USAGE GUIDELINES - comment thread 3 3

[crassus]

Put in these terms I agree, a waste of space and time for sure, although technically it is breaking the rules also, since you are not supposed to be taking up front page sales space unless you are actually posting books. I can remember a time when the sales area was moving so fast that sellers would have threads deleted if they delayed even a couple of hours posting a book. I can remember a time also when if nobody posted in the thread for a few hours you were off page 1. I suspect those days may be gone for now....but I am an optimist so I think one day it will get back there.

[EC ed]

26 minutes ago, crassus said:

Put in these terms I agree, a waste of space and time for sure, although technically it is breaking the rules also, since you are not supposed to be taking up front page sales space unless you are actually posting books. I can remember a time when the sales area was moving so fast that sellers would have threads deleted if they delayed even a couple of hours posting a book. I can remember a time also when if nobody posted in the thread for a few hours you were off page 1. I suspect those days may be gone for now....but I am an optimist so I think one day it will get back there.

This wasn't the situation in this case. Seller was indeed posting books. In this specific case, there was a full blown sales thread already ongoing, with awesome books already listed for sale...call one of them Book X. Then, seller takes a break and says something like "I'll be back later this evening with more awesome books...including Book Y and Book Z."

Then, later that evening, seller comes back and says something like "Book X is sold, along with Book Y and Book Z. Apologies that I didn't actually end up listing Book Y and Book Z in the thread." Then seller carried on and listed more books...

In my view, in this case it's not a rules violation that Books Y and Z were not listed.

Edit: I think the discussion that Bomber-bob wants to have is whether the rules should be amended so that going forward, failure to list Books Y and Z would be a technical rules violation. While I understand that this sort of situation ruffles some feathers, it would be tricky to encode this in the rules...and I'm not sure we would want to. I suppose that makes it good fodder for discussion. 

Edited June 21, 2017 by edowens71

[crassus]

26 minutes ago, edowens71 said:

41 minutes ago, crassus said:

Put in these terms I agree, a waste of space and time for sure, although technically it is breaking the rules also, since you are not supposed to be taking up front page sales space unless you are actually posting books. I can remember a time when the sales area was moving so fast that sellers would have threads deleted if they delayed even a couple of hours posting a book. I can remember a time also when if nobody posted in the thread for a few hours you were off page 1. I suspect those days may be gone for now....but I am an optimist so I think one day it will get back there.

This wasn't the situation in this case. Seller was indeed posting books. In this specific case, there was a full blown sales thread already ongoing, with awesome books already listed for sale...call one of them Book X. Then, seller takes a break and says something like "I'll be back later this evening with more awesome books...including Book Y and Book Z."

Then, later that evening, seller comes back and says something like "Book X is sold, along with Book Y and Book Z. Apologies that I didn't actually end up listing Book Y and Book Z in the thread." Then seller carried on and listed more books...

In my view, in this case it's not a rules violation that Books Y and Z were not listed.

Edit: I think the discussion that Bomber-bob wants to have is whether the rules should be amended so that going forward, failure to list Books Y and Z would be a technical rules violation. While I understand that this sort of situation ruffles some feathers, it would be tricky to encode this in the rules...and I'm not sure we would want to. I suppose that makes it good fodder for discussion. 

Many thanks for the clarification Ed, I had wrongly assumed it was an aborted sales thread with no books posted. Assuming at least one book is posted the seller is under no obligation to post more whatever is announced, and I agree that would otherwise make a bad rule. I had in my mind a person starting a thread and then leaving without posting anything.

[Bomber-Bob]

5 hours ago, crassus said:

Many thanks for the clarification Ed, I had wrongly assumed it was an aborted sales thread with no books posted. Assuming at least one book is posted the seller is under no obligation to post more whatever is announced, and I agree that would otherwise make a bad rule. I had in my mind a person starting a thread and then leaving without posting anything.

Okay, I am surprised no one is behind me on this one and nobody else chimed in for at least a discussion. BTW, I stated no rules were violated, just bad taste. My point is this 'loophole' can be exploited and turn a sales thread into a PM auction. I believe the VCC has a rule about no PM sales before the starting time. My suggestion would be analagous to this rule.

[crassus]

5 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

5 hours ago, crassus said:

Many thanks for the clarification Ed, I had wrongly assumed it was an aborted sales thread with no books posted. Assuming at least one book is posted the seller is under no obligation to post more whatever is announced, and I agree that would otherwise make a bad rule. I had in my mind a person starting a thread and then leaving without posting anything.

Okay, I am surprised no one is behind me on this one and nobody else chimed in for at least a discussion. BTW, I stated no rules were violated, just bad taste. My point is this 'loophole' can be exploited and turn a sales thread into a PM auction. I believe the VCC has a rule about no PM sales before the starting time. My suggestion would be analagous to this rule.

