B/S/T Faux Pas?

[GarageBoy]

I had a little issue when I was selling something on CPF and gave two options.
I was either going to sell the whole thing, or part it out.
Someone had offered to buy the body and tail cap and we had started to negotiate the deal. Then someone right after offered to buy the whole thing. I told the first guy, I have someone buying the whole thing, would you mind if I did and he agreed. Still, I feel awkward. Did I commit a faux pas?
Any others I should know about?

 

[Kestrel]

I've been thinking of this issue, as I had a recent situation myself in B/S/T not long ago (as a seller). From reading other sale threads, it seems to me that problems often crop up with some folks wanting to communicate (& negiotiate) via PM while others post in the thread.

I've tried to develop my boiler-plate text so as to cover various situations, but there will always be some potential issue that I haven't covered yet. Once I figure out how to cover everything, I'll end up with so much text that it will be easy for folks to miss information that I'm trying to convey. So that isn't an optimum solution either.

My opinion: When it all comes down to it, I figure that the seller gets to make the rules and the decisions for selling the stuff and is the final arbitrator - it's your thread. Don't worry too much about it - that's the harder part. :tinfoil:

And another thing, it is impossible to please everyone. I try to do this, but it's impossible - everybody sees things slightly differently. My goal is to please at least the purchasers 100%, that's a feasible goal.

Maybe some more experienced sellers can chime in with more thoughts on this.

 

[scout24]

Certainly not more experienced, and happy to defer, but I would think a "First person to post an I'll take it" for the whole thing has priority..." would cover it. Regardless of ongoing deals for parts and pieces. As long as you were up front, I can't really see hurt feelings. My $.02.

 

[kingofwylietx]

Certainly not more experienced, and happy to defer, but I would think a "First person to post an I'll take it" for the whole thing has priority..." would cover it. Regardless of ongoing deals for parts and pieces. As long as you were up front, I can't really see hurt feelings. My $.02.

I agree with Scout. If you are open to selling whole or part, then you need extra wording in case somebody wants it whole (and you have someone else that just wants a part).

Add'l wording similar to "The first 'I'll take it whole' gets priority over any parts sales".

 

[ElectronGuru]

Sales threads are dynamic. I find the key is controlling the flow as each step develops. In this case, your original offer was for a 3 piece light. You got a counter offer for 2 of the pieces. Accepting that offer, changes the rules of the first post, so it would be helpful to clarify at that time. For example, a conditional acceptance of 'will break up when all parts have takers'. With this in place, a 'take it' for all all pieces would override the offer for only 2, but would not override a pair of offers 1 and 2+3.

 

[Monocrom]

Not really a Faux Pas as long as you make it clear you'd prefer to sell the entire light, and will only give consideration to parting it out perhaps a week or a few days later. (If no one decides to buy the light as a whole.)

 

[Chucula]

Since the guy agreed, it is no big deal. However, I see it as dishonesty. You said you will sell something and then went back on your word for your own convenience.

 

[9volt]

we had started to negotiate the deal. Then someone right after offered to buy the whole thing.

If you were negotiating with buyer A and buyer B posted "I'll take it" then IMHO buyer B gets the item.

 

[Rexlion]

The best way to look at it might be how contract law says things work. When an offer to sell is made, the party receiving the offer has the power to accept, and that acceptance is considered binding. If the offeree makes a counteroffer, though, that nullifies the original offer and the power to accept or reject the counteroffer shifts back to the first party. If the offeror rescinds his offer (and notifies the offeree) before the offeree indicates his acceptance, that will remove the offeree's power to accept.

It sounds like you and the first buyer were not settled on the terms of the deal... what would be purchased for what price. You had the power to rescind the offer. If, however, the two of you had reached an agreement on the details, you still were covered in this instance because you asked the buyer if he would be ok with calling off the deal... and he consented. Folks can agree to cancel a contract. So it seems to me you were ok.

