C@(% blocking in the EE - Page 2

General » General Discussion

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - C@(% blocking in the EE (Page 2 of 3)

Posted: 3/6/2010 1:32:21 PM EDT

[#1]

Could be worse, someone posting I'll take it then doesn't

Posted: 3/6/2010 1:33:36 PM EDT

[#2]

I really don't see the problem.

Granted, I wouldn't do it and it's a tad shady but it's the seller's product, and the buyers money. If no other deals have been made then the seller should be able to choose who buys and who doesn't.

Posted: 3/6/2010 1:37:02 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If I were the seller, I'd still make the deal with the first "I'll take it" that was posted. The EE is not an auction.

I agree. During the height of the scare, I was selling off some stuff to fund other projects. I priced most of my ammo well below the going rate at the time, because I wasn't looking to be accused of "price gouging" and wanted to make a quick sale. It seemed that several times I had quite a few potential buyers all trying to get in really quick and a few times the 3rd and 4th guys in line did try to offer me more. I didn't think taking their offers would be ethical even though some of them came within seconds of each other.

I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as the decision to sell that way is yours and yours alone. It's your property, after all.

I don't want to see an EE, where sellers are being told that they must take the highest bid (like an auction site), nor do I wish to see an EE where they must sell to the first "I'll take it".

The seller should retain the right to control the disposition of his property, as he sees fit. After all, until money exchanges hands, he owns it - not you or I.

I would respectfully disagree.

OFFER:

Here is something for sale. I want $***.** for it.

RESPONSE:

I'll take it.

OR, ALTERNATIVELY:

Deal!

It is a deal at the moment it is posted. Sounds like a theme for one of those commercials where the slick dick screws with the little kids.

Not a deal until the seller accepts the buyers offer, be it at full price or lower.

Posted: 3/6/2010 1:38:04 PM EDT

[#4]

Post a link. I want to know who the jackass is!

Posted: 3/6/2010 1:40:52 PM EDT

[#5]

Perhaps I'm under the mistaken impression that if one posts "I'll take it." and backs out he/she can be reprimanded?

If this is the case, I see the door swinging the same way for someone wanting to sell at a certain price and then backing out after the guy posts the "I'll take it.". Just doesn't seem right for it to be a one way street like that.

Posted: 3/6/2010 1:45:43 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Perhaps I'm under the mistaken impression that if one posts "I'll take it." and backs out he/she can be reprimanded?

If this is the case, I see the door swinging the same way for someone wanting to sell at a certain price and then backing out after the guy posts the "I'll take it.". Just doesn't seem right for it to be a one way street like that.

Let's say hypothetically that I don't like you.

I have something for sale and you want to buy it. I don't want to sell it to you because I don't like you so I go to the next guy. As the buyer you have the first option of buying something from me so I get the 2nd option.

Another one:

I have a gun for sale and you say that you'll take it but you will only pay using a western union money order and you want me to have it shipped from my dealer to your dealer in a purple box. Another guy says he'll take it and he'll pay cash and come pick it up. I'm going to sell it to guy #2 100% of the time.

We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.

Posted: 3/6/2010 1:50:32 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
If I were the seller, I'd still make the deal with the first "I'll take it" that was posted. The EE is not an auction.

I was the first "I will take it" on a upper in the EE. and the dude sold it to a guy that said he would take a half hour after I did. I complained and got no where. I brought it up here in GD and I was widely denounced as anti capitalist commie scum.

Posted: 3/6/2010 1:53:32 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If I were the seller, I'd still make the deal with the first "I'll take it" that was posted. The EE is not an auction.

I was the first "I will take it" on a upper in the EE. and the dude sold it to a guy that said he would take a half hour after I did. I complained and got no where. I brought it up here in GD and I was widely denounced as anti capitalist commie scum.

"I'll take it"s and time stamps only matter if the seller is dumb enough to stipulate that in the ad.

Posted: 3/6/2010 1:55:50 PM EDT

[#9]

Capitalism vs. honor...hmmm. I think Arfcom may implode on itself over this dilemma.

Posted: 3/6/2010 2:01:51 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Capitalism vs. honor...hmmm. I think Arfcom may implode on itself over this dilemma.

It's only a question of honor if the seller stipulates that his item goes to the first "I'll take it" or a message based on time stamp.

