General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[Hado]

Why would he care about the PL? According to him he still sells stuff and has great feedback!

 

I agree, I see no way for someone to get off of it when they laugh at it.

I totally understand that, all too well.

 

I more meant at the time of his nomination, were steps laid out to get off the list. Finish a transaction, refund money's, etc.

 

As I remember it, he was required to honour an "I'll take it" posted by a member and therefore sell the book as advertised. As to whether the book is still available or indeed sold to someone else I do not know.

Thanks, I was trying to recall the details, I thought it was something along those lines.

 

So regardless of if he even still has the book he has refused to honor the

Meaning a PL dead end.

 

Let's not forget that he told the person that the book was no longer for sale via PM twice (I think) before the buyer posted the

 

I'm trying to remember the words but it was something like "no thanks but I think I'm going to keep it". He posted the interaction between the two at someone's request

It's a strange one.

[Bio-Rupp]

Just going by this. Jawn states he knows oceanavekid wants to keep book. Then sent a PM that was unanswered and posted a take it.

 

To be fair, he did say in PM he thought the book was underpriced and he thought he may keep it. I got caught up in some other things, and then fell asleep, woke up and sent a PM agreeing to what he was asking for the book ($10 more than offered) in a PM and posted I'll take it in his open, and still open listing/board post. To me if he was keeping it to sell on Ebay he should have closed it and/or responded to my PM. I don't know it's been a frustrating week but tomorrow is another day.

 

I posted an example during all this with Branget's open thread from four years ago for a slabbed 9.8 Walking Dead #1 listed in an "open" sales thread for $600.

 

There is no difference in Branget stating that his old thread is closed to me now than oceanavekid telling Jawn he is going to keep the book.

 

Jawn just was trying push the sale after being told "no". It happens sometimes to all sellers when a buyer tries to dictate the sale. The 'kid stood his ground.

 

I do wish he and jawn could come to an understanding... the timeline does shows oceanavekid told him he wanted to keep it... and jawn himself posted in the post above that he knew this.

 

It's just another one of those scenarios where not having set board selling rules posted causes problems.

 

 

 

[Hado]

Just going by this. Jawn states he knows oceanavekid wants to keep book. Then sent a PM that was unanswered and posted a take it.

 

To be fair, he did say in PM he thought the book was underpriced and he thought he may keep it. I got caught up in some other things, and then fell asleep, woke up and sent a PM agreeing to what he was asking for the book ($10 more than offered) in a PM and posted I'll take it in his open, and still open listing/board post. To me if he was keeping it to sell on Ebay he should have closed it and/or responded to my PM. I don't know it's been a frustrating week but tomorrow is another day.

 

I posted an example during all this with Branget's open thread from four years ago for a slabbed 9.8 Walking Dead #1 listed in an "open" sales thread for $600.

 

There is no difference in Branget stating that his old thread is closed to me now than oceanavekid telling Jawn he is going to keep the book.

 

Jawn just was trying push the sale after being told "no". It happens sometimes to all sellers and a buyer tries to dictate the sale. The 'kid stood his ground.

 

I do wish he and jawn could come to an understanding... the timeline does shows oceanavekid told him he wanted to keep it... and jawn himself posted in the post above that he knew this.

 

It's just another one of those scenarios where not having set board selling rules posted cause problems.

 

 

Seems like an unfortunate pairing too.

 

Some sellers would have just shipped to avoid the hassle, some buyers would have just moved on, or both parties would have communicated better and come to a resolition privately.

[Bio-Rupp]

Branget... would you take $550

 

Thread's still open.

 

Oh and I'm not picking on Branget... he's a cool dude. He just was the first one I found that had an open thread with a super nice book last month when all this came up.

 

Love ya Branget

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4535681&fpart=1

[HarveySwick]

But Jeff never told anyone "I'm just going to keep The Walking Dead #1 9.8" and left his thread open. It's just an old thread that should have been closed.

 

That's very different than a very live and active thread where someone says I "might" just keep it as he is negotiating and does nothing with his very live and active sales thread. If oceanavekid really wanted to keep the book, he should have marked his sales thread "Closed"

 

Again...if a random buyer came along and said and oceanavekid said "nah, I'm just going to keep it" - would your opinion change?