I understand, but consider the following scenario. Suppose I post a bunch of books as per normal in a thread, get to the end of the day and something comes up and I say "Hey gang, will have to wrap this up tomorrow but check back tomorrow evening as I will be posting some big keys, X-Men 1, FF 1 and some others" etc, and in the ensuing 24hrs my PM inbox fills up with buyers begging to throw top dollar at the books, well....am I really obliged to refuse good sales to go back to a thread to post them instead? Its a fair question I guess, but I could not see my way to making something like that a rule.

[revat]

13 minutes ago, crassus said:

3 hours ago, Bomber-Bob said:

8 hours ago, crassus said:

Many thanks for the clarification Ed, I had wrongly assumed it was an aborted sales thread with no books posted. Assuming at least one book is posted the seller is under no obligation to post more whatever is announced, and I agree that would otherwise make a bad rule. I had in my mind a person starting a thread and then leaving without posting anything.

Okay, I am surprised no one is behind me on this one and nobody else chimed in for at least a discussion. BTW, I stated no rules were violated, just bad taste. My point is this 'loophole' can be exploited and turn a sales thread into a PM auction. I believe the VCC has a rule about no PM sales before the starting time. My suggestion would be analagous to this rule.

I understand, but consider the following scenario. Suppose I post a bunch of books as per normal in a thread, get to the end of the day and something comes up and I say "Hey gang, will have to wrap this up tomorrow but check back tomorrow evening as I will be posting some big keys, X-Men 1, FF 1 and some others" etc, and in the ensuing 24hrs my PM inbox fills up with buyers begging to throw top dollar at the books, well....am I really obliged to refuse good sales to go back to a thread to post them instead? Its a fair question I guess, but I could not see my way to making something like that a rule.

I think what happened kind of sucks, but I'm not sure there's anyway to enforce.  What would the rule say? how would you enforce it?  What is the logical conclusion? What if the thread has like 100 books, but like one of them gets sold before its posted because one of the big buyers in the thread is also a close friend of the seller?

I'm not saying that it what happened doesn't suck or that potential customers have a right to be frustrated (I would be), but it would be far more intrusive to have some type of weird unenforceable rule.

[ChiSoxFan]

7 minutes ago, crassus said:

I understand, but consider the following scenario. Suppose I post a bunch of books as per normal in a thread, get to the end of the day and something comes up and I say "Hey gang, will have to wrap this up tomorrow but check back tomorrow evening as I will be posting some big keys, X-Men 1, FF 1 and some others" etc, and in the ensuing 24hrs my PM inbox fills up with buyers begging to throw top dollar at the books, well....am I really obliged to refuse good sales to go back to a thread to post them instead? Its a fair question I guess, but I could not see my way to making something like that a rule.

I definitely see Bomber-Bob's point, but I'm with you on this one, Robert.  I also think they're a huge difference from someone who starts a thread promising certain books -- and then never posts anything (which as you pointed out, has happened, and those threads almost always get deleted), and someone who mentions certain books that may be coming up (while having posted books already) and then doesn't end up listing every "coming soon" book.  (I think it would be different if it were someone who posted they were listing an AF #15 and then posted a bunch of Youngblookd #1's and nothing else, obviously).

The hardest part about making that a "rule" would be -- how could it ever be enforced, and how would anyone know if an announced book had sold via PM or if the seller had decided to change their mind about listing it?  For example, in my current thread, if I had said I was going to be listing my ASM #39 (to go along with the ASM #40 I did list), but I decided partway through the thread to no longer put it up for sale, would said rule be forcing me to put the book up for sale then?  And if someone bought the #40 (which in my thread, someone did) and asked me to make them a package offer on the #39 as well, if something was arranged via PM, what would have kept me from simply saying I decided not to list the book?  (Not at all saying that what I would do, obviously -- this is purely a hypothetical).  How would that have ever been determined what happened?  That seems like it's too difficult to enforce.  I understand the frustration of people in the thread in question who never saw the two books ever offered, but it does happen.  

[Cliff R.]

I am with Bob wholeheartedly.  What if I, as a buyer, post a big "I'll take it" in response to an offering from a seller. Some hours later, I post "Oh, about that 'take it'. Found a better deal and the money's gone. Sorry to tease like that. ". What repercussions would I face? 

I can understand a seller listing a book, then having a change of heart and pulling it from a sale. At least the seller kept his word about listing it. This seller stated what was coming, then waited hours before telling everyone it was all a tease?

This seller has lost all credibility with me. There was no sincere apology .

