Just curious, is the amount the buyer is proposing to pay at least equal to what the underbidder would have paid? If so the seller would be netting the same sale price, if not more, as he would have if the bidder had not bid in the first place to push the underbidder up to his maximum.
Not sure I understand...
The high bidder wanted $30 back. Based on the selling price I think bid increments would have been $2.50 or $5. So, the underbidder was willing to pay that much less than the high bid.
Just curious, is the amount the buyer is proposing to pay at least equal to what the underbidder would have paid? If so the seller would be netting the same sale price, if not more, as he would have if the bidder had not bid in the first place to push the underbidder up to his maximum.
Not sure I understand...
The high bidder wanted $30 back. Based on the selling price I think bid increments would have been $2.50 or $5. So, the underbidder was willing to pay that much less than the high bid.
If the $30 would settle it I would take the $30 hit (avoiding hassle of return) and move on. Be sure to block him.
That way your saving yourself subsequent relist, selling expense from that sale (bay fees, PayPal, shipping), and unknown period until it sells. I believe bay selling expense on that would be close to or exceed the $30.
@1northcoin said:
Maybe I am missing something here, but if this analysis is correct then blocking this bidder may not be a good business decision as it really is not affecting the bottom line, and if anything is helping to up the bids. This of course assumes that he is not asking to reduce the price by more than the underbidder would have paid.
Blocking a bidder has two parts that are both important. It's giving up any potential help the buyer could provide in raising the price of future auctions (whether they win or not), but weighing that against any potential headache the buyer could cause. Every bidder has the potential to raise an item's price (otherwise they aren't bidding, and their presence is a non-issue). Give me reason to think you'll cause future problems, and it's not worth it. Let's say this buyer never came along and the item sold for $30 less from the outset, but I also didn't have to deal with anything after the item shipped. That sounds a lot better to me. Now, assume that could happen any number of times in the future. That's why this guy got blocked.
A few months ago I took a bogus return (in fact, another partial refund request, though this time way less reasonable dollar-wise) when a buyer claimed one of three coins in a lot was cleaned (it definitely was not). I looked back and saw a few emails he had sent about items over the years asking questions about problems the coins had (which they didn't have), showing a general lack of knowledge or at least propensity to err on the overly cautious side. Sometimes those questions are enough to get a block because they can indicate a potential problem. For whatever reason, I let those few questions slide, and when the guy finally bought sometime, it came right back and I paid for it. Now he's blocked forever. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
What's to prevent a blocked buyer from creating a new identity or new account and continue bidding on your coins?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
If you have the time, could you please PM me the buyer's eBay ID? I want to block him.
You Suck! Awarded 6/2008- 1901-O Micro O Morgan, 8/2008- 1878 VAM-123 Morgan, 9/2022 1888-O VAM-1B3 H8 Morgan | Senior Regional Representative- ANACS Coin Grading. Posted opinions on coins are my own, and are not an official ANACS opinion.
Just curious, is the amount the buyer is proposing to pay at least equal to what the underbidder would have paid? If so the seller would be netting the same sale price, if not more, as he would have if the bidder had not bid in the first place to push the underbidder up to his maximum.
Not sure I understand...
The high bidder wanted $30 back. Based on the selling price I think bid increments would have been $2.50 or $5. So, the underbidder was willing to pay that much less than the high bid.
Yes I agree and it is very possible the high bidder and underbidder went against each other near the top. But my point is that the underbidder was willing to pay one bid less than the high bidder.
@PerryHall said:
What's to prevent a blocked buyer from creating a new identity or new account and continue bidding on your coins?
Theoretically nothing. eBay does prohibit this, so while they may not prevent it, there are protections for sellers if a buyer plays this game (and you can prove it). That said, I've found that when this happens, it's usually with someone that has a relatively new account anyway. The buyer in question has a long-standing account with a lot of transactions under his belt, and he doesn't fit the description of someone that would usually do this, at least in my experience.
@LanceNewmanOCC said:
can anyone else pull up the listing from the link in the op?
