General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[Chaseman210]

The guy threw out 2 I'll take its. It's irrelevant what the buyer thinks in his head about one being priced too high or low, and if I don't get one I'll just walk away from the other. They are 2 seperate and distinct in the sales thread.

 

There was never any conditional statement given to the seller tying the 2 transactions together.

 

IMO it's in bad form to not at least complete the one transaction where the book was still available.

 

 

 

 

Not to beat a dead horse but I agree. Technically the buyer committed to each book separately and then backed out.

 

 

But he bought each book BEFORE anybody else claimed it with . So if he DID purchase both books before anybody, both would technically be his if he's forced to buy the other. You can't say he claimed to buy the books, but then say he can't buy one and HAS to the buy the other.

[VintageComics]

The guy threw out 2 I'll take its. It's irrelevant what the buyer thinks in his head about one being priced too high or low, and if I don't get one I'll just walk away from the other. They are 2 seperate and distinct in the sales thread.

 

There was never any conditional statement given to the seller tying the 2 transactions together.

 

IMO it's in bad form to not at least complete the one transaction where the book was still available.

 

 

 

 

Not to beat a dead horse but I agree. Technically the buyer committed to each book separately and then backed out.

 

 

But he bought each book BEFORE anybody else claimed it with . So if he DID purchase both books before anybody, both would technically be his if he's forced to buy the other. You can't say he claimed to buy the books, but then say he can't buy one and HAS to the buy the other.

 

He claimed both books via PM but there was no PM sent to jsilverjanet.

 

Then the #11 sold.

 

In the mean time (after the #11 sold) he stated that his PM was only to confirm shipping and Paypal.

 

Technically, the #11 sold fairly and the #12 was still committed to him if jsilverjanet was willing to ship to him and to accept Paypal.

 

And if it was me, personally I'd have followed through and taken the #12 under these circumstances if I was the potential buyer even if I lost the #11.

 

That's the way I see it.

[MustEatBrains]

The guy threw out 2 I'll take its. It's irrelevant what the buyer thinks in his head about one being priced too high or low, and if I don't get one I'll just walk away from the other. They are 2 seperate and distinct in the sales thread.

 

There was never any conditional statement given to the seller tying the 2 transactions together.

 

IMO it's in bad form to not at least complete the one transaction where the book was still available.

 

 

 

 

Not to beat a dead horse but I agree. Technically the buyer committed to each book separately and then backed out.

 

 

But he bought each book BEFORE anybody else claimed it with . So if he DID purchase both books before anybody, both would technically be his if he's forced to buy the other. You can't say he claimed to buy the books, but then say he can't buy one and HAS to the buy the other.

 

But by the buyers own admission he added the "per pm" in there just to obtain paypal and shipping charges(as Swick has pointed out several times) then failed to send a PM. The first book went to the next buyer in line which it should have been the case. The second book was not claimed so therefore he should have still proceeded with that sale. It's what any upstanding boardie would/should do.

 

Agree to disagree?

[Buzzetta]

Do you walk into Walmart and start telling everyone you see that x item is cheaper on Amazon?

 

 

 

Actually, yeah.

 

A couple of those stores have started price matching Amazon....so I tell the manager himself if it's cheaper on Amazon.

 

Yeah, I've got to say I've done the same. I walk into Best Buy, TRU and even Macy's and scan things I am interested in. Best Buy and TRU say that they will match the price on Amazon or any other major competitor's online site. I have no problem holding them to it.

 

[HarveySwick]

I posted I'll Take it on both books, and simply put Per PM to confirm shipping charges and paypal information; however, I suppose my phone decided to not send the PM. I only later received a message from the seller saying they had never received a message, when I thought my message had sent successfully.

 

 

Seems like he placed no conditions on his purchase. Doesn't seem like an all or nothing deal. He didn't get the first book because he claimed it "per PM" when there was no PM. Second buyer came along and took it outright with a simple BattlegroundGames explained that he made a mistake with the "per PM". That doesn't get him out of his on the second book.

 

That's like in a feeding frenzy sales thread and multiple people throwing out A potential buyer can't later back out of a deal by complaining "I didn't get all of the books I wanted so now I'm going to rescind my claims and don't want any! "

 

No. He claimed a book, it's his. Hector is good for not pushing the issue, but this guy is a chump.

[Iceman399]

Do you walk into Walmart and start telling everyone you see that x item is cheaper on Amazon?

 

 

 

Actually, yeah.

 

A couple of those stores have started price matching Amazon....so I tell the manager himself if it's cheaper on Amazon.

 

Yeah, I've got to say I've done the same. I walk into Best Buy, TRU and even Macy's and scan things I am interested in. Best Buy and TRU say that they will match the price on Amazon or any other major competitor's online site. I have no problem holding them to it.

