Proposed New Rule for Sales Forum 3 3

[Buzzetta]

On 12/20/2021 at 12:18 AM, NP_Gresham said:

What about pre-sale on modern variants where there has to be a certain number sold to place an order?

What about supplies like Mylars and bags? 
 

What is ‘in the sellers possession’ mean anyways. Sometimes sellers have books in storage and they have to search for them or they are working off an inventory list. Not everyone can store comics where they live, they may be many miles away.

Then there are sketches, signings, and custom artwork sold here, is this included?

This is hard no for me. It is an unworkable rule

I don’t sell things I don’t have in hand and I do not partake in preorders… 

With that said…

Hard no from me as well for the very reasons you have stated. 

[wombat]

I'm all for a rule the seller needs to clearly state if they don't have the book in hand. Outside of that let the buyer decide if they want to buy it or not. 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 12/20/2021 at 1:32 PM, wombat said:

I'm all for a rule the seller needs to clearly state if they don't have the book in hand. Outside of that let the buyer decide if they want to buy it or not. 

I agree. If a buyer is happy to buy from a seller, knowing that the book is not in hand, then it is no ones business but theirs. It should be disclosed though, I think, as there are many possible scenarios where things could go wrong, leaving the seller unable to fulfil the order. As long as it is clear, both buyer and seller know the additional potential risks. If a buyer nominated a seller for failing to deliver when it was clear that the book was not in hand, and the book then got damaged, lost or cancelled at the sellers end, then I would say 'tough' to that buyer because that will always be a possibility when buying books that aren't in the sellers hands. 

[CGC Mike]

So, If a seller doesn't state that the books are not in his/her possession, how am I supposed to know if that person is breaking the rule?  Once an offer and acceptance has taken place, it is out of my hands.

Note that buyers and sellers have full responsibility for their transactions. CGC will not resolve disputes. Purchases and sales are done at your own risk.

 

Users of the Boards may advertise collectibles or other items available for sale or trade, or wanted for purchase. CGC has no control over the items or services listed or purchased or traded through the Boards, the quality of such items, or whether such items correspond to their description on the Boards. CGC also cannot ensure that a buyer, seller or trader will pay the money or send the goods or perform the services promised, and CGC makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to any transactions performed on or through the Boards.

You hereby release CGC and its affiliates, subsidiaries, and their respective officers, directors, agents and employees, from any and all claims, disputes, demands, suits, liabilities and damages of every kind arising out of or connected with any transaction or other dealings you may have with any other Boards user. You understand that you offer, bid for, and agree to buy, sell and trade collectibles on or through the web site at your own risk.

[Sigur Ros]

Is this a seller's complaint or a buyer's complaint? 

Sure, consignments and pre-orders should be noted and maybe complaints should be tracked, leading to potential bans for not mentioning... but banning outright? 

Having less books advertised for sale only benefits the other sellers, not buyers. 

[alexgross.com]

On 12/19/2021 at 7:56 PM, Beige said:

I can see the reasoning.

 

As for new rules - I'd like to see a 6 month timeframe from joining before you can sell books. No post count level, as that will just result in spamming.

 

It does seem to be the 'just got here' crowd who are causing the main problems (not that there are too many, as the board looks after its own) - just a thought.

 

i agree with this wholeheartedly. most of the alleged spammers i've seen just got here and want to sell a bunch of expensive stuff. 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 12/20/2021 at 2:18 PM, CGC Mike said:

So, If a seller doesn't state that the books are not in his/her possession, how am I supposed to know if that person is breaking the rule?  Once an offer and acceptance has taken place, it is out of my hands.

If it had support from the community, would you be averse to making a rule that compels sellers to confirm when books are not in hand? As you say, you can't read minds, but if a dissatisfied buyer subsequently complains that a seller did not advise a book was not in hand, which they would not have bought if they had known, the community could at least police the seller via the probation / HOS against that rule. 

If there is no rule, then any seller can effectively lie about the status / whereabouts of a book and suffer no recourse. Unless I'm missing something?

[wombat]

On 12/20/2021 at 9:18 AM, CGC Mike said:

So, If a seller doesn't state that the books are not in his/her possession, how am I supposed to know if that person is breaking the rule?  Once an offer and acceptance has taken place, it is out of my hands.

Note that buyers and sellers have full responsibility for their transactions. CGC will not resolve disputes. Purchases and sales are done at your own risk.

