General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[HarveySwick]

You do realize the 3rd party was a suggestion and not a condition, right?

 

Seller said no. Buyer said don't worry about it. It was never part of the sale.

[N/A]

You do realize the 3rd party was a suggestion and not a condition, right?

 

Seller said no. Buyer said don't worry about it. It was never part of the sale.

 

I see it as a buyer request. The seller was looking for a shipping solution and the buyer offered this suggestion. Seller opted out. If the was unconditional then there was no need to bring it up.

[N/A]

The buyer gave him an out and he took it. You can like or not like it but the out was given. It seems the timing of Rick's was perfect.

[HarveySwick]

Buyer said he has a US shipping address.

 

But neither of us is going to convince the other anyway so we'll just agree to disagree and call it a day.

[VintageComics]

Thanks for the PM. Seems clear to me seller was discussing terms, didn't like the terms and moved on. He has every right to do so.

 

The seller has every right to sell whom he wants to but the seller's word is binding. When he said this:

 

Ill put a hold on it until we can agree on shipping/payment terms

 

He should have held the book until quadman78 couldn't meet his terms. That never happened.

 

I tried to do the same thing above with colors.

 

And it worked well. We just seem to see it differently. Quadman posted but he shouldn't have. He did need to work out details and didn't. Using a 3rd party is not "normal" by anybody's definition. Regardless of the likelihood of success it is still messier than a direct sale.

 

The problem is that quadman78 was amenable to any terms the seller wanted. Those terms just weren't clear and the seller pulled the rug out before quadman was given an opportunity to agree to anything that trory140 said.

 

quadman78 seemed to be willing to bend over backwards to accomodate trory140. trory140 couldn't be bothered to discuss it any further once there was another potential buyer in the house, took the book off hold (contradicting what he said about holding it until terms were agreed upon) and took the easy sale.

 

If he hadn't put the book on hold, it would be an easy answer.

 

It's the fact that the seller put the book on hold until an agreement was made that separates this scenario from any other.

 

 

[Chaseman210]

You do realize the 3rd party was a suggestion and not a condition, right?

 

Seller said no. Buyer said don't worry about it. It was never part of the sale.

 

I see it as a buyer request. The seller was looking for a shipping solution and the buyer offered this suggestion. Seller opted out. If the was unconditional then there was no need to bring it up.

 

I think one of the main things that keeps coming to my mind is that the seller kept discussing AFTER he knew the buyer was in Canada. Instead of asking if the buyer had a U.S. shipping address (which he did), why not just stop all discussions when he saw quadman was from Canada? A simple, "I saw you live in a Canada. I'm sorry, but I only ship to the U.S." That would've been it. Why ask if quadman had a U.S. address if it didn't matter either way?

[quadman78]

First off I want to thank everyone for their opinions. And to those of you who said something nice about me

As of my last message with the seller, I have rescinded my and endorsed (if that's the right word ) the sale of the book to the other buyer.

Personally I'm going to chalk this up to a transaction gone wrong and I won't be nominating anyone for the PL.

Last I heard the other parties involved had resumed talks on the sale of the book but any information beyond that is obviously up to them to share.

 

[HarveySwick]

You're a good guy Randy.

 

Sorry you had this happen bud.

 

And to the seller -

[N/A]

First off I want to thank everyone for their opinions. And to those of you who said something nice about me

As of my last message with the seller, I have rescinded my and endorsed (if that's the right word ) the sale of the book to the other buyer.

Personally I'm going to chalk this up to a transaction gone wrong and I won't be nominating anyone for the PL.

Last I heard the other parties involved had resumed talks on the sale of the book but any information beyond that is obviously up to them to share.

 

It's a learning experience. I assume with your experience buying high dollar items that you come across some nervous sellers.

 

I would have sold you the book.

 

Good luck!

[N/A]

He did Roy. He put it on hold while they worked out shipping/payment terms. 3rd party was mentioned and the seller did not agree. Book off hold. The seller is not obligated to give any more time to this.

 

The buyer suggested a 3rd party because he was unsure. The seller decided not to proceed because he was unsure.

 

Personally I would have sold Quad the book but I'm not the seller and I back his decision to say no to the suggestion and therefore the sale.

 

If it was an unconditional then no need to suggest a 3rd party. Tell me you have never been involved in a live negotiation like this. We both know you have.

