StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Dark Lord of the Bith wrote:That's pitifully easy to back: people who buy early and sell them inconvenience others merely for profit. Sure, the inconvenience is relatively minor, consisting of just waiting a few more weeks, but they wouldn't have to if that unit wasn't taken by someone who just wanted to turn a profit on it.

You're another person who seems to think the speculators are buying the units and then throwing them down a hole. A unit which has been purchased for resale on eBay can be purchased--get this--on eBay. And if the price on eBay is too high, well, tough. I guess you didn't actually want it that much. It's completely unreasonable to demand to be allowed to buy a luxury for below its market value, and if $9000 happens to be the price a single unit can fetch on eBay, then for the time being, PS3s are worth $9000.

Saying the speculators are douches for inconveniencing people ("minor inconvenience", by the way, is a pretty low standard for douchehood) is tantamount to saying everyone who buys the system is a douche for inconveniencing someone else who won't be able to buy that particular unit. There are more people who want the system than there are systems on the market; someone is going to get left out in the cold no matter what.

You're the one trying to blow my position out of proportion. In a competitive business, this happens all the time. But the fact is, the people who just want to play the new system aren't thinking that they're competing in a cut-throat enterprise, and are being taken advantage of.

How are they being "taken advantage of"? Someone else is willing to pay more than they are for an item in limited supply, therefore, they don't get one. If we were talking about insulin or human hearts for transplants, "it's not fair rich people are pricing us out of the market!" might have some ethical validity, but it doesn't. It's a video game system. A luxury. And in two weeks, the world will be swamped with the Goddamn things. A two week wait because someone else was willing to pay more than you were is not the end of the world.

There's nothing illegal about it, but it's still border-line douchey.

The only douches here work at Sony. They're the ones who created this situation in the first place--that and loons willing to pay a four digit number for a game system with five mediocre launch titles.

RedImperator wrote:You're another person who seems to think the speculators are buying the units and then throwing them down a hole. A unit which has been purchased for resale on eBay can be purchased--get this--on eBay. And if the price on eBay is too high, well, tough. I guess you didn't actually want it that much. It's completely unreasonable to demand to be allowed to buy a luxury for below its market value, and if $9000 happens to be the price a single unit can fetch on eBay, then for the time being, PS3s are worth $9000.

While I never thought they were "throwing them down a hole," I believe I get what you're saying. Basic economics, really.

Saying the speculators are douches for inconveniencing people ("minor inconvenience", by the way, is a pretty low standard for douchehood) is tantamount to saying everyone who buys the system is a douche for inconveniencing someone else who won't be able to buy that particular unit. There are more people who want the system than there are systems on the market; someone is going to get left out in the cold no matter what.

Well, I originally thought that if you buy it, you should use it, and that obviously wouldn't be an issue. After some thought, I realized that if you buy something, it's typically yours to do what you wish with, and selling it for a profit would fall under that.

In other words, "Conceded."

How are they being "taken advantage of"? Someone else is willing to pay more than they are for an item in limited supply, therefore, they don't get one. If we were talking about insulin or human hearts for transplants, "it's not fair rich people are pricing us out of the market!" might have some ethical validity, but it doesn't. It's a video game system. A luxury. And in two weeks, the world will be swamped with the Goddamn things. A two week wait because someone else was willing to pay more than you were is not the end of the world.

The "poor chap" I originally thought of was essentially little Johnny who wanted his games "Nooooowww!!!!!" In a new light, little Johnny is a whiny snot that can learn patience.

The only douches here work at Sony. They're the ones who created this situation in the first place--that and loons willing to pay a four digit number for a game system with five mediocre launch titles.

I definitely agree with you there.

First of all; I'm not greedy, I had fun and wanted to see if I could get a PS3 with all the difficulties. I feel good in accomplishing my goal, and at this point I want to sell it, make some money for my troubles, and be done with it.

I don't care if I don't make $2000 on it. It was worth it, and I accomplished my goal (get a PS3 on launch day).

Anyway, I put it up on eBay again and it sold for $810 + $40 shipping, so basically $850 (minus eBay fees, minus shipping).

HOWEVER...the winning bidder has only ONE feedback, off an item bought this month. The second place bidder (at $801) has 335 positive feedbacks. I clearly put "Please have at least 5 Feedbacks to bid" in my item description.


Now, I've never sold anything for this much on eBay. What do I have to do to protect myself from scammers? Be very detailed please, as I'll have to ship out the system tomorrow morning.

If you want to be sure, I think you should give it to the second-place bidder, since the first-place one openly violated your terms of bidding.

Does anyone here with eBay experience know how that is done, without letting the first bidder who violated my terms give me negative feedback or getting charged a fee from eBay for the bidder who I didn't let buy the item?

Oh, and it's here:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... &rd=1&rd=1

Here's what I usually do with eBay transactions... I only ship when I have the payment money in my account. Doing anything otherwise is just plain risky.

Well, you can wait to see if he pays. Otherwise no, there is nothing preventing the 1 feedbacker from giving you a negative. As far as eBay is concerned, he's the one that won and gets feedback and paying rights to that auction. You could try opening a dispute but see if he pays first if he hadn't already.

Just a reminder. Since you're already sending it by express mail, delivery confirmation and proof of signature should already be had. So remember that you have to ship within seven days of payment to his confirmed address to qualify for the seller's protection policy.

And for the love of god, dress the eBay links.