I don't know what
>> your liability might be, but it's not a risk I'd want to take.
>>
>> Check with your attorney if you doubt this.
>>
>>
>> http://www.visi.com/~melpots/
>> clayart page below:
>> http://www.visi.com/~melpots/**clayart.html/clayart.html>
>> >
>> http://www.**21stcenturykilns.com/
>>
Rimas VisGirda on sun 5 aug 12
Re: And, I charge $15 for my mugs; except I don't make
mugs.
I would like to see one of those mugs you don't make, does the $15 include =
shipping? -Rimas
Marci on sun 5 aug 12
> Lee wrote:
>It has been my experience that the litigation we have to be
>aware of. is from mentally unstable people with financial means.
>I've seen them threaten and/or initiate law suits against list owners.
> They do this even if they have no chance of winning, but defending
>against it can cost the list owner legal fees they cannot bear.
In the 15 years that our PPIO china painting group has been in
existence, I have been threatened with lawsuits 3 times.. .. from
CHINA PAINTERS!!! ARGH !
Two were just blowing smoke ( pissed off because of something I said
that they disagreed with ) ... but one had the potential to actually
do some damage because she has the money and also lawyers in the
family..Luckily , she is from the UK and a total nutbar who couldnt
even come up with a reason why she was" getting together information
for an international lawsuit " ( with all of her rabid emails sent to
me also 'supposedly' ccd in to other UK painters ... 'supposedly'
because she was known to use fake email addresses and personas . )
. So after several years, Im still waiting for those papers. ( Guess
mail across the Atlantic must be unusually slow these days ).....
but Lee is right. Anybody can sue you for anything . All they
need is money and a lawyer willing to take it...
Since Mel is the one whose ass is in the sling if something
happens, he gets to decide what can and cant be discussed....
marci the chinapainter
PS. Congratulations on your daughter's wedding, Mel . May she have an
absolutely beautiful day and a wonderful life .
James Freeman on sun 5 aug 12
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Rimas VisGirda wrote:
Re: And, I charge $15 for my mugs; except I don't make
mugs.
I would like to see one of those mugs you don't make, does the $15 include
shipping?
Rimas...
As luck would have it, I just finished not making a mug, and have posted
the photo on my Flickr page:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/7718005816/in/photostream
Please don't judge it too harshly, as it has been quite awhile since I
haven't made one. Ordinarily shipping is extra, but since you are a good
friend I will include shipping in the $15 price.
I have also posted a photo from before I started not making mugs:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/7718006606/in/photostream
Unfortunately I do not have any more of those available.
When I bought my little 80 acre farm years ago, it was enrolled by the
previous owners in a scheme called the Conservation Reserve Program,
whereby the government took money from you and paid it to farmers to not
grow things, about $50 per acre as I recall. Right after closing on the
land, I contacted the relevant agency to have the farm removed from the
program. They asked what I was planning to start growing, and I replied
"nothing". They asked why I would take the land out of the CRP and give up
all that free money. I tried to explain how I thought it was wrong for the
government to take money from others and pay it to people, including
farmers, who didn't earn it, but they seemed not to understand. I asked
them how many hogs they thought I could not raise on each acre of grain
that I didn't grow, and if they would also pay me for the hogs that I
didn't raise. Government workers seem not to have a sense of humor.
All the best.
...James
James Freeman
"Talk sense to a fool, and he calls you foolish."
-Euripides
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com/resources
John Hesselberth on sun 5 aug 12
On Aug 5, 2012, at 12:22 PM, James Freeman =3D
wrote:
> Government workers seem not to have a sense of humor.
I certainly would agree. About 2 years after my mother died I got a bill =
=3D
(addressed to her) from my state tax authorities claiming she owed $400 =3D
income taxes to the state. She had never lived in this state and had not =
=3D
even set foot in it the decade before she died. I wrote back explaining =3D
all that which did absolutely no good. Pretty soon the state tax =3D
computer started adding interest and penalties and the bill was up to =3D
more than $700. And the letter were growing more threatening.
At that point, being particularly exasperated, I told my accountant I =3D
was going to send them a forwarding address of the cemetery in which she =
=3D
was buried. His instantaneous response: "John, don't do that. State tax =
=3D
people have absolutely NO sense of humor." The strong implication was =3D
that they would cause me to regret it until the end of my days.
