Ebay Hats: Victories, Defeats, Gripes & Items of Interest

[Bill Hughes]

Let me clarify my position. If someone wants to educate a seller - fine. If someone wants to get a great deal - fine. I see no moral dilemma in either case. If I sale a trinket to someone for 50 cents and they turn around and sell it for 50 dollars - it’s a win win. I got 50 cents for something I valued at 50 cents. That other person has the experience and knowledge to get more. I’m fine with that.

The thing I take issue with is after the auction has ended and then the seller backs out because someone outside the auction has offered more money. I don’t mind if the seller backs out before the auction has ended. It’s a bummer but the sale has not been finalized. When they don’t honor the sale - I have a problem. In such cases I will never entertain the thought of buying from them again.

 

[Bill Hughes]

You find a perfect Maclacklin 100 in an old hat box at a garage sale. You know it is worth well over $1000 but the seller has it tagged as $5. Do you tell the seller the real value or do you buy it and walk away? The seller is your neighbor down the street. He is a single father and just found out he has terminal cancer.

Obviously not this exact scenario, I’ve had several occasions to look at hats for families of recently deceased. I give the my opinion as to what I think they could reasonably hope to get selling on eBay. I will not sell it for them. If it is my size and I am interested I’ll make an offer. My offer is never for as much as I think they could get on eBay. Usually it’s around half and I make sure they understand it’s about half value. If it’s not my size and I know someone who may be looking, I’ll contact that person. (Some here on the lounge have benefited from this.) This is all from word of mouth. Often the hat is worthless but I’d never put it that way to the family. Several times they just ask me to find it a home. Then I usually list it in the classifieds for cost of shipping. Other times I give it away locally.

 

[Hurricane Jack]

Let me clarify my position. If someone wants to educate a seller - fine. If someone wants to get a great deal - fine.

The problem comes because this feeling of altruism only comes in sizes other than what they wear themselves. It's often being done when the seller hasn't even asked for it.

Quote:

"So yesterday I helped a seller make 3x more than what they initially figured by giving them an honest assessment of their hat after they politely asked for my help."

"Today I was accused by another seller of being a Nazi white supremacist after I called them out for multiple falsities in their listing. They happen to be a habitual offender, and most of the time I just ignore it and let it slide."

"I guess maybe I should just keep my mouth shut."

https://www.thefedoralounge.com/thr...eats-gripes-items-of-interest.27695/page-1661

End quote.

Contract Law has this concept of "caveat emptor" (let the buyer beware) & the concept of "caveat venditor" (let the seller beware). Ask yourself why anyone would be more concerned about the profits of the seller? I would suggest everyone just let the marketplace do its thing & not look to revenge someone in the FL brethren, because that's what this is really all about.

 

[Bamaboots]

Contract Law has this concept of "caveat emptor" (let the buyer beware) & the concept of "caveat venditor" (let the seller beware). Ask yourself why anyone would be more concerned about the profits of the seller? I would suggest everyone just let the marketplace do its thing & not look to revenge someone in the FL brethren, because that's what this is really all about.

Nailed it.

 

[Just Daniel]

We definitely have common ground if someone purposely gives information that leads a seller to bad behavior such as withdrawing and resisting a sale. That’s a bit rough. But otherwise providing information does what you want: it lets the market work; and of course, the Lounge has both buyers and sellers.

Maybe I missed it, but I don’t see where you have shown an argument that providing information to a seller is any worse than providing information here to other buyers. Extending that in other words, why should your self interest be more important than that of someone else?

Sure, it’s definitely annoying to miss out on a deal, but the next question might be: just because something is a bother, does that translate into judging someone else’s actions? [My point is not well formed there, but I think it is close enough]

The problem comes because this feeling of altruism only comes in sizes other than what they wear themselves. It's often being done when the seller hasn't even asked for it.

Quote:

"So yesterday I helped a seller make 3x more than what they initially figured by giving them an honest assessment of their hat after they politely asked for my help."

"Today I was accused by another seller of being a Nazi white supremacist after I called them out for multiple falsities in their listing. They happen to be a habitual offender, and most of the time I just ignore it and let it slide."

