"Better Records" website and their business practices as they apply to our hobby*

I've reread the above post twice...I still do not know what it is trying to state. Maybe it's me?

 

Not just you, but I think what he is getting at in the white album example is if Better Records is comparing US pressings of the White album and picking a "hot stamper" of a Capitol pressing, the whitest of the white hot US stampers may sound as good as a run of the mill tepid UK stamper and there is no way to know the pressing info on the site. I think?

 

The post about Dusty Groove, The White Album and Black Sabbath?

 

@SuperFuzz: You are espousing an extreme caveat emptor approach to the market, one that is certainly popular. Those with this approach have no problem with what TP or any seller does, placing all responsibility with the buyer.

However, many people and indeed the legal system in many scenarios do burden the seller with certain moral and legal responsibilities. The point of my post was to explain how TP may be seen to violate market morality, as that is the question at hand. You don't have to accept those standards for yourself, but understand that many do.

 

Seriously, do people pay those prices?

 

indeed -- caveat emptor ad absurdum.

 

I was in the middle of typing a response, full of witty retorts about the notion of caveat emptor in a used vinyl marketplace, and how this seller has already burdened himself with a "certain moral responsibility", namely, his no-questions asked full money back guarantee (which he has honored, according to reports in this thread), and how we should perhaps get Congress involved (perhaps creating a Department of Vinyl Security?) to regulate it and make it all "legal" and such...
then it finally occurred to me - you got me! You got me good. I actually thought you were serious for a minute. Well played.

 

After seeing posts questioning the morality (business morality, I presume) of Better Records, I decided to visit the site as I have not done so in ages. Wow, those are some steep prices!!! But to question the morality of the business, that I am not getting, especially with the money back thingy.
My local has a UK copy of DSOTM. He has a price of $900 US of A dollars on it! Now, if'n I was to purchase this item, and not feel 100% satisfaction, and going in I knew there was no refund available, who would be at fault? Could/should I blame the seller and tag him with a "lack of morality" moniker? Or, could my decision making skills, possibly my intelligence be questionable?
Again, no one makes one buy the product...and there is a money back guarantee. Not sure I see who is getting hurt here.

 

A very different situation to what you would be faced with if buying on-line from Better Records. In your post you already know it is a UK pressing (for that money I would assume the 1st A2/B2), you can visually inspect it and for that money one would expect also play-grade it. You are able to make an 'informed' purchase decision. With this particular album if it is a UK 1st and plays n/mint you know almost certainly it can not be bettered sonically and you can ascertain an approximate current market value.

With Better Records the only information you will have is the album title and their 'sonic' and 'play' gradings. The one you buy from them could well be in n/mint condition and sound wonderful, the best you have heard that album, but it turns out to be a much later UK press or a US press. You've never heard a UK 1st or 2nd press, so while you are happy with the sound of the record you've received, 'informed' opinion would be that a better sounding pressing can be had for equal or less money. Better Records have not misled and falsely advertised, they have just withheld readily identifiable & factual information about the item that is relevant to both it's current market value & sonics.

In not providing country of manufacture & pressing information it creates the reasonable suspicion that such information will adversely affect the potential value and sale of their 'hot stampers'. For many of their records that information may well be consistent with the claimed sonics (eg DSOTM UK 1st, LZII RL), but of course they could not be selective in providing pressing information for obvious reasons. I don't object to their pricing but there is a question about the practise of withholding what is relevant factual information (as opposed to opinion) about the items they sell. Offering a money back guarantee doesn't absolve a business from being open & transparent in it's initial sale of goods. Just imo of course

 

Hmmm, so what about Bose? I've never seen them post any specs, if I go to a store what do I know other than it sounds good, has a warranty. Would it not be up to me to be an informed consumer? No, wait, that would put pressure on me! What we need is to get the government, and a few lawyers in there to protect me...from myself? Jeez...because I am not being an informed or wise consumer...let's bust Better Records?

 

Go ahead, bust them yourself. No one here is saying that. Are you exaggerating or mocking?

 

Yes.
I just feel that the consumer has some responsibility in all of this. And I do see posts busting BR, not necessarily the one I attached to, well, and anyone that would buy from them. Posters here can be as opinionated as....ahh...Tom Port! Bottom line for me, not much different than buying any other LP off line...the warranty and the being a smart consumer is how you protect yourself and lessen the risk.

 

When you say 'bust', I assumed you meant 'take down' as in 'drug bust'. Yes, most of us are opinionated and also smart consumers - that's why not many forum members are Better Records customers.

 

I would stop reading this man whom demands a great deal of ones time with such verbose queries as I may have a stamper of one that is not, how shall one say, of a temperature that is light to ones touch awaiting me on the table that turns.

 

Huh?

 

I thought this was the part of the thread where we are practicing our passive voice.

