W2W smelly advert

[PingPong]

A 2k W2W entry

[Slowbee]

If you want to secure a good price rather start high and settle for slightly less instead of starting low and then bargaining a buyer up.

 

I think in this case seller was happy to get R2000 for the entry taking whatever he could get but once the fish started biting he wanted to start an auction. Not on in my opinion

 

I recently sold stuff on the hub. I didn’t have a price in mind but told the buyers to make me an offer. Buyers made an offer and I accepted. I then got offered a higher price afterwards, I said sorry I have sold already.

but you have more than 1000 posts

[lechatnoir]

No I do not haggle at the till, as the cashier is not an agent of the owner of the goods and thus in no legal position to partake in a haggling. So I guess my homework tell me don’t bother. Unlike when you sell goods you have full agency over, then the offer price is open haggling.

 

I see no reason why an advertised price cannot go up. And I do not see why so many on the Hub gets emotional about it. I could never get the, I was first, or don’t increase your price mantra. I am a firm believer in your right to secure the best price you can and to give preference to the person delivering his cash first.

 

And what you said is just factually incorrect, although the seller should do his homework, it cannot be correct that he must be so good at it that he cannot realise that the market will actually bare more based on demand.Thats one of the basic ways prices go up at the JSE, auctions etc.

 

And like someone else said here, if there is some moral code to honour for not increasing the price, where is the morals of offering more if you know it is worth more.

 

Where I do agree however is that when you agree to terms (price, method of payment and time of payment) you have a contract which must be honoured, even if you then get a better offer. But I did not read that that was the case here

 

If this was your 167th post, I'd love to see your first!

[PygaSchmyga]

There's a lot of self righteousness all over this thread, and all the comments saying OP should rather have set  the price higher and then negotiate a lower price miss the point.  By setting a lower price, the seller is attracting way more attention and interest which is the obvious intention.  Now that he has all this interest, he has turned it into an auction.  You can choose to participate or not - your choice.  If you feel this is unethical and against your finer moral code, then exercise your right to withdraw. 

 

All the hubbers who pounced on what they thought was a great bargain could also examine their own moral code.  For example, what happens in the case of a genuinely down-and-out hubber who has fallen on hard times and is forced to sell something at a massive discount just to get the cash in.  Do you buy the goods knowing you got a great deal and move on, or do you ask the seller why so cheap?  And when he tells you he is in trouble do you offer him more, because its the "right thing to do? I doubt it.  You LOVE that you got a great bargain!

 

This is the other side of the same coin.  All you lot who thought you got a hellova bargain for a super cheap entry now find yourselves in an impromptu auction.  And then you get all p1ssed about it that you didn't get the super bargain that you thought.  Grow up.

[PygaSchmyga]

If we're going to be the legalise route with contracts and such then the buyer should take him to small claims court and force the judge to make the seller sell him the entry at R2k.

 

I agree that upping the price was not a great moral decision but cmon R2k for a W2W entry is a steal. If we're going to go the moral perfection game then the buyer should have offered the seller more because robbing him of R12,500 on a R14,500 entry is wrong!!!!!

could not agree more with you - apparently "morality" is a one-way street around here, and its only downhill!

[Wet Ears]

There's a lot of self righteousness all over this thread, and all the comments saying OP should rather have set  the price higher and then negotiate a lower price miss the point.  By setting a lower price, the seller is attracting way more attention and interest which is the obvious intention.  Now that he has all this interest, he has turned it into an auction.  You can choose to participate or not - your choice.  If you feel this is unethical and against your finer moral code, then exercise your right to withdraw. 

 

All the hubbers who pounced on what they thought was a great bargain could also examine their own moral code.  For example, what happens in the case of a genuinely down-and-out hubber who has fallen on hard times and is forced to sell something at a massive discount just to get the cash in.  Do you buy the goods knowing you got a great deal and move on, or do you ask the seller why so cheap?  And when he tells you he is in trouble do you offer him more, because its the "right thing to do? I doubt it.  You LOVE that you got a great bargain!

 

This is the other side of the same coin.  All you lot who thought you got a hellova bargain for a super cheap entry now find yourselves in an impromptu auction.  And then you get all p1ssed about it that you didn't get the super bargain that you thought.  Grow up.

Then he should have started it as an auction surely? Not hard, then you have the right to participate or withdraw. The fact that he started off with a sale and agreed a price with a willing buyer only to push the price up and then move to auction is not on - guess you don't see it that way, your call but that does not mean people are being self righteous - get over yourself bud.

[daniemare]

If this was your 167th post, I'd love to see your first!