[EC ed]

29 minutes ago, Cliff R. said:

What if I, as a buyer, post a big "I'll take it" in response to an offering from a seller. Some hours later, I post "Oh, about that 'take it'. Found a better deal and the money's gone. Sorry to tease like that. ". What repercussions would I face?

Big difference. In your hypothetical example, the seller made an offer, and you accepted. That's a two-sided commitment to complete a transaction, which if broken, should bear some repercussions (perhaps...unless the seller had a return policy...in which case, we can debate some technicalities).

In the case at hand here, there was no offer to sell you a book, so there could be no acceptance by you (because there was no offer), and therefore nothing that forms the basis of an enforceable transaction. So, no basis for formal repercussions.

[Cliff R.]

To make matters worse, I was so wrapped up in this topic that I forgot about the 3 auctions I'm involved in. They ended an hour ago. At least I got one out of three. Need some closure on this.

1 minute ago, edowens71 said:

Big difference. In your hypothetical example, the seller made an offer, and you accepted. That's a two-sided commitment to complete a transaction, which if broken, should bear some repercussions (perhaps...unless the seller had a return policy...in which case, we can debate some technicalities).

In the case at hand here, there was no offer to sell you a book, so there could be no acceptance by you (because there was no offer), and therefore nothing that forms the basis of an enforceable transaction. So, no basis for formal repercussions.

But the seller did make an offer. To list some specific books, which wasn't done. 

It's strange to me that buyers are held to higher standards than sellers are. Even in the WTB forum, members are told not to post listings unless they are serious about buying. Don't waste people's time searching for your items if you are not prepared to buy. This seller wasted a lot of my time that could have been better spent on listings that were sincere.  

[revat]

12 minutes ago, Cliff R. said:

To make matters worse, I was so wrapped up in this topic that I forgot about the 3 auctions I'm involved in. They ended an hour ago. At least I got one out of three. Need some closure on this.

But the seller did make an offer. To list some specific books, which wasn't done. 

It's strange to me that buyers are held to higher standards than sellers are. Even in the WTB forum, members are told not to post listings unless they are serious about buying. Don't waste people's time searching for your items if you are not prepared to buy. This seller wasted a lot of my time that could have been better spent on listings that were sincere.  

that's not remotely the same as an 'offer' from a legal or contractual sense. which is not to say its not frustrating or bad form, just to say that creating an unenforceable rule will not really help.  People have every right to be frustrated and call out the bad form, but it amounts more of a poor business tactic than anything else, which are not and should not be regulated.

Again think through a potnetial rule to its conclusion, including chisoxfan's example.

What if I had the book up on ebay for 3 months prior without a nibble, and was going to take it down in the next few hours before posting?  But it sold in the meantime just before I took it down?

What if I got busy that night and didn't have time to post it?  How long do I have before I HAVE TO LIST IT?

So what if I sold it before listing? Couldn't I just list it for $10M in the thread and meet the letter of the law?  I don't think the secret buyer would mind a profit split.

 

Edited June 21, 2017 by revat

[Bomber-Bob]

Okay, I can clearly see we don't want any more rules. I rescind my suggestion. Though I don't think it was the Seller's intent, he did expose a big loophole.  The way the Boards seem to operate these days we may soon see it as the new normal. Announce a book but don't list it, list something else, wait for the PM offers. Cool.

[Cliff R.]

8 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

Okay, I can clearly see we don't want any more rules. I rescind my suggestion. Though I don't think it was the Seller's intent, he did expose a big loophole.  The way the Boards seem to operate these days we may soon see it as the new normal. Announce a book but don't list it, list something else, wait for the PM offers. Cool.

Bob, I was hoping you'd show up. I'm surrounded by lawyers.

[EC ed]

21 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

Okay, I can clearly see we don't want any more rules. I rescind my suggestion. Though I don't think it was the Seller's intent, he did expose a big loophole.  The way the Boards seem to operate these days we may soon see it as the new normal. Announce a book but don't list it, list something else, wait for the PM offers. Cool.

Bob, I understand the irritation...really I do. It was an unforced error on the seller's part, but I don't believe there was any nefarious intent whatsoever.

As for this "loophole"...I don't see it being something that makes sense to "exploit." Quite the contrary. If I wanted to squeeze every dollar out of a book and get a "PM auction" going, I wouldn't go to a "tease then not list" strategy. Instead, I would list my book out there in the sales thread at an inflated price and say "PM offers considered." In the best case, someone gets itchy and takes it at my inflated price. If not, I'll have my PM auction underway...and no one would think of this as anything but normal operating procedure. There's just no incentive to do what you have in mind...I don't see it.

Edited June 22, 2017 by edowens71

[EC ed]

6 minutes ago, edowens71 said:

Bob, I understand the irritation...really I do. It was an unforced error on the seller's part, but I don't believe there was any nefarious intent whatsoever.

