POSSIBLE rule for SELLING/BUYING
- Thread starter spanky981
- Start date
spanky981 said:
Mike I totally agree with this concept, however, if I were the owner of this forum I would also require that all sellers are registered as such and that they pay the forum a fee for each transaction. These transactions could be used to upgrade the current forum for selling / buying and for hiring of additional staff / support team personnel necessary to maintain and input the required data to keep everything updated.
By the way, keeping the above in mind how many sellers would want to pay the necessary fee's to make this work, you see nothing is free and the forum can only support so much without an additional influx of income.
Last edited:
Jazz said:
But for someone like myself who is not known i lose out on cues , now thats "fair" to me?? Ive been a member here since 2003 longer than most posting here on this issue and yet that doesnt count for anything.....
Im not as big a buyer as i use to be but my family always comes first and when a nice cue comes along i would like the same fair shot as everyone else.... Trust me i have lost more cues and cases to this type of "selling to friends" i know it............ IMO
Happy Saturday
My feelings are that the current situation/arrangement works fine for the most part.....why would anybody want to try to fix what's not broken
Slider said:
My feelings are that the current situation/arrangement works fine for the most part.....why would anybody want to try to fix what's not broken
Last edited:
While I kinda like the idea, it doesn't really solve anything unless it is made a rule. You'll still have people that say, hey I pm'd you before thyat other guy posted in the thread.
The main reason I don't like it is however, that I would like to keep some deals private. It's nobody elses business what I buy and from who. But that's just me maybe.
gr. Dave
The main reason I don't like it is however, that I would like to keep some deals private. It's nobody elses business what I buy and from who. But that's just me maybe.
gr. Dave
I generally like to PM or e-mail the seller of and close the deal in private.Double-Dave said:
So whatever the seller thinks is fair as far who gets it is up to them.
I have to agree with comments already made - if it is not broke don't fix it.
Myron
I agree with Manwon if you are going to use this forum for a regular tool for selling you need to put up some cash to do so. Expecting it to be free and then have someone enforce all these so called rules is out of line I think. Something cheap like $50 a year or something. Otherwise that is what Ebay is for. Let them deal with the retracted bids for a percentage.
agreed
agreed. as far as some talking about backing out of deals, that's what would make any changes you make null anyway. there will always be those who have diamond eyes and penny pockets or those who hedge one deal against another and no matter what changes you make to a system they'll always be there. i personally can't stand when someone backs out of a deal and gives you a lame excuse that you know is either a crock a' bull or what i said before about having diamond eyes or hedging. i will say that i believe the seller always has the right to sell to whom he/she wants but i also believe that once you make an offer to a seller you should be ready at that time to buy if the seller chooses you, within a relatively short period of time of course. no excuses like "oh i had a buyer for my cue and he backed out so i can't buy you cue" or the blatant " i've decided to go with a different cue" or even the idiot who after saying they'll take the deal says to you " i thought i had the money but i'm short, will you do a trade?" for the seller, one of the biggest problems with selling items like cues, that can have such a volatile change in their worth and availability, is that they almost have to put their cue out there to see how much interest they'll get and play 2 or 3 interested people because they've learned that by choosing only one to deal with they have a good chance of painting themselves into a corner and create a bigger problem for them if a buyer decides to back out, which seems to be happening allot. one of the problems being them having to contact the others interested and depending on the situation might have to take less for the item or worst case the others moved on to another available cue. imo it's best these problems are best kept out of forum control and left up to the individuals buying and selling, leave the sharks to the sharks so to speak. it's unfortunate but that's the way it has to be imo.
bruin70 said:
agreed. as far as some talking about backing out of deals, that's what would make any changes you make null anyway. there will always be those who have diamond eyes and penny pockets or those who hedge one deal against another and no matter what changes you make to a system they'll always be there. i personally can't stand when someone backs out of a deal and gives you a lame excuse that you know is either a crock a' bull or what i said before about having diamond eyes or hedging. i will say that i believe the seller always has the right to sell to whom he/she wants but i also believe that once you make an offer to a seller you should be ready at that time to buy if the seller chooses you, within a relatively short period of time of course. no excuses like "oh i had a buyer for my cue and he backed out so i can't buy you cue" or the blatant " i've decided to go with a different cue" or even the idiot who after saying they'll take the deal says to you " i thought i had the money but i'm short, will you do a trade?" for the seller, one of the biggest problems with selling items like cues, that can have such a volatile change in their worth and availability, is that they almost have to put their cue out there to see how much interest they'll get and play 2 or 3 interested people because they've learned that by choosing only one to deal with they have a good chance of painting themselves into a corner and create a bigger problem for them if a buyer decides to back out, which seems to be happening allot. one of the problems being them having to contact the others interested and depending on the situation might have to take less for the item or worst case the others moved on to another available cue. imo it's best these problems are best kept out of forum control and left up to the individuals buying and selling, leave the sharks to the sharks so to speak. it's unfortunate but that's the way it has to be imo.
