[geeks] eBay question

[Charles Shannon Hendrix]

On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 06:56:44 -0400
Phil Stracchino <phil.stracchino at speakeasy.net> wrote:

> Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 01:57:48AM -0500, Bill Bradford wrote:
> >> If you don't like the seller's terms, don't bid.
> > 
> > But what are the sellers terms? He advertises a minimum bid he has no
> > intention of honoring.  That is IMHO false advertisement.
> 
> This goes back to the LaserJet 8500DN we tried to buy earlier this year.
>  The seller listed it with a $199 opening bid and didn't set a reserve,
> then backpedalled fast and started lying and making excuses when I was
> the only bidder.

True, but this is not what Geoff is complaining about.

This is a real cause of fraud.

If they had set a reserve price and you didn't meet it, then they would have
every right to back off.

I have set a reserve price before on auctions specifically for the purpose of
not selling the item lower than I wanted.

That's the whole point of a reserve price.

> That said, I don't much like the idea of reserves either; if you're not
> willing to sell X item for under $400, then IMHO you should have to list
> $400 as your opening bid.  

No, you shouldn't.

The starting price has no inherent meaning with regard to the price of the
product or what the seller wants to get.

It's been a part of auctions for ages.

You also have to understand that, whether you like it or not, auctions have
been used historically as a form of pricing research.

If you watch things like Barret-Jackson you'll see a number of cars that do
not sell.  They are there simply to determine their value.

We might not like it, but it isn't at all uncommon or illegal.




-- 
shannon          | I want this Perl software checked for viruses.  Use Norton 
                 | Antivirus.
                 |         -- Charlie Kirkpatrick (software manager, Infinet)