General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[fastballspecial]

8 hours ago, ChiSoxFan said:

8 hours ago, Ryan. said:

Pushing the Paypal fee back onto the buyer is seriously getting out of control lately. It's the cost of doing business; eat the damn fee.

Arch made that a violation of the selling rules here recently, so whoever the buyer is, they're risking their thread getting yanked if it gets reported.

Sellers are doing this? Really? That's nuts. It is the cost of doing business.

 

[ChiSoxFan]

9 hours ago, Ryan. said:

Pushing the Paypal fee back onto the buyer is seriously getting out of control lately. It's the cost of doing business; eat the damn fee.

 

8 hours ago, ChiSoxFan said:

Arch made that a violation of the selling rules here recently, so whoever the buyer is, they're risking their thread getting yanked if it gets reported.

 

 

52 minutes ago, fastballspecial said:

Sellers are doing this? Really? That's nuts. It is the cost of doing business.

 

It is.  It's been a practice on here, though, for a long time already -- in fact, there have been threads before where the seller was asking for 5% added to the price for payment by PayPal (THOSE sales threads usually were brought up here for "discussion", lol.   ).  There was always some push by some boardies to make the practice a violation of the terms to sell here, and apparently, there is actual language in PayPal's terms of service that makes it a violation (and which someone brought up to Arch), so it was just recently added to the guidelines.  My guess is that a number of sellers don't check for changes in the standards here (when return guidelines were added, there were a number of established sellers who weren't including that info in their threads, not out of anything willful, but simply because they hadn't realized it changed).  And of course, there are  some of the brand new sellers who never check the rules -- and others who just may not care.

[entalmighty1]

On 3/3/2018 at 4:16 PM, ChiSoxFan said:

 

 

It is.  It's been a practice on here, though, for a long time already -- in fact, there have been threads before where the seller was asking for 5% added to the price for payment by PayPal (THOSE sales threads usually were brought up here for "discussion", lol.   ).  There was always some push by some boardies to make the practice a violation of the terms to sell here, and apparently, there is actual language in PayPal's terms of service that makes it a violation (and which someone brought up to Arch), so it was just recently added to the guidelines.  My guess is that a number of sellers don't check for changes in the standards here (when return guidelines were added, there were a number of established sellers who weren't including that info in their threads, not out of anything willful, but simply because they hadn't realized it changed).  And of course, there are  some of the brand new sellers who never check the rules -- and others who just may not care.

I saw a thread last week where somebody brought it to the attention of the seller, and the response was basically, "I'll change mine as soon as everybody else changes theirs."  

[thehumantorch]

On 3/3/2018 at 5:55 AM, Ryan. said:

Pushing the Paypal fee back onto the buyer is seriously getting out of control lately. It's the cost of doing business; eat the damn fee.

I looked at a thread today with buyers getting a 3% discount if paying by means other than paypal.  Didn't even look at the books, just clicked out.  

[Columbia Comics]

3 minutes ago, thehumantorch said:

I looked at a thread today with buyers getting a 3% discount if paying by means other than paypal.  Didn't even look at the books, just clicked out.  

what's the problem with that?!?!

[thehumantorch]

10 minutes ago, entalmighty1 said:

I saw a thread last week where somebody brought it to the attention of the seller, and the response was basically, "I'll change mine as soon as everybody else changes theirs."  

Link?

[thehumantorch]

Just now, Columbia Comics said:

1 minute ago, Columbia Comics said:

what's the problem with that?!?!

what's the problem with that?!?!

It's the same as charging 3% extra for paypal payments.  

[Columbia Comics]

Just now, thehumantorch said:

It's the same as charging 3% extra for paypal payments.  

I disagree.

If I'm advertising a book for $1,000 and will accept PayPal, check, money order, bank wire, etc....why should someone who chooses a fee-less method be force to absorb the fee that's baked in for PayPal.

I fully understand that accepting PayPal (or any other fee-based payment method) is the responsibility of the seller.  I totally get that.  However, if you've priced all associated fees into your price and someone wants to use a method that doesn't cost the seller those fees, it's simply a courtesy to not charge them those fees.

just my opinion... 

[entalmighty1]

 

21 minutes ago, thehumantorch said:

Link?

 

Edited March 5, 2018 by entalmighty1
wrong thread linked, fixed

[thehumantorch]

Just now, Columbia Comics said:

I disagree.

If I'm advertising a book for $1,000 and will accept PayPal, check, money order, bank wire, etc....why should someone who chooses a fee-less method be force to absorb the fee that's baked in for PayPal.