"I guess maybe I should just keep my mouth shut."

https://www.thefedoralounge.com/thr...eats-gripes-items-of-interest.27695/page-1661

End quote.

Contract Law has this concept of "caveat emptor" (let the buyer beware) & the concept of "caveat venditor" (let the seller beware). Ask yourself why anyone would be more concerned about the profits of the seller? I would suggest everyone just let the marketplace do its thing & not look to revenge someone in the FL brethren, because that's what this is really all about.

 

[Hurricane Jack]

Extending that in other words, why should your self interest be more important than that of someone else?

Did you offer to pay 3x or more the sellers asking price plus full shipping on that 100 you just bought?

 

[Just Daniel]

Definitely not. I think we long ago established that in most cases our personal self interest overrules our commercial altruism.

Is that what upsets you so much? That someone might take a good deal themselves and then help out another seller later when that particular deal does not help them?

From my vantage that makes for a very, very weak cry of hypocrisy, especially if it is all well and good to help a fellow buyer find a deal. That’s why we investigated the question “is helping a seller different than helping a buyer?”

Again, we all get annoyed if we miss out on a deal. For sure. But the leap from annoyance to judgment looks pretty steep.

Maybe another member has more experience with ethics and can give us better examples than I can, it can actually be an interesting topic.

Did you offer to pay 3x or more the sellers asking price plus full shipping on that 100 you just bought?

 

[Frunobulax]

You find a perfect Maclacklin 100 in an old hat box at a garage sale. You know it is worth well over $1000 but the seller has it tagged as $5. Do you tell the seller the real value or do you buy it and walk away? The seller is your neighbor down the street.

Which neighbor? I can't stand some of them.

Oh for sure, I didn't think you where. Every time I've messaged a seller it's been to reduce a price or gain more information about size as well. I really don't know who does what nor do I care to make it my business. I enjoy the debate. I personally haven't had any weird issues with anyone here. All of my dealings have been pretty straight up. @Frunobulax gave me shit once when I was trying to sell a hat and didn't set a price but he felt bad after

I didn't give you anything. I informed you of Lounge Policy for selling items in the Classifieds, which is to set a price. We don't do auctions here.

We used to have a language policy here, too.

We definitely have common ground if someone purposely gives information that leads a seller to bad behavior such as withdrawing and resisting a sale. That’s a bit rough. But otherwise providing information does what you want: it lets the market work; and of course, the Lounge has both buyers and sellers.

Maybe I missed it, but I don’t see where you have shown an argument that providing information to a seller is any worse than providing information here to other buyers. Extending that in other words, why should your self interest be more important than that of someone else?

Sure, it’s definitely annoying to miss out on a deal, but the next question might be: just because something is a bother, does that translate into judging someone else’s actions? [My point is not well formed there, but I think it is close enough]

Well, HJ and Bama are correct. Do your principles include informing the seller to list an item at a higher price if it's something you want? Or only if it's something somebody else wants?

Also, in deciding whether to inform or educate a seller, which friends are you now placing at a disadvantage? If I see a hat not in my size that's a good deal, I will point it out to a fellow Lounger who is that size. I'd rather help a friend than a stranger.

 

[Héctor Fernández]

Wow, if missing on a "good deal" upsets anyone, I'll suggest that person needs to do some serious soul searching.

Over a hat? Seriously? I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but I have to laugh.

After all, what's the definition of a "good deal"?

 

[Hurricane Jack]

Definitely not. I think we long ago established that in most cases our personal self interest overrules our commercial altruism.

But is that then really following the religious ethos & walking the path that has been used as a reason?

Is that what upsets you so much? That someone might take a good deal themselves and then help out another seller later when that particular deal does not help them?

Why not let the free market work for itself? Why put an uninformed seller ahead of a fellow brethren of the FL?

From my vantage that makes for a very, very weak cry of hypocrisy, especially if it is all well and good to help a fellow buyer find a deal.

If you support a fellow buyer find a deal why would you not support all members of the FL by staying out & not interfering with the marketplace?

