Raffles VS. Auctions

thanatossg9

Watcher
Joined
Jan 12, 2001
Messages
50
Just a thought for the more modestly incomed con-goers. Raffles may actually be a tad more fair when it comes to "private" events with the actors.....and yes, I have long since outgrown the need for the universe to be fair. However, each year my friends and I watch as the same people get to go on the 'cool' trips and events merely because their disposable income is apparently an astronomical amount.:eek:
While I have nothing against paying $2300 US (and thereby supporting a worthy charity) to spend a bit of time with JR and Amanda, a price that high is guaranteeing that anyone with a modest income ain't got a chance.
Guess I'll have to start saving now if I hope to get in on any of the 'pay-per' events:rolleyes:
 
I find myself in agreement. Although whilst my credit card would uphold any such payment, I wouldn't, on principle, spend that amount of money in return for anything. I believe in true charity.

1. generous actions or donations to aid the poor, ill, or helpless: to devote one's life to charity.
2. something given to a person or persons in need; alms: She asked for work, not charity.
3. a charitable act or work.
4. a charitable fund, foundation, or institution: He left his estate to a charity.
5. benevolent feeling, esp. toward those in need or in disfavor: She looked so poor that we fed her out of charity.
6. leniency in judging others; forbearance: She was inclined to view our selfish behavior with charity.

In none of the dictionary definitions above does it state that by giving to someone in need, you should be expecting something in return.

Therefore, I would be quite prepared to give a sum to an actual charity (such as Cystic Fibrosis), but not to get the lunch with either JR or Amanda. Then it isn't charity. Not per se. It's the paying out of an inordinately and often quite inaffordable large sum of money to spend time with people who quite honestly aren't that important in the scheme of things, because of the added self gratification of spending a short period of time with them. The charity merely receives the by-blow of this and whilst I'm sure they're not complaining, it seems to me that by expecting something in return for your 'charitable donation' you are actually negating the whole idea of charity in the first place.

If one is that desperate to spend some time with a bunch of people who just appear on your TV screen and grace everyone with their presence at a convention (where they do get paid a fee for appearing anyway), then I think they definitely need to rethink their life's priorities.

$2,300 for a lunch with JR and Amanda so one can kid oneself that they could well just be one's buddies? Simply not worth it. These folk have their own circles of real close friends, they're unlikely to think of you as anyone other than someone who was prepared to pay to have lunch with them, and lunch is just a meal.

Having said all that, I do realise that there are many people to whom this sort of occasion would be the high point in their lives and at the end of the day the idea of auctioning anything off infers that he/she who has the deepest pockets will always win. Unfair? Yes definitely, but whether or not raffling a lunch with 'pseudo celebrities' would be feasible given the British Columbian gaming laws, is another question and I think you might find that this is where your idea comes a cropper.
 
raffles vrs auctions

Raffles fall under a totally different set of law [BC Gaming commission] than auctions and are much more complex to set up and administer.

Auctions can be much more flexable and spur of the moment and don't require nearly all the legal pre-requirements, etc.

Believe me... we had a lot of legal hoops to jump through just to get the '65 Roses' quilt set up as a raffle. Trying to do too many of them would require a *lot* of time and work and just may not be possible in the time allowed, etc.

And since the BC Gaming commission *does* swing by the con and check on what we're doing, no one is gonna take the risk and not follow every single letter of the law.

Rowan
 
I don't see anything wrong with someone bidding on whatever amount they so choose, especially if that is what they want to do. I find it very rude that anyone would criticize what someone else does or to even speculate their motives.
 
Anni....Always a pleasure to hear from you! I know I can usually depend on you to be the cool head of reason in any discussion ;)
As for the gaming laws.....had no idea, but it does put an interesting spin on my thought. I'll have to think a bit more on the subject:cool:. I most definitely do not want anyone breaking the law for a convention; it's just not worth it.
kmg.....may I suggest that you read my post again? I am CLEARLY not critisizing people for bidding whatever they see fit to bid on an auction. By all means, if you have the money spend it! I am merely pointing out that certain auctions become so popular that modestly incomed people are priced right out of bidding(and winning).
:)evil:the anarchist in me requires that I now point out that those who have money are rewarded and those who don't have money are penalized :evil:)
 
I have a feeling kmg might have been replying to my posting rather than yours Thanatoss! However, I could be wrong.