Sorry... didn't realize that when I added the close paren, the forum software added it to the link. Fixed it up top, and also here: https://www.ebay.com/itm/333619566104
np. i was a goofball cuz all i had to do was copy/past the item number into a simple ebay.com/itm/ - link. ty
pictures could be a little sharper but i've seen tons of items listed like this and they are pretty straight forward. you are gonna get stuff like this from time to time. just the nature of the beast.
nothing wrong with a consult but keep your quality of life and take the easy way out and think about all the problem-free transactions. - once i started doing that, which you seem to do as well, life was good again. hehe
I'm not sure we're being fair here. I've had customers do something similar: "there's a green spot, I'll return it or keep at a reduced price". It's actually a fair compromise. The cost of returns is high as you are on the hook for round-trip shipping plus payment processing fees. So, giving someone a 10% discount or something is well worth it. In a lot of cases, the customer is being very reasonable.
I recently had someone who wanted to return a set of silver earrings ($42) from Canada. She hadn't noticed a small dent near the post. I refunded her money and told her to keep it. Otherwise I was going to have to pay $12 to get it back anyway and I was already out $12 to ship it to her in the first place as well as a couple bucks in PayPal fees. Meh.
How many times has this come up from one of us as the buyer? eBay allows the partial refund for just such occasions and the buyer made a good faith suggestion which you are free to ignore, also in good faith.
@jmlanzaf said:
I'm not sure we're being fair here. I've had customers do something similar: "there's a green spot, I'll return it or keep at a reduced price". It's actually a fair compromise. The cost of returns is high as you are on the hook for round-trip shipping plus payment processing fees. So, giving someone a 10% discount or something is well worth it. In a lot of cases, the customer is being very reasonable.
I recently had someone who wanted to return a set of silver earrings ($42) from Canada. She hadn't noticed a small dent near the post. I refunded her money and told her to keep it. Otherwise I was going to have to pay $12 to get it back anyway and I was already out $12 to ship it to her in the first place as well as a couple bucks in PayPal fees. Meh.
How many times has this come up from one of us as the buyer? eBay allows the partial refund for just such occasions and the buyer made a good faith suggestion which you are free to ignore, also in good faith.
Doesn't this line of thinking just muddy the waters when it comes to when the point of sale occurs? I understand refunds but adding to the possible outcomes post sale seems to add more uncertainty than there already is. There can be no presumption of good faith when the deck is stacked against sellers already. Had the offer of a partial refund come from the OP then thats a different story.
@1northcoin said:
When a sale falls apart didn’t eBay at one time allow the underbidder to somehow get a chance with mutual consent by the seller and the underbidder?
You spoke with eBay, so did you ask if this buyer has a history of doing this, or even if eBay tracks such things? Does eBay allow you to contact the underbidder in this case to see if a second-chance offer would go through before responding to the initial buyer? You said you weren't sure it would sell for the same price again, so was the buyer's assessment a good one? Of course, even if it had been, you go back to whether or not they have a history of winning with a generous bid followed by getting the price they really wanted through extortion.
Put me in the "return it" camp. No reason to reward that kind of behavior or encourage it becoming more and more commonplace. EBay probably won't clamp down on it until more people do that than don't and they can correlate it with a compromised bottom line.
@jmlanzaf said:
I'm not sure we're being fair here. I've had customers do something similar: "there's a green spot, I'll return it or keep at a reduced price". It's actually a fair compromise. The cost of returns is high as you are on the hook for round-trip shipping plus payment processing fees. So, giving someone a 10% discount or something is well worth it. In a lot of cases, the customer is being very reasonable.
I recently had someone who wanted to return a set of silver earrings ($42) from Canada. She hadn't noticed a small dent near the post. I refunded her money and told her to keep it. Otherwise I was going to have to pay $12 to get it back anyway and I was already out $12 to ship it to her in the first place as well as a couple bucks in PayPal fees. Meh.
How many times has this come up from one of us as the buyer? eBay allows the partial refund for just such occasions and the buyer made a good faith suggestion which you are free to ignore, also in good faith.
Doesn't this line of thinking just muddy the waters when it comes to when the point of sale occurs? I understand refunds but adding to the possible outcomes post sale seems to add more uncertainty than there already is. There can be no presumption of good faith when the deck is stacked against sellers already. Had the offer of a partial refund come from the OP then thats a different story.
Is it?
eBay allows for the seller to make such an offer. Personally, I prefer if the buyer would tell me up front what would make them happy. On a couple of occasions, a customer claimed not to be happy and asked me "what are you going to do about it?" In those instance, it would be easier for me if they told me they would keep the item at a lower price rather than have me guess.
