Sales via PM - is it fair Poll

[Frunkstar]

Hi All

Not sure if I have ever done a poll before, but first time for everything.

Right I have been mulling this subject over for years rather than weeks or months as I personally hate the PM'd sales & ease of being able to back door due to it, so should IYO all sales be conducted on a persons for sales post rather than via PM??

My reasoning -

A for sales thread pop's & inevitable many folk want to buy the items listed for sale, but it can he a hard sell sometimes with many folks wanting the same item(s) that are on offer.

If any interest in a said item were asked for directly on the for sales thread EVERYONE can see whats going on & what is available (assuming the seller keeps the post up to date).

Often one replies to a thread with your intent of a purchase (always the way I have done things as its polite IMO) & in the mean time a PM has been sent & the item is sold already, just by one taking the time to IMO do the right thing.

Keeping all sales on the for sales post would also IMO stop back door sales to higher offers & sales for favoritism.

Or should we just stick with what we know & has been the way since the forum started?

 

[lejackal]

I far prefer to be able to pm without everyone knowing what im spending, having to say I'll take this that or the other serves no purpose but fuel the look at me and what I'm spending types.
If someone is going to accept a higher offer all they have to do is say it was sold elsewhere.

 

[db94]

The whole pm sent thing bugs my tits -

Someone lists a whole heap of items for sale and people post up "pm sent" - why not at least say pm sent for Han Bespin MOC that way anyone else looking at the thread knows it's potentially gone.

Several times I have replied to a thread saying I will take item to be told it was already gone - if the person had just posted on sale thread I would have known and not bothered.

For me it just makes so much more sense to reply in the actual sale thread - it's quicker for a start, most people work the system of 1st to ask either by sale post or pm gets it - well I can post "I'll take the Han MOC" quicker than hitting send PM then giving it a subject before even writing a message. I'll always send a quick reply in the thread followed by a longer pm.

Please people stop saying "pm sent" think about all the other people that have just found the thread and want an item - please let them know what the pm is about to avoid disappointment.

 

[mr_palitoy]

Frank, I don't think you are in any position to be lecturing anyone on ethics.

After you claimed dibs on that harbert cardback a while back because you had given a valuation on it before the seller put it up on here for sale (a clear conflict of interest btw), you subsequently told me that another buyer had backdoored you on it when I asked about it later and the deal had fallen through. Wind forward a year or so to the last cardbacks and curry meet in London and I was chatting with the collector who owned that cardback. He said the deal never fell through and that it is in your collection.

Someone is clearly lying.

Jason

 

[db94]

For ****'s sake Jason this is SWFUK not facebook why not send that by PM

 

[steve obi wan]

Pm'd :lol:

 

[olisuds]

Personally I think a buyer should have the right to privacy and a seller should have the right to sell it to whoever he wants regardless of who was first to post or send a PM. Just my opinion on it.

Furthermore I think there are other things to consider over who was first in line. If you know someone is easy to deal with or a friend then why shouldn't you give them preference. Also I've had PMs from buyers before saying they'll take something but then disappeared for days on end without response or tried to haggle on price or shipping. Whereas someone after that might say" I'll take it at the asking price, send me your paypal and I'll send you the money now".

 

[Hothrebel]

Personally I think a buyer should have the right to privacy and a seller should have the right to sell it to whoever he wants regardless of who was first to post or send a PM. Just my opinion on it.

Furthermore I think there are other things to consider over who was first in line. If you know someone is easy to deal with or a friend then why shouldn't you give them preference. Also I've had PMs from buyers before saying they'll take something but then disappeared for days on end without response or tried to haggle on price or shipping. Whereas someone after that might say" I'll take it at the asking price, send me your paypal and I'll send you the money now".

Well put !!!

 

[olisuds]

Just another scenario to back up my thoughts on this....

You put a lovely 12 back up for sale on the forum at a decent price hoping to help out a fellow collector in the community. That douche bag flipper Eric is first to respond saying he'll take it. Are you going to sell it to him because he was first in line or are you going to tell him to do one? :lol:

 

[mr_palitoy]

Just another scenario to back up my thoughts on this....