If this is the case, then I still stand exactly by my statement and do not amend it in any way. Personally I don't feel it's charity to give something and expect something back. I give to charity. I make regular donations to the People's Dispensary for Sick Animals, RSPCA, Cancer Research (because I am a sufferer although in remission), National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children and a society which deal with Autistics (my son suffers from Aspergers Syndrome, which is high functioning autism). I give money without any expectation whatsoever of receiving anything in return and I give it willingly.

However, if people do wish to use their money in order to gain something along with supporting a deserving cause, then that is their decision only without a doubt. Personally it would make me feel bad to think I was getting something out of it, but that's just me. I'm the one who has to live with my conscience.

At the end of the day, no matter what anyone says, it's still the case of 'he who hath the deepest pockets wins the prize' - if in fact you view it as a prize. I'm sure there are many who would think that lunch with a couple of actors is. I had dinner (along with a whole heap of other people) with Anthony Hopkins and he really is a celebrity, but I still wouldn't have paid for a ticket to do that even if the money went to all of the above charities. (I was invited by my boss to attend after a private screening of a movie in Beverly Hills).

I'd rather just give to the charity, period.

These are just my feelings of course and no one has to think like me or agree with me.



:cool:
 
Once again, I find myself agreeing with you Anni! Maybe I'll just start the thread and then sit back and let you argue my position for me in the future....;). You are so much more eloquent than I:D
 
Just had another thought.....should there be a rule of some kind that requires people to specify exactly to whom they are posting their reply? :rolly2:
Discuss among yourselves.
 
Thanatoss posted
Just had another thought.....should there be a rule of some kind that requires people to specify exactly to whom they are posting their reply?

Hee! This is what's normally supposed to happen. You quote the bit from the posting you're answering with the name of the person who posted. Then folk know exactly who is being addressed. I agree it's confusing especially when someone just posts an offhand reply and doesn't indicate who they're replying to!

:D :D
 
The auctions and such are a bit of a symbiotic relationship. By this i mean, well i think it's safe to say that out of the roughly 500 con attendees, maybe 10% were capable of or willing to accept the debt of betting big. these were teh same folks i've recognized from past years betting big and winning.

I know i've went to the auctions all 3 years and am usually amazed that someone is willing to shell out 2400 for a crystal skull or 1200 for a jacket worn by and signed by rda. I'm certainly not saying these folks were wrong, hey, it's their money, they can spend it however they want.

I do know however, that there are a lot of us that didn't bet or spend big. for the most part, all we spent was our ticket price $210. Now take 210 x 500 and you get 105,000. and out of that money has to come the cost of renting the rooms at the best western, i would imagine the av equipment, paying for the guests (yeah, they don't just come out of the goodness of thier hearts, they get paid) paying for the out of town guests' rooms, the meals for the guests while theyre there and tons of other expenses.

i would imagine that doesn't leave a whole heck of a lot as 'profit' to get turned over to make a wish. that's where the auction comes in. (and the pictures with the actors. I got a pic taken with 3 people, that's $36 which had to pay for the photographer's time, film and developing)

Make a wish gets their money from the studio donating auction items, which they auction off and give the 'profit' to the charity. Basically, it's those fifty odd folks that can afford the auction items that makes up a lot of the money donated to make a wish.
but they can't hold a con for only those folks, they hold it for all of us...so we other 90% help pay the way and have the auction for that 10% yet if it wasn't for that 10%, they'd have no reason for the rest of us since even at 210 a piece, we're barely making enough money to pay the bills.

