19 Comments

Original Poster Banned

bod emrys;3595996

I disagree, I think it should remain that it's up to the seller who they … I disagree, I think it should remain that it's up to the seller who they choose to sell to, whether they decide because someone has better feedback, or can pay instantly or for any other reason.



So you dont think it should be done fairly?

So say you offer asking...

then 5 mins later someone else offers asking too...

Seller chooses them for no legitimate reason...

and your happy with that?



If you look at first example the OP was slow to respond...by then the potential buyer had gone offline...had OP responded faster then the item may have had a different buyer!

It would be nice to think that people would follow a conduct of fairness without being threatened with the yellow or red card. Agreeing within the forum should be binding enough. Unfortunately, we all like to make a buck. I think trying to establish rule enforcements will be detrimental to what is currently a fantastic forum. In my experience, the large percent of 'trading' is good and we should accept, as in aspects of life, there are a few unscrupulous undesirables that leave a bad taste in the mouth.

i think that the only reason for someone selling it in a rush is because they have a reason for wanting to complete the sale in a hurry, whatever the reason.
at the end of the day you cant force the seller to sell to one person and not the next.
youve just got to hope that somone has the patience to wait a while for someone to come baack online, if they take too long according to the seller, then hard luck

My problem is with conditional offers eg...

A: 22:30 "I'll take it for asking price if you can show a pic"
B: 22:35 "I'll take for asking"
Seller: 22:40 "sold to B for asking"

that's fair enough though, isn't it?

supermod

There was a similar discussion in this thread > ]http//ww…e=4

And to summarize what was clarified on the FS thread referred to in the above :

Out of courtesy the first person to offer full asking price should be … Out of courtesy the first person to offer full asking price should be considered to have first refusal.If the seller isn't happy to deal with that person for a valid reason, then it is of course up to them to sell to the next, unless they have concerns about them too.



Thanks.

guv;3596277

The latter was fine..... Clearly there were issues with the first buyer … The latter was fine..... Clearly there were issues with the first buyer or he wouldnt have asked for the picture if the "take it" was unconditional.I'm with you ODB. If someone makes an uncondtional full asking price offer, they should take the "prize". However, if after the offer has been accepted, that buy changes his mind - he gets hit with a trading suspension. ie Exactly as AVF do it.Now - I can understand some sellers want to sell locally for instance. Thats fine. All they need to do is state that and if the first offer doesnt meet that criteria, then its fair enough to wait to see if someone else can meet that. That way the buyer knows the score and offer placed knowing he may not necessarily be buying regardless.



So if every seller stated in all FS/FT threads that they wish to CHOOSE the buyer ( as apposed to just stating they want to sell "locally" ) This would be ok?

Banned

surely it boils down to respecting everyone, if a seller doesnt then i wouldn't want to deal anyway

Original Poster Banned

guv;3597657

That's not what I said!If its prefered that the buyer is local and … That's not what I said!If its prefered that the buyer is local and collects, that doesnt rule out that it could be posted.So offer (a) I offer the full asking price please post(b) Offer full price - will collectWould mean offer b CAN leap frog offer a.Personally seeing 5 people offering full asking price with no strings - its just plain wrong that the seller is able to pick and chose the buyer.



:thumbsup:

Exactamundo

sassie;3597717

surely it boils down to respecting everyone, if a seller doesnt then i … surely it boils down to respecting everyone, if a seller doesnt then i wouldn't want to deal anyway



Likewise...few people on here I wouldnt buy off now for what I have seen them do

sigma;3596357

Out of courtesy the first person to offer full asking price should be … Out of courtesy the first person to offer full asking price should be considered to have first refusal.If the seller isn't happy to deal with that person for a valid reason, then it is of course up to them to sell to the next, unless they have concerns about them too.



That's what I said in the other thread... as a general rule, you should sell to the first person that offers asking price. You should only be able to not accept that offer, and choose someone else, for a valid reason i.e. that person has terrible feedback; or you've had a problem with them in the past.

Choosing someone else 'cos the first person has now gone offline isn't a valid reason, in my opinion.

I know people can accept from whoever they want but think it would be … I know people can accept from whoever they want but think it would be better for them to have a specific reason and not just 'thi guy is online right now'



So what you are proposing is that you don't have to sell to the first person?

Original Poster Banned

thesaint;3602129

So what you are proposing is that you don't have to sell to the first … So what you are proposing is that you don't have to sell to the first person?



???no...the exact opposite....they should sell to the first person who makes them an offer and should only choose someone else for a legitimate reason

Although a member for a long time I have made an offer first yet been refused as I did not have sufficent feedback. I was annoyed but it is the sellers choice

ODB_69;3603409

???no...the exact opposite....they should sell to the first person who … ???no...the exact opposite....they should sell to the first person who makes them an offer and should only choose someone else for a legitimate reason



Who decides what is a legitimate reason though?
Not online soon enough could be a legitimate reason for the seller.

Can you imagine being forced to sell to someone that you didn't want to? It creates a whole new problem.

I got caught out once, but it's the only way it can realistically work.

It has happened to me where I offer asking first but sold to another person (I was annoyed sure because I didn't get it but more annoyed because there wasn't a reason given). However ruling would be difficult.

I don't know ODB......

I like to feel there would be an element of personal choice for the seller IMO.

Say I put my copy of COD5 up for sale and you offered me asking price...just before your bid is pushed into my thread someone else who I haven't spoken to before on here offers me asking too.

I would like to feel I would be able to choose to give the offer preference to you - as I know for sure there'd be no problems AND we get along together on here - so I would like the choice personally - but that's just IMO.

Where misc meets FS/FT can cause problems - It's very much a grey area.

One thing I think should be accepted (as someone else touched on this) is that if a bidder offers asking WITH conditions applied - a seller could sell to another member who offers asking WITHOUT conditions applied - as it's his/her preference.

guv;3616420

If it was a rule, the choice would be simple. Comply or don't post in FS.



Yep can't fault that thinking.

Maybe the truth is it isn't a set in stone 'rule' for the very point I made in my last post - about the seller having more power in the trading.

guv;3622266

Indeed it isn't.But that's what this thread exists in Feedback to suggest … Indeed it isn't.But that's what this thread exists in Feedback to suggest it's made into a rule!



If it's a thumbs-up or a thumbs-down to a proper black or white ruling being put into place - I would have to say thumbs-down imo.

That's not to say I don't respect the HUKD FS/FTforum ettiquette which should(hopefully) still exist - far from it, infact it would be great if all first bidders got the item in question if they took up a seller's asking price..BUT that's in an ideal world.

I just think it would be too tough a ruling to enforce - with many bad rep seller's getting away with it for supplying a 'valid' reason. Then the odd good honest seller gets penalised for simply using freedom of choice.

If a ruling is put into place then so be it, people will just have to get used to it.

As you said earlier: comply or don't post in FS/FT
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text