I knew this would get people going!
The problem for me is that an agreement is an agreement. The Ebay policy obligating the seller is: 5.2 Binding Bids. Except for items listed in a category under the Non-binding Bid Policy, if you receive at least one bid at or above your stated minimum price (or in the case of reserve auctions, at or above the reserve price), you are obligated as the seller to complete the transaction with the highest bidder upon the auction's completion, unless there is an exceptional circumstance, such as: (a) the buyer fails to meet the terms of your listing (such as payment method), or (b) you cannot authenticate the buyer's identity.
In this case there were bids above the minimum and the seller had an obligation to sell. There was no mistake in the listing. In fact by offering a lot of two frames with a WYSIWYG disclaimer the seller was indicating that he didn't care to carefully describe what he was offering and was indifferent to the consequences. By the way, with good pictures this WYSIWYG type of listing often gets excellent results for people who know nothing about what they are selling. Even in this case I think the seller would have received a good fair price in the first auction and he didn't need to march off breaking agreements left and right in pursuit of top dollar.
I guess I'm very firmly of the opinion that sellers should never back out of an agreed deal based on information as to value learned after agreeing to a deal.
Joe Bender-Zanoni
Great Notch, NJ
> Sorry, Joe. I just can't side with you on this one. I agree that there is
> nothing to be gained by wising up a chump, but I can't agree that the
seller
> is obligated to let a valuable item sell for pennies on the dollar because
> he didn't realize what he had until after the auction started. Now, if
the
> auction had ended, that would be an entirely different story. Look at it
> this way. Perhaps there is someone who really wants the bike, but who
would
> not have noticed it with the previous descrption. That person would
really
> appreciate a more accurate listing. In fact, this is certainly what IS
> happening, or else the biding pattern should not significantly change.
> Certainly, his offer of a private "Buy it now" is an infringement of
eBay's
> terms of service and is probably intended to circumvent the associated
> seller's fees.
>
> We had an instance up here that made the paper where a couple of guys
bought
> a painting at a yard sale, then found out it was an original and had it
> auctioned off at a major auction house for a substantial amount of money.
A
> lot of people in the area thought the most fair thing was for the two guys
> to share some of the proceeds with the hapless original owner. What if
they
> had known exactly what the painting was worth when they bought it? Would
> their purchase have constituted fraud? Some people might think so.
>
> My point is that these are not black & white issues. eBay provides the
> opportunity for a seller to end an auction early if there is an error in
the
> listing. In this case, there were errors of omission.
>
> On topic: that bike has a very short top tube if there's that much
headtube
> showing on what appears to be a 20" frame. Steep angles for a bike of
that
> vintage, too. I wish I could buy it for a song, as it looks perfect for
me.
>
> Steve Barner
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 14:59:36 -0400
> > From: Joe Bender-Zanoni <joebz@optonline.net>
> > To: themaaslands@comcast.net,
> > Classic Rendezvous <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> > Subject: Re: [CR]Vintage Pogliaghi Track Bicycle Bike FB crank Italy
EBay
> > Itemnumber: 2267774042
> >
> > In my opinion, whoever gave this seller the idea that the second bike is
> the
> > valuable one, a Pogliaghi etc.did not do the hobby a favor. While I'm
> > certainly not in the "never wise up a chump" school, wising up this guy
> irks
> > me because the information is being put to bad purposes.
> >
> > Based on this information the seller now figures he has a hot ticket and
> > that justifies 1) Breaking a contract with his original bidders in
> conflict
> > with Ebay policy, 2) Soliciting private so-called "buy it now" offers in
> > another apparent attempt to mess with the bidding process and violate
Ebay
> > policy and 3) Possibly misrepresenting the bike as a Pogliaghi (I don't
> know
> > if it is or not).
> >
> > The first auction had a number of bidders and no reserve. The auction
was
> > on. The seller cancelled those legitimate bids using the basis of an
error
> > in the listing. This was a false pretense. The listing clearly said the
> > second bike was unidentified and "what you see is what you get".
> >
> > Then in the second auction he now has a reserve, not yet met and "WILL
> > CONSIDER OFFERS AND OFFER A BUY IT NOW FOR THE RIGHT PRICE."
> > So he's already fishing to violate the auction terms and Ebay rules
again.
> >
> > I really detest this sort of predatory double dealing and see this as a
> good
> > example of why a little information can be a dangerous thing.
> >
> > Joe Bender-Zanoni
> > Great Notch, NJ
>
> > > http://ebay.com/