What's new

double ring cheater

At least the auction was not discontinued for an under the table deal. I don't see the problem tbh with you. If someone wants to be a philistine and put up their valuables without having a clue of their true worth that is on them...
 
Doesn't that handle look a little short?

I imagine that it will look decent shined up, but the modification will probably always be a major ding to the razor's actual market value.

Can a double ring be frankensteined with a single ring?
 
Sounds like you're just mad you didn't get it! :) Nothing wrong with asking the seller for a quick sale. Maybe it was someone he knew. May he was trying to PIF. You never know. A deal's a deal, though. Cheating would be, like, hacking into the seller's account and setting up the BIN.
 
...Basically someone's trying to steal something when they offer a price that low when it's already up on auction...

smh...

Two people agreed on a price, signed a contract, and traded money. Calling this stealing is ridiculous! Dodgy? Maybe. Shrewd? Absolutely. But illegal?

The free market relies on giving people the freedom to make decisions. Even dumb ones. How are we to determine the value of an item if not by a mutual agreement between a buyer and a seller?

I wholeheartedly support you sending that girl a message letting her know the potential value of her item. I've seen people post very angry messages about that practice in this very forum, unable to believe someone would tell a "dumb seller" that they were sitting on a nice item. That was a kind thing that you did, and if more people acted like that, the world would be a nicer place. But just because someone got something for less than what you consider "fair" doesn't make them a thief.
 
Anyone has the ability to offer anything they want to the seller - you just have to ask. Maybe the seller was tired of waiting and needed the money? From their perspective what the buyer offered was better than whatever the outcome would have been via the auction. There really is no "fair" when it comes to dealing in a market like this. Anyone can initiate a transaction at any time, in any form they desire (within the eBay rules, of course). The buyer is silly for doing so, in that they likely loose out, but how do they know what's likely to be offered on the item in the auction?

I don't mean steal in a legal sense. It's OK with me when it's offered on a BIN at a very low price because that's obviously what the seller wanted to sell it for--even if it's out of ignorance.

But it doesn't seem right when something starts out on a bid and there's other people waiting six days to bid in the last few seconds, only to have the rug pulled out from under them just because they were playing the game as it was set up. By rules of the game I mean it's a bid game. The seller's ignorance was taken advantage of because the buyer got them to change the game in his favor for (probably) less money, and the potential buyers lost out because their rules of fair play kept them from trying the same thing.

I think that's what I mean.
 
I don't mean to sound like I'm attacking your point of view. I understand completely where you're coming from. You're clearly someone who, when faced with a choice to do the right thing or the wrong thing, probably chooses the right thing most of the time. It's OK to say that what "Rick" did was disappointing to you, and even to say that he shouldn't have done it. I agree, he shouldn't have. But eBay set up their system, including the ability to BIN an item early at a lower price, for a reason. If people didn't think they could get "a deal" once in a while, they wouldn't shop on eBay. They would go to Amazon. But getting "a deal" sometimes means one person paying less than a "fair" value for something. If eBay wanted, they could easily change the site to disallow this. In fact, I believe that it was originally set up that way. That's also why they allow sniping, which some people consider "cheating." But it's not. It's just how the game is played. One of the original online auction sites, onsale.com, had a system in place such that if you put in a bid at the last minute, it would start a 2 minute clock. Every time someone put in another bid, that timer would restart, until it finally reached a price that nobody was willing to top. You know what happened? Items, more or less, sold for their fair market value all the time. Sellers loved it, but buyers got bored and went to eBay, who ended up buying onsale.com and gutting it. eBay has to walk a delicate and sometimes changing line. If your policies favor buyers, nobody would want to sell on your site. If it favored sellers, nobody would go there to shop. eBay needs both groups to be happy, and sometimes that means looking the other way when a slimy deal happens. Those are the rules.