As to a raffle, well, yes, canada is a wee bit strict <G> but also....i've been to raffles where the same person got her name drawn out 5 times and others never even had thiers pulled out. it's all a matter of some being more lucky than others, and the simple fact that those that have more disposable income can buy 100 tickets as opposed to the 10 i could afford. and even while a raffle has stricter rules, it still wouldn't make as much money as an auction does.

and at the end of the day, making money for the charity is what it's all about. I honestly believe if Gatecon was a for profit venture, they'd have nowhere near the support and backing from the studios that they have. Bridge personally supports make a wish (they've granted 2 wishes that i personally know about and i'm sure there are more that i've never heard about) and that's one reason, IMHO, that they support gatecon as generously as they do.

they literally donated thousands of dollars of props to the auction, plus thier time. the sunday tour babysitters....they came in on their own time to babysit us so we could see the studio.

I'll agree with you, personally i think some of the prices paid for the auction items was exhorbitant, but like i said, it ain't my money. it's thiers and thiers to spend however they wish. One nice thing is that a charity benefits.

this year i was hoping to get me a prop, I had a couple of hundreddollars and had budgeted it....then most things went for above that so, i brought my money home with me. cest le vie

I know of at least a couple folks that were planning to donate thier props back to the auction to go again next year.

No matter how you work it, there will always be a person that has more cash or willingness to accept debt than you do and that person is more likely to get something they want. tis the way of life.

(this is just one person's opinion, i'm not affiliated with the con in any way other than going to it the past 3 years)
 
surely everyone gains...

I don't say much usually on the notice boreds but thought that I'd say something. Just before gatcon last year I found out I was to be made redundant. So I went along to canada, gatecon and spent what was too much money not knowing what was going to happen upon my return to the UK.

I've still not found the right role and am still looking. But, I had a fantastic time at gatecon and the auction was a fantastic evening. I did bid on an item and won it. I collect the prints or concept art. And have now 13 official prints some signed.

But my point is the event is fun in itself. Charities, the auction winners and the guys watching all gain.

I missed gatecon this year for that very reason and can't wait until some people start putting up their photos and hopefully get a copy of the video to make myself feel much better :D

Besides if you really want to meet the actors do what I did and do some volunteering. I had a fantastic time talking to Alexis anf don when helping out with the photos. Love to do it again too!!
 
Question

Are the prices that people are posting the usual final bids? Depending on what is being auctioned off, what are the "usual" prices? Is there a dramatic difference in prices between clothing and props? I'm assuming the prices go up especially when there is an actor/actress/crew member involved such as dinner with so and so...

so, yeah...just wondering
=*philoSCIFI*=
 
Prices...

The prices seem to vary not only between clothing and props but between who's it was [actor vrs general piece] and signed and not signed. It's almost like a sliding scale.

I don't like generalities, but I think I can use a few in this case.

Clothing worn *&* signed by RDA or Michael Shanks usually goes high, accessories like hats are also higher than other hats and such. I've seen a 'complete costume set' [shirt, pants, and t-shirt, sometimes a hat] go for over $1000 for RDA. Michael's 'signed boonie hat' went for something like $500 last year and his director's chair from 'Absolute Power' went for more than that.

Things like concept art, etc tend to run in the lower figures, but we're still talking $100+, especially if it's signed. Props always do fairly well with things like a zat right up top and other items such as a piece of Nurtti's lab lower - in the $50 range, if I remember right from last year.

Studio items tend to go for more than fan donated items - perhaps the mystique involved with having something that was actually filmed.

Each year Becky's 'Quote Quilts' have gone for at least $1000, making them the highest priced fan donated item that I know of at GateCon, however a cast jacket signed by all the cast and given to QS at the SehkParty, she turned around and donated and it was auctioned off that night for a wonderful $1,600 with all the money going to the Canadian Cystic Fibrosis Foundation.