Posted: 3/6/2010 2:02:47 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
There should be someone in charge of how much he can sell it for, you know spreading the wealth.

Note that I didn't say anything about the price that the seller would put on the goods he is selling. My point is that man's word is his bond.

The way it sounds, there is a good % of people around here I don't care to deal with. You say that you're going to do something and another takes you up on it. Then you renege on what you previously committed to do since you want to strike another deal. The word that was used when I was grew up for that type of behavior is 'Lying'.

Definition of 'Renege'.
Pronunciation: \ri-ˈneg also -ˈnāg, -ˈnig; rē-
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): re·neged; re·neg·ing
Etymology: Medieval Latin renegare
Date: 1548

transitive verb : deny, renounceintransitive verb
1 obsolete : to make a denial
2 : revoke
3 : to go back on a promise or commitment

— re·neg·er noun

Posted: 3/6/2010 2:03:11 PM EDT

[#12]

Meh, don't care. Seller can sell to any willing buyer he wants. Buyers can make any offer the want. All that matters is that the seller and the buyer agree on the price and make the deal in good faith. Being butthurt because you didn't get what you wanted at an under market price is pretty weak.

The only thing I could buy into would be if the seller accepted and offer and then renigged when a better offer came along. Until you have offer AND acceptance, all is fair game.

Posted: 3/6/2010 2:03:17 PM EDT

[#13]

theres a bunch of people here that keep lists of people not to deal with (from people that condone theft, and other bullshit posts in GD)

so obviously if they say I"LL TAKE IT on someones listing, the seller is not going to deal with them.

Posted: 3/6/2010 2:04:33 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:

Quoted:
There should be someone in charge of how much he can sell it for, you know spreading the wealth.

Note that I didn't say anything about the price that the seller would put on the goods he is selling. My point is that man's word is his bond.

The way it sounds, there is a good % of people around here I don't care to deal with. You say that you're going to do something and another takes you up on it. Then you renege on what you previously committed to do since you want to strike another deal. The word that was used when I was grew up for that type of behavior is 'Lying'.

Definition of 'Renege'.
Pronunciation: \ri-ˈneg also -ˈnāg, -ˈnig; rē-
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): re·neged; re·neg·ing
Etymology: Medieval Latin renegare
Date: 1548

transitive verb : deny, renounceintransitive verb
1 obsolete : to make a denial
2 : revoke
3 : to go back on a promise or commitment

— re·neg·er noun

Here's where you're going wrong.

Until the buyer acknowledges to someone that "yes, I am selling to you", no deal has been made.

Posted: 3/6/2010 2:05:53 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Meh, don't care. Seller can sell to any willing buyer he wants. Buyers can make any offer the want. All that matters is that the seller and the buyer agree on the price and make the deal in good faith. Being butthurt because you didn't get what you wanted at an under market price is pretty weak.

The only thing I could buy into would be if the seller accepted and offer and then renigged when a better offer came along. Until you have offer AND acceptance, all is fair game.

+1

Posted: 3/6/2010 2:08:29 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Perhaps I'm under the mistaken impression that if one posts "I'll take it." and backs out he/she can be reprimanded?

If this is the case, I see the door swinging the same way for someone wanting to sell at a certain price and then backing out after the guy posts the "I'll take it.". Just doesn't seem right for it to be a one way street like that.

Let's say hypothetically that I don't like you.

I have something for sale and you want to buy it. I don't want to sell it to you because I don't like you so I go to the next guy. As the buyer you have the first option of buying something from me so I get the 2nd option.

Another one:

I have a gun for sale and you say that you'll take it but you will only pay using a western union money order and you want me to have it shipped from my dealer to your dealer in a purple box. Another guy says he'll take it and he'll pay cash and come pick it up. I'm going to sell it to guy #2 100% of the time.

We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.

While you make interesting arguments, you did not address whether or not the buyer can be reprimanded for stating "I'll take it.". I certainly see what you are saying though.

I guess the "I'll take it." stuff is general social code rather than an actual rule.

I would also put forth that capitalism and honor are not mutually exclusive. If anyone has read about Ayn Rand's views they will know that being an honest and forthright seller is one of they keys to a long term business model.