If you walk into a garage sale and see a sweet old lady selling her late husband's mint condition boxed Darwin Deluxe for $5 so she can buy a new set of dentures, are you going to buy it? Or are you going to tell her it's probably worth enough to get some dental implants? There are solid arguments that go both ways, and it really comes down to a person's character. You can't regulate character.

Plato once said "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." That pretty much sums it up.
 
Last edited:
So funny. When razors on the bay go for higher and higher prices it is not OK. When a razor goes for less than what it normally goes it is not OK either.
 
I have had my legal BIN offers rejected only to win the item later for a lesser price once the bidding cycle ran it's course.

Life is not an exact science it seems.
 
I don't mean steal in a legal sense. It's OK with me when it's offered on a BIN at a very low price because that's obviously what the seller wanted to sell it for--even if it's out of ignorance.

But it doesn't seem right when something starts out on a bid and there's other people waiting six days to bid in the last few seconds, only to have the rug pulled out from under them just because they were playing the game as it was set up. By rules of the game I mean it's a bid game. The seller's ignorance was taken advantage of because the buyer got them to change the game in his favor for (probably) less money, and the potential buyers lost out because their rules of fair play kept them from trying the same thing.

I think that's what I mean.

I love eBay due to the fact that it is a tiny corner of unregulated capitalism where we can all have a bit of fun without anyone getting seriously hurt. On the one hand, I do not like the fact that one potential buyer can by-pass the snipers (like me) by asking for an early BIN, but on the other hand, it is all part of the game. If I had managed to pull off that "theft," I'd be pretty pleased with myself.
 
I have had my legal BIN offers rejected only to win the item later for a lesser price once the bidding cycle ran it's course.

Life is not an exact science it seems.

Done that. I've also was watching a BIN where I was on the fence and it finished without being bought - I thought I would make him an offer, but he relisted it at twice the price and it sold almost immediately. sometimes you get the bear and sometimes he gets you.

This is something that I've always thought is bad with using sniping programs. A lot of times, an auction won't get any bids because it's all going to be sniped at the end. The seller gets nervous. If there aren't any bids on an item, I have made offers in the past and had them accepted. Ebay is a combo auction site, vintage store and flea market. I treat it like a flea market when I can. I don't make offers if there are bids on though.

That's a funny double ring, all mine have the clear band with pat on it.

-jim
 
In a near future all Ebayers use snipingsoftware. How fun would that be?

In theory, if everyone sniped, the item would end up going to whoever was willing to pay the most, like a silent auction. In fact, that's exactly what it's like. Part of the allure of the a traditional auction is that people get whipped up in a frenzy and might end up paying more than they normally would. If everyone just punches in their maximum bid, it'll never get crazy, and eBay thrives on that crazy, just a little. Again, if I wanted a set price for something, I'd go to Amazon. On Amazon, I can buy, and I can sell.

I'm sure that if the balance of power shifted too far in favor of the buyers, or if all the sniping made it too boring, eBay would work on creating a new and interesting way to keep the buying and selling experience enjoyable. Not quite sure how they'd do that, but that's why I don't make big bucks working for eBay.
 
Last edited:
In theory, if everyone sniped, the item would end up going to whoever was willing to pay the most, like a silent auction. In fact, that's exactly what it's like. Part of the allure of the a traditional auction is that people get whipped up in a frenzy and might end up paying more than they normally would. If everyone just punches in their maximum bid, it'll never get crazy, and eBay thrives on that crazy, just a little. Again, if I wanted a set price for something, I'd go to Amazon. On Amazon, I can buy, and I can sell.

I'm sure that if the balance of power shifted too far in favor of the buyers, or if all the sniping made it too boring, eBay would work on creating a new and interesting way to keep the buying and selling experience enjoyable. Not quite sure how they'd do that, but that's why I don't make big bucks working for eBay.

I'm thinking that if everyone sniped, then the sellers will just stop setting up auctions and go with over priced BINs with Best Offer. What seller in their right mind would enjoy setting a low auction price in order to attract bids and then not see any bids come in? I mean, until the last 5 seconds.

-jim
 
Top Bottom