posted on August 29, 2000 04:22:37 PM new
Sure, the bidder didn't have any negotiation room. We all know that!
The $3.20 is a rip and the seller knew it.
Chisolm, didn't realize you weren't the seller. The weird remarks about KatyD...ewww!
Seems like attacks, but Moderator is not seeing it the same, I guess.
As far as the whole value thing, when a bidder feels ripped off, then it's all bets off as far as a good transaction goes.
Why quote $3.20 if you know it misleads bidders?
No one wants to address that one. It's "they bid, they agreed." Sure they did, but to what? And yes it's up to the foolish customer to take care.
Why bite the hand that feeds you?
Just curious.
edited to add... Amy of course that is obvious...but stating terms simply and straightforwardly doesn't harm anyone.
[ edited by Capriole on Aug 29, 2000 04:24 PM ]
posted on August 29, 2000 04:29:04 PM new
[b]Capriole[b] Attacks? What attacks?
KatyD is the one who approached ME! I didn't go to high school with her, and I DO NOT make friends with people from chat rooms.
Her comments to me seem very "Play Misty For Me", I have been stalked by several women on the internet, and am wary of such things. I consider her to be a danger to me, so I utilized the IGNORE feature.
I nip such comments like "Where have you been all this time" and "So nice to see you again" squarely in the bud. That is a firm policy. I don't like unknown women telling me they "know" me, it is quite unsettling. I am happy in a marriage full of love. I do not need some woman in some chat room having false memories about our "High-School Backseat Romances".
posted on August 29, 2000 04:29:26 PM new
SHIPPING IS 3.20
That's the seller's TOS. I do feel buyer was intentionally mislead, because of the priority charge being used.
I do think it is a way for a seller to make a little extra, unless they are buying shipping boxes from an office supply store. However, I don't agree with this tactic.
But, as far as the dispute, I think the buyer could have handled it a little better at the start, and it appears the buyer was the first one with the curse words?
posted on August 29, 2000 04:31:26 PM new
Well, Webster says the non-nautical definition of ship ,used as a verb, is "to put in place ready to use". Sounds like that supports amy's and chisholm's position. Not that the seller probably wasn't trying to take advantage of people's assumptions when they saw "$3.20"...sneaky (and in MHO bad business practice and short-sighted) but not strictly dishonest. If buyer wasn't comfortable with the total expenditure, the time to say so was before the auction ended with an inquiry to the seller about whether the item could be shipped for less.
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside a dog, it's too dark to read.
Please take a look at both sides on the verbage. They did that game to each other equally.
Bet a double neg was left as well.
I think that if the buyers opening line was more Like "Hi just got the beannie, its in great shape, and just like you discribed. However, I was kind of wondering about the shipping cost ect" things would have been different. JIMHO Ed
edhdsn
I am wondering. If the seller had paid $5.00 to ship the item, would the buyer then go to the seller and say, "Hey you only charged me $3.20 for shipping, and it cost you $5.00, so do you want an extra $1.80 to cover your costs."
I've done that -- sent extra money when the item had cost more to ship that the seller had anticipated. So yes, it does happen.
About this issue:
Isn't it obvious? The stated $3.20 shipping charge was accurate, but intentionally deceptive. Dishonest practices don't always involve actually breaking the rules.
posted on August 29, 2000 04:36:10 PM new
Capriole, not to worry about Chisholm's remarks to me. "Old history". Another place, another time, another name. Rolls right off me
Actually, Amy, I've taken many business courses in my life. Even have a degree, although not in business. Imagine that! I've never seen overhead costs such as electricity, rent, water, yada, yada categorized as "shipping" in either a profit or loss statement, tax returns, or any other accounting ledger. And, I just betcha, that THIS seller isn't itemizing his "shipping profit" on his "books" either. Gimme a break! If you think this is an "honest" seller, that's fine. There's too many of us that have been around this bush too many times, and we know gouging when we see it. If you want to call it "overhead" that's fine, but it's still gouging.
KatyD
(clarification)
[ edited by KatyD on Aug 29, 2000 04:37 PM ]
posted on August 29, 2000 04:36:51 PM new
Bidders want shipping charges posted in the auction. I agree with this as a buyer, I want to know exactly what the total cost is going to be. On the other hand, as a seller I have many options available to me for shipping. On most of my items, I do not list with a specific shipping method in mind. I always use the shipping method that I feel is best for the buyer based on their location. Depending on the location, there can be a large variation in what it actually costs me to ship. The only way I can list a shipping cost that is accurate for everyone is to list the shipping cost for the most expensive destination. If a buyer contacts me and tells me where they are and asks for a specific method of shipping, I will do my best to accomodate them and quote them shipping based on that method to that destination (which ocassionally means that shipping charges will be higher than originally stated). The problem with USPS is that there are costs involved with the shipping of an item that are not shown on the stamp. Is it wrong for me to charge a buyer for insurance if they want it and then insure through U-pic? After all, it does not show the .85 cents in the postage on the package? And if I insure each package individually, it will actually cost me $1.35! Or if they pay for insurance and I find it better to ship to their location using UPS which includes insurance? Buyers want an exact shipping charge up front, which is very reasonable, but it is not always easy to do. Also, many of you say that "handling fees" should be considered overhead or cost of doing business and should not be included in shipping charges. Everyone who sells charges for packing materials, gas, pick up fees, etc. ... if you don't add it to the shipping, you are adding it to the cost of the item or you are losing money. If you add it to the cost of the item, are you not gouging on the price of the item? If so, what's the difference? If not...how in the heck do you figure that???
posted on August 29, 2000 04:45:23 PM new
This reminds me of a person who advertised baseball cards in a magazine years ago. His ad said something like..."1980 Topps baseball (726 cards). $20.00". Since there were exactly 726 cards in a complete set of 1980 Topps cards, buyers obviously assumed that they were buying a complete set. The buyers did indeed receive 726 1980 Topps cards, but they received multiples of some of the cards, and none of some of the others (the highest priced ones, of course). The advertiser was reported and was banned from placing future ads.
This ebay seller is basically doing the same thing.
posted on August 29, 2000 04:46:02 PM new
"Stalking"? HUH??? "Where have you been all this time" Not a question I would ask. I know where *you've* been, and so do quite a few of us here.
I consider her to be a danger to meQuaking in your boots, are ya Chisholm? Gimme a break!
posted on August 29, 2000 04:52:23 PM new
Maybe I missed it, but I don't see that the seller has identified him/herself in this thread yet notified the moderator that he was ready to join in the discussion.
I would just like to know the reason for stating $3.20 shipping-an odd amount if not meant to simulate the priority mail rate and confer a false impression.
Never mind, I know the answer I'll receive-their breakdown of shipping costs is none of my business or the business of any potential buyer as long as the charge is stated. True enough, but I think it violates the spirit of the agreement.
Also, by my reading of the buyer's initial email, she merely expressed disappointment in the charge and did not attempt a re-negotiation. Seemed like a polite enough inquiry. Then later the seller said they would have refunded if the buyer hadn't been so rude. Granted the situation escalated but the buyer was not rude in the beginning.
posted on August 29, 2000 05:01:04 PM new
Excuse me KatyD, you may have been round that bush many times but methinks you never opened your eyes.
Overhead costs are part and parcel of a business. Many businesses who do a lot of shipping will figure out the overhead of the shipping in figuring out their shipping charges. How they put it into the ledger is not what I was talking about.
As for what the seller is doing or thinking..whether he is being delibertly deceptive or not is pure speculation. Unless you are the seller in question any statement you make about his intentions or business practices are nothing more than assumptions on your part. And isn't that exactly what led up to the problem this buyer had..she assumedsomething instead of finding out for sure.
Until the seller comes here and tells us why he set the shipping charge at $3.20 I will not enter into any discussions about how he was being deceptive, dishonest or any other such possible slander.
But the fact that many are willing to judge this seller as dishonest without hearing what he has to say does say a lot about those posters and their own ethics and sense of fair play.
posted on August 29, 2000 05:07:18 PM new
Amy, Amy, Amy!!
But the fact that many are willing to judge this seller as dishonest without hearing what he has to say does say a lot about those posters and their own ethics and sense of fair play.
Yes, Yes, Yes! Much to be said about these posters, willing to pass final judgements. They must all be so white and pure.
I am glad KatyD is back on topic, and back to arguing with Amy. Someone tell me if it's safe to read her posts again, or if she still has me confused with her High School Sweetheart! I can assure you I don't know ANYONE from ANY chat room.
posted on August 29, 2000 05:10:39 PM new
OK, I am not one to jump on someone without giving the benefit of doubt, but this thread is three pages long with no (apparent)input from the invited seller.
posted on August 29, 2000 05:22:26 PM new
In my auctions I clearly state Actual postage and 1.00 handling fee, plus insurance if desired. That's clear cut and not misleading.
I have found out, never assume. Be as specific as possible, leave nothing to the imagination. If someone chooses not to bid on my auction for reason of 1.00 handling fee that's there business. But it stated up front, so they'll have to find something to complain about other than a handling fee!!!
Antyque
posted on August 29, 2000 05:23:33 PM new
ok....this is probably not the place for this comment, since you can kind of figure what a beanie baby weighs. But, as a seller, sometimes I can't always tell what it is going to cost me to ship and item. I think that you should be able to recoup the money you spend on packaging in the shipping amount.
I think $3.20 was probably misleading due to the fact that it is the amount of priority mail. I recently sold a bunch of auto parts as buyer pays actual shipping. Since I weighed the parts without the packaging, and quoted those prices, I lost money with each shipment. (My own fault) But I think that I would rather estimate high from now on vs. losing $2-$6 on each sale. (Not saying that I would add an additional $6 to each shipping fee - that's just what I lost).