[crassus]

I think the seller got tripped up in his own cleverness, and then decided to just ignore the buyer, and having made a hole for himself, decided instead to keep digging. And so he is on the PL and looks to be another Solarcadet, different class but same result.

[CAHokie]

But Jeff never told anyone "I'm just going to keep The Walking Dead #1 9.8" and left his thread one. It's just an old thread that should have been closed.

 

That's very different than a very live and active thread where someone says I "might" just keep it as he is negotiating and does nothing with his very live and active sales thread. If oceanavekid really wanted to keep the book, he should have marked his sales thread "Closed"

 

Again...if a random buyer came along and said and oceanavekid said "nah, I'm just going to keep it" - would your opinion change?

 

To me it was an obvious bartering tool. Yes, the WD analogy is great and all but common sense would let most people know that the thread was old and closed. Not really the same as a new thread at the top of the sales thread. I would love for the naysayers to answer Harveys question though.

[Bio-Rupp]

But Jeff never told anyone "I'm just going to keep The Walking Dead #1 9.8" and left his thread one. It's just an old thread that should have been closed.

 

That's very different than a very live and active thread where someone says I "might" just keep it as he is negotiating and does nothing with his very live and active sales thread. If oceanavekid really wanted to keep the book, he should have marked his sales thread "Closed"

 

Again...if a random buyer came along and said and oceanavekid said "nah, I'm just going to keep it" - would your opinion change?

 

To me it was an obvious bartering tool. Yes, the WD analogy is great and all but common sense would let most people know that the thread was old and closed. Not really the same as a new thread at the top of the sales thread. I would love for the naysayers to answer Harveys question though.

 

Justin (Harvey) has a good point.

 

Here's the only answer (which is a question ) that I have... when is a sales thread closed if the seller doesn't close it? One day? A week? A month?

 

The only person that can tell you if a thread is closed or something isn't for sale is the seller... if he doesn't post the information, then when?

[Hado]

But Jeff never told anyone "I'm just going to keep The Walking Dead #1 9.8" and left his thread open. It's just an old thread that should have been closed.

 

That's very different than a very live and active thread where someone says I "might" just keep it as he is negotiating and does nothing with his very live and active sales thread. If oceanavekid really wanted to keep the book, he should have marked his sales thread "Closed"

 

Again...if a random buyer came along and said and oceanavekid said "nah, I'm just going to keep it" - would your opinion change?

Yes.

 

I know it's poor communication, which seems like the theme of this issue.

 

But what if "I think I'll keep it" was a way of cutting off communication with a buyer you simply didn't want to deal with for whatever reason. Low post count, gut feeling, whatever.

 

And while the thread should have been closed or the issue should have been clearer via PM, we all have to sleep sometimes. The takeit in the thread was Jawn's 35th post and was placed at 4:14 am.

Edited June 5, 2014 by Hado

[Bio-Rupp]

But Jeff never told anyone "I'm just going to keep The Walking Dead #1 9.8" and left his thread one. It's just an old thread that should have been closed.

 

That's very different than a very live and active thread where someone says I "might" just keep it as he is negotiating and does nothing with his very live and active sales thread. If oceanavekid really wanted to keep the book, he should have marked his sales thread "Closed"

 

Again...if a random buyer came along and said and oceanavekid said "nah, I'm just going to keep it" - would your opinion change?

 

To me it was an obvious bartering tool. Yes, the WD analogy is great and all but common sense would let most people know that the thread was old and closed. Not really the same as a new thread at the top of the sales thread. I would love for the naysayers to answer Harveys question though.

 

It appears to have been a bartering tool to the buyer.

 

If it was a bartering tool to the seller, then I'm guessing he would have sold it to him at the price listed. The seller didn't sell it, so we can only assume he wasn't bartering.

 

Editing this in...

 

Jawn posted on 5/1/14 at around 4am. The last activity oceanavekid's thread had was on 4/24/14 at around 10pm at night. So roughly a week had passed without activity in this thread.

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Board=79&Number=7656855&Searchpage=1&Main=336609&Words=&topic=0&Search=true#Post7656855

 

Since it was posted in the very popular Copper/Modern section... I would "guess" this thread was probably on page 5 or 6. Not really a "new thread at the top of the sale's threads"

Edited June 5, 2014 by Bio-Rupp

[HarveySwick]

But doesn't that start to become a very slippery slope? When would sellers ever be held to honor a sale if they have outs from their own rules? Now we have to examine at what time books were claimed?

