Topic: Some dude is Hoarding 17,000 Bottles of Sanitizer
Anonymous A started this discussion 6 years ago #97,547
Matt and Noah Colvin of Hixson, Tennessee, spent between $10,000 and $15,000 buying up hand sanitizer, surgical masks, and antibacterial wipes
They drove around Tennessee and Kentucky buying the items at various stores like Dollar Tree, Walmart, Staples, and Home Depot
The Colvins then placed the items for sale on their Amazon online store, pricing hand sanitizer for as much as $70 apiece
They managed to sell about 200 bottles of hand sanitizer before Amazon shut them down
The New York Times reported that the Colvins were left with more than 17,000 bottles of hand sanitizer and other items in their garage and nowhere to sell it to
Social media reaction to the Times story was fierce and the Colvins started to receive death threats
The Tennessee attorney general sent the brothers a letter threatening legal action if they continued buying up medical supplies
In response to the backlash, the Colvins pledged to donate the unsold items to health agencies or a church
They drove around Tennessee and Kentucky buying the items at various stores like Dollar Tree, Walmart, Staples, and Home Depot
The Colvins then placed the items for sale on their Amazon online store, pricing hand sanitizer for as much as $70 apiece
They managed to sell about 200 bottles of hand sanitizer before Amazon shut them down
The New York Times reported that the Colvins were left with more than 17,000 bottles of hand sanitizer and other items in their garage and nowhere to sell it to
Social media reaction to the Times story was fierce and the Colvins started to receive death threats
The Tennessee attorney general sent the brothers a letter threatening legal action if they continued buying up medical supplies
In response to the backlash, the Colvins pledged to donate the unsold items to health agencies or a church
(Edited 12 minutes later by a moderator.)
| Poll option | Votes | Percentage | Graph |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do we help him buy paying $70 per bottle? | - | 0% | |
| Should Bert apply to live in that Garage, Yes | 2 | 67% | |
| Do we give two fucks? | 1 | 33% |
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 4 minutes later[^] [v] #1,100,510
I'm awaiting the inevitable story where he cries about how people invaded and looted his house. I've made popcorn. I've seriously got nothing better to do now.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 12 minutes later, 16 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,100,511
> The New York Times reported that the Colvins were left with more than 17,000 bottles of hand sanitizer and other items in their garage and nowhere to sell it to
There's are dozens and dozens of sites to post items for sale online.
There's are dozens and dozens of sites to post items for sale online.
Meta !Sober//iZs joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 54 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,100,529
He's gonna feel pretty silly spending his life savings on this bullshit when stores are restocked in a week or two and this whole thing is over and forgotten about by May ??
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 56 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,100,531
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 6 years ago, 19 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,100,532
@1,100,511 (C)
If he was smart he would cut out the middleman, get his own website coronavirushandsanitizer.com or whatever, and use the media coverage to get free advertising.
If he was smart he would cut out the middleman, get his own website coronavirushandsanitizer.com or whatever, and use the media coverage to get free advertising.
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,100,534
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 6 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,100,535
Meta !Sober//iZs double-posted this 6 years ago, 5 days later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,103,130
Update: it got seized by local authorities ?https://www.wdrb.com/news/kentucky-tennessee-authorities-seize-bottles-of-hand-sanitizer-in-alleged/article_cd56f5e0-6ac7-11ea-bf6b-ff9ce788c5be.html
Anonymous B replied with this 6 years ago, 23 minutes later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,103,136
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
But will Kentucky Senator Rand Paul speak up and blast the nanny state for stepping in and destroying the purest pursuits of capitalism?
The two had purchased truckloads of masks, hand sanitizers and other supplies from stores along the Interstate 75 corridor in Kentucky and Tennessee border. Authorities said they planned to re-sell the merchandise at inflated prices.
“They were basically going through these small convenience stores and dollar stores and Dollar Trees, and buying up what was on the shelf but also asking the folks to go in the back of the warehouse and purchase those boxes as well,” Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron said.