I also once had someone ask for a price reduction without specifying how much. So, now I"m forced to risk low-balling him and inviting his wrath or actually being more generous than he even expected.
Personally, I would also prefer to know what they are specifically looking for.
Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer they just live with the deal they made. But calling him an extortionist and a POS seems overdone.
@1northcoin said:
When a sale falls apart didn’t eBay at one time allow the underbidder to somehow get a chance with mutual consent by the seller and the underbidder?
Is there still such a process available?
Yes, it's called second chance offer.
Yes. And when you utilize it, half the people think you shilled the item in the first place. LOL
Thank you for your perspective. A partial refund is not problematic in it of itself. Amazon does this all the time. They offer a return of an item, but will also consider a partial refund. Sometimes items arrive damaged, but not unuseable, so a partial refund settles it quick and easy.
Selling something on eBay that has several components to it and is not graded by a third party is tough without very good photos, otherwise, the risk is a situation like this. It does not mean the seller did anything wrong in particular, it is just tough to sell a collectible with so much nuance where condition is also so important. Selling MS69 or MS70 slabbed single coins is easier and a lot cleaner, but even then there could be a problem. The slabbed coin could still have slight toning, a fingerprint or spotting that is not always visible even with good photos and the customer then gets disappointed and wants to return it (or keep for partial refund). Not an illegitimate reason, but heart-breaking for the seller nonetheless.
"So many of our DREAMS at first seem impossible, then they seem improbable, and then, when we SUMMON THE WILL they soon become INEVITABLE "- Christopher Reeve
@messydesk said:
You spoke with eBay, so did you ask if this buyer has a history of doing this, or even if eBay tracks such things? Does eBay allow you to contact the underbidder in this case to see if a second-chance offer would go through before responding to the initial buyer? You said you weren't sure it would sell for the same price again, so was the buyer's assessment a good one? Of course, even if it had been, you go back to whether or not they have a history of winning with a generous bid followed by getting the price they really wanted through extortion.
eBay won't ever divulge information like that. I looked the buyer's feedback history (in particular, feedback he's left, along with follow-ups posted by the seller for whom he left the feedback) and determined this wasn't his first time doing this. Additionally, The way everything was worded gave me a strong impression that he was very clear on how the system works.
As for the note about the price, that comes from my experience listing and relisting items. While you sometimes have a relisted item sell for more, I've found that, on the whole, unique items (as opposed to something generic like a video game) sell for less when they are relisted. The original high bidder is out, and some people may see an item again and think something is wrong with it (even if it was a non-paying bidder, buyers may assume it was returned due to a problem).
@jmlanzaf said:
I'm not sure we're being fair here. I've had customers do something similar: "there's a green spot, I'll return it or keep at a reduced price". It's actually a fair compromise. The cost of returns is high as you are on the hook for round-trip shipping plus payment processing fees. So, giving someone a 10% discount or something is well worth it. In a lot of cases, the customer is being very reasonable.
I recently had someone who wanted to return a set of silver earrings ($42) from Canada. She hadn't noticed a small dent near the post. I refunded her money and told her to keep it. Otherwise I was going to have to pay $12 to get it back anyway and I was already out $12 to ship it to her in the first place as well as a couple bucks in PayPal fees. Meh.
How many times has this come up from one of us as the buyer? eBay allows the partial refund for just such occasions and the buyer made a good faith suggestion which you are free to ignore, also in good faith.
Doesn't this line of thinking just muddy the waters when it comes to when the point of sale occurs? I understand refunds but adding to the possible outcomes post sale seems to add more uncertainty than there already is. There can be no presumption of good faith when the deck is stacked against sellers already. Had the offer of a partial refund come from the OP then thats a different story.
Is it?
eBay allows for the seller to make such an offer. Personally, I prefer if the buyer would tell me up front what would make them happy. On a couple of occasions, a customer claimed not to be happy and asked me "what are you going to do about it?" In those instance, it would be easier for me if they told me they would keep the item at a lower price rather than have me guess.
I also once had someone ask for a price reduction without specifying how much. So, now I"m forced to risk low-balling him and inviting his wrath or actually being more generous than he even expected.
Personally, I would also prefer to know what they are specifically looking for.
Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer they just live with the deal they made. But calling him an extortionist and a POS seems overdone.
I agree in part. Suppose I sold a single coin and the buyer pointed out that a flaw (a spot, a scratch, something) wasn't visible in the photo or mentioned in the description. They had no reason to suspect an issue that was present and would have changed their assessment of the coin's value. I wouldn't call it extortion if they proposed a partial refund. Where I see it as different here is how the buyer went about things. His email can be summarized as him saying he didn't think the photos were useful, and rather than asking a question or passing on the lot, he bid based on the information he had. When the item then wasn't to his liking--without even specifying what the specific problem was--he changed his valuation. It's more similar to buying a coin from a crummy photo and hoping it will grade X, but when you get it you realize it wasn't any better than the photo shows and is really only an X-1 or X-2 and then asking for money back to prevent a return.
I would have him return and then block him. This will probably cost you more money than giving him the $30, but, since the dollars aren't huge, it seems like sacrificing a few dollars for the principle is worth it.
I would tell him to return the set for a refund. I would block him and move on. I’m not big on extortion.
I had a similar situation on my VERY FIRST EBAY transaction. The buyer won a common date PCGS Washington quarter, for about $50. The auction closes, and I get a polite message from the buyer, saying he had found a cheaper ($40) PCGS quarter on eBay, of the same date, and he’d like to cancel his winning bid. He hinted he might keep it if I lowered the cost. I replied back that he was committed to purchase the item. We went back and forth several times, when he finally said, he would simply send the item back, if I forced him to honor his bid. He said “It would just cost us both on shipping costs...what’s the point of that?” I held the line. He paid, and I shipped the item, which he immediately returned.
At the time, I thought, holy cow, this eBay is a nightmare! Luckily it’s been the only issue I’ve had as a Seller, 20+ years later.
Dave
Always looking for original, better date VF20-VF35 Barber quarters and halves, and a quality beer.
@1northcoin said:
When a sale falls apart didn’t eBay at one time allow the underbidder to somehow get a chance with mutual consent by the seller and the underbidder?
Is there still such a process available?
Yes, it's called second chance offer.
Yes. And when you utilize it, half the people think you shilled the item in the first place. LOL
@messydesk said:
You spoke with eBay, so did you ask if this buyer has a history of doing this, or even if eBay tracks such things? Does eBay allow you to contact the underbidder in this case to see if a second-chance offer would go through before responding to the initial buyer? You said you weren't sure it would sell for the same price again, so was the buyer's assessment a good one? Of course, even if it had been, you go back to whether or not they have a history of winning with a generous bid followed by getting the price they really wanted through extortion.
eBay won't ever divulge information like that. I looked the buyer's feedback history (in particular, feedback he's left, along with follow-ups posted by the seller for whom he left the feedback) and determined this wasn't his first time doing this. Additionally, The way everything was worded gave me a strong impression that he was very clear on how the system works.
As for the note about the price, that comes from my experience listing and relisting items. While you sometimes have a relisted item sell for more, I've found that, on the whole, unique items (as opposed to something generic like a video game) sell for less when they are relisted. The original high bidder is out, and some people may see an item again and think something is wrong with it (even if it was a non-paying bidder, buyers may assume it was returned due to a problem).
@jmlanzaf said:
I'm not sure we're being fair here. I've had customers do something similar: "there's a green spot, I'll return it or keep at a reduced price". It's actually a fair compromise. The cost of returns is high as you are on the hook for round-trip shipping plus payment processing fees. So, giving someone a 10% discount or something is well worth it. In a lot of cases, the customer is being very reasonable.
I recently had someone who wanted to return a set of silver earrings ($42) from Canada. She hadn't noticed a small dent near the post. I refunded her money and told her to keep it. Otherwise I was going to have to pay $12 to get it back anyway and I was already out $12 to ship it to her in the first place as well as a couple bucks in PayPal fees. Meh.
How many times has this come up from one of us as the buyer? eBay allows the partial refund for just such occasions and the buyer made a good faith suggestion which you are free to ignore, also in good faith.
Doesn't this line of thinking just muddy the waters when it comes to when the point of sale occurs? I understand refunds but adding to the possible outcomes post sale seems to add more uncertainty than there already is. There can be no presumption of good faith when the deck is stacked against sellers already. Had the offer of a partial refund come from the OP then thats a different story.