Or only if it's something somebody else wants?

I'd rather help a friend than a stranger.

Exactly!

 

[Bamaboots]

Wow, if missing on a "good deal" upsets anyone, I'll suggest that person needs to do some serious soul searching.

Over a hat? Seriously? I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but I have to laugh.

After all, what's the definition of a "good deal"?

I think you are missing the point.

 

[Héctor Fernández]

With all do respect HJ, but I have been screwed by the same "FL brethren" you speak of. Loyalty is earned, not a given.

 

[Hurricane Jack]

With all do respect HJ, but I have been screwed by the same "FL brethren" you speak of. Loyalty is earned, not a given.

That's exactly the point Hector. Some egos have taken over. Why would anyone contact an eBay seller telling them they're from the FL & proceed to point out errors in their listing including price?

 

[TheOldFashioned]

The problem comes because this feeling of altruism only comes in sizes other than what they wear themselves. It's often being done when the seller hasn't even asked for it.

Quote:

"So yesterday I helped a seller make 3x more than what they initially figured by giving them an honest assessment of their hat after they politely asked for my help."

"Today I was accused by another seller of being a Nazi white supremacist after I called them out for multiple falsities in their listing. They happen to be a habitual offender, and most of the time I just ignore it and let it slide."

"I guess maybe I should just keep my mouth shut."

https://www.thefedoralounge.com/thr...eats-gripes-items-of-interest.27695/page-1661

End quote.

Contract Law has this concept of "caveat emptor" (let the buyer beware) & the concept of "caveat venditor" (let the seller beware). Ask yourself why anyone would be more concerned about the profits of the seller? I would suggest everyone just let the marketplace do its thing & not look to revenge someone in the FL brethren, because that's what this is really all about.

If you're going to quote me, Jack, please have the courtesy to attribute the quote to me. Heck, if you're going to take the effort to link to a specific page within a thread then take two seconds more effort and link to my post specifically. Furthermore, you failed to mention that you edited the quote by removing text, and you also took time to emphasize specific parts of said quote. It should be clearly noted that the emphasis of selected text was of your doing, not mine.

You habitually have the habit of making veiled references to other people's postings, but don't have the stones to explicitly say whom or what it is you are referring to. (At least in the expample above you did lazily quote a specific message.) When someone pushes back on your cowardly, bullying behavior you then hide behind the line that you weren't talking about so and so or such and such, that people are drawing their own conclusions based on implication. Please, what a crock of crap.

Regarding that quote, you don't know the full details of either of those exchanges with those sellers and how the conversations evolved. How do you know that another FL member got screwed into paying 3x? Do you have proof that it was a FL member that bought that specific hat?

 

[suitedcboy]

I want to start a Gofundme for RMcCamey's neighbor. His situation got a lot worse in a relatively short time. I am leaving his hat price alone though, not my monkey- not my circus.

 

[Hurricane Jack]

"If you're going to quote me, Jack, please have the courtesy to attribute the quote to me. Heck, if you're going to take the effort to link to a specific page within a thread then take two seconds more effort and link to my post specifically. Furthermore, you failed to mention that you edited the quote by removing text, and you also took time to emphasize specific parts of said quote. It should be clearly noted that the emphasis of selected text was of your doing, not mine."

Jonathan, I didn't know you would want such a post linked to you. As far as linking the page specifically to your post, sorry I don't know how to do that. And as far as cropping or editing your post the only part I didn't quote was your part about the holocaust which referred back to the names you were called. Yes, all emphasis was mine; that should be fairly obvious.


"Regarding that quote, you don't know the full details of either of those exchanges with those sellers and how the conversations evolved. How do you know that another FL member got screwed into paying 3x? Do you have proof that it was a FL member that bought that specific hat?"

It seems obvious for this seller to ask for your help he first would have had to been contacted by you. I never said an FL member bought the hat but taking you at your word someone paid 3x what they would have had to. Again, why get into the middle of something that is of no concern of yours? Take your own good advice.