Posted: 3/6/2010 3:40:14 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:
There should be someone in charge of how much he can sell it for, you know spreading the wealth.

Note that I didn't say anything about the price that the seller would put on the goods he is selling. My point is that man's word is his bond.

The way it sounds, there is a good % of people around here I don't care to deal with. You say that you're going to do something and another takes you up on it. Then you renege on what you previously committed to do since you want to strike another deal. The word that was used when I was grew up for that type of behavior is 'Lying'.

Definition of 'Renege'.
Pronunciation: \ri-ˈneg also -ˈnāg, -ˈnig; rē-
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): re·neged; re·neg·ing
Etymology: Medieval Latin renegare
Date: 1548

transitive verb : deny, renounceintransitive verb
1 obsolete : to make a denial
2 : revoke
3 : to go back on a promise or commitment

— re·neg·er noun

Here's where you're going wrong.

Until the buyer acknowledges to someone that "yes, I am selling to you", no deal has been made.

Once you place an item for sale on a public board, you've inherently agreed to sale to whoever has the $$$ to pay for it. First come, first serve irrespective of race, color, or creed. I really wonder how you would react if a vendor did the same thing? The BFI ACR debacle readily comes to mind here.

The basic irreconcilable difference between us is that I accept and expect someone to do what they say that they're going to do while you think that everything is free game for the almighty dollar.

Posted: 3/6/2010 3:47:59 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

Once you place an item for sale on a public board, you've inherently agreed to sale to whoever has the $$$ to pay for it. First come, first serve irrespective of race, color, or creed. I really wonder how you would react if a vendor did the same thing? The BFI ACR debacle readily comes to mind here.

Most vendors reserve the right to refuse sevice to anyone.

If you listed a Barret for sale FTF in your state, and a sketchy guy named Achmend with a scraggly beard and a heavy middle eastern accent said he would take it then started asking what ammuntion would best go through an armored car or airplane, you wouldn't back out?

Posted: 3/6/2010 3:55:09 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:

While you make interesting arguments, you did not address whether or not the buyer can be reprimanded for stating "I'll take it.". I certainly see what you are saying though.
I guess the "I'll take it." stuff is general social code rather than an actual rule.
I would also put forth that capitalism and honor are not mutually exclusive. If anyone has read about Ayn Rand's views they will know that being an honest and forthright seller is one of they keys to a long term business model.

If the buyer says "I'll take it" then they are on the hook unless the seller decides not to sell to them. The buyer has already weighed his options and made a decision that they want to buy from this person so now the seller gets to decide if they want to sell to them or not.

What it boils down to is that the seller has a vested interest in the transaction while the buyer does not. If the buyer drags the seller along and ends up not buying then the seller could have possibly lost out selling the item to another person which makes them lose a possible sale. The buyer loses nothing if the transaction does not go through.

A seller can be honest and forthright while at the same time being particular on who they do business with. Many extremely successful businesses are both honest and forthright while being extremely particular on who they allow to purchase from them. The EE is no different.

Posted: 3/6/2010 4:01:39 PM EDT

[#20]

how would everyone feel if one buyer posts up that he will take the item, then backs out because 'no deal has been made'

Posted: 3/6/2010 5:19:15 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Once you place an item for sale on a public board, you've inherently agreed to sale to whoever has the $$$ to pay for it. First come, first serve irrespective of race, color, or creed. I really wonder how you would react if a vendor did the same thing? The BFI ACR debacle readily comes to mind here.

Most vendors reserve the right to refuse sevice to anyone. Oh, I forgot the 1960's "We reserve the right to refuse service" signs. OK, please post linkage to those site supporters that have this reservation posted. Ask Ed. Sr. if this is valid.

If you listed a Barret for sale FTF in your state, and a sketchy guy named Achmend with a scraggly beard and a heavy middle eastern accent said he would take it then started asking what ammuntion would best go through an armored car or airplane, you wouldn't back out? In this straw man argument, you know that the proper thing to do would be to notify the DHS/FBI/ATF so that they can get involved just in case 'Achmend' gets such a weapon from another source. Since you know this much information, you're just as culpable as the friends of Timothy McVeigh that didn't report his comments.

Posted: 3/8/2010 3:22:47 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:
There should be someone in charge of how much he can sell it for, you know spreading the wealth.

