JasonZavoda wrote:What do you want to call it when a seller cancels out a buyer's bid?

"Clueless", "misguided" or "newbie" works just as well when talking about 0-rated eBayers who might not have read all the rules and know all the etiquette inside-out. (Even if they registered a couple of years back, they've shown no confidence to buy or sell since then).

The original drift of this discussion was that the buyer had swindled the seller.

He didn't.

Ebay should not allow a seller who has a bid to cancel an auction.  Simple as that.

God!  

Given the description of the trasaction by THeHistorian, I have no real problem with how it went down.  He made contact before a bid was placed on the item.  I'm okay with that.  I'm not okay with canceling bids.  Once a bid has been placed the auction should run its course.  Once a bid is placed that item belongs (in my mind) to the high bidder until he is out bid.  Doing a deal to cancel the bid is stealing (again, in my mind).

Some folks believe that the ends justify the means - that's bullshit.

Martin

JasonZavoda wrote:
So it is unethical to make a lowball offer? And it would also be unethical to post a great buy on a collecting newsgroup where we show off great buys and collections all the time?

If I'm in a used book store and I find a rare book or gaming item that I know usually goes for 10, 20 or 100 times as much, should I buy it or bring it tot he counter and say 'charge me more for this' and if I get a bargain why wouldn't I post it here.

In reply, I believe so, yes. Secondly, no depending on the circumstances. And if you get a bargain from a book store, absolutely post it here.

I also agree though, that when a bid is placed, the item should not be sold as a BIN. I have had that happen to me and it is a pain in the ass.

But to clarify what I was saying originally, I do believe that if a low offer is made on a valuable item, the buyer is screwing the seller in whatever business it is. (It is the sellers choice, but they could be mis-led)
If the seller puts an item up for sale at a low price, I believe that is different.
Yes, the seller should research the item once they receive an offer before accepting, but I still believe that a buyer going in with a cheap offer is not playing with a straight bat.

I also believe that if they pick up a bargain that is for sale at a given price and show it here, that's fine, but if they screwed a seller and then posted it here to show that they made a low offer and got away with it, that sucks.

That is completely different to what appears to have happened in this case anyway, I was just offering my opinion on the whole  'ethical/unethical' argument.

Although not an attorney, it seems obvious that some confuse, ethics, laws and scruples... and have absolute ideas regarding their meaning and use in the context of life and or business.  However, in the context of business, particularly in the U.S. ... some or all of these concepts are ever evolving as our courts interpret old law and statutes, etc.... and new law and statutes... as they relate to the manner in which business is done and in accordance with the Commercial Code and related formal guidelines.

Common definitions of unethical include:

base, immoral, wrong.  
or reference:  Lie, cheat steal.
or reference:  outside of common trade practice.

They do not include... actions that a minority of participants in a business (or hobby)  (or even a majority... if the practice is common) don't happen to like.

If someone simply makes an offer and it is accepted there is no ethics or legal issue for the buyer unless the offer was made in the context of a lie or made to a person without the capacity to enter a legal contract.  One can not "steal" from a willing party who is competent when they enter a formal deal/transaction or contract... unless there is instance of fraud or other misconduct.

Further, although their may be an issue between ebay and the seller, or a bidder whose bid was canceled and the seller, generally, if a practice is understood and nothing is done to enforce it...  it becomes unenforceable.  This is a major issue in copyright law, and I believe I have seen that discussion presented competently on this site in the past.  

Further, when sellers cancel bids on buyers...  if they had already "closed the sale" with another party, they are in a horns of an ethical dilemma.  But, since commercial transactions are not complete in the U.S. and most of the world until the property exchanges hands... money remains a remedy for the prospective bidder.   Since the bidder whose bid was cancelled had neither paid for the item they bid upon, nor in fact, have they demonstrated that there can be damages, since the auction to determine value was not complete.... and no one knows that they are an injured party they have little argument for remedy in the form of the item or for money.  And, the obvious remedy for the party that had their offer formally accepted... is for the seller to accept payment and ship them the item.

In summary,

Making an offer to a competent party (mentally, age, etc.) is not unethical.
Doing so on ebay is common trade practice... which prevents it from being classified as unethical.
Ebay does nothing to enforce any regulations that would prevent this... which makes it questionable that they can enforce it if they wanted to.
The parties with bids canceled can not demonstrate injury but could attempt (albeit probably unsuccessfully) to seek remedy through the courts.

I am amused to note that once again, several members of this site, jumped to conclusions with incomplete facts, inadequate understanding of the circumstances (or the law... or of standard definitions of ethics), yet felt perfectly justified in tossing around accusations that can not be successfully legally defended and which can result in personal liability for themselves.

Sour grapes, is just sour grapes.  

Congratulations, TheHistorian.  Nice buy.

I agree it is an "incorrect" way to operate.  Given TheHistorian's description about how the deal went down, I'm not really upset.  He made the approach before a bid was placed.  He did not suggest a price but let the seller give a price.  The only regettable thing is a bid was made and cancelled.  The responsibility for that lies with the seller not the buyer.

Martin

TheHistorian wrote:I feel that I did not deceive the seller, and I could not prevent him from doing a simple search to see what his items might be worth. I did not force him to sell.

You may not have lied to the seller but you absolutely baited him and set in motion actions that caused him to be taken advantage of and cost him money.  The whole purpose of asking for a BIN (when there was none) was to determine if the seller was a noob or not and to try and get the item for less than it would go for in the open auction (that it was already set up in).  Then after he offers himself up as a noob you took advantage by taking the BIN as fast as you could.

The seller has his part in this for his actions but so does the buyer.

Not sure this is the right thread to post interesting TSR stuff seen on E-Bay or not anymore.


Looks like the "is this a rip off seller/buyer" thread for the past couple of pages....







White Box Set from 1974....  


Actually it is a complete OCE in very nice condition with Ref Sheets (Not pictured but stated in Description).




Seller likes taking sideways pictures...  




http://cgi.ebay.com/D-D-Dungeons-Dragons-First-Edition-3-Volume-Set-1974_W0QQitemZ180398896167QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item2a009cb427&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14




Seller also listed four supplements.


Blackmoor


Greyhawk


Eldritch Wizardry


Gods...




And a 3rd Edition Spiral bound Chainmail-Wizard Logo...




A T1-4 ToEE (With map booklet)




Plus a few other interesting items.

http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-DUNGEONS-DRAGONS-BOOK-70S-D-D-TSR-HOBBIES_W0QQitemZ170373979250QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item27ab149c72&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14




What is this?


It is not (I think) a set of the Reference Sheet from the OD&D White Box Sets.