I can see where offering 2 different ways of selling the same thing could be problematic, though. In the future, it might be wiser to offer to sell the thing just one way (like, whole) and say the offer is open for a set time (say, 2 days) after which that offer is withdrawn and a new offer to part out the thing is introduced.

 

[Kestrel]

If you were negotiating with buyer A and buyer B posted "I'll take it" then IMHO buyer B gets the item.

Yep, that's how I see it as well. Good summation.

I can see where offering 2 different ways of selling the same thing could be problematic, though.

This seems to me one of the most difficult aspects, IMO. My particular situation wasn't parting out an item, but negiotiating (via PM) on what might work via payment methods & a delayed payment, but then someone posts an unconditional 'take-it' in the actual thread. To keep things clearer, I'm adding "unconditional 'take-its' get priority" to my subsequent sale threads from now on - I think that would help to address issues such as this. Lots of other folks seem to do it this way as well.

 

[ninemm]

To keep things clearer, I'm adding "unconditional 'take-its' get priority" to my subsequent sale threads from now on - I think that would help to address issues such as this. Lots of other folks seem to do it this way as well.

That's what I have done as well. I resisted adding the "unconditional" part because sometimes I too have posted a "if the answer is yes, then I will take it" statement, but in the end it is just clearer and safer to state that unconditional take-its have priority. Also, I made sure to add "posted in this thread" to my take-it statement that way everyone can see exactly who said what and when. There's no question then about if you were impartial in giving a person dibs on the item.

 

[*Dusty*]

Fwiw on another forum I use the rules clearly state all transactions are to be carried out without the use of pm's except where confidential details like adresses or contact numbers are being exchanged.

 

[kaichu dento]

Fwiw on another forum I use the rules clearly state all transactions are to be carried out without the use of pm's except where confidential details like adresses or contact numbers are being exchanged.

Nothing wrong with communication by PM, but the prospective buyer just runs the risk of losing out if someone else posts in the interim.

Not really a Faux Pas as long as you make it clear you'd prefer to sell the entire light, and will only give consideration to parting it out perhaps a week or a few days later. (If no one decides to buy the light as a whole.)

Yes, unconditional "I'll take it" trumps all.

 

[*Dusty*]

Nothing wrong with communication by PM, but the prospective buyer just runs the risk of losing out if someone else posts in the interim.

Yes, unconditional "I'll take it" trumps all.

It's more for the fact that if the sale goes wrong, buyer ends up not having the item delivered, or indeed claims they've received something in a different condition to that which was described it is easier for us to determine who said what and when, also to prevent the age old "i've had a better offer by PM" trying to bump up the worth of their goods. Occasionally people would even have agreed a sale then bumped another few sheckles on using that ruse.

It also prevents "bedroom" traders from undercutting paying advertisers.

Like I say it is a rule I personally would use and make clear if I ever do decide to sell anything here but I'm by no means suggesting it should be made a rule.

 

[kaichu dento]

It's more for the fact that if the sale goes wrong, buyer ends up not having the item delivered, or indeed claims they've received something in a different condition to that which was described it is easier for us to determine who said what and when, also to prevent the age old "i've had a better offer by PM" trying to bump up the worth of their goods. Occasionally people would even have agreed a sale then bumped another few sheckles on using that ruse.

It also prevents "bedroom" traders from undercutting paying advertisers.

Like I say it is a rule I personally would use and make clear if I ever do decide to sell anything here but I'm by no means suggesting it should be made a rule.

There's some sense to what you're saying and I guess I understand a little better now why some members choose that route, although I prefer PM conversations and to primarily keep the decisions public.

 

[Monocrom]

If a Seller tells me that they've had a better offer through PM, after the sale has been completely worked out, I tell them I expect them to keep their word since I dealt with them in good faith.

If they refuse to keep their word, it shows a strong lack of integrity; and I never deal with them again.

But that's different compared to a faux pas.