You put a lovely 12 back up for sale on the forum at a decent price hoping to help out a fellow collector in the community. That douche bag flipper Eric is first to respond saying he'll take it. Are you going to sell it to him because he was first in line or are you going to tell him to do one? :lol:

Did someone say flipping? Ring any bells with any other contributors on this thread? Hmmmmm

Jason

 

[Stuart Skinner]

Personally I think a buyer should have the right to privacy and a seller should have the right to sell it to whoever he wants regardless of who was first to post or send a PM. Just my opinion on it.

Furthermore I think there are other things to consider over who was first in line. If you know someone is easy to deal with or a friend then why shouldn't you give them preference. Also I've had PMs from buyers before saying they'll take something but then disappeared for days on end without response or tried to haggle on price or shipping. Whereas someone after that might say" I'll take it at the asking price, send me your paypal and I'll send you the money now".

Great post - this is how I see it as well

 

[itfciain]

I trust sellers on here to do the right thing - I always go by the first to message and am sure that others do

It is a shame when things like Oli describe (first to message flipping it) but that is the nature of the beast I guess

 

[olisuds]

Just another scenario to back up my thoughts on this....

You put a lovely 12 back up for sale on the forum at a decent price hoping to help out a fellow collector in the community. That douche bag flipper Eric is first to respond saying he'll take it. Are you going to sell it to him because he was first in line or are you going to tell him to do one? :lol:

Did someone say flipping? Ring any bells with any other contributors on this thread? Hmmmmm

Jason

Got a beef with someone Jason

 

[yoda]

I don't mind the pm idea it seems to work ok. Twice I lost out by the seller telling me item was sold but some you win some you don't. There isn't really much you can do no matter how disappointed you feel.
Plus the item on question could also be up for sale on other sites also. So I guess as lain said you have to put your trust in the seller and hope they do the right thing if you have pm'd them first.

 

[Frunkstar]

Frank, I don't think you are in any position to be lecturing anyone on ethics.

After you claimed dibs on that harbert cardback a while back because you had given a valuation on it before the seller put it up on here for sale (a clear conflict of interest btw), you subsequently told me that another buyer had backdoored you on it when I asked about it later and the deal had fallen through. Wind forward a year or so to the last cardbacks and curry meet in London and I was chatting with the collector who owned that cardback. He said the deal never fell through and that it is in your collection.

Someone is clearly lying.

Jason

A little shocked by this really Jason, I said it would have been nice had I been offered it due to helping with advice on valuation, from memory you said you would step aside as it's my focus figure which I thought was really good of you & most appreciated, you said should I ever let it go for it to come your way, which obviously it would have done had I ever parted with it, so what have I missed?

Yes I have the cardback, but it was you who said to take it remember???, I have never backdoored anyone on any item.

The owner of that cardback got it from ebay, bought a loose figure & the cardback turned up unexpectedly with the figure, I did a trade of 3 nice loose die cast in exchange for it.

I am a little lost as to what the problem is & why you are now publicly saying I swindled you out of it, which I did not :?

 

[Lom]

I don't mind the pm idea it seems to work ok. Twice I lost out by the seller telling me item was sold but some you win some you don't. There isn't really much you can do no matter how disappointed you feel.
Plus the item on question could also be up for sale on other sites also. So I guess as lain said you have to put your trust in the seller and hope they do the right thing if you have pm'd them first.

To be honest I don't mind if a seller looks through a pile of PMs and chooses to sell to mate first or maybe someone who he knows will complete the sale without any drama; it's their item after all. I like this place because it hasn't got a ton of regulations and rules stifling it.

Mind you if a seller agrees a deal then reneges on that deal for a few extra quid then may his balls wither.

 

[mr_palitoy]

Frank, I don't think you are in any position to be lecturing anyone on ethics.

After you claimed dibs on that harbert cardback a while back because you had given a valuation on it before the seller put it up on here for sale (a clear conflict of interest btw), you subsequently told me that another buyer had backdoored you on it when I asked about it later and the deal had fallen through. Wind forward a year or so to the last cardbacks and curry meet in London and I was chatting with the collector who owned that cardback. He said the deal never fell through and that it is in your collection.

Someone is clearly lying.

Jason

A little shocked by this really Jason, I said it would have been nice had I been offered it due to helping with advice on valuation, from memory you said you would step aside as it's my focus figure which I thought was really good of you & most appreciated, you said should I ever let it go for it to come your way, which obviously it would have done had I ever parted with it, so what have I missed?