 

Thanks for the PM. Seems clear to me seller was discussing terms, didn't like the terms and moved on. He has every right to do so.

 

The seller has every right to sell whom he wants to but the seller's word is binding. When he said this:

 

Ill put a hold on it until we can agree on shipping/payment terms

 

He should have held the book until quadman78 couldn't meet his terms. That never happened.

 

I tried to do the same thing above with colors.

 

And it worked well. We just seem to see it differently. Quadman posted but he shouldn't have. He did need to work out details and didn't. Using a 3rd party is not "normal" by anybody's definition. Regardless of the likelihood of success it is still messier than a direct sale.

 

The problem is that quadman78 was amenable to any terms the seller wanted. Those terms just weren't clear and the seller pulled the rug out before quadman was given an opportunity to agree to anything that trory140 said.

 

quadman78 seemed to be willing to bend over backwards to accomodate trory140. trory140 couldn't be bothered to discuss it any further once there was another potential buyer in the house, took the book off hold (contradicting what he said about holding it until terms were agreed upon) and took the easy sale.

 

If he hadn't put the book on hold, it would be an easy answer.

 

It's the fact that the seller put the book on hold until an agreement was made that separates this scenario from any other.

 

[N/A]

 

And to the seller -

 

Although I agree with this I do believe he had every right to act this way.

[Bio-Rupp]

Fully agree. (thumbs u A seller's integrity to honor transactions and use common sense SHOULD be enough, but it's obviously not the case with some so it seems clearly defined rules are needed.

 

SHOULD BE... but unfortunately, the majority of sellers here, much like on Ebay and Craigslist, aren't educated in the intricacies of contract law.

 

Yes and no. I agree that a seller runs his sales thread and makes the rules for his sales thread. BUT if a buyer follows those rules, he needs to honor the deal. That's pretty clearly stated - you list a book for sale, someone buys it, you SELL the book. Not "I decided I'm not going to sell it" after someone buys it. This JUST happened with oceanavekid and he rightfully ended up on the Probation List.

 

The oceanavekid scenario left me with mixed feelings as well. There are similarities in the two cases.

 

Both buyers were in the gist of some form of discussion. In oceanavekid's case, it was over price... and in trory140's case, it was over shipping to an unknown buyer/out of country/use of 3rd party.

 

In each case, when the sellers receded from the sales, both buyer's bypassed discussions and opted for "Buy it Now" scenarios.

 

Oceanavekid's buyer Jawn bypassed the "kid's" statement of "I think I will just keep it" and did a Buy It Now to force the sale. That buyer dictated that sale and I personally don't think it was right. I showed an example of an open thread with a Walking Dead # 1 from 4 years ago and how the same scenario could be used to force a sale. Without set rules in place, even here, we are going on "board etiquette".

 

All I saw was the "kid" not wanting to sell for less and then stating he was going to "keep the book". Then Jawn, not satisfied with this explanation, used the as a technicality to force the seller into a transaction with the buyer. I do not think this was right... and I personally don't feel oceanviewkid should be on the PL because of it. Maybe I would feel differently had I really wanted that book though

 

In this current scenario, Randy posted the to trory140's book... that's a given. That said, without a stated set of general rules that we can all fall back on and use...Rory's lack of stating "whoever posts wins" takes a back seat to "we can discuss payment/shipping/pickup options" which he did state. When the seller didn't agree with the options presented, the buyer, sensing the seller's reluctance, did a Buy It Now scenario offering to send a check without stipulations.

 

Now I know Randy didn't do this to force the sale, but just to entice the seller to sell to him. The seller, not having set rules in place, went with his gut feeling and opted out... which is his right to do since discussions for his merchandise from his thread didn't work out to his liking.

 

Keep in mind that without stated board rules, all a sign is... is "board etiquette". Trory140 didn't have it listed in his "normal rules" that posting a would insure the sale of the book. "Board etiquette" might state (in the cloud where "board etiquette" resides)... that Randy get that book, unfortunately based on the wording of Rory's sales thread, and Rory's gut feeling on the transaction, plus the fact that it ultimately IS his 10K comic... it is his to do with what he pleases.

 

I have my own personal history with the use of the sign. Unless the Board posts stated, uniform rules concerning that sign... its all left up to interpretation and "board etiquette".

