Cigar Flipping Discussion (moved from La Escepcion Thread)

[shlomo]

Coming out of the woodwork to comment on this one.

"Trading" at a fair and reasonable price is the thing I miss most about the old days of the Trading Forum at CA. Rarely any gouging or profiteering there. Too bad it's gone.

Nice to see you brother!

[jwr0201]

Let's go back to the analogy of concert tickets. Suppose those here who have a real affinity to one particular cigar also feel the same about a particular rock group. They really love that group and see every one of their concerts possible. Now, most of the seats are sold and the music enthusiast looms to buy tickets. Then the evil scalper steps in and snatches up a block of coveted tickets and offers them for resale (say, flip) at an absorbitant cost. Music lover would love to get the tickets, but cannot justify selling the farm to get them.

Now, he wasn't a wet blanket, but is still pissed. Music lover was a good regular customer, offering up regular sales to the seller. He now has an opportunity to not get the coveted tickets to his beloved group because capitalism worked so well in that the scalper/flipper scooped the rare tickets and is charging absorbitant prices that the everyday buyer cannot/will not not pay.

This could be most of us with average disposable income. If this does occur with CC's when the embargo ends, I suspect many here who support the filpper will be singing a far different tune when their beloved stogies are unavailable or out of reach. BTW, in Florida, scalping is not legal and selling (flipping) cigars requires a license and paying taxes. And THAT is why I feel the practice of flipping sucks and DOES say a lot about a person's character.

[jwr0201]

"I know I'm going into dark waters and defending the indefensible here but on an economic basis there's nothing wrong with scalping."

Are you kidding??? Scalping in most of the US in illegal. There is a good reason for that.

"Buying up a pool of tickets does not increase or decrease demand. "

Wrong here as well. If the only tickets left are from scalpers at sky high prices, interest will fall after fans continually try to get affordable tickets without success.

In Orlando around the arena, scalpers are usually seen offering tickets. Most people regard them as little more than trash for what they do.

Fortunately, police confiscate tickets when the scalpers are caught.

In cigars, take Anejo Sharks for example. A few years back, they were only faint rumors to most cigar enthusiasts because they were limited in quantity and flippere snatched most of them up. As a result, many people said piss on it, I'll get something else. Now, Anejos can readily be found for around 10 bucks and sit on the shelf. I work part time in a cigar b&m and have a large supply of them. They are now passed over for other sticks that are easily as good. So yes, scalpers and flippers DO have a negative effect in the interest and eventual sale of items.

Besides, scalpers and flippers just suck!

[NSXCIGAR]

"I know I'm going into dark waters and defending the indefensible here but on an economic basis there's nothing wrong with scalping."

Are you kidding??? Scalping in most of the US in illegal. There is a good reason for that.

"Buying up a pool of tickets does not increase or decrease demand. "

Wrong here as well. If the only tickets left are from scalpers at sky high prices, interest will fall after fans continually try to get affordable tickets without success.

In Orlando around the arena, scalpers are usually seen offering tickets. Most people regard them as little more than trash for what they do.

Fortunately, police confiscate tickets when the scalpers are caught.

In cigars, take Anejo Sharks for example. A few years back, they were only faint rumors to most cigar enthusiasts because they were limited in quantity and flippere snatched most of them up. As a result, many people said piss on it, I'll get something else. Now, Anejos can readily be found for around 10 bucks and sit on the shelf. I work part time in a cigar b&m and have a large supply of them. They are now passed over for other sticks that are easily as good. So yes, scalpers and flippers DO have a negative effect in the interest and eventual sale of items.

Besides, scalpers and flippers just suck!

Just because something's illegal doesn't make it wrong, economically or morally. Like the Cuban embargo...

And why should tickets, or anything else for that matter, be "affordable"? What's affordable? That's a subjective, nonsensical & meaningless term. Sounds to me like that means whatever you want to pay, or whatever is a "fair" price--in your opinion. I wish everything I bought cost less. I wish Yachts were affordable. Wait--they are affordable--for those who can afford them.

The hatred and criminalization of scalpers simply isn't justified rationally. It's an uninformed and emotional policy. And the police confiscate these scalpers' tickets so now no one can use them? Thanks police. Who has done more harm in that case? And ask yourself that honestly.

And I'm sorry, but you should familiarize yourself with some basic economics and how money prices, supply and demand actually work in a market economy. The demand for the tickets already exceeds supply at face value--that's the whole point! The venue has priced the tickets below the equilibrium price and will therefore sell to those who demand them less urgently. The whole point of higher prices is to encourage goods and services go to those who demand them most urgently.