i have been on a small watch message board for 5 years, we have a buy and sell forum and the smallest deal is around $3,000. Watches are expensive the highest are around $100K, there is alot of activity there from newbies as well as long time members like myself. what we did was set up the rules similar to whats here and then 2 sub-forums one is the good-guys where anyone can post its an open forum, the second is the bad guy forum where a moderator hears both sides or sometimes only one side and if the seller is bad the post goes up and they are finished. this system has reduced fraud down to just about zero and the amount of the average sale there is much higher than here, thats not a knock of AZ i'm just saying that because with big $$$ there usally is more incentive for fraud. It dosent solve the issue of buyers remorse but those threads are the responsibility of the seller to keep clean and alive until the sale is complete. The bad guy forum does stop bad people from harming a second customer. The watch site is smaller and easier to moderate. I'm only trying to help and sharing my experiences, I did buy one cue here for around $2K and it was a perfect deal, but I picked my spot carefully.
Rules
Mike,
I agree with your suggestion, it should help. This weekend I created a nightmare for myself selling a few items. I had to try and find a fair solution to the many offers I received on the items. I received responses on the thread, my email in-box, my email junk-box, my AZ email boxes, it was almost impossible to sell the items without offending someone.
Regards,
Charles
Mike,
I agree with your suggestion, it should help. This weekend I created a nightmare for myself selling a few items. I had to try and find a fair solution to the many offers I received on the items. I received responses on the thread, my email in-box, my email junk-box, my AZ email boxes, it was almost impossible to sell the items without offending someone.
Regards,
Charles
spanky981 said:
Uhhhh.....I kinda thought that this was the right of the seller anyways....after all, they are the current owner of the cue until it is sold.
While I do not sell here very often at all, and some have been done via PM, without ever listing....I still feel it's the right of the owner to sell his/her cue to whomever they feel the most comfortable to deal with.
Also, for me, I will often to chose to sell to someone whom I believe will give the cue a 'good home'. In other words, I sometimes do not want to see what I am selling 'flipped'. I want someone to enjoy it as much as I have.
But that's just me.
Lisa
pocono said:
Charles, you handled that sale as best you could. You offered a nice cue at a terrific price, and a lot of what went down was a case of 'sour grapes'. Everyone wanted that deal, but only one could have it. I do not get this 'I was first, so you MUST sell it to me!' mentality. I'm guessing that you sold to the first person who contacted you in a medium that you were currently in, and whom you felt comfortable doing a deal with. No harm, no foul. No worries.
Lisa
I wouldn't say "sour grapes" is the right term. (at least not for me) It's just that I was told I was first in line and then come to find out the item I was interested in was sold pending payment to someone else. I was just a bit confused at the time but its' no big deal.ridewiththewind said:Charles, you handled that sale as best you could. You offered a nice cue at a terrific price, and a lot of what went down was a case of 'sour grapes'. Everyone wanted that deal, but only one could have it. I do not get this 'I was first, so you MUST sell it to me!' mentality. I'm guessing that you sold to the first person who contacted you in a medium that you were currently in, and whom you felt comfortable doing a deal with. No harm, no foul. No worries.
Lisa
Cudos to Charles for doing the best he could considering the high interest in his items.
Guys who think I need to be more involved need to put themselves in this position.
Two words ; hell no.
Third party impartial would be ebay.
AZB simply offers space for people to network and make the connection, not broker thier sales and thus be party to deals gone bad etc.
Two words ; hell no.
Third party impartial would be ebay.
AZB simply offers space for people to network and make the connection, not broker thier sales and thus be party to deals gone bad etc.
Agreed
This makes sense to me as well. I have done a number of transactions and when I want to buy or sell a cue, I go to the people I know first, as the transaction and communication is guaranteed for the most part. I have sold and traded the last few cues without posting them on the forum at all. I have been very lucky so far in having 100% positive transactions over the last couple of years.
spanky981 said:
This makes sense to me as well. I have done a number of transactions and when I want to buy or sell a cue, I go to the people I know first, as the transaction and communication is guaranteed for the most part. I have sold and traded the last few cues without posting them on the forum at all. I have been very lucky so far in having 100% positive transactions over the last couple of years.
I make every attempt to sell to the first person who I come to agreement with on a price. But it's obvious from reading this thread that you are more likely to 'close the sale' if you deal with someone you know you can trust, because of reputation or past deals.
What I find really weird is people here who haggle back and forth and then act surprised when you sell the cue to someone else. If you really, really want the cue, and the price is fair, just pay it or offer something very close - that guarantees you get it. Otherwise you are taking a chance at losing the cue. And it goes the other way as well - if you make me a cash offer and I hold out for my asking price, then when I can't get it I go back to you to accept, you may have allocated those funds elsewhere. That's life and I won't whine about it.