 

Item must be in stock... A sale from 6 months ago isn't in stock

[Bomber-Bob]

A potential buyer can't later back out of a deal by complaining "I didn't get all of the books I wanted so now I'm going to rescind my claims and don't want any! "

 

No. He claimed a book, it's his. Hector is good for not pushing the issue, but this guy is a chump.

 

So if I order spaghetti and meatballs at a restaurant and they '86' the meatballs, I'm obligated to eat the spaghetti by itself. Interesting.

[Chaseman210]

The guy threw out 2 I'll take its. It's irrelevant what the buyer thinks in his head about one being priced too high or low, and if I don't get one I'll just walk away from the other. They are 2 seperate and distinct in the sales thread.

 

There was never any conditional statement given to the seller tying the 2 transactions together.

 

IMO it's in bad form to not at least complete the one transaction where the book was still available.

 

 

 

 

Not to beat a dead horse but I agree. Technically the buyer committed to each book separately and then backed out.

 

 

But he bought each book BEFORE anybody else claimed it with . So if he DID purchase both books before anybody, both would technically be his if he's forced to buy the other. You can't say he claimed to buy the books, but then say he can't buy one and HAS to the buy the other.

 

He claimed both books via PM but there was no PM sent to jsilverjanet.

 

Then the #11 sold.

 

In the mean time (after the #11 sold) he stated that his PM was only to confirm shipping and Paypal.

 

Technically, the #11 sold fairly and the #12 was still committed to him if jsilverjanet was willing to ship to him and to accept Paypal.

 

And if it was me, personally I'd have followed through and taken the #12 under these circumstances if I was the potential buyer even if I lost the #11.

 

That's the way I see it.

 

The guy threw out 2 I'll take its. It's irrelevant what the buyer thinks in his head about one being priced too high or low, and if I don't get one I'll just walk away from the other. They are 2 seperate and distinct in the sales thread.

 

There was never any conditional statement given to the seller tying the 2 transactions together.

 

IMO it's in bad form to not at least complete the one transaction where the book was still available.

 

 

 

 

Not to beat a dead horse but I agree. Technically the buyer committed to each book separately and then backed out.

 

 

But he bought each book BEFORE anybody else claimed it with . So if he DID purchase both books before anybody, both would technically be his if he's forced to buy the other. You can't say he claimed to buy the books, but then say he can't buy one and HAS to the buy the other.

 

But by the buyers own admission he added the "per pm" in there just to obtain paypal and shipping charges(as Swick has pointed out several times) then failed to send a PM. The first book went to the next buyer in line which it should have been the case. The second book was not claimed so therefore he should have still proceeded with that sale. It's what any upstanding boardie would/should do.

 

Agree to disagree?

 

 

I'm not saying the buyer is right. Personally, I would've bought the book once Hector contacted me. All I was trying to say is that in this particular case, it's a little more odd and different than a normal buyer saying and then backing out.

[HarveySwick]

A potential buyer can't later back out of a deal by complaining "I didn't get all of the books I wanted so now I'm going to rescind my claims and don't want any! "

 

No. He claimed a book, it's his. Hector is good for not pushing the issue, but this guy is a chump.

 

So if I order spaghetti and meatballs at a restaurant and they '86' the meatballs, I'm obligated to eat the spaghetti by itself. Interesting.

 

Come on, seriously??

 

He was ordering the books ala carte! Did he say anywhere "I will only buy the two books together?"

 

He ordered a Cheeseburger and some Mozzarella sticks and was told that they were sold out of Mozzarells sticks, he walked out of the restaurant with the burger already plated.

 

This is not a "spaghetti and meatballs" plate.

[Red84]

A potential buyer can't later back out of a deal by complaining "I didn't get all of the books I wanted so now I'm going to rescind my claims and don't want any! "

 

No. He claimed a book, it's his. Hector is good for not pushing the issue, but this guy is a chump.

 

So if I order spaghetti and meatballs at a restaurant and they '86' the meatballs, I'm obligated to eat the spaghetti by itself. Interesting.

 

Come on, seriously??

 

He was ordering the books ala carte! Did he say anywhere "I will only buy the two books together?"

 

He ordered a Cheeseburger and some Mozzarella sticks and was told that they were sold out of Mozzarells sticks, he walked out of the restaurant with the burger already plated.

 

This is not a "spaghetti and meatballs" plate.

 

Now I think Bob is just busting your meatballs.

[Ditch Fahrenheit]

You guys are making me hungry.

[Meeklo]

Can someone use a taco analogy...I'm craving tacos!

[wombat]

If the buyer can be put on the PL for not taking the one taco I think he should be able to put the seller on for not getting the other taco. Buyer posted the same thing for both tacos. Doesn't matter what he came back later and said.

 

That being said I don't think anyone should be put on the PL for this.

