Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21  
    actually i think Ebay has had some very interesting effects on world-wide commerce. here is an example of someone taking advantage of something he knows that others don't, effectively INCREASING the price of the item. in most cases, Ebay has created a market that DECREASES the price of new items, though in some cases of collectibles, it has had the effect of increasing them by getting a wider audience into the action.

    interesting, and as noted above, all part of the efficient capital markets... lets face it, lawyers get paid for stuff that you could go read in a book...
    Change is a challenge to the adventurous, an opportunity to the alert, a threat to the insecure.
  2. #22  
    I gotta tell you, the more I think about this, the more I'm being won over to the thought that this guy is onto a pretty good idea, though after looking over the description of what he was selling, I will say that he needed to be much more clear (more on that later). I already posted some analogies previously, but here's the bottom line:

    This person did some research (in this case, the information probably fell on his lap simply by browsing a geek forum that he already frequents, but in other situations it might require doing more legwork, etc.). So, as with my "consultant" analogy previously, you're paying someone for doing the research to get you a better deal than you currently are aware of. Remember that according to Handspring's site, the Treo 270 costs $249 after rebate through T-Mobile.

    As I mentioned above, though, he did a bad job in some respects:
    1) He had a typo (I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt) which resulted in wording suggesting that you'd be getting the phone and $69 when, as we know, the deal is that you get the phone for $69.
    2) He didn't make it clear that this was through T-Mobile USA (I'm assuming it's only good for T-Mobile's US customers), that it involved a mail-in rebate, and that you needed to be a new subscriber.

    Those are some pretty big "mistakes." Had he been more accurate about the details, I'm not sure if he'd get as many (or any) people biting, but I think he would have been more legitimate (though probably would still have not won any new friends here).

    Scott
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  3. #23  
    Originally posted by KRamsauer
    And that is entirely within your rights. It is outside your rights to demand things of people over whom you have no legitimate authority.
    I didn't demand anything of anyone. I was merely debating ethics and maintained that, to me, this practice is not ethical.

    Oh, and might I add the urging of violence against this person is completely wrong and though it may be hyperbole, I find disturbing.
    Debating ethics like I did is by no stretch of the imagination "urging violence".
  4. #24  
    Originally posted by silverado


    Debating ethics like I did is by no stretch of the imagination "urging violence".
    That's true. I was referring to the subject of the thread.
  5.    #25  
    Wow I never expected this, very interesting for those of us who like to debate subjective issues. For those whom I may have offeneded
    Oh, and might I add the urging of violence against this person is completely wrong and though it may be hyperbole, I find disturbing.
    I should have chosen different wording for the subject line of this thread and in the future I will consider more carefully the impact of my statements. Please forgive me.
    TD
  6. njchris's Avatar
    Posts
    459 Posts
    Global Posts
    475 Global Posts
    #26  
    Originally posted by silverado

    I rarely get involved in such hair-splitting "Clintonisms", but this one irks me a bit too much. I happen to think that blatantly taking advantage of ignorant people is unethical. It might be technically legal, but ethical is a stretch, IMO.
    I don't see it as taking advantage of people. Does that mean if I go to a store that sells a product (lets say a washer & dryer) for more than another store (say $100 less), then is that first store bad?

    That seller is not forcing ANYONE to buy this from him.

    If someone is willing to pay for information where to buy a product, then that's their choice. If the guy was misleading them or forcing them to pay, then it would be wrong.

    These people bidding/buying it obviously are smart enough to search for such auctions, they are smart enough to bid on it, then they are the ones responsible for buying it. Not you. Not me. Not the seller.

    The buyers see some value in it. I don't, but that's why *I* don't bid on those auctions. It's no skin off my back if someone wants to spend their money on something I would never need.
  7. jke
    jke is offline
    jke's Avatar
    Posts
    46 Posts
    #27  
    While I think both sides of this thread have a point, it is still funny. I mean its like being at a store and you see a guy with only a couple of items in front of you and tell him for $25.00 you'll show him how to get to the front of the line. After taking the money you point out the express line. I mean some people just can't figure things out. I think it's really funny that ebay gets a cut of the action also as well as paypal. I wonder if someone puts up a auction for the location of the WMD.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions