ok4leather
|
posted on February 27, 2002 01:50:33 PM new
We will just have to disagree on that one. Ive read the whole post and everyones comments and if everything you posted is true and you really did to him ,what you said- I feel bad for the guy. If you brought the postage vs shipping & handling question to Squaretrade they go with the amount listed in the discription everytime. Now if it says Priority shipping and you get first class thats another matter.Also if you got a CD thrown inside a dirty pizza box with tape on the corners Id see some room for anger. Yes Probably the guy padded his shipping cost, but it was listed in the auction terms and you chose to bid. The best way to discourage postage padding is by Not bidding on the auction.
Ill go away now.
Ok4
|
trai
|
posted on February 27, 2002 02:01:23 PM new
"I will most likely just trash it."
"you know I expected priority shipping for $4.00, since I was paying $4.00 for POSTAGE and nothing else (as the auction indicated)."
Why do you assume? It did not state priority.
|
peiklk
|
posted on February 27, 2002 02:06:13 PM new
THREAD CLOSED.
[ edited by peiklk on Feb 27, 2002 08:24 PM ]
|
peiklk
|
posted on February 27, 2002 02:08:54 PM new
THREAD CLOSED.
[ edited by peiklk on Feb 27, 2002 08:25 PM ]
|
eauctionmgnt
|
posted on February 27, 2002 02:15:18 PM new
peiklk,
As with MANY words in the English language, there are often more than one definition for any given word. Before you get to high and mighty about what the word postage means... you might want to review this definition:
post·age Pronunciation Key (pstj)
n.
1. The charge for mailing an item.
2. The stamps, labels, or printing placed on an item to be mailed as evidence of payment of this charge.
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Notice how the first definition states that postage CAN be defined as the charge for mailing an item (note that it does NOT say who's charge that is!) Technically... I think that the seller was using the word Postage correctly as the $4.00 was HIS charge for mailing your item.
|
katmommy
|
posted on February 27, 2002 02:22:01 PM new
The fact remains no matter what the guy said in his auction..you got what you wanted (your money back easily) and got to keep the CD's. The question was what rating you should have given him and its plain and simple..you gave him a negative, you werent fair.
MEOW
|
tomwiii
|
posted on February 27, 2002 02:23:26 PM new
All weel & good...BUT...
This is a common PLOY on the part of many DISHONEST & CROOKED & SCUMMY seller who try to pull a fast one!
AND YOU ALL KNOW THIS!
Since so many are defending this seller this baloney practice must be very common!
Split hair with the dict all ye want, but this shipping BS is getting very old!
|
trai
|
posted on February 27, 2002 02:25:47 PM new
"trai, have you not read anything in this thread? I've said why I used logic and reason and assumed that it would be shipped priority. BECAUSE I WAS PAYING $4.00 FOR POSTAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "
Oh yes,I have read everything and we all know what you are saying.
"Postage can only be POSTAGE. No handling fees. Egads, I've said this like 50 times now. "
Once again, only in your mind. If it does not state, then ask first.
"This is SOOOOO simple. And so many of you are missing this. Sad, sad, sad."
No, not at all.
Well as this is not going anywhere, we will just agree to disagree and leave it at that.
|
eauctionmgnt
|
posted on February 27, 2002 02:30:06 PM new
Ummmm.... I just did some detective work and found the auction in question.... I think everyone will be VERY interested to know that the "Postage" charge in the auction is NOT $4.00 as Peiklk has been saying... but was rather stated as being $3.00. Now... I don't know about the rest of you.... but it's been a long time since I remember Priority mail costing just $3.00. That kinda throws your "I assumed it was Priority" excuse out the window... doesn't it?!?! I think you've been providing us with misinformation and have been making far too many assumptions on your own. I think your reaction to his resolution were far too harsh.
|
ok4leather
|
posted on February 27, 2002 02:30:58 PM new
I know what you are trying to say and Technically you can say that but it is an extreme legalistic interpertation which any reasonable person would gasp at applying to a someone. Its like Me posting in my terms Payment must be received within ten days of the auction ending or I will post negative FB and file NPB with ebay, Bidders payment arrives day 11 I suppose I could leave neg FB and file NPB with ebay - But Id be a real Jerk for doing so and ebay might suspend me for falsely filing a NPB and who would want to buy from or sell to anyone who saw things in that way.
|
holdenrex
|
posted on February 27, 2002 02:44:57 PM new
eauctionmgnt, I located the auction too and the stated postage is $4. I think you located the wrong auction.
|
katmommy
|
posted on February 27, 2002 02:53:07 PM new
Yup..it says $4 as clear as day. Cant whine over that if ya ask me. Anyone with common sence wouldnt assume Priority mail if the auction didnt say Priority mail. If I see an item I am interested in and it can be shipped media mail or for less then stated I will ask if the seller is willing to do so before I bid.
MEOW
|
ahc3
|
posted on February 27, 2002 02:54:13 PM new
Yeah, I have to admit it was very easy to find the auction in question. You should be more careful what information you post here, took me about 4 minutes this morning. At least I got to block you from my auctions. You are basically a seller too, much more feedback from selling than buying.
Your problem is in your first comment here, that you automatically assume that $4 shipping means priority mail. It is an assumption! How much profit are you making for charging $5 shipping on a slide rule? It's okay because you use the term shipping & handling instead of postage? You don't even include insurance for that greedy amount! $5 is at your own risk!! Sorry, but in my book, postage and shipping are the same and interchangable. The seller was upfront with you about the fee, if you had a question, you should have asked instead of assumed.
|
ahc3
|
posted on February 27, 2002 02:55:45 PM new
This is the problem of the buyer, they stated upfront they assumed priority mail. I honestly don't understand what difference is possibly makes, especially since they got the item. The buyer has a lot of nerve since they are basically going to charge $6.10 to ship a sliderule to someone.
|
thedewey
|
posted on February 27, 2002 03:01:06 PM new
peiklk -- I think a negative was WAAAAY out of line here. I, too, found the auction in question, and it's obvious to me what the item is, by how he describes it. The description says* that the CD will work in any CD player ... now, if you were buying a factory-made CD, why would the seller even bother to state that?
And the $4.00 postage is clearly stated, as well.
The seller gave you a refund PLUS let you keep the merchandise. He did all that he could do to make you happy -- and then you negged him and reported him to eBay for selling illegal items when you yourself admit that you don't know for sure if they're illegal or not.
What more did you want from the guy?
What if the guy IS selling perfectly legal copies, and eBay suspends him based on your complaint? You've been around eBay long enough to know that eBay sometimes shoots, and THEN asks questions later (and usually they don't even bother to ask questions!).
I'm sorry, but I think you went overboard. 
*I slightly edited the exact wording, just in case it's against AW's rules to post it, but the meaning is the same.
[ edited by thedewey on Feb 27, 2002 03:09 PM ]
|
eauctionmgnt
|
posted on February 27, 2002 03:06:52 PM new
I appologize! I guess my detective work is a little rusty. I found the right seller... wrong auction! You are correct.... the $4.00 postage charge was listed. I am very sorry! Still... I do think that assuming it would be shipped priority was not a wise thing to do.
|
katmommy
|
posted on February 27, 2002 03:08:21 PM new
ahc3:
Maybe I'm wrong but where do you see that peiklk is mostly a seller? I looked at all his feedback and it looks to me like he is much more of a buyer (in the past year anyway). Just thought I'd ask (maybe we arent looking at the same auction?)
MEOW
|
REAMOND
|
posted on February 27, 2002 03:09:14 PM new
Why the bias against CD-Rs, other than the possible copyright issue ?
CD-Rs are generally higher quality than pressed CDs, there are no medium flaws on a burned CD, but I have gotten plenty of pressed CDs that had problems.
|
trai
|
posted on February 27, 2002 03:10:28 PM new
tomwiii
"Since so many are defending this seller this baloney practice must be very common! "
No, I do not think that most people here are defending the seller.
No one like's the sly type of sellers.
I think what strikes a chord with most people is that in this case the seller bend over backwards for the buyer, just to have a two by four rammed up their butt.
Does anyone think that the seller will leave feedback or be real fast to give a refund after this? I do not think so!
It would have been best to leave no feedback if one feels so strong about it, and move on.
|
ahc3
|
posted on February 27, 2002 03:24:06 PM new
Are you sure you have the right auction? I see far more S than B in the feedback. Out of the most recent 40 feedbacks, 36 are as seller and 4 as buyer...
|
holdenrex
|
posted on February 27, 2002 03:25:09 PM new
I agree that a negative was too extreme. I also will set aside the postage issue as a non-issue. My issue is more with the fact that he's selling material of questionable copyright ownership. Just because it's less than 75 years old doesn't mean that it's covered - the shows in question were originally produced prior to the laws of the automatic renewal and the like which came about in the 1960s to 1970s, so there is a chance that they are public domain - to me, that question alone would be reason to not leave a negative.
The problem is, the seller is clearly in a gray area selling CD-R's of questionable copyright ownership. The wording of the auction is the classic wording used by bootleg sellers on ebay - vague enough to avoid getting pulled by Safeharbor, while containing enough "wink, nudge" language to be understood by experienced buyers of such product.
Unfortunately, every now and then a naive buyer is taken in by the intentionally misleading description. Take a look at the feedback of any sellers pushing bootleg product and it's fairly typical to find at least one or two neutrals/negs per page of 25 because of buyers who weren't experienced enough to read between the lines. My guess is this seller has avoided such feedback by refunding the buyer's money and letting them keep the product. But anybody selling items that are questionable and who uses misleading language has to expect that sooner or later they're going to get zinged, even with excellent customer service such as in this case.
So while I don't think a neg was deserved in this case, I certainly would have no trouble with a neutral being left if only to leave a flag telling future bidders that a) this seller's descriptions may be misleading and b) the seller may be selling items of questionable copyright. Of course noting that the good points of the customer service can't be ignored either - that's why I would go with neutral, since there's both positive and negative aspects of the transaction to be reported. All in IMHO of course.
|
katmommy
|
posted on February 27, 2002 03:40:33 PM new
ahc3:
I think you might be looking at the wrong auction? I checked the FB of the seller on the auction I looked at and the comment peiklk left that he posted in this thread was in the sellers FB profile. Peiklk isnt his ebay ID and as far as I see, he/she is mostly a buyer
MEOW
|
ahc3
|
posted on February 27, 2002 03:46:22 PM new
I am sure I have the right person.
peiklk (not the name on ebay) has a feedback of 200 uniques, and is currently running 10 auctions, with one of them being a slide rule
|
peiklk
|
posted on February 27, 2002 05:53:57 PM new
yes, I am mostly a seller, though I see now why people keep separate accounts.
The shipping was $4.00 as stated in the auction, but I think that's been cleared up now.
And I DO have common sense and while I don't normally make assumptions about anything and just go with the TOS, since this auction clearly indicated the item would be shipped with $4 worth of postage and it arrived with 1/5 of that, it was worth noting.
However, the bulk cause for the negative was due to the probable illegality of the item in question. My feedback is clear not to state it WAS illegal, only question it. If ebay suspends this seller over the material it won't be because of me, but because ebay agreed the material was not for him to sell. I've only brought it to their attention. They can make the call.
|
peiklk
|
posted on February 27, 2002 05:56:12 PM new
Oh yeah, on the slide rule. It will be shipped priority mail with delivery confirmation. This is $3.90, plus whatever extra packaging it takes to secure the item in the box. From $5.00 this leaves about 75 cents handling -- which is clearly stated up front that I am charging SHIPPING & HANDLING.
And insurance is $1.50 (for $50 and under), I don't use the USPS for insurance.
|
ahc3
|
posted on February 27, 2002 05:56:48 PM new
Yes, it is wise to have a buying and selling account. I did not do that until about 18 months ago, glad I never got a negative on my account from buying. I still have not got one, but I would actually not care about a retalitory neg on my strictly buying account.
|
ahc3
|
posted on February 27, 2002 06:01:57 PM new
I also would be careful with info posted here. I speak from experience, I used to have a different ID here that was easy to get to my ebay auctions. I posted something, and someone actually threatened me because they did not agree with what I said. The info you posted made it pretty easy to find you on ebay, probably want to be less specific in the future...Just some unsolicited advice. You never know who is out there.
|
alanuk
|
posted on February 27, 2002 08:36:24 PM new
Why didn't you just admit you were WRONG instead of deleting all your posts and putting "THREAD CLOSED"
Should the seller be invited here to put his side of the story?
[ edited by alanuk on Feb 27, 2002 08:37 PM ]
[ edited by alanuk on Feb 27, 2002 08:37 PM ]
|
ahc3
|
posted on February 27, 2002 08:40:33 PM new
I can't blame him for deleting his messages. He gave away enough information so that several people were able to find out his ebay ID, and it appears he did not want that to happen.
|
alanuk
|
posted on February 27, 2002 08:47:09 PM new
Well I hope he realizes that he made a mistake by leaving this seller negative feedback, and thinks a little harder before doing the same thing again in the future.
|
