An eBay story

[Peter Johnson]

I had two identical iiyama monitors to sell so I listed the first and
sold it for £78, sending a second chance offer to the underbidder.
He replied asking: Can you provide a picture of the Monitor Working?
Having already got it boxed up and not wanting to go to the hassle of
getting it out and connected to something I told him no, and added
that it had been in use until last week.
To which he replied: As eBay told me the other buyer couldn't finish
the transaction and i have a second chance to buy this, I'm ready to
buy this monitor but i would like to see if it's perfectly working.
coz I don't want after ''refunding issues, and Sending it back, etc,,
So I'm a serious buyer.
So I said:
Actually the other buyer has completed. You received the offer because
I have, or had, two identical monitors to sell.
If I wanted to go to the effort of setting up the monitor to be able
to demonstrate it working, which I don't, it would cause me a lot of
inconvenience, you would still have to take my word for it that what
you were seeing was a picture of the monitor working, which it might
not be, because I have another one that I am not selling. And all it
would prove, if I wasn't telling you a load of old bollocks, was that
the monitor was working at the time I took its photograph, which is no
guarantee that it will be working when it reaches you, although I hope
that it would be.
I'm rather puzzled by your approach, because if the other bidder had
been a little less keen you would have purchased without any
demonstration of electrical activity. But that's OK. I don't mind
listing it if you don't want to go ahead without an alleged
demonstration. Your choice. No hard feelings.
So he backed out, not so serious after all.
I listed the second monitor and it sold for £97, so he did me a
favour.
I did say in the listing that if it did arrive DOA then I would refund
on return.

[Theo]

Peter Johnson <pe...@parksidewood.nospam> wrote:
> I'm rather puzzled by your approach, because if the other bidder had
> been a little less keen you would have purchased without any
> demonstration of electrical activity. But that's OK. I don't mind
> listing it if you don't want to go ahead without an alleged
> demonstration. Your choice. No hard feelings.
> So he backed out, not so serious after all.

I understand it's a pain from a seller perspective, and technically what he
did was against the rules. But there's a misfeature of the ebay auction
system that I think leads to a lot of this.

Let's say you want to buy something reasonably common, perhaps it's a
Vauxhall Corsa, or maybe a 1080p monitor. There are dozens of possible
examples listed as auctions. Because they're auctions you have no idea what
the finishing price might be, and so will end up out of your price range -
but you don't know which. This leads to a buyer's dilemma.

As a buyer can only inspect a handful of them in person. But maybe those
will exceed your price bracket when the auction completes, at which point
you need to start from scratch. If you can't inspect, maybe you can ask the
seller questions instead? But you won't know which are in your price
bracket until minutes before the end of the auction, when the seller
probably won't be able to respond.

So the dilemma is either you only select listings where you can learn
everything you need to know about the item from the listing (which less
common than you would hope), or you bid on things blind and then sort out
issues later. Sometimes those issues are covered by 'not as described' (eg
it was listed working when it wasn't) and sometimes not (things the buyer
didn't realise about the item because the listing didn't show them).

Obviously a buyer doesn't want to pay return shipping for an item to find it
doesn't work or the screen is a funny shade of green, and the seller doesn't
want the hassle of a return. The buyer doesn't want to discover the seller
refuses returns either. So we end up with this situation where they ask
for more info post-sale, and then possibly pull out.

It's a pain, but the best way to avoid it is:
1) Provide a comprehensive listing that preempts any questions ('does it
work' is a pretty basic one, and easy to prove with a photo)
2) List with a fixed price so the uncertainty of the auction price-setting
is removed, and everyone knows where they stand

There's actually good reason for sellers to do this: due to this imperfect
information, the price of ebay auction cars is down on the price of
classified cars. Unless you need the item shifted fast, for cars the
classified/buy-it-now listing will often get you a higher price.

Theo

[Peter Johnson]

On 11 Jun 2020 11:36:56 +0100 (BST), Theo

An interesting insight. But listing things at fixed price depends on
knowing the average value and the likely demand. I didn't know either
and started at £50 for the first and £60 for the second so I did
better by listing in auction format. (Because the first fetched over
£70 didn't mean that the second would.)
I did say that the monitors were working but this is as meaningless as
posting a picture of them 'working.' (In the past I've had people
complaining 'You haven't said if it works. How do I know it will
work?' Well if you don't trust me to sell something in expectation of
it working why would you trust me if it said it worked? But I usually
say now, if I remember.
I used to link to manufacturers' product specs until eBay started
removing links but I do give a good description, and photographs of
all the accessories included, and any visual defects if there are any.
The question here is, if seeing a picture of the monitor allegedly
working was so important to the underbidder, why didn't he ask for it
before he started bidding, when he was at risk of making a commitment
to purchase?
It was a minor inconvenience for me, one that I benefitted from.

(I had a similar experience a few years ago, when I listed a 40in flat
panel TV and sold it to a guy who lived 25 miles away. I asked him if
he wanted to save the carriage and collect it himself. He said he
would if he could see it working but I said no, it would have taken
too much effort to set it up for him to see it for a minute or two and
pointed out that he wouldn't see it working if I sent it by carrier.
He said that he trusted me but he must see it working. I stood my
ground and he decided that he didn't want a non-completion report
against him and paid (by Paypal). I sent it by carrier and heard
nothing more from him.)