To not leave the story unfinished, I finally got them off her/my back by =
=3D
following their appeal procedure to the letter and enclosing a copy of =3D
her death certificate which indicated where she had lived and died. I =3D
also included the address of the attorney who help settle the estate and =
=3D
asked that they address future questions to him as he could better =3D
answer their questions. About 3 months later I got a computer-generated =3D
letter saying the case was closed and the debt cancelled. Not a single =3D
world of apology or even a 'thank you' for helping them resolve this =3D
case. But apparently a human being had finally seen my appeal and told =3D
the computer to back off.
Oh, and a nice mug James---I think!
Regards,
John
John Hesselberth
http://www.masteringglazes.com
http://www.frogpondpottery.com
jonathan byler on sun 5 aug 12
it hurts to pass on opinion if it has zero basis in law or reality.
passing on fearful opinions just makes people... more fearful. we
have enough of that already in this country. I am tired of living in
a nation full of cowards. let's really think about this before we
post crazy thoughts. kind of like the people who freak out at the 1
in a million chance of something happening and decide to shut down
your school's clay program.
On Aug 4, 2012, at 6:32 AM, mel jacobson wrote:
> i am just passing along an opinion.
>
> things are different when you sit in this chair, and
> now that i own this list, hmmm. and, things are very different
> on the internet today. everything is monitored, by someone.
> and, there is a kook around every corner with an `ax` the grind.
>
> it is only stupid until someone sends you a letter, or
> knocks on your door. the world has changed a great
> deal in the past decade. i bit if dicussion is not unworthy.
>
> it never hurts to pass on an opinion.
> it is always stupid until it affects you...or you.
> or me. then listen to the howls.
> mel
> http://www.visi.com/~melpots/
> clayart page below:
> http://www.visi.com/~melpots/clayart.html
> http://www.21stcenturykilns.com/
John Britt on sun 5 aug 12
Talking about prices is not price fixing. Talking about design is not cop=
=3D
ying.=3D20
If anyone can sue about anything, does that stop us from doing everything=
=3D
?=3D20
No. We could be sued for making pottery that cuts someone, but do we stop=
=3D
=3D20
making pottery. No.
It is the same thing with safety. Because there are toxic materials that=3D=
20=3D
POSSIBLY could kill you does that mean we stop making pottery? Because=3D20=
=3D
barium carbonate kills rats does that mean the having it in the studio wi=
=3D
ll kill=3D20
us? And we don't worry about silica ? Or do we quit pottery altogether? =
=3D
Or quit=3D20
going to the beach because of sand (silica) or the desert (sand/ silica)?=
=3D
We=3D20
just stay home and hunker down if fear?
It is a ridiculous proposition to say we can't talk about prices because =
=3D
it is=3D20
price fixing, then we can't talk about design because someone could sue a=
=3D
bout=3D20
stealing designs. We can't talk about safety or toxicity because someone =
=3D
could=3D20
sue because we misrepresented proper safety warning. We can't talk about=3D=
20=3D
......anything because we could be sued.=3D20
The question is who will sue and why? Remember that they incur costs an=3D2=
0=3D
spend time. And there has to be come gain for them and the lawyer.=3D20
For some reason, over the past 20 years I never heard of clayart being su=
=3D
ed=3D20
for price fixing ....and I remember bitching about it many times.
John Britt Pottery
=3D20=3D20
Arnold Howard on mon 6 aug 12
On 8/5/2012 12:46 PM, John Hesselberth wrote:
>> Government workers seem not to have a sense of humor.
I was at Dallas/Ft Worth Airport last Saturday for a trip to Chicago,
and a young TSA agent in security patted me down. As I held out my arms,
I said, "This would make a good skit on Saturday Night Live."
At first the agent maintained a grave expression. I think he was trained
to stay serious during pat downs. But he finally smiled and told me
humorous stories about his job. We were both laughing when I walked away.
Sincerely,
Arnold Howard
Paragon Industries, L.P., Mesquite, Texas USA
ahoward@paragonweb.com / www.paragonweb.com
| |
|