And the Anejo Sharks story should make you happy--the flippers apparently got burned badly and miscalculated demand. That's the risk one takes. It's a risky business and profits reflect that. I've known many a ticket scalper in my day that's had to sell below face value. Shouldn't they be applauded for that? If demand always decreased after scalpers scooped up concert tickets there wouldn't be a profit because they wouldn't sell them above face value. I think what you really mean is that it's demand from people who want them cheaper than the equilibrium price that declines. And that's what called...sour grapes.

[jwr0201]

Here's another analogy and example of profiteers and scalpers irreversibly damaging a complete market for a product. I mention this because it is a very simple example to see. Take Ty Beanie Babies that were on fire in terms of collectibles about 10 or 15 years ago. For quite a while, they were under the radar and were very collectible, but affordable. When popularity began to rise, at some point, flippers entered the picture. Suddenly, entire shipments were bought by these flippers, creating shortages to the everyday collectors. Then the flippers offered the 'hard to get' pieces for outrageous prices. Long story short, collectors eventually gave up trying to acquire complete collections because flippers hoarded pieces and sold at unreasonable prices. Demand fell and the company nearly went out of business. Long term collectors lost their investments when the pieces were no longer in demand. The decline in this particular line had nothing to do with popularity, but the interruption and flipping by greedy profiteers and the resulting frustration and loss of interest by consumers and collectors. Many toy lines remain collectible when normal business cycles are not interrupted. In this case, demand was negatively impacted by the flippers. At some point, the company attempted to have it's distributors limit the number of items sold to allow collectors and consumers to have better access, but that action came too late. Never did the parent company raise prices, believing that the price needed to stay affordable for the intended audience. Apparently, this company had more ethics and better character than the flippers that destroyed the collectibility of the entire line.

Business does not always have to be heartless and harm people just for the almighty buck. IMHO, much better to take a meager profit and allow others to have enjoyment rather than take it all and piss on anyone who cannot afford the high prices.

I do understand business principles quite well, having worked in an unfeeling, professional environment for far too many years. I am fortunate to have come to my senses and gave it up for a much more eclectic, humane manner of living and am much happier for it. I sleep well at night, knowing I transact business with others in an ethical, honest manner. I love my work and am blessed to be able to help others. My company will not tolerate taking advantage of clients. My profits are not sky high, but I do OK and want nothing different.

Yep... scalpers and flippers still just plain suck and are definitely in the same league as loan sharks and bookies!

[Guest scsi]

I think you are missing an important part of economics.... well economics 101 as well as a truth with supply and demand...

For my daughter's 21st birthday, I invited her to see Coldplay with me on the floor of a major venue

I didn't think that it might have been sold out and it was

Thanks to secondary sellers, I was able to treat my daughter to that experience... I didn't care what it cost

I got value for the money I chose to spend....

In the end, no one's forcing you to buy anything,,,

If I want to spent 800 bucks to treat my daughter then I will.....

Same can be said about cigars

it's not brain surgery

[Habana Mike]

There's no need to be paying for a premium for any new release regardless where it comes from. There are enough gentlemen in this community that will either help you acquire the box or sell one to you at cost rather than taking advantage of you. It's called relationship building and making true friends. Anyone else it's purely business, which is why you pay way more than you should for the box.

Aged or vintage boxes on the other hand are a completely different story.

Agree with both your points and I've had friends help me acquire boxes at cost and vice versa, though personally I'd be a bit averse to procuring something for someone else that I'm on the hook for regardless of the relationship.

More than happy to point friends to sources, not so much to order for them on my dime and lose out if for whatever reason I couldn't deliver.

To my original point, I've been willing to pay a 'reasonable' markup for some items knowing my risk was mitigated, particularly knowing there was risk in acquiring those items at a better than market price typically also passed on to me.

I've never been one to sell anything and those that have asked me to sell know I always prefer to make a fair trade rather than a cash transaction. There are examples here at FOH where I was fortunate to come upon a hard to find that I could have sold for a significant profit yet split out at cost.

Net net, while I am not a fan of flippers or gougers there is obviously a market for in demand product whether recent production or aged/vintage so to my mind, regardless of the product in question or the motives of the seller, it's up to the buyer to determine the merit of the transaction.