 

I'm assuming his rules were "First in the thread takes it" even though it's tough to find out as he edited the thread of contention and his last few sales threads were shut down by the mods.

 

"I THINK I MIGHT just keep it" is very different than "I decided that I AM going to keep it [and I'm going to update my thread stating as such]". I'm not arguing semantics. I'm just reading the words for what they say. He was posturing for $10 more and when the buyer decided - why not and paid the asking price- he should have honored the sale.

 

But the real issue now is - why didn't he just honor the sale after the fact or find a way to work something out with the would be buyer. He just doesn't care so why would anyone else care to deal with him, let alone advocate for him to be off the PL.

[crassus]

But Jeff never told anyone "I'm just going to keep The Walking Dead #1 9.8" and left his thread one. It's just an old thread that should have been closed.

 

That's very different than a very live and active thread where someone says I "might" just keep it as he is negotiating and does nothing with his very live and active sales thread. If oceanavekid really wanted to keep the book, he should have marked his sales thread "Closed"

 

Again...if a random buyer came along and said and oceanavekid said "nah, I'm just going to keep it" - would your opinion change?

 

To me it was an obvious bartering tool. Yes, the WD analogy is great and all but common sense would let most people know that the thread was old and closed. Not really the same as a new thread at the top of the sales thread. I would love for the naysayers to answer Harveys question though.

 

It appears to have been a bartering tool to the buyer.

 

If it was a bartering tool to the seller, then I'm guessing he would have sold it to him at the price listed. The seller didn't sell it, so we can only assume he wasn't bartering.

 

Editing this in...

 

Jawn posted on 5/1/14 at around 4am. The last activity oceanavekid's thread had was on 4/24/14 at around 10pm at night. So roughly a week had passed without activity in this thread.

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Board=79&Number=7656855&Searchpage=1&Main=336609&Words=&topic=0&Search=true#Post7656855

 

Since it was posted in the very popular Copper/Modern section... I would "guess" this thread was probably on page 5 or 6. Not really a "new thread at the top of the sale's threads"

 

As for a bartering tool, it read to me like the seller was fishing for more based on the threat to remove it from sale, (it was "underpriced") not realizing the buyer could (and in fact did) trump it with an I'll take it for the advertised price.

 

For me the timelines that matter are the PM conversations. If the thread was indeed dead and buried, the seller could have stopped fishing and simply said, "sorry buddy, thread is closed and book is off to another venue, thanks for your interest".

 

 

 

[Bio-Rupp]

 

But the real issue now is - why didn't he just honor the sale after the fact or find a way to work something out with the would be buyer. He just doesn't care so why would anyone else care to deal with him, let alone advocate for him to be off the PL.

 

Another good point Justin .

 

What if he had just said that jawn was a "buyer on his personal no sell to list" ?

 

We don't fault other seller's for stating this... if the 'kid would have stated this, would he have been off the hook?

 

Now that's a slippery slope !

[HarveySwick]

For me the timelines that matter are the PM conversations. If the thread was indeed dead and buried, the seller could have stopped fishing and simply said, "sorry buddy, thread is closed and book is off to another venue, thanks for your interest".

Very good point. (thumbs u

 

The seller was actively discussing selling the book. He just wouldn't budge on the price for $10.

 

He basically said "I think it's underpriced as is... so I can't budge on the price, so if you want it, you better act quick...as I might just keep it."

 

Doesn't that sort of kill the argument that the sales thread was closed? It was still very open per the seller's negotiations at that point.

[CAHokie]

I Am surprised you are spending the time to defend someone who acts the way he does. I look at the totality of the circumstances.

 

1. Sellers reputation.......

 

2. Did seller have time to close thread? Obviously, since he had someone typing him about it, I doubt it slipped his mind.

 

3. Do not sell list? Can't use that argument after bartering with the guy?

 

4. Seller made a good faith effort to fix things? Yeah right....

 

5. Again..sellers reputation. Not a long time seller that people know would not try to get one over on. He will learn that in the long run that little bit of money he may have squeezed out will cost more in future sales.