Edited April 22, 2016 by wombat

[Buzzetta]

Do you walk into Walmart and start telling everyone you see that x item is cheaper on Amazon?

 

 

 

Actually, yeah.

 

A couple of those stores have started price matching Amazon....so I tell the manager himself if it's cheaper on Amazon.

 

Yeah, I've got to say I've done the same. I walk into Best Buy, TRU and even Macy's and scan things I am interested in. Best Buy and TRU say that they will match the price on Amazon or any other major competitor's online site. I have no problem holding them to it.

 

Item must be in stock... A sale from 6 months ago isn't in stock

 

Yup... and it must be from Amazon itself and not a third party seller.

[thecopperagekids]

The guy threw out 2 I'll take its. It's irrelevant what the buyer thinks in his head about one being priced too high or low, and if I don't get one I'll just walk away from the other. They are 2 seperate and distinct in the sales thread.

 

There was never any conditional statement given to the seller tying the 2 transactions together.

 

IMO it's in bad form to not at least complete the one transaction where the book was still available.

 

 

 

 

Not to beat a dead horse but I agree. Technically the buyer committed to each book separately and then backed out.

 

 

But he bought each book BEFORE anybody else claimed it with . So if he DID purchase both books before anybody, both would technically be his if he's forced to buy the other. You can't say he claimed to buy the books, but then say he can't buy one and HAS to the buy the other.

 

He claimed both books via PM but there was no PM sent to jsilverjanet.

 

Then the #11 sold.

 

In the mean time (after the #11 sold) he stated that his PM was only to confirm shipping and Paypal.

 

Technically, the #11 sold fairly and the #12 was still committed to him if jsilverjanet was willing to ship to him and to accept Paypal.

 

And if it was me, personally I'd have followed through and taken the #12 under these circumstances if I was the potential buyer even if I lost the #11.

 

That's the way I see it.

 

The guy threw out 2 I'll take its. It's irrelevant what the buyer thinks in his head about one being priced too high or low, and if I don't get one I'll just walk away from the other. They are 2 seperate and distinct in the sales thread.

 

There was never any conditional statement given to the seller tying the 2 transactions together.

 

IMO it's in bad form to not at least complete the one transaction where the book was still available.

 

 

 

 

Not to beat a dead horse but I agree. Technically the buyer committed to each book separately and then backed out.

 

 

But he bought each book BEFORE anybody else claimed it with . So if he DID purchase both books before anybody, both would technically be his if he's forced to buy the other. You can't say he claimed to buy the books, but then say he can't buy one and HAS to the buy the other.

 

But by the buyers own admission he added the "per pm" in there just to obtain paypal and shipping charges(as Swick has pointed out several times) then failed to send a PM. The first book went to the next buyer in line which it should have been the case. The second book was not claimed so therefore he should have still proceeded with that sale. It's what any upstanding boardie would/should do.

 

Agree to disagree?

 

 

I'm not saying the buyer is right. Personally, I would've bought the book once Hector contacted me. All I was trying to say is that in this particular case, it's a little more odd and different than a normal buyer saying and then backing out.

 

The buyer caused *more* aggravation with his not sending a PM and his per PM I'll take it drivel...in this case, he caused Hecor more of a headache than otherwise.

 

if the buyer sent the PM and Hector didn't receive it, WTF was it sent to???

 

Makes me think that is BS on the buyer's part, right there...even if it was sent to Hector, doesn't matter.He committed to buying the book

 

Hector posted that he needed to sell the books yesterday and he had them all pretty much below FMV i.e. priced to move that day.

 

The books were priced low to start with, looks like the buyer wanted the lowest possible deal on two books, while saving more money on combined shipping......and with with his "conditions" and lack of an actual PM being sent, he not only dicked Hector over by not following through on his word but caused Hector additional grief with his weaseling out tactics and annoying excuses.

[MetalPSI]

Johnny Cab has spoken. Thread over

 

[Bomber-Bob]

Without commenting on this specific 'spaghetti and meatballs' situation, in general I am seeing the Boards more and more favoring the seller. It seems like a seller can get away with virtually any selling tactic, Pre Sales, no pics, pics but no grades, everything seems to be okay. If a buyer has a bad experience he cannot leave negative feedback, only kudos are allowed. A Board buyer can be the recipient of bad packaging, bad grading, slow shipping, etc. and he has to suck it up and smile.

As mostly a Buyer, I don't like it.

[HarveySwick]

[jsilverjanet]

let's not forget about new sellers that come in and insult the board members, make invalid claims about existing double covers of books, act like a complete person_who_is_obnoxiously_self-impressed, are borderline racist , but thank god we all have standards and draw the line somewhere

 

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=9203128&fpart=1

[comicdonna]

There's no perfect world buying and selling comics. This place is about as good as it gets, though.