As for this "loophole"...I don't see it being something that makes sense to "exploit." Quite the contrary. If I wanted to squeeze every dollar out of a book and get a "PM auction" going, I wouldn't go to a "tease then not list" strategy. Instead, I would list my book out there in the sales thread at an inflated price and say "PM offers considered." In the best case, someone gets itchy and takes it at my inflated price. If not, I'll have my PM auction underway...and no one would think of this as anything but normal operating procedure. There's just no incentive to do what you have in mind...I don't see it.

If you ask me, here's what I think happened...or something close to it. A potential buyer PM'd seller about a big book that was already listed for sale in the thread. Potential buyer then says "hey, I may be interested in those other two books you mentioned...if we can do a package deal for all three books, I'd be interested in all 3." Then, it goes from there. Seller is just a collector who is trying to sell a few comics as efficiently as possible and carry on with other aspects of life, so the package deal made sense for him. 

I wouldn't be surprised if, in the end, the seller cost himself a few bucks by not listing the books in the thread. 

[EC ed]

Let's push a little further on this...

Hypothetical #1: Seller is running a sales thread. Then, he says "I'm taking a break for the evening, but I'll be back tomorrow with more awesome books!" (note: without mentioning any specific books). Tomorrow comes, and seller posts in the thread "well, I was planning on listing some more books in this thread, but I ended up selling them all last night via PM, so the thread is at its end."

Is this a problem?

Hypothetical #2: Seller is running a sales thread. Then, he says "I'm taking a break for the evening, but I'll be back tomorrow with more awesome books!" (note: without mentioning any specific books). Tomorrow comes, and seller posts in the thread "well, I decided to keep all the others I had planned on listing, so the thread is at its end." 

Is this a problem? Is it different than Hypothetical #1? If so, why?

Edited June 22, 2017 by edowens71

[Ryan.]

1 hour ago, Bomber-Bob said:

Okay, I can clearly see we don't want any more rules. I rescind my suggestion. Though I don't think it was the Seller's intent, he did expose a big loophole.  The way the Boards seem to operate these days we may soon see it as the new normal. Announce a book but don't list it, list something else, wait for the PM offers. Cool.

 

[Bomber-Bob]

39 minutes ago, edowens71 said:

Let's push a little further on this...

Hypothetical #1: Seller is running a sales thread. Then, he says "I'm taking a break for the evening, but I'll be back tomorrow with more awesome books!" (note: without mentioning any specific books). Tomorrow comes, and seller posts in the thread "well, I was planning on listing some more books in this thread, but I ended up selling them all last night via PM, so the thread is at its end."

Is this a problem?

Hypothetical #2: Seller is running a sales thread. Then, he says "I'm taking a break for the evening, but I'll be back tomorrow with more awesome books!" (note: without mentioning any specific books). Tomorrow comes, and seller posts in the thread "well, I decided to keep all the others I had planned on listing, so the thread is at its end." 

Is this a problem? Is it different than Hypothetical #1? If so, why?

Ed, no, I would not consider either of those hypothetical situations a problem. Regarding the actual events, maybe you had to be there. In the middle of the sales thread, the seller announced that later that day he would be presenting an ASM 1 and an X-Men 1 . The popcorn was flowing. I can only imagine how many times refresh was hit by numerous Board members. Anyone, upon his return, it was sorry I sold the books via PM. Again, maybe you had to be there live to feel the balloon burst. I don't think it was intentional on the seller's part. I'm not here to call him out. I just think it was handled poorly. I also don't want to see this become a new pattern of selling. 

[Bomber-Bob]

9 minutes ago, Ryan. said:

 

Perhaps you are right. I actually hope I am wrong.

[CatskillMike]

On 6/20/2017 at 9:59 PM, Bomber-Bob said:

Someone has a sales thread. Someone announces he is going to list two, very desirable books later in the evening. The popcorn is flowing. Someone does come on that evening and says Sorry, both books sold by PM. Realizing technically no rules were broken, it still appears to be in very bad taste. I know there are a lot of vultures out there, scooping up every available book to flip, leaving the few collectors we have left wanting but that's another topic. I would just like to see everyone, especially those waiting patiently, be given at least a chance. Upon a pre sale announcement, it should be a Board Rule the books cannot be sold via PM until the books are actually for sale. Without such a rule, sales threads can turn into pimping announcements, effectively turning the announcement into a PM bidding war. Opinions ????? Anyone else agree with me ?

I totally agree.  I saw that post, but I didn't have a dog in that fight, so I moved on.   I feel it would be a good rule in the FS threads if you announce a book is forthcoming, do not take any pm's on it until it is posted. Otherwise don't announce it.