Is it?
eBay allows for the seller to make such an offer. Personally, I prefer if the buyer would tell me up front what would make them happy. On a couple of occasions, a customer claimed not to be happy and asked me "what are you going to do about it?" In those instance, it would be easier for me if they told me they would keep the item at a lower price rather than have me guess.
I also once had someone ask for a price reduction without specifying how much. So, now I"m forced to risk low-balling him and inviting his wrath or actually being more generous than he even expected.
Personally, I would also prefer to know what they are specifically looking for.
Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer they just live with the deal they made. But calling him an extortionist and a POS seems overdone.
I agree in part. Suppose I sold a single coin and the buyer pointed out that a flaw (a spot, a scratch, something) wasn't visible in the photo or mentioned in the description. They had no reason to suspect an issue that was present and would have changed their assessment of the coin's value. I wouldn't call it extortion if they proposed a partial refund. Where I see it as different here is how the buyer went about things. His email can be summarized as him saying he didn't think the photos were useful, and rather than asking a question or passing on the lot, he bid based on the information he had. When the item then wasn't to his liking--without even specifying what the specific problem was--he changed his valuation. It's more similar to buying a coin from a crummy photo and hoping it will grade X, but when you get it you realize it wasn't any better than the photo shows and is really only an X-1 or X-2 and then asking for money back to prevent a return.
I don't disagree. If you sell as much as I do, you wouldn't be surprised how many times people ask questions AFTER the fact. [We had a forum member do this with a stock photo not that long ago.]
This is particular troublesome now with the PayPal fees. People will buy AND pay and then say something like, "if there is a hint of toning on this I don't want it" What's a "hint"? So, do I ship it and risk return round-trip postage and the PayPal fees or cancel it and just eat the PayPal fees?
I'm not saying I want a customer who ever returns anything. I just think the "extortionist", POS is overdone. He might just be innocently trying to resolve his unhappiness.
Now that the buyer has the $30, I'm wondering if they can come back with some other lame excuse and try to extort even more. But, if $30 is the end of it, I'd say it's money well spent. You'll make it up on the 9 out of 10 deals that go like they're supposed to.
@Coinosaurus said:
Now that the buyer has the $30, I'm wondering if they can come back with some other lame excuse and try to extort even more. But, if $30 is the end of it, I'd say it's money well spent. You'll make it up on the 9 out of 10 deals that go like they're supposed to.
30 dollars is not a whole lot of money, but it's no drop in the bucket for a 260 dollar purchase. something like this would bother me for a few days, I would not only block him, but write him a message to never bid on your auctions again
Pay him his $30, cut bait, air punch a wall and then block his azz
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Comments
Not sure I understand...
The high bidder wanted $30 back. Based on the selling price I think bid increments would have been $2.50 or $5. So, the underbidder was willing to pay that much less than the high bid.
Guy is a bag of 💩 to start this over $30. He should be blocked from the coin catagory.
That depends on how much back and forth there was between the top 2 bidders. Take 1 bidder out and the result could be more than $30.
If the $30 would settle it I would take the $30 hit (avoiding hassle of return) and move on. Be sure to block him.
That way your saving yourself subsequent relist, selling expense from that sale (bay fees, PayPal, shipping), and unknown period until it sells. I believe bay selling expense on that would be close to or exceed the $30.
I don’t see any problem with your photo.
Blocking a bidder has two parts that are both important. It's giving up any potential help the buyer could provide in raising the price of future auctions (whether they win or not), but weighing that against any potential headache the buyer could cause. Every bidder has the potential to raise an item's price (otherwise they aren't bidding, and their presence is a non-issue). Give me reason to think you'll cause future problems, and it's not worth it. Let's say this buyer never came along and the item sold for $30 less from the outset, but I also didn't have to deal with anything after the item shipped. That sounds a lot better to me. Now, assume that could happen any number of times in the future. That's why this guy got blocked.
A few months ago I took a bogus return (in fact, another partial refund request, though this time way less reasonable dollar-wise) when a buyer claimed one of three coins in a lot was cleaned (it definitely was not). I looked back and saw a few emails he had sent about items over the years asking questions about problems the coins had (which they didn't have), showing a general lack of knowledge or at least propensity to err on the overly cautious side. Sometimes those questions are enough to get a block because they can indicate a potential problem. For whatever reason, I let those few questions slide, and when the guy finally bought sometime, it came right back and I paid for it. Now he's blocked forever. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
What's to prevent a blocked buyer from creating a new identity or new account and continue bidding on your coins?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
For the $30 in play I would have him return it and block him. The net loss is minimal in comparison to the principle.