Stargate fans care... and it shows! ;)

Rowan
 
Wow. That's good to know (not only the money aspect, but the caring fans as well). :) Stargate fans seem very caring, as well as the cast and crew of the show itself. It definitly shows with the stories and pictures from personal experiences that are brought back to the world of fantasy/leisure in reality (does that make sense? :lol: ) :) Anyway, thanks for the 411 on prices.
 
Re: Prices...

Originally posted by Rowan
Stargate fans care... and it shows! ;)

Rowan

No, no, no, Rowan -- it's 'Stargate cans fare! ;)

(little joke - osmosis - from SP4 - uh, and the rest of the con)



But, seriously, the items are donated to Gatecon and do generally fetch high prices. It probably doesn't hurt that the actors hanging around and 'working' the auction play with everything, wear items, talk about them, dance in them, you name it --

Anyone remember Amanda screaming "Piercing blue eyes in the darkness!" over and over about a painting of Daniel last year? That was hilarious!

This year we had Jacqueline, JR and Colin dancing on the box in the middle of the floor. Then Jacqueline and Alex later - those were pretty good too!
 
sometimes it varies on the folks doing the auction too. this year i noticed that JR would pick something and they'd really work to drive up the price, and i mean really, really work, spending 10-15 + minutes on it...then there would be another item and it'd be sold in just a few minutes.

I think it might be a way to try and keep things in various price ranges for everyone
 
Originally posted by Anni
I have a feeling kmg might have been replying to my posting rather than yours Thanatoss! However, I could be wrong.

These are just my feelings of course and no one has to think like me or agree with me.:cool:

Although my remarks were more in general, it was directed more towards your remarks. If someone gets pleasure from attending a luncheon for whatever reason and are willing to bid/spend money to do so, that's their business.

Mine is to attend Gatecon and just have fun whether there's guests or not. It is a place where I can share my interests on a television show that I love and where me and others who love the show can recite dialogue/scenes/plots and know exactly what we are talking about. :p
 
Although my remarks were more in general, it was directed more towards your remarks.

Of course and you are entitled to your opinion as I am mine. The whole reason for having forums like this is so we can put forward our opinions and perhaps discuss them. You may not agree with me. I personally was not telling anyone they had to think or feel like me on this issue, although there is a tendency for posters to fly off the handle without realising that what is stated is *just* someone's opinion.

The issue wasn't about people attending Gatecon, although I must admit to extreme puzzlement that people would spend such a lot of money every year to do the same thing when there are so many wonderful things in this world to see. Again, this is *just* my opinion and not a criticism. If folk want to take it that way, I can't stop them, however they may need to realise that I am by no means telling them what they should be doing. I am just giving my thoughts and opinion. Any perception anyone has of my statements is purely *their* perception and therefore *their* issue, not mine. Therefore they need to deal with it.

I speak as I find. Folk on this forum will tell you that I am blunt and speak openly without any kind of nastiness, flaming or ulterior motives, but that's just my way. Just as I have to accept how others are, then they must also accept who I am.

The actual issue was Thanatoss pointing out that auctioning something was going to mean that the same people with large credit limits or deep pockets were always going to win what might seem like the most attractive 'prizes'. And no matter what anyone else has stated since, this is still the unassailable fact of the matter. The same folk who bid high will always get whatever 'goodies' are on offer. Whether or they are worth it or not and whether they are is always going to be in the eye of the beholder.

However, as Rowan has so succinctly and correctly pointed out, the logistics of organising something like a raffle which then comes under the BC gaming laws is prohibitive, so auctions it has to be.

To me (and I *stress* to me), it doesn't matter whether the auction items are re-presented for auction or what, my views on charity and how it's given stand firm. I would rather write a cheque to Cystic Fibrosis than purchase any auction article. However, I suppose the entertainment value of having the actors perform like a proverbial 'troupe of performing animals' and their subsequent antics may seem like a lot of fun. It doesn't do anything for me personally, but I can see how people would enjoy it. My idea of fun is obviously different to theirs. It would be an immensely tedious world if we all thought the same way.

:cool:
 

Similar threads


Back
Top