[michael adams]

"Peter Johnson" <pe...@parksidewood.nospam> wrote in message
news:fjb2efp83e0tevles...@4ax.com...

But did you also say that you'd refund all his P&P costs ?

Unless I'm mistaken your second highest bidder (SHB) didn't solicit
this offer himself. eBay contacted him.

And quite possibly he was cautious because he has no way of knowing
why the original bidder backed out. ( The fact that there was no original
bidder backing out is irrelevant, given the SHB had no way of knowing that )

That would make all the difference between buying it as the highest bidder
no questions asked, and being offered it as the SHB when the original
bidder has backed out for some unknown reason.

And to be quite honest, the fact that you subsequently explained that
in fact you were selling two sets, rather than one as it was made to
appear is hardly likely to have increased his confidence in the situation.


michael adams

...

[Peter Johnson]

On Thu, 2 Jul 2020 17:00:09 +0100, "michael adams"
<mjad...@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:



>But did you also say that you'd refund all his P&P costs ?
>

That wasn't an issue because he never asked the question. I probably
would have been relaxed about it but it wasn't something I gave any
thought to.

>Unless I'm mistaken your second highest bidder (SHB) didn't solicit
>this offer himself. eBay contacted him.

The offer was triggered by me using eBay's system for doing so. I
agree that it would be reasonable for him to assume that the highest
bidder had backed out, I don't remember what the wording is, but as he
received the offer a few minutes after the auction ended it it would
actually be too soon for a normal sale to collapse.

>
>And quite possibly he was cautious because he has no way of knowing
>why the original bidder backed out. ( The fact that there was no original
>bidder backing out is irrelevant, given the SHB had no way of knowing that )
>
>That would make all the difference between buying it as the highest bidder
>no questions asked, and being offered it as the SHB when the original
>bidder has backed out for some unknown reason.
>
>And to be quite honest, the fact that you subsequently explained that
>in fact you were selling two sets, rather than one as it was made to
>appear is hardly likely to have increased his confidence in the situation.

I don't understand that, unless I've misunderstood you. Why should the
sale of one item be ok but the knowledge that I have a second
identical one to sell cause doubts? I'm not a dealer but they sell
multiples of an item all the time. The 'proof' he wanted that the
monitor was working wouldn't have been proof at all and I was quite
happy to take the risk that I'd get it back if I'd sent it to him and
it didn't work.
In the end, it didn't really matter. He did me a favour because I sold
it for £20 more. And I've heard nothing from the purchaser, yet. Lol.

(I sold a monitor a few years ago and the purchaser got in touch a few
months later so say that it had stopped working, which is why I set my
stall out this time.)

[michael adams]

"Peter Johnson" <pe...@parksidewood.nospam> wrote in message

news:ofnufftfjjjrreosc...@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 2 Jul 2020 17:00:09 +0100, "michael adams"
> <mjad...@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
>>But did you also say that you'd refund all his P&P costs ?
>>
>
> That wasn't an issue because he never asked the question. I probably
> would have been relaxed about it but it wasn't something I gave any
> thought to.

So that even now, after the sale has fallen through you still haven't
decided whether or not you'd have been "relaxed" about refunding his
P&P costs, had say the monitor had been damaged in transit or
otherwise DOA. *You* still haven't decide whether you'd have been
happy to refund his P&P costs, and yet you expected *him* to have
confidence in the transaction at the time ?

>
>>
>>And to be quite honest, the fact that you subsequently explained that
>>in fact you were selling two sets, rather than one as it was made to
>>appear is hardly likely to have increased his confidence in the situation.
>
> I don't understand that, unless I've misunderstood you. Why should the
> sale of one item be ok but the knowledge that I have a second
> identical one to sell cause doubts?

Here's how you explained it to the buyer according to your original post

"Actually the other buyer has completed. You received the offer because
I have, or had, two identical monitors to sell."

From which the buyer could reasonably assume you were trying avoid eBay
listing fees. It might also cast doubt in his mind as to whether the
transaction would be fully covered by all the relevant guarantees. If
I've misunderstood this then I apologise in advance; but otherwise this
can be seen as being dishonest at worst or "too clever by half" at best.
How is this supposed to instil confidence in the buyer ?


michael adams

...

[Peter Johnson]

On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 01:29:45 +0100, "michael adams"

Have you really been worrying about this for a month?
It doesn't matter at all what I thought about refunding theoretical
postage because the item wasn't sold (to this 'buyer') so the question
of refunding postage never arose.
And how you get to suggesting that I was trying (or could have been
trying) to avoid eBay fees because I mentioned that I that I had a
duplicate item to sell I have no idea.
I think you are trying to read far too much into my motives and into
the 'buyer's' interpretation of my motives. Do give it a rest.

[michael adams]

"Peter Johnson" <pe...@parksidewood.nospam> wrote in message

news:p4tlifh05vctnc21m...@4ax.com...

>
> Have you really been worrying about this for a month?

Nowadays I only check out this group every now and again, as the
amount of traffic doesn't justify anything more frequent

> I think you are trying to read far too much into my motives and into
> the 'buyer's' interpretation of my motives. Do give it a rest.

The reason for your original post, if your remember was your puzzlement
at the buyer's attitude. All I was doing, was suggesting why they may
have reacted in the way that they did.

If you don't like the answer, then maybe you shouldn't have asked the
question in the first place.


michael adams

...