 

I would respectfully question, Upon whose authority are you now speaking for the forum? Are most of us opinionated? Are most of us smart consumers? (By smart do you mean intelligent and informed about the topic?) You conclude "not many forum members are Better Records customers."

I would ponder, compared to whom? Compared to, say, Cadillac owners? Vegetarians? I would venture to guess that SH forum members are more likely than, say, the body of Cadillac owners or, say, the body of vegetarians at large, to be customers of Better Records. Did you mean, of all record buyers at large? I would still suggest SH forum members would average (index above 100) to demonstrate a propensity to be customers of Better Records.

But the main thing, my over-arching gravamen, is that the very few (I counted three people) who bothered to try and help you get some visibility on Better Records business practices were allowed an unimpeded and honest voice.

Like so many other threads, it seems the journey entangles itself in a self-terminating act of homogeneity. It seems abject homogeneity sets upon itself, hardens, and becomes the singular goal and ambition of the type of posers who present themselves in spades here to testify. It seems they can stand nothing less than complete consensus in a world of diverse experience. Can they let no unique and qualified voice be heard and considered?

And so it ends (for me anyway), coming up on one thousand posts and nothing is brought to light. I wonder if you on this thread you initiated actually learned a single darn thing? Homogeneity above all else! Such prejudice! What a wasteland.

 

And at those prices I never will be. Even had I the disposable income to afford it. I guess I've been a record collector too long to want anything to do with record sellers that conduct business like that -- withholding vital info that I need to make an informed decision.

But to play devil's advocate there's nothing wrong, basically, with people that have the means and who don't want to spend the time to find the records themselves to pay 50X or 100X what the record would ordinarily bring to have a guaranteed play graded copy, regardless of whatever 'hot stamper' blather accompanied it. Nice to be that rich.

My concern is, if there's ever much or more media attention paid, how will it affect the various and sundry record sellers who think any vinyl record is worth a fortune? There's been enough price inflation already and it has finally creeped down off its Beatles and core classic rock pedestal to virtually every multi-platinum album sold during the last 35 years. I mean, come on, a $50 copy of Silk Degrees? On what planet? The planet of one-percenters, that's what planet.

Just glad I never thought much of that album.

Reminds me of the time in 1998 or 1999 when I walked into a "antique" store in Fredricksburg and there was up on a very prominent display a mono copy of Meet The Beatles for $99.99. I have to say the cover looked new -- the whites were pure white, the definition sharp, the corners crisp -- looked new. I picked it up to look at the vinyl -- backyard dog toy thrift store frisbee. Thrashed. Plastered with scratches and gouges and scuffs to the point you wonder how it's possible to damage a record that badly without deliberate abuse. I also wondered how on earth anyone thought that would be worth anything? I remember thinking I might give $10 or $15 for the cover...then I thought what's the point of suggesting that to a seller who has no clue that his or her $99 item has virtually no value? I would even be willing to bet that if that store is still there, Meet The Beatles will still be there on the display. No clue.

Now TP obviously has a very good clue about the market he exploits and that's great. I just hate the idea there could be spillover -- and there already has to a certain extent -- to every Tom, Dick and Harry that has a bunch o' old records to sell.

"Hey, it's vinyl. It's worth at least $50. That's what Tom Port over at Better Records is selling it for."

"But those are 'Hot Stampers' and play graded."

"Suit yourself."

--no sale--

Some years back (again, around 1999/2000) I came across a couple of flea-market -type venders who'd priced every record they had at Goldmine NM and more (and even all their Pickwick and Design label budget junk that rarely gets into any price guide) and they were all thrashed junk. The ones that weren't were priced insane. They both went out of business. Well-deserved failures.

But who knows? If they get a gander at the business Better Records is doing, life and hope and dreams of the big $$$$ may spring anew out of those mildewing basement stacks of multi-million selling rock fodder.

"Check it out! I just got a copy of Billy Joel's Greatest Hits! It was only $75!!!!!"

Good choice.

 

You promise?

 

....hmmm, I beginning to remember why I don't venture out into the main forums much now....

 

Rich = busy i.e. hard-working?

 

I know this has been voiced in this thread numerous times already but I think the fuss comes from people believing there is a moral business code Port is violating, that there is an objective value for these records and that Port is guilty of duping people into paying unfair amounts of money for them. I think it's important to remember that his customers are not only paying for his records, they're also paying for his service, the time his company is investing into the endeavor. For some people it adds up, for me (coincidentally, not wealthy) it doesn't.

 

I can't help but notice that your preference is consistent with Steve Hoffman's regarding this album.

My best guess is gambling isn't intended to be part of the Better Records experience. I'd personally rather take a VG++ purple and orange label pressing for 50 bucks on eBay where I know what I'm getting.

 

Posers or posters? No need for name-calling. If you're opinion isn't popular and you're outnumbered, there's more positive ways to react than that.