Anyway...what I'm trying to say is that I try to be fair to both myself and my customers, but it can be hard to estimate shipping fees.
posted on August 29, 2000 05:24:55 PM new
I just got back from the post office....and instead of the shipping costing 31.21 like I quoted to the bidder...it was 44.45. I went ahead and shipped anyway. Did I email her and tell her I was off? Nope. Just ate it because I want her BACK. (Does this even belong in this thread?)
posted on August 29, 2000 05:35:24 PM new
This is really a long thread. I'd say you got your 2 bucks and change back because he spent 60.00 in time defending his shipping price. It stinks, he is wrong for it and his Karma will come back to haunt him
posted on August 29, 2000 05:35:46 PM new
I think most people see "buyer pays actual POSTAGE" when they see "actual shipping". I think "actual shipping" should cover the price of the box, bubble wrap, envelope (padded ones cost), tissue paper, etc. Of course since priority boxes are free, that's an exception and should convey the actual mailing fee.
Handling starts to fall into their time to stand there & pack it, and who knows what someone thinks their time is worth. I am not a big fan of handling, but I see others that charge it.
I recently purchased a small stuffed animal & was charged $1.50 shipping. It came with .77 cents POSTAGE but it was inside a padded envelope & then wrapped in padding again inside. I understand that the supplies do cost & was happy with the item AND overall price.
Had the ad stated "actual postage" (who's does?), then I feel you would have a right to complain. The ad was $3.20 shipping and you paid $3.20. You should never "ass u me" anything.
posted on August 29, 2000 05:43:29 PM new
I am not trying to change any prices, renigociate shipping charges or anything of the sort. I was simply trying to discuss with him how I felt that I was being over charged. He did not care! That was extra money for him, that's all he wanted. Who cares if he steps on toes to get it! I, myself, might over charge by mistake, BUT I do not do it purposely such as this seller did!
posted on August 29, 2000 05:51:00 PM new
YOU JUST HAVE TO GO ON AND ON WITH THIS CRUSADE, DON'T YOU?
It was worth $4.70 when you bid on it. It is still worth $4.70.
I am not trying to change any prices, renigociate shipping charges or anything of the sort. I was simply trying to discuss with him how I felt that I was being over charged.Wrong! Nobody got overcharged! He said $3.20, you paid $3.20! You agreed to pay that price, and it was clear and plainly written in the text by an honest and upfront seller. You are responsible to READ that text. You DID NOT! Nowhere in that text does it say anything about the "method".
He did not care! That was extra money for him, that's all he wanted. It's all any seller wants.
Who cares if he steps on toes to get it!Wrong nobody got toes stepped on. You thought it was worth $4.70, delevered safely to your door. IT WAS! Period!
I, myself, might over charge by mistake, BUT I do not do it purposely such as this seller did! Nobody was overcharged. $4.70 was agreed upon, you came in after the fact.
The seller is in the right, the bidder is in the wrong. Buyers are responsible for reading the terms BEFORE the end of the auction.
posted on August 29, 2000 06:00:45 PM newchisholm1943
If this thread is bothering you so much, why do you persist on jumping on everyone that makes a comment / opinion that doesn't go along with your opinion????
Who cares that you are a powerseller, that has nothing to do with this thread, why must you throw that out... does it give you extra clout? Not with me.
When this seller said $3.20 that would imply priority pricing on an item like this that is under 2 pounds.... PERIOD!
This buyer has never asked for any money back, she just let him know she was unhappy with the way things went. Then the seller started (with all caps) making her out to be the bad guy. I don't blame her for defending herself!
This got out of hand and she came here to try to settle it. The seller hasn't even bothered to say anything, so that says something!
I am looking at this from the sellers point, as that is what I primarily do. This seller was wrong!
posted on August 29, 2000 06:01:30 PM new
I check fixed amount. If the item goes low...under 10 bucks I self insure so you arent going to see that on the postage stamp.
I check fixed amount, bidder sees fixed amount.... bidder bids.... bidder sends winning bid amount + fixed shipping amount.
I usually stick to round numbers tho. I lose, I gain a quarter, I lose. Whatever, I am not into postal calculations to the exact penny on my dollar no reserve auctions.
posted on August 29, 2000 06:01:42 PM new
Priority is not an upgrade from 1st class. The P.O. bills priority as first class treatment for packages (NOT improved). The only reasons to use priority for packages under 14 ounces are
- to use the free boxes
- to mistake the USPS for a favored charity.
posted on August 29, 2000 06:10:27 PM newIf this thread is bothering you so much, why do you persist on jumping on everyone that makes a comment / opinion that doesn't go along with your opinion????
ROFL, no matter what name he uses, even people who don't know who he is can't miss his style.
)