“They were basically going through these small convenience stores and dollar stores and Dollar Trees, and buying up what was on the shelf but also asking the folks to go in the back of the warehouse and purchase those boxes as well,” Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron said.
But will Kentucky Senator Rand Paul speak up and blast the nanny state for stepping in and destroying the purest pursuits of capitalism?
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 6 years ago, 11 minutes later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,103,140
@previous (B)
He unironically should. The problem is not with the brothers, but with Walmart, Dollar General, et al selling hand sanitizer for below-market prices. If the retailers had priced it properly to reflect the increased demand (but no increase in supply), there would be no incentive or even option for hoarding. The increased price of hand sanitizer will encourage conservation and encourage manufacturers and retailers to increase supply, restoring equilibrium as soon as possible.
The brothers are guilty only of trying to correct a market failure.
Essentially pre-Coronavirus price of hand sanitizer is like $2 a bottle. Supply and demand are balanced. Post-Coronavirus, the real price of hand sanitizer is now like $15 a bottle. But in a misguided effort to be "nice", retailers didn't raise the price, leading to empty shelves (and smart people investing their life savings into 17,000 bottles at below-market prices). If they had raised the price to balance supply and demand, people would still be able to buy it in the stores. Albeit at a higher price. This higher price will send a huge, flashing red "there are massive profits in hand sanitizer!!!" signal and manufacturers will be falling all over themselves trying to make as much as possible.
He unironically should. The problem is not with the brothers, but with Walmart, Dollar General, et al selling hand sanitizer for below-market prices. If the retailers had priced it properly to reflect the increased demand (but no increase in supply), there would be no incentive or even option for hoarding. The increased price of hand sanitizer will encourage conservation and encourage manufacturers and retailers to increase supply, restoring equilibrium as soon as possible.
The brothers are guilty only of trying to correct a market failure.
Essentially pre-Coronavirus price of hand sanitizer is like $2 a bottle. Supply and demand are balanced. Post-Coronavirus, the real price of hand sanitizer is now like $15 a bottle. But in a misguided effort to be "nice", retailers didn't raise the price, leading to empty shelves (and smart people investing their life savings into 17,000 bottles at below-market prices). If they had raised the price to balance supply and demand, people would still be able to buy it in the stores. Albeit at a higher price. This higher price will send a huge, flashing red "there are massive profits in hand sanitizer!!!" signal and manufacturers will be falling all over themselves trying to make as much as possible.
(Edited 9 minutes later.)
Apocalypse Indy !bYobIzYIFE joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 32 seconds later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,103,141
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
https://1047wonkfm.iheart.com/content/2020-03-21-kentucky-couple-rages-when-denied-23-case-mountain-dew-purchase/
https://1047wonkfm.iheart.com/content/2020-03-21-kentucky-couple-rages-when-denied-23-case-mountain-dew-purchase/
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 57 minutes later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,103,159
> In response to the backlash, the Colvins pledged to donate the unsold items to health agencies or a church
Death threats? Sounds like they better call the police and tell them to send an ambulance or a hearst.
Death threats? Sounds like they better call the police and tell them to send an ambulance or a hearst.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
chill dog !!81dzJNNYL joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 1 hour later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,103,181
@1,103,140 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
Some places have passed laws against price-gouging items like hand sanitizer and masks.
Some places have passed laws against price-gouging items like hand sanitizer and masks.
Sheila LaBoof joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 1 hour later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,103,213
@1,103,140 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
> He unironically should. The problem is not with the brothers, but with Walmart, Dollar General, et al selling hand sanitizer for below-market prices. If the retailers had priced it properly to reflect the increased demand (but no increase in supply), there would be no incentive or even option for hoarding. The increased price of hand sanitizer will encourage conservation and encourage manufacturers and retailers to increase supply, restoring equilibrium as soon as possible.
>
> The brothers are guilty only of trying to correct a market failure.
