Re: [AH] "best offer" trend?

From Daryl Posnett
Sent Tue, Jan 19th 1999, 21:53

>Daryl Posnett wrote:
>> I think you're really missing my point.  If that's what people want then
>> it.  AH is NOT the forum to legislate how poeple sell things.  It's none
>> your damn business, if you don't like those posts, don't bid, just like
>> that.
>I got your point, otherwise I wouldn't have responded. I just thought
>you were wrong.

Hence you missed my point, let me try once more.  I am right for me, as is
everybody else, get off your soap box and mind your own business.  Deal
however you want to, however, you have no business telling anyone else how
to deal.

>> This isn't the antique business, gear value is widely publicised.
>So is antique value. I think the two are very much related, vintage gear
>is generally old and becoming rarer as individual examples die due to
>age and lack of care. Just like Stikel chairs and deco toasters. Gear
>prices are rising rapidly, that makes it difficult to establish a fair
>market value. Where do I find the current fair price for some Roland
>100m modules?

It doesn't matter, the fair price is what the market will bear.  If the
value is unknown it is no different to expect the buyer to determine the
value than the seller. Offer what they are worth to you.

>As someone who sells gear, of course I'm concerned. If I'm a buyer, I
>want a response when I make an offer. If it's too low I want to know so
>I can either say no thanks or offer more. If I'm a seller I need to
>respond so that I can elecit a better offer. That's how haggling works
>(and has for thousands of years). You can't just wait (as a seller)
>until someone offers what you want without ever having given anyone any
>idea what you want.

Why not, again, just your perspective, nothing more.  I don't do a lot of
haggling personally, I find waiting for better offers to be more successful
over the long haul.  I almost always take the first reasonable offer or
return offer, the unreasonable ones aren't worth wasting time over.  It
always kills me to hear buyers try to explain why I should sell to them for
less.  It's just sales techniques in reverse, in other words, in my opinon,
buyer and seller are equal in this game.  If you expect something of the
seller then do the same yourself.  If you expect that the seller should know
what an item should sell for, then the buyer should know what he is willing
to pay for it.

>Well, that is unethical. If you say you are willing to sell an item for
>a certain price, then you should. If you were a store and put an add
>saying you'd sell a stereo for $100 and then when people came in, you
>told them it was reall $150, that would be illegal, at least in the US.
>The seller should either research a fair price (which you expect the
>buyer to do) or use an auction with a reserve price.

So, now you understand my point, to the seller that sucks.  So they are much
safer just asking for offers.  The fact that it is illegal, and that this
list has more than it's fair share of price/sales technique police is why
you have so many people just soliciting offers.  You are essentially asking
the seller to name the first price, when in fact, it is no less legit for
the buyer to name the first price.  You are obviously uncomfortable doing

>have paid full market value? No, they deserve to be compensated for
>their knowledge and for the work they put in to find such things.

Thankyou, so does the seller, his knowledge of sales techniques will net him
a better price, and I think, that's what pisses people off.

>courtesy, which is what my post was about anyway.

And that's opinion, which is what my post is about.

>> I think it's all bullshit.  It's all about me me me, what can I buy a
>> of gear for.
>Well, if it's all about you you you, then don't expect to get a good

You completely missed it, I'm reffering to you you you, not me me me.  This
thread is all about buyers trying to coerce sellers into dealing their way
so they can get a nice predictable deal.  I don't have any such qualms, I'm
clear about what I'm willing to pay for somthing and quite willing to make
an offer.  If you're willing to pay more than your original offer then why
not offer it in the first place, because, of course, you want a better deal,
which is what this is really all about.  It's all just hidding underneath
this thin veil of fairness and ethics because it is easier to claim as the
innocent buyer.

>It's not at all unethical to try to get top dollar. I never said it was.
>The point is that posting "best offer" makes the whole process a lot
>more complicated than it should be for both parties.

Then as a seller don't use that technique.  I'm sure sellers who do think
that whatever complications are necessary are worth the effort.  You are not
qualified to decide what is right for someone else.

<snip opinion about sales methods>

There are probably hundreds of different ways to buy and sell, your opinion
about what is fair has no relavance.  Any method in use that yields
satisfactory results for buyer and seller is valid.  If best offers don't
work, then they wouldn't be posted.  You are just bent because someone with
more buying skill gets the piece when you don't.  Your lack of skill in
buying is not justification to coerce others into selling to meet your