I fully understand that accepting PayPal (or any other fee-based payment method) is the responsibility of the seller.  I totally get that.  However, if you've priced all associated fees into your price and someone wants to use a method that doesn't cost the seller those fees, it's simply a courtesy to not charge them those fees.

just my opinion... 

We'll disagree and that's fine.  To me paypal is a cost of doing business.  But I'm not here to tell people how to sell their books,  I just click out.

[skypinkblu]

2 hours ago, Columbia Comics said:

I disagree.

If I'm advertising a book for $1,000 and will accept PayPal, check, money order, bank wire, etc....why should someone who chooses a fee-less method be force to absorb the fee that's baked in for PayPal.

I fully understand that accepting PayPal (or any other fee-based payment method) is the responsibility of the seller.  I totally get that.  However, if you've priced all associated fees into your price and someone wants to use a method that doesn't cost the seller those fees, it's simply a courtesy to not charge them those fees.

just my opinion... 

Maybe you can argue with Arch about that. I've tried and lost.

I always gave people discounts if they paid by check, but apparently PP has a problem with it, they don't want anything that would give them a disadvantage, so he said that would not be acceptable.

So, if you give a discount for a check, don't be surprised if your thread is closed or locked.

[Ryan.]

Dress it up any way you want but the 3% fee is the cost of the convenience and mutual protection that Paypal provides.

[NP_Gresham]

10 hours ago, Columbia Comics said:

I disagree.

If I'm advertising a book for $1,000 and will accept PayPal, check, money order, bank wire, etc....why should someone who chooses a fee-less method be force to absorb the fee that's baked in for PayPal.

I fully understand that accepting PayPal (or any other fee-based payment method) is the responsibility of the seller.  I totally get that.  However, if you've priced all associated fees into your price and someone wants to use a method that doesn't cost the seller those fees, it's simply a courtesy to not charge them those fees.

just my opinion... 

And PP says they will revoke your account

Dump PP or follow the rules

Not rocket science

[fastballspecial]

20 hours ago, skypinkblu said:

22 hours ago, Columbia Comics said:

I disagree.

If I'm advertising a book for $1,000 and will accept PayPal, check, money order, bank wire, etc....why should someone who chooses a fee-less method be force to absorb the fee that's baked in for PayPal.

I fully understand that accepting PayPal (or any other fee-based payment method) is the responsibility of the seller.  I totally get that.  However, if you've priced all associated fees into your price and someone wants to use a method that doesn't cost the seller those fees, it's simply a courtesy to not charge them those fees.

just my opinion... 

Maybe you can argue with Arch about that. I've tried and lost.

I always gave people discounts if they paid by check, but apparently PP has a problem with it, they don't want anything that would give them a disadvantage, so he said that would not be acceptable.

So, if you give a discount for a check, don't be surprised if your thread is closed or locked.

This was never in issue here for years. 

I've got buyers that only pay me in personal checks or money orders. While I disagree with advertising the discount
what you and buyer/seller's do is between both parties.

Paypal I guess can cry foul if its advertised and I guess I can understand that from a business side.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 6, 2018 by fastballspecial

[miraclemet]

 

shots fired over in oceanverse's sales thread (over the 'tec)

[DR.X]

29 minutes ago, miraclemet said:

 

shots fired over in oceanverse's sales thread (over the 'tec)

how about a link so it don't take me three weeks to find it in this mess.

[ChiSoxFan]

39 minutes ago, miraclemet said:

 

shots fired over in oceanverse's sales thread (over the 'tec)

 

9 minutes ago, DR.X said:

how about a link so it don't take me three weeks to find it in this mess.

Here you go:

The oceanavekid username looked familiar -- a search of the probation forums reminded me why. 

[miraclemet]

best case scenario is he's flipping his ebay win.... maybe (probably) before its even arrived (since he's reusing the ebay pictures)

[DR.X]

26 minutes ago, ChiSoxFan said:

 

Here you go:

The oceanavekid username looked familiar -- a search of the probation forums reminded me why. 

why? I wonder what was he asking for it in the thread. His first post was edited.

Edited March 8, 2018 by DR.X

[miraclemet]

looks like a lot of his listings in that thread (maybe all?) are recent ebay wins, which is fine IF HE HAS THE BOOKS IN HAND.

 

otherwise how can he make any claims on their condition? or that they will arrive to him safely (before he ships them back out)