 

Don't get me wrong. I think Randy should be entitled to the book. That's because I know him and I've seen his purchases in the past and know that if he could, he would hand deliver that 10K to Rory in person. It's just that until both buyer and seller come to a mutual agreement based on the seller's given thread rules... one that's consented upon by both parties... then it's the seller's book until that happens.

 

 

I think the call for HOS has become something out of hand lately where every single transgression leads to "Let's add him to the HOS! " But I don't think there is anything wrong with a buyer ASKING for opinions and people offering those opinions as is the case here. Randy started a thread to ask other's opinions on the matter. That's how most of these discussions arise - someone looking for advice.

 

Asking opinions is fine and Randy has the full right to do this, but when opinions escalate into the snowball effect that they often do on the boards, they tend to become more "facts" than "opinions" in the eyes of the people who read them.

[mschmidt]

He did Roy. He put it on hold while they worked out shipping/payment terms. 3rd party was mentioned and the seller did not agree. Book off hold. The seller is not obligated to give any more time to this.

 

The buyer suggested a 3rd party because he was unsure. The seller decided not to proceed because he was unsure.

 

Personally I would have sold Quad the book but I'm not the seller and I back his decision to say no to the suggestion and therefore the sale.

 

If it was an unconditional then no need to suggest a 3rd party. Tell me you have never been involved in a live negotiation like this. We both know you have.

 

But it was an unconditional , Jeff.

 

Look at the PM - does Quad stipulate any sort of conditions in there? It's the seller who moves the conversation to shipping/payment terms where Quad then lists a couple of options (and when those options are rejected seems happy to follow the rules of the sales thread to the letter).

 

If Quad had posted ":takeit: with shipping to Canada & payment by Paypal", it would have been a completely different story - but he didn't.

[revat]

SOunds like potential buyers are no long pressing the issue, can we all just agree now to make our sales thread rules more explicit and move along?

[HarveySwick]

 

Fully agree. (thumbs u A seller's integrity to honor transactions and use common sense SHOULD be enough, but it's obviously not the case with some so it seems clearly defined rules are needed.

 

SHOULD BE... but unfortunately, the majority of sellers here, much like on Ebay and Craigslist, aren't educated in the intricacies of contract law.

 

Yes and no. I agree that a seller runs his sales thread and makes the rules for his sales thread. BUT if a buyer follows those rules, he needs to honor the deal. That's pretty clearly stated - you list a book for sale, someone buys it, you SELL the book. Not "I decided I'm not going to sell it" after someone buys it. This JUST happened with oceanavekid and he rightfully ended up on the Probation List.

 

The oceanavekid scenario left me with mixed feelings as well. There are similarities in the two cases.

 

Both buyers were in the gist of some form of discussion. In oceanavekid's case, it was over price... and in trory140's case, it was over shipping to an unknown buyer/out of country/use of 3rd party.

 

In each case, when the sellers receded from the sales, both buyer's bypassed discussions and and opted for "Buy it Now" scenarios.

 

Oceanavekid's buyer Jawn bypassed the "kid's" statement of "I think I will just keep it" and did a Buy It Now to force the sale. That buyer dictated that sale and I personally don't think it was right. I showed an example of an open thread with a Walking Dead # 1 from 4 years ago and how the same scenario could be used to force a sale. Without set rules in place, even here, we are going on "board etiquette".

 

All I saw was the "kid" not wanting to sell for less and then stating he was going to "keep the book". Then Jawn, not satisfied with this explanation, used the as a technicality to force the seller into a transaction with the buyer. I do not think this was right... and I personally don't feel oceanviewkid should be on the PL because of it. Maybe I would feel differently had I really wanted that book though

 

In this current scenario, Randy posted the to trory140's book... that's a given. That said, without a stated set of general rules that we can all fall back on and use...Rory's lack of stating "whoever posts wins" takes a back seat to "we can discuss payment/shipping/pickup options" which he did state. When the seller didn't agree with the options presented, the buyer, sensing the seller's reluctance, did a Buy It Now scenario offering to send a check without stipulations.

 

Now I know Randy didn't do this to force the sale, but just to entice the seller to sell to him. The seller, not having set rules in place, went with his gut feeling and opted out... which is his right to do since discussions for his merchandise from his thread didn't work out to his liking.