 

Users of the Boards may advertise collectibles or other items available for sale or trade, or wanted for purchase. CGC has no control over the items or services listed or purchased or traded through the Boards, the quality of such items, or whether such items correspond to their description on the Boards. CGC also cannot ensure that a buyer, seller or trader will pay the money or send the goods or perform the services promised, and CGC makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to any transactions performed on or through the Boards.

You hereby release CGC and its affiliates, subsidiaries, and their respective officers, directors, agents and employees, from any and all claims, disputes, demands, suits, liabilities and damages of every kind arising out of or connected with any transaction or other dealings you may have with any other Boards user. You understand that you offer, bid for, and agree to buy, sell and trade collectibles on or through the web site at your own risk.

You also don't know if a seller had the books for sale somewhere else. But I believe that is also a rule. Its just something to be hopefully followed. 

[crassus]

On 12/20/2021 at 9:36 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

On 12/20/2021 at 9:18 AM, CGC Mike said:

So, If a seller doesn't state that the books are not in his/her possession, how am I supposed to know if that person is breaking the rule?  Once an offer and acceptance has taken place, it is out of my hands.

If it had support from the community, would you be averse to making a rule that compels sellers to confirm when books are not in hand? As you say, you can't read minds, but if a dissatisfied buyer subsequently complains that a seller did not advise a book was not in hand, which they would not have bought if they had known, the community could at least police the seller via the probation / HOS against that rule. 

If there is no rule, then any seller can effectively lie about the status / whereabouts of a book and suffer no recourse. Unless I'm missing something?

Where the book is physically at the time of sale would not imo change anything in terms of how the existing rules enforce accountability on sellers. At the end of the day, by running a sales thread here and taking money you will be held to account for meeting your obligations. On that level it doesn't matter where the book is, ultimately, the existing rules bind parties to meet their obligations, if they cannot we have a PL process which has proven its effectiveness, imo, for dealing with these problems. In this view, consignment is a bigger risk for sellers than for buyers, if anything goes wrong, it will be the seller who is dragged through the muck. 

[crassus]

On 12/20/2021 at 10:12 AM, wombat said:

You also don't know if a seller had the books for sale somewhere else. But I believe that is also a rule. Its just something to be hopefully followed. 

I  agree this is a fair comparison, the "Boards exclusive" rule is of the same kind of rule, it does not have to be declared but it is an assumed obligation, and when a seller posts we all assume they understand this, but one difference is that members can (and sometimes do) discover the book(s) posted elsewhere online, as to break this rule is by definition to do so publicly (i.e.  found  still  for sale on Facebook  or Instagram etc). So in this case someone breaking the Boards exclusive rule can be discovered to be breaking the rule, its not the same as failing to  mention the whereabouts of the book, consignment or otherwise. I think the problem the Boards exclusive rule was designed to guard against is also  more  serious than the issues surrounding  consignment. Assuming a consignment  book  is only offered here, there is no conflict of obligations, and the Boards buyer in any event  has recourse to the PL if the seller fails to  meet their obligations. 

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

On 12/19/2021 at 8:00 PM, lizards2 said:

Jolly the Grinder...,  

Just don't Google that... 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 12/20/2021 at 3:38 PM, crassus said:

Where the book is physically at the time of sale would not imo change anything in terms of how the existing rules enforce accountability on sellers. At the end of the day, by running a sales thread here and taking money you will be held to account for meeting your obligations. On that level it doesn't matter where the book is, ultimately, the existing rules bind parties to meet their obligations, if they cannot we have a PL process which has proven its effectiveness, imo, for dealing with these problems. In this view, consignment is a bigger risk for sellers than for buyers, if anything goes wrong, it will be the seller who is dragged through the muck. 

Thanks Crassus.

For the sake of argument, and to clarify the current position, if a seller put a book up for sale that they didn't have in hand, and did not disclose that fact, would any subsequent buyer be in a position to nominate them to be 'dragged through the muck', claiming deception, if the seller could not then fulfil the deal for reasons beyond their control?

And if so, what would that dragging through the muck actually constitute?