 

[TheOldFashioned]

"If you're going to quote me, Jack, please have the courtesy to attribute the quote to me. Heck, if you're going to take the effort to link to a specific page within a thread then take two seconds more effort and link to my post specifically. Furthermore, you failed to mention that you edited the quote by removing text, and you also took time to emphasize specific parts of said quote. It should be clearly noted that the emphasis of selected text was of your doing, not mine."

Jonathan, I didn't know you would want such a post linked to you. As far as linking the page specifically to your post, sorry I don't know how to do that. And as far as cropping or editing your post the only part I didn't quote was your part about the holocaust which referred back to the names you were called. Yes, all emphasis was mine; that should be fairly obvious.


"Regarding that quote, you don't know the full details of either of those exchanges with those sellers and how the conversations evolved. How do you know that another FL member got screwed into paying 3x? Do you have proof that it was a FL member that bought that specific hat?"

It seems obvious for this seller to ask for your help he first would have had to been contacted by you. I never said an FL member bought the hat but taking you at your word someone paid 3x what they would have had to. Again, why get into the middle of something that is of no concern of yours? Take your own good advice.

The following is the complete exchange between the seller and myself. The only editing I have done was to hide user identities. Hopefully you can appreciate anonymity and trust that I did not make any other alterations. These are screen shots taken from my eBay messages records:


Please note that the hat size is 7-3/8, one that I typically wear. Please also note that the format was auction with an option to make an offer. The seller elected to accept the offer of $150.

 

[deadlyhandsome]

No one was advocating for informing sellers. This discussion didn’t start with anyone condemning anyone for taking advantage of someone else’s ignorance. This started when someone was whining about individuals helping others.

it’s a mark against our civilization when morality and trying to do the tight thing are mocked and disparaged. The Golden Era isn’t just about hats and clothing; to me it also harkened back to a time when people behaved more in alignment with my personal beliefs.

I don’t claim any monopoly on moral behavior, but I’m equally sure that what I’m describing is legal and moral so...?

The argument of tort and common law concept of “buyer beware” is sound if I/we were making a legal argument. This was never about the law. No one said you have a legal obligation to treat people fairly, including strangers. Morality isn’t something we can legislate and lots of legal practices are, in my opinion, very wrong. If your personal standard is if it’s not illegal it’s fine to do it then any further conversation is pointless.

If I stop and help a pregnant woman (a stranger) change her tire I don’t do it out of some legal obligation, and I don’t care that my actions have caused a tow company to lose business. I do it because my personal sense of morality extends to even strangers and I try to follow my beliefs. I don’t bemoan the other drivers who passed by without helping, nor do I think they have a legal obligation to help. I do what I think is right and they are free to do what they think is right.

The argument that people only educate sellers on hats that aren’t their size is not based on anything quantifiable. I suspect it is based on the writer’s erroneous assumption that everyone acts selfishly.

I’m not advocating that anyone else here change what they do. I will, however, continue to defend the position that it’s not “wrong” to help others.

Hats are just transitory things and they all will eventually turn to dust. “Stuff” just isn’t very important to me. I’ll continue to err on the side of kindness and fairness.

 

[deadlyhandsome]

Let me clarify my position. If someone wants to educate a seller - fine. If someone wants to get a great deal - fine. I see no moral dilemma in either case. If I sale a trinket to someone for 50 cents and they turn around and sell it for 50 dollars - it’s a win win. I got 50 cents for something I valued at 50 cents. That other person has the experience and knowledge to get more. I’m fine with that.

The thing I take issue with is after the auction has ended and then the seller backs out because someone outside the auction has offered more money. I don’t mind if the seller backs out before the auction has ended. It’s a bummer but the sale has not been finalized. When they don’t honor the sale - I have a problem. In such cases I will never entertain the thought of buying from them again.

I don’t think anyone thinks that type of behavior is right. I’d report that to ebay. Once the auction is over contacting the seller to buy it is just sleazy and there’s no justification for the buyer or the seller.

 

[Héctor Fernández]

This is a really sad state of affairs. With that I'm done with this thread until it returns to some sort of civility.

I got things to do anyway, lol....