>
> Essentially pre-Coronavirus price of hand sanitizer is like $2 a bottle. Supply and demand are balanced. Post-Coronavirus, the real price of hand sanitizer is now like $15 a bottle. But in a misguided effort to be "nice", retailers didn't raise the price, leading to empty shelves (and smart people investing their life savings into 17,000 bottles at below-market prices). If they had raised the price to balance supply and demand, people would still be able to buy it in the stores. Albeit at a higher price. This higher price will send a huge, flashing red "there are massive profits in hand sanitizer!!!" signal and manufacturers will be falling all over themselves trying to make as much as possible.
but seriously, fuck those guys
> He unironically should. The problem is not with the brothers, but with Walmart, Dollar General, et al selling hand sanitizer for below-market prices. If the retailers had priced it properly to reflect the increased demand (but no increase in supply), there would be no incentive or even option for hoarding. The increased price of hand sanitizer will encourage conservation and encourage manufacturers and retailers to increase supply, restoring equilibrium as soon as possible.
>
> The brothers are guilty only of trying to correct a market failure.
>
> Essentially pre-Coronavirus price of hand sanitizer is like $2 a bottle. Supply and demand are balanced. Post-Coronavirus, the real price of hand sanitizer is now like $15 a bottle. But in a misguided effort to be "nice", retailers didn't raise the price, leading to empty shelves (and smart people investing their life savings into 17,000 bottles at below-market prices). If they had raised the price to balance supply and demand, people would still be able to buy it in the stores. Albeit at a higher price. This higher price will send a huge, flashing red "there are massive profits in hand sanitizer!!!" signal and manufacturers will be falling all over themselves trying to make as much as possible.
but seriously, fuck those guys
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 6 years ago, 18 minutes later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,103,224
@1,103,181 (chill dog !!81dzJNNYL)
That's not going to change the underlying market dynamics but only exacerbate shortages of those items. Again, the prices need to rise to encourage more production, which will have the effect of lowering prices as it stabilizes. Those laws were passed by people who didn't pass freshman economics.
There's so much ethanol in the US. In a real free market, people would see the hand sanitizer shortage and say "fuck it we're taking ethanol out of gasoline and putting it in hand sanitizer instead". The gas in America has 10% ethanol added as a pork barrel thing for corn farmers. I can buy 1.7 gallons of ethanol dirt cheap at the gas pump (as 10% of the 17 gallons my car takes) but I can't buy a pint of ethanol in the form of hand sanitizer.
This crisis is being caused by the absence of "price gouging". If prices were allowed to rise to balance supply and demand, there would be no shortage. It would be over very quickly as any factory that could be possibly be retooled to make surgical masks and hand sanitizer, would be.
That's not going to change the underlying market dynamics but only exacerbate shortages of those items. Again, the prices need to rise to encourage more production, which will have the effect of lowering prices as it stabilizes. Those laws were passed by people who didn't pass freshman economics.
There's so much ethanol in the US. In a real free market, people would see the hand sanitizer shortage and say "fuck it we're taking ethanol out of gasoline and putting it in hand sanitizer instead". The gas in America has 10% ethanol added as a pork barrel thing for corn farmers. I can buy 1.7 gallons of ethanol dirt cheap at the gas pump (as 10% of the 17 gallons my car takes) but I can't buy a pint of ethanol in the form of hand sanitizer.
This crisis is being caused by the absence of "price gouging". If prices were allowed to rise to balance supply and demand, there would be no shortage. It would be over very quickly as any factory that could be possibly be retooled to make surgical masks and hand sanitizer, would be.
chill dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 6 years ago, 24 minutes later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,103,238
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
Those processes take time which we don't have, and have the effect of making essential items unaffordable for some or many people.
In addition it's the stores raising prices to consumers. The stores aren't paying more to suppliers.
Those processes take time which we don't have, and have the effect of making essential items unaffordable for some or many people.
In addition it's the stores raising prices to consumers. The stores aren't paying more to suppliers.
(Edited 53 seconds later.)