Note that I didn't say anything about the price that the seller would put on the goods he is selling. My point is that man's word is his bond.

The way it sounds, there is a good % of people around here I don't care to deal with. You say that you're going to do something and another takes you up on it. Then you renege on what you previously committed to do since you want to strike another deal. The word that was used when I was grew up for that type of behavior is 'Lying'.

Definition of 'Renege'.
Pronunciation: \ri-ˈneg also -ˈnāg, -ˈnig; rē-
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): re·neged; re·neg·ing
Etymology: Medieval Latin renegare
Date: 1548

transitive verb : deny, renounceintransitive verb
1 obsolete : to make a denial
2 : revoke
3 : to go back on a promise or commitment

— re·neg·er noun

Here's where you're going wrong.

Until the buyer acknowledges to someone that "yes, I am selling to you", no deal has been made.

Once you place an item for sale on a public board, you've inherently agreed to sale to whoever someone has the $$$ to pay for it. First come, first serve irrespective of race, color, or creed.

Fixed it for you. Where does it say "first come, first serve"? Only if you specify that in your ad is that the case. What if the first one to post "I'll take it" has negative feedback, but not enough to get him banned? I hope your "honor" forces you to deal with him and no one else, since that is what you are implying.

Hell, what is even the point of the feedback forum for the seller, if he's honor bound to deal with whoever can type an "I'll take it" before everyone else?

Posted: 3/8/2010 3:30:18 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If I were the seller, I'd still make the deal with the first "I'll take it" that was posted. The EE is not an auction.

I agree. During the height of the scare, I was selling off some stuff to fund other projects. I priced most of my ammo well below the going rate at the time, because I wasn't looking to be accused of "price gouging" and wanted to make a quick sale. It seemed that several times I had quite a few potential buyers all trying to get in really quick and a few times the 3rd and 4th guys in line did try to offer me more. I didn't think taking their offers would be ethical even though some of them came within seconds of each other.

I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as the decision to sell that way is yours and yours alone. It's your property, after all.

I don't want to see an EE, where sellers are being told that they must take the highest bid (like an auction site), nor do I wish to see an EE where they must sell to the first "I'll take it".

The seller should retain the right to control the disposition of his property, as he sees fit. After all, until money exchanges hands, he owns it - not you or I.

I would respectfully disagree.

OFFER:

Here is something for sale. I want $***.** for it.

RESPONSE:

I'll take it.

OR, ALTERNATIVELY:

Deal!

It is a deal at the moment it is posted. Sounds like a theme for one of those commercials where the slick dick screws with the little kids.

That's nonsense. As I just said, the EE rules don't say to post an "I'll take it". That's just a commonly used method on the EE.

What if someone already sent them an email or IM saying they would take it? Or what if the first "I'll take it" is posted by someone with one post, and you'd prefer to deal with someone who has a more established reputation, perhaps for a high dollar item?

It's the seller's discretion on who he wants to sell to. It's not a deal until both the buyer and seller acknowledge they are making the deal with one another.

ETA: I would never put in one of my ads the phrase, "First 'I'll take it' gets it". Why would I do that to myself? It's stupid.

Cocur... unless the seller specifically says 'first "I'll take it" gets it' or some such, it's not a deal until BOTH parties say it is. Up to that point, all is fair. However, once the deal is made, it's very bad form to withdraw. But I don;t see a problem with a guy trying to get in on the deal before he knows fro sure it's closed. I probably wouldn;t do it myself, but hey.....

Posted: 3/8/2010 3:38:15 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If I were the seller, I'd still make the deal with the first "I'll take it" that was posted. The EE is not an auction.

I agree. During the height of the scare, I was selling off some stuff to fund other projects. I priced most of my ammo well below the going rate at the time, because I wasn't looking to be accused of "price gouging" and wanted to make a quick sale. It seemed that several times I had quite a few potential buyers all trying to get in really quick and a few times the 3rd and 4th guys in line did try to offer me more. I didn't think taking their offers would be ethical even though some of them came within seconds of each other.

I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as the decision to sell that way is yours and yours alone. It's your property, after all.

I don't want to see an EE, where sellers are being told that they must take the highest bid (like an auction site), nor do I wish to see an EE where they must sell to the first "I'll take it".