Latin American Collection
If you have the time, could you please PM me the buyer's eBay ID? I want to block him.
Yes I agree and it is very possible the high bidder and underbidder went against each other near the top. But my point is that the underbidder was willing to pay one bid less than the high bidder.
Theoretically nothing. eBay does prohibit this, so while they may not prevent it, there are protections for sellers if a buyer plays this game (and you can prove it). That said, I've found that when this happens, it's usually with someone that has a relatively new account anyway. The buyer in question has a long-standing account with a lot of transactions under his belt, and he doesn't fit the description of someone that would usually do this, at least in my experience.
Please pm me buyers ID. Tx.
I would tell him to return it. Then block him.
My YouTube Channel
np. i was a goofball cuz all i had to do was copy/past the item number into a simple ebay.com/itm/ - link. ty
pictures could be a little sharper but i've seen tons of items listed like this and they are pretty straight forward. you are gonna get stuff like this from time to time. just the nature of the beast.
nothing wrong with a consult but keep your quality of life and take the easy way out and think about all the problem-free transactions.
- once i started doing that, which you seem to do as well, life was good again. hehe
I'm not sure we're being fair here. I've had customers do something similar: "there's a green spot, I'll return it or keep at a reduced price". It's actually a fair compromise. The cost of returns is high as you are on the hook for round-trip shipping plus payment processing fees. So, giving someone a 10% discount or something is well worth it. In a lot of cases, the customer is being very reasonable.
I recently had someone who wanted to return a set of silver earrings ($42) from Canada. She hadn't noticed a small dent near the post. I refunded her money and told her to keep it. Otherwise I was going to have to pay $12 to get it back anyway and I was already out $12 to ship it to her in the first place as well as a couple bucks in PayPal fees. Meh.
How many times has this come up from one of us as the buyer? eBay allows the partial refund for just such occasions and the buyer made a good faith suggestion which you are free to ignore, also in good faith.
Doesn't this line of thinking just muddy the waters when it comes to when the point of sale occurs? I understand refunds but adding to the possible outcomes post sale seems to add more uncertainty than there already is. There can be no presumption of good faith when the deck is stacked against sellers already. Had the offer of a partial refund come from the OP then thats a different story.
When a sale falls apart didn’t eBay at one time allow the underbidder to somehow get a chance with mutual consent by the seller and the underbidder?
Is there still such a process available?
Yes, it's called second chance offer.
You spoke with eBay, so did you ask if this buyer has a history of doing this, or even if eBay tracks such things? Does eBay allow you to contact the underbidder in this case to see if a second-chance offer would go through before responding to the initial buyer? You said you weren't sure it would sell for the same price again, so was the buyer's assessment a good one? Of course, even if it had been, you go back to whether or not they have a history of winning with a generous bid followed by getting the price they really wanted through extortion.
Put me in the "return it" camp. No reason to reward that kind of behavior or encourage it becoming more and more commonplace. EBay probably won't clamp down on it until more people do that than don't and they can correlate it with a compromised bottom line.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Is it?
eBay allows for the seller to make such an offer. Personally, I prefer if the buyer would tell me up front what would make them happy. On a couple of occasions, a customer claimed not to be happy and asked me "what are you going to do about it?" In those instance, it would be easier for me if they told me they would keep the item at a lower price rather than have me guess.
I also once had someone ask for a price reduction without specifying how much. So, now I"m forced to risk low-balling him and inviting his wrath or actually being more generous than he even expected.
Personally, I would also prefer to know what they are specifically looking for.
Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer they just live with the deal they made. But calling him an extortionist and a POS seems overdone.
Yes. And when you utilize it, half the people think you shilled the item in the first place. LOL
jmlanzaf,
Thank you for your perspective. A partial refund is not problematic in it of itself. Amazon does this all the time. They offer a return of an item, but will also consider a partial refund. Sometimes items arrive damaged, but not unuseable, so a partial refund settles it quick and easy.