[crassus]

 

But the real issue now is - why didn't he just honor the sale after the fact or find a way to work something out with the would be buyer. He just doesn't care so why would anyone else care to deal with him, let alone advocate for him to be off the PL.

 

Another good point Justin .

 

What if he had just said that jawn was a "buyer on his personal no sell to list" ?

 

We don't fault other seller's for stating this... if the 'kid would have stated this, would he have been off the hook?

 

Now that's a slippery slope !

 

I would agree that this is in principle possible and that this is a larger question, and it can be a slippery slope certainly. Here in this case there is no evidence of prior animosity, or any desire to ban the buyer for personal reasons.

 

That said, in general terms, it is difficult to define the limits of a seller's discretion.

 

 

Edited June 5, 2014 by crassus

[Bio-Rupp]

I Am surprised you are spending the time to defend someone who acts the way he does. I look at the totality of the circumstances.

 

1. Sellers reputation.......

 

2. Did seller have time to close thread? Obviously, since he had someone typing him about it, I doubt it slipped his mind.

 

3. Do not sell list? Can't use that argument after bartering with the guy?

 

4. Seller made a good faith effort to fix things? Yeah right....

 

5. Again..sellers reputation. Not a long time seller that people know would not try to get one over on. He will learn that in the long run that little bit of money he may have squeezed out will cost more in future sales.

 

I understand all that you have put forth above.

 

Again all I'm reading in to it is oceanavekid stating he wanted to keep the book... and jawn acknowledging that he knew oceanavekid wanted to keep the book.

 

All I've done is pointed out that both parties stated the above... and that the thread wasn't a "new sales thread on page 1".

 

I'm not really defending oceanavekid as much as I'm defending a seller's right to say "no" to a sale. sign or not... oceanavekid made a call in his sales thread with his merchandise. If he was bartering to get the most out of his book, then he would have sold it. Instead he told the interested buyer that he didn't want to sell as he thought the price was too low (if I remember it correctly).

 

If oceanavekid was bartering then I'm assuming a sale would have been made. If he decided to keep the book... which he told the buyer before the was placed, it just shows me that he decided to keep the book

 

Had jawn not sent the PM trying to get a discount in the first place and just posted the , then it would be clearer to me as to who would be more in the right.

 

 

 

No one has answered my query on "when" a sales thread is closed yet without posted instructions from the seller either

[CAHokie]

That is a great question and I think the board should have a standard "if no update by seller then all threads are considered closed after.......". Personally, I feel that 10 days or 2 weeks would make sense and be fair.

[Bio-Rupp]

That is a great question and I think the board should have a standard "if no update by seller then all threads are considered closed after.......". Personally, I feel that 10 days or 2 weeks would make sense and be fair.

 

It would be great if there was option we could select when starting a new thread that asks us how long we want the thread to remain open.... and it would automatically close at a time of our choosing, be it two weeks or maybe a month

 

We have that option with polls.

 

That would be awesome to have that ability... plus it would take care of a lot of forgotten, open threads.

[N/A]

Just going by this. Jawn states he knows oceanavekid wants to keep book. Then sent a PM that was unanswered and posted a take it.

 

To be fair, he did say in PM he thought the book was underpriced and he thought he may keep it. I got caught up in some other things, and then fell asleep, woke up and sent a PM agreeing to what he was asking for the book ($10 more than offered) in a PM and posted I'll take it in his open, and still open listing/board post. To me if he was keeping it to sell on Ebay he should have closed it and/or responded to my PM. I don't know it's been a frustrating week but tomorrow is another day.

 

I posted an example during all this with Branget's open thread from four years ago for a slabbed 9.8 Walking Dead #1 listed in an "open" sales thread for $600.

 

There is no difference in Branget stating that his old thread is closed to me now than oceanavekid telling Jawn he is going to keep the book.

 

Jawn just was trying push the sale after being told "no". It happens sometimes to all sellers when a buyer tries to dictate the sale. The 'kid stood his ground.

 

I do wish he and jawn could come to an understanding... the timeline does shows oceanavekid told him he wanted to keep it... and jawn himself posted in the post above that he knew this.

 

It's just another one of those scenarios where not having set board selling rules posted causes problems.

 

 

 

There is a very large difference actually and this conversation should have morphed into a discussion on expiry of open threads but it didn't.