The seller should retain the right to control the disposition of his property, as he sees fit. After all, until money exchanges hands, he owns it - not you or I.

I would respectfully disagree.

OFFER:

Here is something for sale. I want $***.** for it.

RESPONSE:

I'll take it.

OR, ALTERNATIVELY:

Deal!

It is a deal at the moment it is posted. Sounds like a theme for one of those commercials where the slick dick screws with the little kids.

Not a deal until the seller accepts the buyers offer, be it at full price or lower.

Correct.

An ad in the EE is an 'invitation to treat'. 'I'll take it' is an offer, and the seller agreeing is the acceptance.

A buyer should be free to ignore all replies and IMs until he finds someone with an avatar he likes, or a prime number for a post count.

Posted: 3/8/2010 4:08:33 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If the seller actually sold it to the "High bidder" as opposed to the first i'll take it, then he needs a "Timeout". The EE is "Not" an auction

I disagree. The only way he deserves a timeout, is if he made a deal with the first "I'll take it", then rescinded it when a better offer came along.

If he didn't welch on a deal, he's GTG in my book. And I suspect the EE mods see it the same way.

Right.

As far as I'm aware, there is no rule prohibiting a "bidding war" and. to be honest, I'm only surprised that it took this long to happen. If the seller agreed to a deal and then took the higher offer, there's a problem. If not, I don't think there is, under the current rules.

Understand I'm not commenting on the morals of it, just the legality of it.

ETA - NM, I see it IS covered.

If the guys takes the higher offer, he's in the wrong.

Posted: 3/8/2010 4:20:13 AM EDT

[#26]

Break the deal. Face the wheel.

Posted: 3/8/2010 4:21:41 AM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Perhaps I'm under the mistaken impression that if one posts "I'll take it." and backs out he/she can be reprimanded?

If this is the case, I see the door swinging the same way for someone wanting to sell at a certain price and then backing out after the guy posts the "I'll take it.". Just doesn't seem right for it to be a one way street like that.

Let's say hypothetically that I don't like you.

I have something for sale and you want to buy it. I don't want to sell it to you because I don't like you so I go to the next guy. As the buyer you have the first option of buying something from me so I get the 2nd option.

Another one:

I have a gun for sale and you say that you'll take it but you will only pay using a western union money order and you want me to have it shipped from my dealer to your dealer in a purple box. Another guy says he'll take it and he'll pay cash and come pick it up. I'm going to sell it to guy #2 100% of the time.

We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.

Good , valid points.

Quoted:
theres a bunch of people here that keep lists of people not to deal with (from people that condone theft, and other bullshit posts in GD)

so obviously if they say I"LL TAKE IT on someones listing, the seller is not going to deal with them.

Exactly . I wouldnt sell squat to a few people on here , regardless of hard up I was for the $$$

Likewise...... Im sure that Im on a few 'lists' as well.

BUT......first and foremost , once Ive agreed to sell to a person , I'll not re-neg on the deal provided it's gone as promised.

Posted: 3/8/2010 4:54:47 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If I were the seller, I'd still make the deal with the first "I'll take it" that was posted. The EE is not an auction.

I was the first "I will take it" on a upper in the EE. and the dude sold it to a guy that said he would take a half hour after I did. I complained and got no where. I brought it up here in GD and I was widely denounced as anti capitalist commie scum.

Did the seller contact you and tell you it was yours and then back out later to sell it to the other guy? If not, then you have no valid complaint. Sure it sucks to not get what you wanted but it's not yet a deal with only an offer but no acceptance. This just comes off as being kind of a childish complaint like bitching about someone taking cutsies in line or something. You didn't lose any money or property, you just didn't get what you wanted.

Posted: 3/8/2010 5:04:11 AM EDT

[#29]

Some people send an IM or email directly to the seller, so the first publicly posted "I'll take it" could very well be the fifteenth in line.

If unlisted deal #1 falls through, are you obligated to offer the item to deal #2, or can you go directly to deal #17 that is more than your asking price? Or should you offer the item next to deal #15, since he likes to loudly proclaim his purchasing intentions to the world?

What if deal #2 happens to be for LESS than your asking price? Do you skip #2 and go to the next in line that offers the asking price, or skip to the best price offered?