I'm thinking of two scenarios

1. Seller secures x copies of a variant from, say, Metropolis. Advertises on the boards without disclosing that they are not in hand. Buyer buys, Metropolis fails, seller refunds buyer. Buyer not happy, as could have secured elsewhere if they had known the copy wasn't in hand
2. Seller secures x copies of a variant from, say, Metropolis. Advertises on the boards but discloses that they are not in hand. Buyer buys, Metropolis fails, seller refunds buyer. Buyer cannot complain as they knew the risks

Edited December 20, 2021 by Get Marwood & I
added scenarios

[Dr. Love]

Dog piling and thread krapping and serious sarcasm. Probation is to influence solutions - if a consignment isn't disclosed, falls through, and a refund is subsequently made in a timely fashion, then probation isnt warranted and the formal hall of shame might be overkill.

We can just drive the guy out the door. It's been done before for less.

[shadroch]

If a seller doesn't follow thru, for whatever reason, they are on the hook. Why complicate things? If a book isn't sent out in a timely manner, the buyer has a recourse. 

If there is one thing we don't need, it is new rules. 

Edited December 20, 2021 by shadroch

[Get Marwood & I]

On 12/20/2021 at 4:05 PM, Dr. Love said:

Dog piling and thread krapping and serious sarcasm. Probation is to influence solutions - if a consignment isn't disclosed, falls through, and a refund is subsequently made in a timely fashion, then probation isnt warranted and the formal hall of shame might be overkill.

We can just drive the guy out the door. It's been done before for less.

Aren't all those things moderation offences though Dr Love? If there is no rule broken, can't the seller complain to the mods? And won't they be obliged to act in the seller's favour?

On a separate point, I love that Dr Love is a proponent of dog piling, thread krapping and serious sarcasm 

[Ride the Tiger]

Rule #5 in the marketplace rules.

Either a scan or an estimated grade must be listed with each book offered for sale.

 

How can you give either of those without book in hand?

[shadroch]

On 12/20/2021 at 9:10 AM, Ride the Tiger said:

Rule #5 in the marketplace rules.

Either a scan or an estimated grade must be listed with each book offered for sale.

 

How can you give either of those without book in hand?

If a book is headed back from it's year long sabbatical , you would know it's grade. 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 12/20/2021 at 4:14 PM, shadroch said:

If a book is headed back from it's year long sabbatical , you would know CGC's assessment of it's grade. 

Repaired that for you.

SCS pending, of course. 

[crassus]

On 12/20/2021 at 10:51 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

Thanks Crassus.

For the sake of argument, and to clarify the current position, if a seller but a book up that they didn't have in hand, and did not disclose that fact, would any subsequent buyer be in a position to nominate them to be 'dragged through the muck', claiming deception, if the seller could not then fulfil the deal for reasons beyond their control?

And if so, what would that dragging through the muck actually constitute?

 

I suppose a lot would depend on the exact circumstances, but running a scenario, for example, seller posts book without disclosing consignment, someone  posts "I'll take it" unconditionally, seller invoices and  buyer  pays, but at some point thereafter the  real owner backs out....well if the seller immediately refunds that might, depending upon the buyer, end the matter completely. However, experience has shown that that does not necessarily end the drama,  as there have been  some big PL takedowns for sellers denying buyers a book  they were promised, even  after refund. One example I can think of did  not involve  consignment, but was  logically equivalent, in that after making sale, and accepting payment  by cheque, while cheque was  in the mail got  seller's  remorse and decided  to keep the book, that  seller  is on the  PL. Potentially, if you run  the same  scenario but with the hidden consignor having seller's remorse, the Board's proxy could still be hung  out to  dry in the same fashion. From the other  perspective, I  can  think  of  a Boardie who was otherwise  a very nice  guy with  lots  of  friends here  who got himself  blown up because  he  played the middleman buying stuff  for  a non-Boardie  friend, who  flaked, and  that did  not  save  the Boardie from consequences when he couldn't follow  through  on the sale  he had put  the "I'll take  it" on, so another  hard lesson learned I  guess. My experience has been  that if  you  promise  people  things  here and can't  come  through afterwards, then any kind  of subsequent "failure  to disclose" revelations only make  the drama  bigger and  the consequences  harder. 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 12/20/2021 at 4:18 PM, crassus said:

My experience has been  that if  you  promise  people  things  here and can't  come  through afterwards, then any kind  of subsequent "failure  to disclose" revelations only make  the drama  bigger and  the consequences  harder. 

Again, thanks. A formal requirement to disclose rule could only help then, wouldn't you say?