 

Keep in mind that without stated board rules, all a sign is... is "board etiquette". Trory140 didn't have it listed in his "normal rules" that posting a would insure the sale of the book. "Board etiquette" might state (in the cloud where "board etiquette" resides)... that Randy get that book, unfortunately based on the wording of Rory's sales thread, and Rory's gut feeling on the transaction, plus the fact that it ultimately IS his 10K comic to do with what he pleases.

 

I have my own personal history with the use of the sign. Unless the Board posts stated, uniform rules concerning that sign... its all left up to interpretation and "board etiquette".

 

Don't get me wrong. I think Randy should be entitled to the book. That's because I know him and I've seen his purchases in the past and know that if he could, he would hand deliver that 10K to Rory in person. It's just that until both buyer and seller come to a mutual agreement based on the seller's given thread rules... one that's consented upon by both parties... then it's the seller's book until that happens.

 

 

I think the call for HOS has become something out of hand lately where every single transgression leads to "Let's add him to the HOS! " But I don't think there is anything wrong with a buyer ASKING for opinions and people offering those opinions as is the case here. Randy started a thread to ask other's opinions on the matter. That's how most of these discussions arise - someone looking for advice.

 

Asking opinions is fine and Randy has the full right to do this, but when opinions escalate into the snowball effect that they often do on the boards, they tend to become more "facts" than "opinions" in the eyes of the people who read them.

 

Thanks for taking the time to reply. (thumbs u Unfortunately, I think we're just though because nothing is going to change. Sellers are responsible for their own sales threads and when they're too lazy to clearly define the rules of THEIR sales thread and essentially giving themselves cart Blanche to sell to who they want to and how they want to, not much you can really do other than add them to personal lists and move on. The book should be Randy's and it won't be so that's that.

[N/A]

He did Roy. He put it on hold while they worked out shipping/payment terms. 3rd party was mentioned and the seller did not agree. Book off hold. The seller is not obligated to give any more time to this.

 

The buyer suggested a 3rd party because he was unsure. The seller decided not to proceed because he was unsure.

 

Personally I would have sold Quad the book but I'm not the seller and I back his decision to say no to the suggestion and therefore the sale.

 

If it was an unconditional then no need to suggest a 3rd party. Tell me you have never been involved in a live negotiation like this. We both know you have.

 

But it was an unconditional , Jeff.

 

Look at the PM - does Quad stipulate any sort of conditions in there? It's the seller who moves the conversation to shipping/payment terms where Quad then lists a couple of options (and when those options are rejected seems happy to follow the rules of the sales thread to the letter).

 

If Quad had posted ":takeit: with shipping to Canada & payment by Paypal", it would have been a completely different story - but he didn't.

 

I disagree Michael. He posted the and because he did that everyone is claiming it was unconditional. The rest of the conversation tells me it was not unconditional.

[comicdonna]

Had it said"Phil's Parking Lot (btw someone needs to PM me the background on that)"

It's a fictitious place, (I believe in Florida originally)where boardies meet up, and get physical with each other. It started after a person or people got strikes for threats. Rather than state you want to kick someone's butt, it's safer to say lets meet at Phil's parking lot.

[comicdonna]

First off I want to thank everyone for their opinions. And to those of you who said something nice about me

As of my last message with the seller, I have rescinded my and endorsed (if that's the right word ) the sale of the book to the other buyer.

Personally I'm going to chalk this up to a transaction gone wrong and I won't be nominating anyone for the PL.

Last I heard the other parties involved had resumed talks on the sale of the book but any information beyond that is obviously up to them to share.

I hope Rick sells you the book, Randy.

[Bio-Rupp]

Fully agree. (thumbs u A seller's integrity to honor transactions and use common sense SHOULD be enough, but it's obviously not the case with some so it seems clearly defined rules are needed.

 

SHOULD BE... but unfortunately, the majority of sellers here, much like on Ebay and Craigslist, aren't educated in the intricacies of contract law.

 

Yes and no. I agree that a seller runs his sales thread and makes the rules for his sales thread. BUT if a buyer follows those rules, he needs to honor the deal. That's pretty clearly stated - you list a book for sale, someone buys it, you SELL the book. Not "I decided I'm not going to sell it" after someone buys it. This JUST happened with oceanavekid and he rightfully ended up on the Probation List.