What if you're selling 100 PMAGS, the price for each mag includes shipping. One guy offers to buy all 100 and 50 other people offer to buy two mags. Do you choose to ship 50 packages, or ship one package saving yourself time and money? If you put the phrase, "I prefer to deal with someone who will buy all the magazines at once" in the advertisement, does that have any bearing on your decision?

Personally, I don't assume I've made a deal with a seller until I get an answer back on my offer, since I have no way to know if somebody else has already made a deal with him. I would be irritated if the seller decided to break the deal after that. After hearing from the seller, I might have passed on other deals, or bought some accessories that I would not otherwise need.

Posted: 3/8/2010 5:13:04 AM EDT

[#30]

If you want to play the odds for max profit or you love to bid, take it to Gunbroker or Auction Arms.

AR15's site, AR15's rules.

Posted: 3/8/2010 5:21:38 AM EDT

[#31]

capitalism- i'm okay with it.

Posted: 3/8/2010 5:27:46 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If I were the seller, I'd still make the deal with the first "I'll take it" that was posted. The EE is not an auction.

I agree. During the height of the scare, I was selling off some stuff to fund other projects. I priced most of my ammo well below the going rate at the time, because I wasn't looking to be accused of "price gouging" and wanted to make a quick sale. It seemed that several times I had quite a few potential buyers all trying to get in really quick and a few times the 3rd and 4th guys in line did try to offer me more. I didn't think taking their offers would be ethical even though some of them came within seconds of each other.

I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as the decision to sell that way is yours and yours alone. It's your property, after all.

I don't want to see an EE, where sellers are being told that they must take the highest bid (like an auction site), nor do I wish to see an EE where they must sell to the first "I'll take it".

The seller should retain the right to control the disposition of his property, as he sees fit. After all, until money exchanges hands, he owns it - not you or I.

I would respectfully disagree.

OFFER:

Here is something for sale. I want $***.** for it.

RESPONSE:

I'll take it.

OR, ALTERNATIVELY:

Deal!

It is a deal at the moment it is posted. Sounds like a theme for one of those commercials where the slick dick screws with the little kids.

No, that's not how it works, nor should it be.

If I post an ad for a AR-15, and a non-team member, who joined yesterday with 2 posts says he'll take it, I don't want to be forced to sell to him. I'm going to be weary of who I mail a $1000 rifle to.

Why is that? Is there money not as good as someone elses?

I can see you requiring funds up front for a buyer but refusing to sell to them becuase they are a new member is a bit snobish... now i may not buy something from a new user for your reason.

Posted: 3/8/2010 5:49:10 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

Exactly . I wouldnt sell squat to a few people on here , regardless of hard up I was for the $$$

.[/div]

then you take the internet WAY to seriously...

Posted: 3/8/2010 6:33:59 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
<snip>
Personally, I don't assume I've made a deal with a seller until I get an answer back on my offer, since I have no way to know if somebody else has already made a deal with him. I would be irritated if the seller decided to break the deal after that. After hearing from the seller, I might have passed on other deals, or bought some accessories that I would not otherwise need.

+1 on THIS
If you want to auction, go to an auction website.
And as for the low post count anti's: hey, you gotta start somewhere. Just sayin'.

Posted: 3/8/2010 1:27:07 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:

If I were the seller, I'd still make the deal with the first "I'll take it" that was posted. The EE is not an auction.

I agree. During the height of the scare, I was selling off some stuff to fund other projects. I priced most of my ammo well below the going rate at the time, because I wasn't looking to be accused of "price gouging" and wanted to make a quick sale. It seemed that several times I had quite a few potential buyers all trying to get in really quick and a few times the 3rd and 4th guys in line did try to offer me more. I didn't think taking their offers would be ethical even though some of them came within seconds of each other.

I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as the decision to sell that way is yours and yours alone. It's your property, after all.

I don't want to see an EE, where sellers are being told that they must take the highest bid (like an auction site), nor do I wish to see an EE where they must sell to the first "I'll take it".

The seller should retain the right to control the disposition of his property, as he sees fit. After all, until money exchanges hands, he owns it - not you or I.

I would respectfully disagree.

OFFER:

Here is something for sale. I want $***.** for it.

RESPONSE:

I'll take it.

OR, ALTERNATIVELY:

Deal!

It is a deal at the moment it is posted. Sounds like a theme for one of those commercials where the slick dick screws with the little kids.