[NSXCIGAR]

For quite a while, they were under the radar and were very collectible, but affordable. When popularity began to rise, at some point, flippers entered the picture. Suddenly, entire shipments were bought by these flippers, creating shortages to the everyday collectors. Then the flippers offered the 'hard to get' pieces for outrageous prices. Long story short, collectors eventually gave up trying to acquire complete collections because flippers hoarded pieces and sold at unreasonable prices.

I'm not sure you're theory here makes any sense. If the flippers are offering the pieces at high prices wouldn't that be because demand is high? Hence high prices? Prices rise in the face of rising demand. The flippers have nothing to do with this. Your theory is that due to increasing scarcity, demand declines eventually? There's no such theory in economics. There must necessarily be another explanation, like people just got sick of them--it was a fad. Simply put, economics dictates that demand cannot decline due to increasing scarcity. Exactly the opposite. If demand declines, it's for exogenous reasons.

Conversely, if prices are too low there will be shortages as well. Whether the flippers hold back or hoard stock waiting for a higher price or there's simply a production shortage, a shortage is still a shortage any way you slice it. Equilibrium price theory is in action here.

I do understand business principles quite well, having worked in an unfeeling, professional environment for far too many years. I am fortunate to have come to my senses and gave it up for a much more eclectic, humane manner of living and am much happier for it. I sleep well at night, knowing I transact business with others in an ethical, honest manner. I love my work and am blessed to be able to help others. My company will not tolerate taking advantage of clients. My profits are not sky high, but I do OK and want nothing different.

Understanding business and understanding economics are different things, That's why they're completely separate areas of study.

I'm sorry that you're experiences in the business world were negative and I'm glad you're in a better place professionally and personally. But there are plenty of us in the business world who love what we do and are fulfilled and provide enormous value for others and receive enormous value back. I pride myself on running my business honestly and with integrity but I'd be lying if I said it wasn't competition that kept my industry in line. My customers have options, as all of us do. And bad business relative to my competition means no business.

[greenpimp]

As I've written before, my only issue is that I would rather cigars were not purchased and resold by people who either never smoke or have no intent of ever smoking anything they buy.

I love cigars for their communal and festive nature, and despise them being seen as a mere commodity to be invested and manipulated. Cigars are to be smoked, enjoyed, and shared. As soon as they are seen as other.....

But what do I know. I enjoy my Bolivar PC s much as my old rare **** that I would never flip, even though a few of them are worth more than a lot. I view it a passion, not an investment. If this was an investment, it would be a foolish one.

[forgop]

Here's another analogy and example of profiteers and scalpers irreversibly damaging a complete market for a product. I mention this because it is a very simple example to see. Take Ty Beanie Babies that were on fire in terms of collectibles about 10 or 15 years ago. For quite a while, they were under the radar and were very collectible, but affordable. When popularity began to rise, at some point, flippers entered the picture. Suddenly, entire shipments were bought by these flippers, creating shortages to the everyday collectors. Then the flippers offered the 'hard to get' pieces for outrageous prices. Long story short, collectors eventually gave up trying to acquire complete collections because flippers hoarded pieces and sold at unreasonable prices. Demand fell and the company nearly went out of business. Long term collectors lost their investments when the pieces were no longer in demand. The decline in this particular line had nothing to do with popularity, but the interruption and flipping by greedy profiteers and the resulting frustration and loss of interest by consumers and collectors. Many toy lines remain collectible when normal business cycles are not interrupted. In this case, demand was negatively impacted by the flippers. At some point, the company attempted to have it's distributors limit the number of items sold to allow collectors and consumers to have better access, but that action came too late. Never did the parent company raise prices, believing that the price needed to stay affordable for the intended audience. Apparently, this company had more ethics and better character than the flippers that destroyed the collectibility of the entire line.

Business does not always have to be heartless and harm people just for the almighty buck. IMHO, much better to take a meager profit and allow others to have enjoyment rather than take it all and piss on anyone who cannot afford the high prices.

I do understand business principles quite well, having worked in an unfeeling, professional environment for far too many years. I am fortunate to have come to my senses and gave it up for a much more eclectic, humane manner of living and am much happier for it. I sleep well at night, knowing I transact business with others in an ethical, honest manner. I love my work and am blessed to be able to help others. My company will not tolerate taking advantage of clients. My profits are not sky high, but I do OK and want nothing different.

Yep... scalpers and flippers still just plain suck and are definitely in the same league as loan sharks and bookies!

Who exactly is the victim in such a situation? The person who sold said it or buyer who purchased it for an AGREED upon price?

How about the stock market?

[NSXCIGAR]

Good thread everyone.

Increasing demand can take many forms. That includes diminishing the available supply.

Scalpers are able to do this through maximizing only one thing:

Timing. They get there first, so they set the price.

How do they do this?

1. Being unscrupulous enough to prey on the buyer

2. Having no life other than to make #1 happen.

We all know when we've met this type of person in life. Scumbags.

Correct, the scalper sets the price. The ticket's face value is therefore meaningless and is worthless as a measure of it's actual value. The price the scalper sells the tickets for is the market price, and comes much closer to establishing its actual market value. How is selling something for its actual market value to strangers unscrupulous? The concert venue isn't doing anyone any favors by undervaluing their tickets and creating shortages for those who wish to attend the concert more urgently than someone who doesn't.

Restriction of supply isn't as straightforward here as it seems. The total number of tickets is already restricted by seats in the venue. Ideally, these tickets should all be auctioned off individually by the venue, but that's not technically feasible. But if they were, they'd sell for exactly the same price as the scalper sells them for--actual market value! The price paid and the amount of profit would be identical, the only variable being who gets it.

No one can be preyed upon in a voluntary exchange (assuming no outright fraud). Can't happen, it's axiomatically false. I value the tickets more than the money and the scalper values the money more than the tickets. Both parties are better off than they were before the exchange. These are apodictically true statements that apply to all market exchanges (again, assuming no force or fraud).

And what about the scalpers who are forced to sell their tickets for less than face value? It happens all the time. That allows people who couldn't afford the tickets at face value to now be able to attend. Venues never discount tickets below face value, so the only scenario where that's possible is when the scalper is involved. It works both ways.

Now, I'm not saying these are particularly noble individuals in the same way I'd say a prostitute isn't exactly engaging in a noble activity but since when is creating value immoral?

Incidentally, economically speaking, as far a restricting output in a market, only cartels or monopolies enforced by government laws can successfully restrict supply and raise prices above the equilibrium price. Save for those types of laws, attempting that with a production good will simply create profit opportunities for competitors to undercut them.

[ayepatz]

It's certainly an interesting moral and ethical debate, and how strongly people feel says much about their character.

What I find interesting is that nobody is offering a solution, perhaps because any measures that can be taken legally will have no effect on a black market?

Fair or not, legal or not, it happens and will always happen. Why get so worked about about something that will never change?

[Scrubber]

It's certainly an interesting moral and ethical debate, and how strongly people feel says much about their character.

What I find interesting is that nobody is offering a solution, perhaps because any measures that can be taken legally will have no effect on a black market?

Fair or not, legal or not, it happens and will always happen. Why get so worked about about something that will never change?

Agreed. While I'm pretty new to the cigar community I can see that "flipping" is pretty prevalent.

I have no issue with anyone making a buck unless they deceive or rob people which I don't think happens too often. If everyone voluntarily agrees to the transaction then good luck to them.

Just as NSX said, it simply comes down to supply and demand. I take no issue with it at all.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[suggs]

I've enjoyed this thread a lot and, while I'm very bothered by the supposed amorality/neutrality of market logics, I'll only discuss what I take to be a common moral thread here. (Note that a lot of these points have already been discussed...but I'm just trying to summarize what I see as being the main ethical concerns.)

The single biggest difference of opinions I see concerns something along the lines of individual market choices conflicting with something like communal virtues--my private dealings are my private dealings v. what it means to be a "BOTL." I think both sides have their merits and problems, but it would seem that both positions can roughly be broken-down as follows:

Group

1.) There are at least *some* virtues/values that cigar communities hold--some idea of "BOTL-ness."

2.) Whatever the virtues/values in (1) are, scalping and/or gouging are not one of them.

3.) Therefore, the community has a stake in the marketplace transactions of its members.

Individual

1.) The choices that buyer and seller make in their transactions, unless faulty in some way (coercive, manipulative, etc.), should be acceptable.

2.) By "acceptable," I mean the choice in (1) either conforms to the rules of the community, or at the very least does not violate them.

3.) If (1) and (2) are true, the community/individual claiming to represent the community is not justified in its disapproval of (1).

For the record, I think invoking the supposed idea of "BOTL-ness" is often well-intended, but oftentimes individuals usurp the authority of the group/community and claim to speak for everyone (as a self-appointed policeman) or as if their idea of "BOTL-ness" is somehow more correct. Also, as forgop and a few others have said, I really don't see how people can object to "gauging" a luxury product.

TL;DR: Unless someone's being a douchebag, there are more important things to worry about.

[wabashcr]

I'm not sure you're theory here makes any sense. If the flippers are offering the pieces at high prices wouldn't that be because demand is high? Hence high prices? Prices rise in the face of rising demand. The flippers have nothing to do with this. Your theory is that due to increasing scarcity, demand declines eventually? There's no such theory in economics. There must necessarily be another explanation, like people just got sick of them--it was a fad. Simply put, economics dictates that demand cannot decline due to increasing scarcity. Exactly the opposite. If demand declines, it's for exogenous reasons.

You should research price elasticity of demand. A tight supply leading to higher prices for highly elastic items (like luxury goods) leads to, yes, decreased demand.

You're trying to selectively apply very basic free market economic principles of supply and demand to an imperfect market with barriers, restrictions and imperfect information. When you study economics, you learn pretty quickly that there are no truly free markets. There are myriad variables you have to account for that completely flip the script. No business or enterprising individual wants a truly free market, despite what they say. Nobody makes money in a truly free market.

Arbitrage is not a virtue. In many cases, it completely ignores the intention of the initial supplier, at which point it can absolutely be an immoral practice. Yes, ultimately the supplier priced their commodity lower than a free market equilibrium would dictate. But there are many different reasons for that. Sometimes they don't know or care. Other times maybe they want to entice consumers or extend a modicum of goodwill. The free market equilibrium is held up as a virtuous ideal, when in many cases, it's the opposite. Whether it's a luxury good or a basic necessity, if your justification is that you're selling something for what the market will bear, that's fine. But it completely ignores several other factors, including morality, which is completely separate from economics.

[Smallclub]

As a side note: IMHO each page added to this thread makes this cigar "indispensable" for people who would actually be very happy with a good cab of Epicure No2, at half the price of this italian RE…

[Fugu]

As a side note: IMHO each page added to this thread makes this cigar "indispensable" for people who would actually be very happy with a good cab of Epicure No2, at half the price of this italian RE…

Perhaps - but at least consensus of this thread seems to be: They'd do so voluntarily....

[Fugu]

I've enjoyed this thread a lot and, while I'm very bothered by the supposed amorality/neutrality of market logics, I'll only discuss what I take to be a common moral thread here. (Note that a lot of these points have already been discussed...but I'm just trying to summarize what I see as being the main ethical concerns.)

The single biggest difference of opinions I see concerns something along the lines of individual market choices conflicting with something like communal virtues--my private dealings are my private dealings v. what it means to be a "BOTL." I think both sides have their merits and problems, but it would seem that both positions can roughly be broken-down as follows:

I guess, in the end it all boils down to a concept called fairness - be it a personal friend, a BOTL or an unknown person.

[fabes]

I guess, in the end it all boils down to a concept called fairness - be it a personal friend, a BOTL or an unknown person.

And who determines "fairness"?

The moral/ethical dilema continues...

[Fugu]

Yes of course. The amount of fairness tolerated will strongly depend on the market....

That's why we keep turning in circles. There is no right or wrong. It is a thing that has to be made up by and between each single market actor.

[CigSid]

I'm a big believer in "Cigar Karma"

The good you do, gets repaid twofold.

The bad you do, gets repaid tenfold.

[CanuckSARTech]

Very interesting discussion.

Personally i am a free will type of guy. A sale is someone accepting money at a value a buyer is willing to pay for it. If i'm not willing to pay then i wont! I'm an adult i can make my own decisions. For us cigar friends and enthusiasts i would never on sell something at a marked up price. I would sell with whatever it costs me for postage and taxes and what not, sure, but no more than that. The situation i will talk about below, i have never been in that situation and i am not sure what i would do to be honest.

I have a question about the morality of marking up cigars. People are saying in here the biggest problem they have with marking up is it's not "in the the spirit" of a BOTL. I can understand that. My question to you guys though is this, are you happy if a BOTL sells cigars at a mark up to non "Brothers"?

What i mean is, does morality only apply to friends/people who share the same interest? Would people be happy if i sold a box at a marked up price to some rich guy who wasn't a cigar enthusiast like we are, and was just a rich snob who wanted a cigar for the bling? Or better yet, if i sold a box at a marked up price to a businessman who then will go on to sell it at an auction? Would it sit fine with you guys if that was the case?

I'm curious to find out the psychology behind our moral values

That's a buyers perspective. Whats your perspective if you were the seller?

I had something similar on here, with selling Hotel Nacional ashtrays.

I sell them on eBay when I have them. Anywhere from $340 up to $435 USD I've got for them.

A while back, I offered three of them in the trading room. My cost down in Cuba ranged ($15 to $34 CUC), as they were 3 different sizes. I told people that, as I was doing it solely that way for the BOTL community on here, we were gonna factor in the exchange and round up for my costs (exchange loss, luggage space, etc.) - $40 to $60 CAD or so. Told them to put valuation on it at that, and send me what THEY thought would be a fair trade in cigars, valued out at whatever online prices they bought them for. *** for tat. Shipping was relatively same, as I shipped within North America.

With this, I also offered to help out a few Aussies and other buddies known on here, with sourcing to get some for them.

And, just in case some were overly generous with me due to the VERY amicable valuations, I was sure to include a couple of very nice Cuban custom sticks as an added little surprise, to "break in" their new Cuban ashtray.

So, that's doing it the BOTL way.

However, lots quote "BOTL", while acting completely contrary to it in SOOOOOOOOOOO many other measures. A BOTL is not one who joins on here 3 years ago, with 7 posts in total, and then messages you out of the blue to request a "BOTL" favour in getting something. Or who you haven't met personally, or haven't done a trade with someone, and yet then messaging them out of the blue to request a "BOTL" price or assistance with something.

[CanuckSARTech]

Definitely. When I think of flippers, I'm thinking more of rare/HTF Fuentes, Tat limited releases, etc. I'm talking about situations where the flippers step in either through early or other special access and buy up everything, only to turn around and sell them at >100% markups. That's what I find to be immoral. Those boxes would all sell out just fine on their own. There's no argument to be made that these flippers are providing any kind of service. They're just using their access to gouge...

See, THAT is what "drives me MAD", but I don't think it's "immoral".

And even then, it's not even at the flippers.

When I was down in Havana in November, a bunch of the bigger name retailers and such had used their "special access" to get in and buy up **** tons of the Diplomaticos RE Cuba. Hell, I MYSELF was gonna try and get 10 or 12 boxes - at least 4 or 5 for me personally, and the rest to resell, IF I didn't like them for myself, and IF the market warranted it with the increase in valuation.

But, I didn't even have an opportunity to buy myself any, nor any for some Canadian friends.

And it was because Habanos S.A. and/or the LCDH stores in Havana made these deals with the various overseas vendors and allowed them all to be scooped up.

I was mad that things weren't set up in Cuba to at least make sure they weren't all being scooped up by outside persons, and that they didn't have any effing boxes available for those of us enthusiasts who made the effort to be down there for the Encuentros Partagas.

Pissed? Yes.

Immoral? No.

[wabashcr]

See, THAT is what "drives me MAD", but I don't think it's "immoral".

And even then, it's not even at the flippers.

When I was down in Havana in November, a bunch of the bigger name retailers and such had used their "special access" to get in and buy up **** tons of the Diplomaticos RE Cuba. Hell, I MYSELF was gonna try and get 10 or 12 boxes - at least 4 or 5 for me personally, and the rest to resell, IF I didn't like them for myself, and IF the market warranted it with the increase in valuation.

But, I didn't even have an opportunity to buy myself any, nor any for some Canadian friends.

And it was because Habanos S.A. and/or the LCDH stores in Havana made these deals with the various overseas vendors and allowed them all to be scooped up.

I was mad that things weren't set up in Cuba to at least make sure they weren't all being scooped up by outside persons, and that they didn't have any effing boxes available for those of us enthusiasts who made the effort to be down there for the Encuentros Partagas.

Pissed? Yes.

Immoral? No.

How would you have felt if (hypothetically of course) the people who used their connections to buy up all those boxes were waiting just outside all the LCDHs reselling them at 2 or 3 times what they had just paid for them, and that was their sole reason for buying? To me that's immoral.

[Puros Y Vino]

However, lots quote "BOTL", while acting completely contrary to it in SOOOOOOOOOOO many other measures. A BOTL is not one who joins on here 3 years ago, with 7 posts in total, and then messages you out of the blue to request a "BOTL" favour in getting something. Or who you haven't met personally, or haven't done a trade with someone, and yet then messaging them out of the blue to request a "BOTL" price or assistance with something.

I'd be very surprised if people on this forum or any other don't take those post counts & date joined metrics into account when they receive a message for a trade/favour, etc. . Many believe it speaks volumes. But I am sure, the flipside has happened too.

I think what irks people about "flipping" is when a "BOTL" snags up something coveted in volume and then offers it up for sale with a nice markup vs organizing a group buy to "spread the love" at cost.