 

The oceanavekid scenario left me with mixed feelings as well. There are similarities in the two cases.

 

Both buyers were in the gist of some form of discussion. In oceanavekid's case, it was over price... and in trory140's case, it was over shipping to an unknown buyer/out of country/use of 3rd party.

 

In each case, when the sellers receded from the sales, both buyer's bypassed discussions and and opted for "Buy it Now" scenarios.

 

Oceanavekid's buyer Jawn bypassed the "kid's" statement of "I think I will just keep it" and did a Buy It Now to force the sale. That buyer dictated that sale and I personally don't think it was right. I showed an example of an open thread with a Walking Dead # 1 from 4 years ago and how the same scenario could be used to force a sale. Without set rules in place, even here, we are going on "board etiquette".

 

All I saw was the "kid" not wanting to sell for less and then stating he was going to "keep the book". Then Jawn, not satisfied with this explanation, used the as a technicality to force the seller into a transaction with the buyer. I do not think this was right... and I personally don't feel oceanviewkid should be on the PL because of it. Maybe I would feel differently had I really wanted that book though

 

In this current scenario, Randy posted the to trory140's book... that's a given. That said, without a stated set of general rules that we can all fall back on and use...Rory's lack of stating "whoever posts wins" takes a back seat to "we can discuss payment/shipping/pickup options" which he did state. When the seller didn't agree with the options presented, the buyer, sensing the seller's reluctance, did a Buy It Now scenario offering to send a check without stipulations.

 

Now I know Randy didn't do this to force the sale, but just to entice the seller to sell to him. The seller, not having set rules in place, went with his gut feeling and opted out... which is his right to do since discussions for his merchandise from his thread didn't work out to his liking.

 

Keep in mind that without stated board rules, all a sign is... is "board etiquette". Trory140 didn't have it listed in his "normal rules" that posting a would insure the sale of the book. "Board etiquette" might state (in the cloud where "board etiquette" resides)... that Randy get that book, unfortunately based on the wording of Rory's sales thread, and Rory's gut feeling on the transaction, plus the fact that it ultimately IS his 10K comic to do with what he pleases.

 

I have my own personal history with the use of the sign. Unless the Board posts stated, uniform rules concerning that sign... its all left up to interpretation and "board etiquette".

 

Don't get me wrong. I think Randy should be entitled to the book. That's because I know him and I've seen his purchases in the past and know that if he could, he would hand deliver that 10K to Rory in person. It's just that until both buyer and seller come to a mutual agreement based on the seller's given thread rules... one that's consented upon by both parties... then it's the seller's book until that happens.

 

 

I think the call for HOS has become something out of hand lately where every single transgression leads to "Let's add him to the HOS! " But I don't think there is anything wrong with a buyer ASKING for opinions and people offering those opinions as is the case here. Randy started a thread to ask other's opinions on the matter. That's how most of these discussions arise - someone looking for advice.

 

Asking opinions is fine and Randy has the full right to do this, but when opinions escalate into the snowball effect that they often do on the boards, they tend to become more "facts" than "opinions" in the eyes of the people who read them.

 

Thanks for taking the time to reply. (thumbs u Unfortunately, I think we're just though because nothing is going to change. Sellers are responsible for their own sales threads and when they're too lazy to clearly define the rules of THEIR sales thread and essentially giving themselves cart Blanche to sell to who they want to and how they want to, not much you can really do other than add them to personal lists and move on. The book should be Randy's and it won't be so that's that.

 

" " is what it's all about Justin

 

xxx ooo

 

Rupp

[Bio-Rupp]

First off I want to thank everyone for their opinions. And to those of you who said something nice about me

As of my last message with the seller, I have rescinded my and endorsed (if that's the right word ) the sale of the book to the other buyer.

Personally I'm going to chalk this up to a transaction gone wrong and I won't be nominating anyone for the PL.

Last I heard the other parties involved had resumed talks on the sale of the book but any information beyond that is obviously up to them to share.

I hope Rick sells you the book, Randy.

 

I'm with Mike on this Randy

 

If it doesn't happen, don't worry... good things come to those who wait

 

xxx ooo

 

Rupp