No, that's not how it works, nor should it be.

If I post an ad for a AR-15, and a non-team member, who joined yesterday with 2 posts says he'll take it, I don't want to be forced to sell to him. I'm going to be weary of who I mail a $1000 rifle to.

Why is that? Is there money not as good as someone elses?

I can see you requiring funds up front for a buyer but refusing to sell to them becuase they are a new member is a bit snobish... now i may not buy something from a new user for your reason.

It just makes for less chance of a headache happening, for buying or selling.

Posted: 3/8/2010 1:32:16 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If I were the seller, I'd still make the deal with the first "I'll take it" that was posted. The EE is not an auction.

I agree. During the height of the scare, I was selling off some stuff to fund other projects. I priced most of my ammo well below the going rate at the time, because I wasn't looking to be accused of "price gouging" and wanted to make a quick sale. It seemed that several times I had quite a few potential buyers all trying to get in really quick and a few times the 3rd and 4th guys in line did try to offer me more. I didn't think taking their offers would be ethical even though some of them came within seconds of each other.

I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as the decision to sell that way is yours and yours alone. It's your property, after all.

I don't want to see an EE, where sellers are being told that they must take the highest bid (like an auction site), nor do I wish to see an EE where they must sell to the first "I'll take it".

The seller should retain the right to control the disposition of his property, as he sees fit. After all, until money exchanges hands, he owns it - not you or I.

I would respectfully disagree.

OFFER:

Here is something for sale. I want $***.** for it.

RESPONSE:

I'll take it.

OR, ALTERNATIVELY:

Deal!

It is a deal at the moment it is posted. Sounds like a theme for one of those commercials where the slick dick screws with the little kids.

No, that's not how it works, nor should it be.

If I post an ad for a AR-15, and a non-team member, who joined yesterday with 2 posts says he'll take it, I don't want to be forced to sell to him. I'm going to be weary of who I mail a $1000 rifle to.

Why is that? Is there money not as good as someone elses?

I can see you requiring funds up front for a buyer but refusing to sell to them becuase they are a new member is a bit snobish... now i may not buy something from a new user for your reason.

It just makes for less chance of a headache happening, for buying or selling.

but if i got cash in hand who cares who that guy is. at that point the burden is on me to ship or deliver. I just made my first EE sale the other day and i dont know the buyer for anything. Since i got the cash thru gunpal , litterally with in minutes, i fail to see the issue if he had 2 posts or 20,000.. Cash is cash who cares.

Please dont get me wrong. I think you shoudl be able to sell who you wish to sell too but to be honest its a first come first serve enviorment. it says right in the rules to make sure you have set a price you are happy selling for. if I put up a price and someone says "Ill take it", as long as they continue on a path to payment and delivery in a normal time then thats what it is.

Posted: 3/8/2010 1:33:12 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

If I were the seller, I'd still make the deal with the first "I'll take it" that was posted. The EE is not an auction.

+1

Posted: 3/8/2010 1:33:43 PM EDT

[#38]

Rather than post 10 quotes

-yes there is a rule against auctions, someone said there wasn't

-there is no rule that "I'll take it" gives you any priority, if the seller wants to sell it to the 15th guy, or the first guy with buck teeth, or the first guy from his hometown etc fine with him. If some guy passes me over because an hour after my e-mail a Marine offered to buy it and he thinks Marines are cooler than middle aged lawyers it's none of my damn business

-what is the big deal with the events in the first post anyway. If someone sees something, decides he wants it bad enough to offer over the asking price, who cares?

I guess the only downside to this is the seller could unfairly be accused of running an auction when some guy offers a higher than asking price out of the blue, not sure how to deal with that

Posted: 3/8/2010 1:36:01 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
If the seller actually sold it to the "High bidder" as opposed to the first i'll take it, then he needs a "Timeout". The EE is "Not" an auction

you would be wrong.

Posted: 3/8/2010 3:10:51 PM EDT

[#40]

OK.

I'll post a bunch of really cool stuff I don't really intend to sell at ridiculously low prices and then when someone say's "I'll take it" , I'll just say "No, I don't want to sell it to you. Just because."

Of course this is in the extreme but you all are condoning this practice.

