fsn4dN69ey

We've let people rent on and off - the issue with renting is there's not much we can do scalably about verifying missing components, rules, good working condition (when non-board game people are running the store) - I charge about $10/wk for a game rented but it's definitely not a service we advertise actively.

I opened a board game/trading card store in May. We host events and sell products. Takes up a lot of my time but ultimately it's a passion project that actually makes money.

There's a certain charm to doing things in person. Same reason as to why some people prefer film photography when digital exists - traveling in person when google maps exists, reading books when movies exist. It's just a different medium of interaction. I personally enjoy it (heavy board games) but totally understand why others don't.

You can basically think of insects like this as organic ASICs. Input in, output out. It's a biological circuit that just has a raw response that's hardcoded in. Kind of like asking how does a computer know to do "MOV". It's baked in to the circuit. Do trial and error trillions of times and some of the circuits end up functioning and survive.

In total, for a 15-year old cat, I have spent $8,000+ USD. He plays a large emotional part in my life and I don't think I would spare any expenses given the opportunity. It is worth it.

Thanks! Glad to see someone else with similar experiences. The other issue I think people are overlooking is... 20 years ago you would present to your local, low-cost veterinarian, and they wouldn't know what the issue was (or they knew and couldnt treat it), and your animal would just die.

Now we have a ton more information, a ton more training, and an issue now that would be game-ending prior is now treatable, but it comes at a cost. We see the same patterns in human medicine too. A lot of it has to do with demographics and cultural shifts in my opinion, as well as the supply/demand factor of trained practitioners.

Unfortunately, I think I'm in that boat. Truly, I appreciate the discourse.

However, whether or not that's what people want, that's the reality. Next time you get a medical charge, even with insurance, ask for an itemized bill. Compare the bill you receive to the one you receive when you tell them "I'm paying with cash". When I pay cash with a third party provider, they "magically" reduce the amount I owe by orders of magnitude, even for simple bloodwork (United States, major metropolitan area).

Again, in good faith, what am I supposed to expect when I hear regulation in animal medicine? People like my partner are studying and training for years to do this work. People are leasing or buying real estate for these facilities.

They are buying equipment, they are hiring trained surgeons, nurses, and practitioners who have been committing at minimum a decade of their life for this - what am I supposed to expect with "calls for regulation" a la human medicine style (the only comparison we have), especially when prices are ACTUALLY competitive, as I believe the human medicine market should be?

I can be convinced of any position, but it has to make sense. What prices or charges, even with private equity-funded veterinary firms, do you consider egregious and need a non-opt-outable mandatory third party oversight for? Has there been a good or a service you feel was only available at a specific provider that they gouged you on? Again, not being aggressive, just genuinely curious.

Disclaimer: My partner works as a small animal surgeon, and I'm honestly appalled by seeing some of the comments asking for more government intervention in here.

Private equity scooping up veterinary practices makes sense - it's a good investment. It's the same way PE firms will pool together a bunch of discrete dentist offices. I see many posters in here talking about how it's "rent-seeking" behavior, but frankly, these services are in demand and consolidating them is an increase in market efficiency. It's still good business to open up new clinics, even if the end goal is getting bought out (the standard practice for 95%+ of companies for which everyone here works for or is the beneficiary of).

If people are willing to spend more, then nothing really changed. If anything, goods and services were mispriced beforehand. If they raise the prices too high, nobody can afford the vet services and they will go out of business. If they make prices too low, we end up in a UK-style NHS situation where your dog's cancer is in line to get treated 8 months after they die, and they go out of business. Prices going up is natural for a restricted supply of extremely skilled labor (yes, you still need surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses, drugs, human-tier equipment) and growing demand for the services (people having more pets in lieu of children in western countries). People were getting "better deals" before and are now being priced appropriately.

A big trend here is the increase in desire to spend on pets, particularly in the US, the richest country in the world. Yes, consolidation is one part of it, but we have to look at demographic trends as well. More and more people are spending more and more money on pets (in lieu of children). And yet, the increase in supply of skilled veterinarians has not increased nearly as much. Obviously, investment firms need their cut, but prices go up while owned by an investment firm does not make it evil, nor does it not make sense or outrageous. What might actually be considered outrageous around here is spending $20k on surgery for a domestic pet (common occurence as far as I can tell in a metropolitan area).

Lastly - there's actually a competitive healthcare market here! I have enjoyed being able to peek behind the curtain and look at what procedures of this scale should really cost, e.g. we still need the same training, people, equipment, and time relative to human medicine (arguably with a much lower tolerance of risk), but the prices are...... reasonable. $10-20k for a crazy surgery would be highly affordable for a human, and these PE firms are actually competing with each other for clients for these expensive procedures. It makes me wish for a similar competitive pricing landscape for humans - even if they are PE owned.

The last thing anyone needs when caring for their pet is a government bureaucrat handing out human-medicine style hospital monopolies to a "partnered provider" knighted by the government which will force a 100x billing charge to bill the govt and make it illegal to not have pet insurance while driving your premiums up 100x over the next 30 years.

skipping succession episodes is insane, i'm sorry. it had a niche following but the entire series is a work of art in every aspect. i don't think i can point to a single episode that was "wasted".

This is crazy because I kept getting ads like this for MDMA (after checking the next IG story), I finally got tired of it and reported one, they actually manually reviewed it and DENIED the report, so I re-reported and they denied it again. Definitely enabling sales.

I get that, but can't I just go to TCGPlayer and click the first category - Magic, and browse the same goods in a more liquid market?

What I'm trying to say is what sets you guys apart, or why would I as a seller (or buyer) prefer to use Mana Pool over TCG?

Is it commission? I'll say from personal experience that 10% commission (or 10.25% or whatever) is quite expensive as a seller. If the commission is the killer, are you hoping to capture more of the market from TCG for Magic? Is it sustainable to run a price war on commission?

Genuinely asking all of this btw, I do prefer the design here to tcg

It's clean, works well, great job! How does this compare to TCGPlayer on a fundamental level?

Yeah, makes sense, I was just running through my train of thought to eliminate all other possibilities. I agree with you.