 

So what I have learnt/established in my 167 post is

1. You must always sell to the first person calling dibs on your item. Regardless whether number 3 is a easier sale logistically, or a more reliable sale through prompt and quick responses vs that number 1 guy just not returning any of your communication with good frequency
2. As a seller, one cannot respond to under estimated market demand with a higher price, because everyone must be perfect with their research.
3. It is morally acceptable to let the seller understand that he got the sales price wrong and he should accept less (and preferably your offer), but one has no moral obligation to let the seller know he got the sales price wrong and he should accept more
4. And a new lesson, that one's opinion can only count if the arbitrary measure of experience (your post count) indicate that you have been around long enough to be indoctrinated to think like everyone else. I never played the person in any of my posts, but tried to reason with I believe is sound arguments.  Maybe you can extend the same courtesy and point out where my reasoning is flawed, rather than just wonder about my experience, insinuating that my opinion can't matter regardless of the arguments put forward

[PygaSchmyga]

Then he should have started it as an auction surely? Not hard, then you have the right to participate or withdraw. The fact that he started off with a sale and agreed a price with a willing buyer

only to push the price up and then move to auction is not on - guess you don't see it that way, your call but that does not mean people are being self righteous - get over yourself bud.

He did not. 

 

OP called "DIBS", and cried about not getting a superduper bargain.  Seller agreed to nothing - read the first post, it's clear.

 

Starting with a low asking price and switching to an auction is a selling strategy to drum up interest.  Who are you to say what the seller should or should not do?  Is he obliged to sell to the first person who calls DIBS?  What if he already sold it on another platform?  Does the International Law of Dibs give the OP an inalienable right to the goods?  All the self righteous crying in the thread seems to think so, yours included, bud.

[fabes]

 

So what I have learnt/established in my 167 post is

• You must always sell to the first person calling dibs on your item. Regardless whether number 3 is a easier sale logistically, or a more reliable sale through prompt and quick responses vs that number 1 guy just not returning any of your communication with good frequency
• As a seller, one cannot respond to under estimated market demand with a higher price, because everyone must be perfect with their research.
• It is morally acceptable to let the seller understand that he got the sales price wrong and he should accept less (and preferably your offer), but one has no moral obligation to let the seller know he got the sales price wrong and he should accept more
• And a new lesson, that one's opinion can only count if the arbitrary measure of experience (your post count) indicate that you have been around long enough to be indoctrinated to think like everyone else. I never played the person in any of my posts, but tried to reason with I believe is sound arguments. Maybe you can extend the same courtesy and point out where my reasoning is flawed, rather than just wonder about my experience, insinuating that my opinion can't matter regardless of the arguments put forward

This isn’t bid or buy

[Eldron]

 

So what I have learnt/established in my 167 post is

• You must always sell to the first person calling dibs on your item. Regardless whether number 3 is a easier sale logistically, or a more reliable sale through prompt and quick responses vs that number 1 guy just not returning any of your communication with good frequency
• As a seller, one cannot respond to under estimated market demand with a higher price, because everyone must be perfect with their research.
• It is morally acceptable to let the seller understand that he got the sales price wrong and he should accept less (and preferably your offer), but one has no moral obligation to let the seller know he got the sales price wrong and he should accept more
• And a new lesson, that one's opinion can only count if the arbitrary measure of experience (your post count) indicate that you have been around long enough to be indoctrinated to think like everyone else. I never played the person in any of my posts, but tried to reason with I believe is sound arguments. Maybe you can extend the same courtesy and point out where my reasoning is flawed, rather than just wonder about my experience, insinuating that my opinion can't matter regardless of the arguments put forward

I like this guy. Next time I'm in SA I will buy you a bells.

[Eldron]

This isn’t bid or buy

So you don't think he raised any good points at all?

 

Is thehub a buyers paradise where the only way a price can go is down?

[greg_sa]

IMHO, the price was set by the original ad.

 

It was a dick move to increase it afterwards.

[Skubarra]

IMHO, the price was set by the original ad.

 

It was a dick move to increase it afterwards.

 

But as others said - what if you are suddenly flooded with offers to buy and you realise the prize you asking are way too low?

 

We don't know but I would be surprised if it was the initial intention of the seller to do the whole "bait-and-switch" auction thing.

 

I get your point and why the OP is upset, but I really struggle to have much sympathy because even if the seller sold the entry at R3k or R4k HE is still the one that suffered a financial loss in the saga not the OP.

[Patchelicious]

Jocklaw offers a W2W shiraz entry for R2000 and after you dibs it he start pushing it...pretending you were not the first one! 

 

Whats a dibs?

[Dirkitech]

regarding the whole 1000 post count guideline some people go by, how do you determine if it was 1000 useful or contributing or acceptable posts as opposed to posts that are actually spam by purposely avoiding the multiquote feature?
Double standards everywhere

[Rocket-Boy]

Whats a dibs?

Its similar to a Dips only it still appears on this forum