Yes I have the cardback, but it was you who said to take it remember???, I have never backdoored anyone on any item.

The owner of that cardback got it from ebay, bought a loose figure & the cardback turned up unexpectedly with the figure, I did a trade of 3 nice loose die cast in exchange for it.

I am a little lost as to what the problem is & why you are now publicly saying I swindled you out of it, which I did not :?

You said you were backdoored and never got the card to me. The seller of the card and now you say that isn't the case.

You're very concerned in this thread about getting first dibs on things that come up for sale. Someone else mentioned flipping, and that's something you were trying to do on a piece you acquired on here recently.

My point is, don't lecture people on ethics when yours leave something to be desired.

Jason

 

[Frunkstar]

Personally I think a buyer should have the right to privacy and a seller should have the right to sell it to whoever he wants regardless of who was first to post or send a PM. Just my opinion on it.

Furthermore I think there are other things to consider over who was first in line. If you know someone is easy to deal with or a friend then why shouldn't you give them preference. Also I've had PMs from buyers before saying they'll take something but then disappeared for days on end without response or tried to haggle on price or shipping. Whereas someone after that might say" I'll take it at the asking price, send me your paypal and I'll send you the money now".

Some excellent points there Olli, some I had not considered TBH, the privacy thing had never really crossed my mind with not being much in the way of a big spender, but I totally get that.

This is quite the awkward subject really considering the other side of the fence.

 

[wrighty]

I agree with Oli that privacy should be a right and also the seller should have the option of selling it to whoever he/she wants. :wink:

Personally I think a buyer should have the right to privacy and a seller should have the right to sell it to whoever he wants regardless of who was first to post or send a PM. Just my opinion on it.

Furthermore I think there are other things to consider over who was first in line. If you know someone is easy to deal with or a friend then why shouldn't you give them preference. Also I've had PMs from buyers before saying they'll take something but then disappeared for days on end without response or tried to haggle on price or shipping. Whereas someone after that might say" I'll take it at the asking price, send me your paypal and I'll send you the money now".

 

[Frunkstar]

Frank, I don't think you are in any position to be lecturing anyone on ethics.

After you claimed dibs on that harbert cardback a while back because you had given a valuation on it before the seller put it up on here for sale (a clear conflict of interest btw), you subsequently told me that another buyer had backdoored you on it when I asked about it later and the deal had fallen through. Wind forward a year or so to the last cardbacks and curry meet in London and I was chatting with the collector who owned that cardback. He said the deal never fell through and that it is in your collection.

Someone is clearly lying.

Jason

A little shocked by this really Jason, I said it would have been nice had I been offered it due to helping with advice on valuation, from memory you said you would step aside as it's my focus figure which I thought was really good of you & most appreciated, you said should I ever let it go for it to come your way, which obviously it would have done had I ever parted with it, so what have I missed?

Yes I have the cardback, but it was you who said to take it remember???, I have never backdoored anyone on any item.

The owner of that cardback got it from ebay, bought a loose figure & the cardback turned up unexpectedly with the figure, I did a trade of 3 nice loose die cast in exchange for it.

I am a little lost as to what the problem is & why you are now publicly saying I swindled you out of it, which I did not :?

You said you were backdoored and never got the card to me. The seller of the card and now you say that isn't the case.

You're very concerned in this thread about getting first dibs on things that come up for sale. Someone else mentioned flipping, and that's something you were trying to do on a piece you acquired on here recently.

My point is, don't lecture people on ethics when yours leave something to be desired.

Jason

I never told you I was backdorred on it ever, I have even posted photos in my power droid limelight with it clearly showing & I also said it would go to you if I ever parted with it, so I don't have a clue what you are on about Jason, would I really put it in a limelight if I said I never got it??? :?

As for the "other item" that being the cantina 4 figure MP, I bought it from the guy here & asked if he is cool with me buying it to use as trades for other packs I need, the seller had no problem with that & I have indeed since traded it for another pack, well 2 packs to be precise, both the packs have issues & this one was graded, so I & the person I traded it with were happy with the deal as was the seller of the pack, so whats your's (& Iain's) problem with that??, trying to buy anything these days is not easy or cheap & ofter having a nice item to trade with is more appealing that cash.

I actually thought is was most gentlemanly & SWFUKer'ish of you to step aside for me on the Harbert cardback at the time, as said I traded it for 3 die cast - no secret