Posted: 3/8/2010 3:17:15 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:

http://images.starcraftmazter.net/4chan/for_forums/cool_story_bro2.jpg

Mods throw a fit over the c#nt punch pic, yet don't bat an eye while fools keep posting CSB pics.

Posted: 3/8/2010 3:22:06 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:

OK.

I'll post a bunch of really cool stuff I don't really intend to sell at ridiculously low prices and then when someone say's "I'll take it" , I'll just say "No, I don't want to sell it to you. Just because."

Of course this is in the extreme but you all are condoning this practice.

And?

Posted: 3/8/2010 3:25:43 PM EDT

[#43]

1. List fake shit.
2. Laugh at people trying to buy it.
3. Drive prices down/up.
4.?????
5. PROFIT!!!!1!!!!

Posted: 3/8/2010 3:44:17 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
OK.

I'll post a bunch of really cool stuff I don't really intend to sell at ridiculously low prices and then when someone say's "I'll take it" , I'll just say "No, I don't want to sell it to you. Just because."

Of course this is in the extreme but you all are condoning this practice.

Posted: 3/8/2010 3:46:28 PM EDT

[#45]

Ya, That's the feeling I get when I look to the west.

Posted: 3/8/2010 3:51:35 PM EDT

[#46]

If I say I'll take it I immediately follow it up with an IM/email asking payment info and place to send along with providing my address. If the seller sends back payment info and place to send it, I take it that they have accepted my offer and we are good to go. If the seller has reservations then I expect an IM/email back telling me the deal is not accepted.

Where has the honor gone?

Posted: 3/8/2010 4:32:49 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
If I say I'll take it I immediately follow it up with an IM/email asking payment info and place to send along with providing my address. If the seller sends back payment info and place to send it, I take it that they have accepted my offer and we are good to go. If the seller has reservations then I expect an IM/email back telling me the deal is not accepted.

Where has the honor gone?

It is now how you 'feel' about getting more money. Honor implies a set of core principles that apparently is now lacking in the general population since it isn't being taught by single mothers or in the socialist schools. Much that once was is lost, for none now live who remember it.

Posted: 3/8/2010 5:43:56 PM EDT

[#48]

Seeing as a lot of folks are OK with teh whole get offered more after several folks have agrred to your price; how long is the "i'll take it" good for. Seller sees folks offering more, so he lists, and doesn't respond to anyone for 3 weeks hoping someone will bid up his item. Now, he contacts you, says you have bought the item, even though you bought it from elsewhere 1 week ago, says you said I'll take it, you either buy, or get neg. feedback for welching. Where do you draw the line?

Posted: 3/8/2010 5:58:55 PM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:
Seeing as a lot of folks are OK with teh whole get offered more after several folks have agrred to your price; how long is the "i'll take it" good for. Seller sees folks offering more, so he lists, and doesn't respond to anyone for 3 weeks hoping someone will bid up his item. Now, he contacts you, says you have bought the item, even though you bought it from elsewhere 1 week ago, says you said I'll take it, you either buy, or get neg. feedback for welching. Where do you draw the line?

If you get no contact for three weeks, I don't think anyone is going to accuse you of welching.

I think there's a certain bit of common sense that can be applied for these situations.

ETA: Thinking about it more, I've been in this situation, though not quite as extreme. I've sent a message to a seller telling them I would take an item, and got no reply for several days. At some point I would send another message, both via IM and email. No response by another day or so, and I'd be done with them and move on. I may indicate in one of the messages that since they were not answering my offer to buy was retracted. Until he or she responded and we made an agreement, it's not welching on a deal in my book, because there was no deal.

Posted: 3/8/2010 6:05:06 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Once you place an item for sale on a public board, you've inherently agreed to sale to whoever has the $$$ to pay for it. First come, first serve irrespective of race, color, or creed. I really wonder how you would react if a vendor did the same thing? The BFI ACR debacle readily comes to mind here.

Most vendors reserve the right to refuse sevice to anyone.

If you listed a Barret for sale FTF in your state, and a sketchy guy named Achmend with a scraggly beard and a heavy middle eastern accent said he would take it then started asking what ammuntion would best go through an armored car or airplane, you wouldn't back out?

Especially if every other phrase is "I kill you!"

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - C@(% blocking in the EE (Page 2 of 3)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us