Selling something on eBay that has several components to it and is not graded by a third party is tough without very good photos, otherwise, the risk is a situation like this. It does not mean the seller did anything wrong in particular, it is just tough to sell a collectible with so much nuance where condition is also so important. Selling MS69 or MS70 slabbed single coins is easier and a lot cleaner, but even then there could be a problem. The slabbed coin could still have slight toning, a fingerprint or spotting that is not always visible even with good photos and the customer then gets disappointed and wants to return it (or keep for partial refund). Not an illegitimate reason, but heart-breaking for the seller nonetheless.
BST: Tennessebanker, Downtown1974, LarkinCollector, nendee
eBay won't ever divulge information like that. I looked the buyer's feedback history (in particular, feedback he's left, along with follow-ups posted by the seller for whom he left the feedback) and determined this wasn't his first time doing this. Additionally, The way everything was worded gave me a strong impression that he was very clear on how the system works.
As for the note about the price, that comes from my experience listing and relisting items. While you sometimes have a relisted item sell for more, I've found that, on the whole, unique items (as opposed to something generic like a video game) sell for less when they are relisted. The original high bidder is out, and some people may see an item again and think something is wrong with it (even if it was a non-paying bidder, buyers may assume it was returned due to a problem).
I agree in part. Suppose I sold a single coin and the buyer pointed out that a flaw (a spot, a scratch, something) wasn't visible in the photo or mentioned in the description. They had no reason to suspect an issue that was present and would have changed their assessment of the coin's value. I wouldn't call it extortion if they proposed a partial refund. Where I see it as different here is how the buyer went about things. His email can be summarized as him saying he didn't think the photos were useful, and rather than asking a question or passing on the lot, he bid based on the information he had. When the item then wasn't to his liking--without even specifying what the specific problem was--he changed his valuation. It's more similar to buying a coin from a crummy photo and hoping it will grade X, but when you get it you realize it wasn't any better than the photo shows and is really only an X-1 or X-2 and then asking for money back to prevent a return.
I would have him return and then block him. This will probably cost you more money than giving him the $30, but, since the dollars aren't huge, it seems like sacrificing a few dollars for the principle is worth it.
I would tell him to return the set for a refund. I would block him and move on. I’m not big on extortion.
I had a similar situation on my VERY FIRST EBAY transaction. The buyer won a common date PCGS Washington quarter, for about $50. The auction closes, and I get a polite message from the buyer, saying he had found a cheaper ($40) PCGS quarter on eBay, of the same date, and he’d like to cancel his winning bid. He hinted he might keep it if I lowered the cost. I replied back that he was committed to purchase the item. We went back and forth several times, when he finally said, he would simply send the item back, if I forced him to honor his bid. He said “It would just cost us both on shipping costs...what’s the point of that?” I held the line. He paid, and I shipped the item, which he immediately returned.
At the time, I thought, holy cow, this eBay is a nightmare! Luckily it’s been the only issue I’ve had as a Seller, 20+ years later.
Dave
Yes. And when you utilize it, half the people think you shilled the item in the first place. LOL
I don't disagree. If you sell as much as I do, you wouldn't be surprised how many times people ask questions AFTER the fact. [We had a forum member do this with a stock photo not that long ago.]
This is particular troublesome now with the PayPal fees. People will buy AND pay and then say something like, "if there is a hint of toning on this I don't want it" What's a "hint"? So, do I ship it and risk return round-trip postage and the PayPal fees or cancel it and just eat the PayPal fees?
I'm not saying I want a customer who ever returns anything. I just think the "extortionist", POS is overdone. He might just be innocently trying to resolve his unhappiness.
I was kinda hoping you would get the return and try to sell it on the boards!
Don't forget you will still pay full paypal fees on a return.
Cashback from Mr. Rebates
Now that the buyer has the $30, I'm wondering if they can come back with some other lame excuse and try to extort even more. But, if $30 is the end of it, I'd say it's money well spent. You'll make it up on the 9 out of 10 deals that go like they're supposed to.
Luckily it's much more than 9 out of 10.
30 dollars is not a whole lot of money, but it's no drop in the bucket for a 260 dollar purchase. something like this would bother me for a few days, I would not only block him, but write him a message to never bid on your auctions again
Pay him his $30, cut bait, air punch a wall and then block his azz
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......