What I find really weird is people here who haggle back and forth and then act surprised when you sell the cue to someone else. If you really, really want the cue, and the price is fair, just pay it or offer something very close - that guarantees you get it. Otherwise you are taking a chance at losing the cue. And it goes the other way as well - if you make me a cash offer and I hold out for my asking price, then when I can't get it I go back to you to accept, you may have allocated those funds elsewhere. That's life and I won't whine about it.
DJKeys said:
100% agree, Ken.
So a small percentage of deals go sour? So what. That's going to happen regardless of how many rules and policies are implemented.
Rules like those proposed here are like tits on a bull. First you have to develop a set of guidelines, then agree on the verbiage, the implement the new Rules, then Administer them, then Police them, then Enforce them, then establish consequences and implement those.....
RE: stating that the Seller has the right to sell to whomever he pleases - WTF? That's IMPLICIT! It's a given! It's the Sellers property and he can sell or not sell to whomever he pleases, with absolutely no reason or excuse. (I'm referring to the Offer/Acceptance stage of the sale, not post-agreement)
Posting times that one sent a PM is supposed to obligate the seller to sell to that person? Not in this country, boys. "I responded first therefore you must sell to me" is one of the least-logical, silly concepts to pop up in a long while.
The exception to all this is a Double-Blind Auction, which not even Ebay offers. Sotheby's does, of course, but not too many pool cues there.....
Have you EVER removed an item from your basket and placed it near the checkout of the grocery store?? Or handed a piece of clothing back to the cashier at Macy's, after trying it on and carrying it for a while, with the full intent of purchasing it?
I understand that some deals go bad, that wouldn't go sour had the buyer (or seller) communicated more openly. Like if you're literally waiting on a mailed payment for several weeks and then the buyer tells you he changed his mind.
That sucks. And there's usually some trickle-down effect that impacts other deals.
But rules & polices won't change one's integrity, not one lil bit.
Look at the recent Canada/Kentucky deal. One party showed great integrity and maintained composure and professionalism; the other party blew a gasket. These proposed rules would not have helped that situation.
Or PAINPOOL publicly, repeatedly, promising a refund to a disgruntled buyer for 5+ months! "Satisfaction Guaranteed! lolololol" Would Buyer/Seller policies have changed that? Nope.
Now, who has a radial pin shaft for me??
-von
So a small percentage of deals go sour? So what. That's going to happen regardless of how many rules and policies are implemented.
Rules like those proposed here are like tits on a bull. First you have to develop a set of guidelines, then agree on the verbiage, the implement the new Rules, then Administer them, then Police them, then Enforce them, then establish consequences and implement those.....
RE: stating that the Seller has the right to sell to whomever he pleases - WTF? That's IMPLICIT! It's a given! It's the Sellers property and he can sell or not sell to whomever he pleases, with absolutely no reason or excuse. (I'm referring to the Offer/Acceptance stage of the sale, not post-agreement)
Posting times that one sent a PM is supposed to obligate the seller to sell to that person?
Not in this country, boys. "I responded first therefore you must sell to me" is one of the least-logical, silly concepts to pop up in a long while.The exception to all this is a Double-Blind Auction, which not even Ebay offers. Sotheby's does, of course, but not too many pool cues there.....
Have you EVER removed an item from your basket and placed it near the checkout of the grocery store?? Or handed a piece of clothing back to the cashier at Macy's, after trying it on and carrying it for a while, with the full intent of purchasing it?
I understand that some deals go bad, that wouldn't go sour had the buyer (or seller) communicated more openly. Like if you're literally waiting on a mailed payment for several weeks and then the buyer tells you he changed his mind.
That sucks. And there's usually some trickle-down effect that impacts other deals.
But rules & polices won't change one's integrity, not one lil bit.
Look at the recent Canada/Kentucky deal. One party showed great integrity and maintained composure and professionalism; the other party blew a gasket. These proposed rules would not have helped that situation.
Or PAINPOOL publicly, repeatedly, promising a refund to a disgruntled buyer for 5+ months! "Satisfaction Guaranteed! lolololol" Would Buyer/Seller policies have changed that? Nope.
Now, who has a radial pin shaft for me??
-von
krbsailing said:
My feelings are that the current situation/arrangement works fine for the most part.....why would anybody want to try to fix what's not broken
Last edited:
For that kind of breakdown, sir.....I'll make you a radial pin shaft myself.VonRhett said:Now, who has a radial pin shaft for me??
-von
Mind you...it'll be 28mm with a major taper rollout to it....but by God, I'll make ya one!!!
Well said, Von. Nail on the head, and all that.
Hope all's well with you, sir.
Mark