Announcement Junkyard Changes - ALL PLEASE READ!
- Thread starter Art Andrews
- Start date
-
- Tags
- iron man iron man 2
- Status
Just a heads up: I am out of town through Monday night, so I will have a limited ability to respond and almost no ability to make changes until then. Once I am back, I will catch up on the comments and questions.
Maybe our experiences are different, but the only place I have ever seen "firm pricing" used was on craiglist. Everywhere else you generally see the price and if they are willing to negotiate, they add OBO. Even on eBay, (whether you love it or hate it, it IS the standard for selling) there is an option to offer a lower price and if that option isn't used, it is implied that the price is non-negotiable.
Can you send me some links to examples of a system that uses "firm" or similar words as opposed to OBO?
We do not plan to have that at this time as your ability to browse through the content visually and because we believe this will cut down on non-prop items being sold, we don't see it as an issue. If, over time, we see that non-prop items are still cluttering the page (not just one or two scattered throughout), we will revisit.
That is a really good point that, honestly, we had not considered. No matter what pay system we go to, PayPal is likely to always be the primary one, so we need to revisit this and see if having the returns option makes sense or not. Thanks for bringing it up.
Not sure if it was mentioned, but I know people were commenting on the fact that PayPal is being used...
I've also noticed that there is a 'returns accepted' section of each listing. If you use PayPal, you accept returns, you have no choice. A buyer can simply state it wasn't what they wanted (or make up any 'not as described' excuse), return the item with tracking, and PayPal will refund their money. This is the same issue eBay sellers have. You can't just say 'I don't accept returns', you (the seller) have no way to stop it.
Seems pointless to have that as part of the listings, at least until something other than PayPal/Credit Cards is allowed for payment... (All credit card transactions give this security to the buyer (which is why PayPal does this). Anything purchased on a credit card can be returned to the seller for a refund. As a seller accepting credit cards, either directly or through PP, you agree to this.)
Just throwing that out there...It can still work on an honor system if the buyer chooses, but it can't be enforced (although the RPFs user ratings could reflect a buyer doing that, but that seems like it would be unfair as the reason for using PayPal is to offer this kind of protection as long as it's not being abused).
Nah... if we wanted to be eBay, we would have just turned on Panjo, like Sideshow Freaks did and charge you per item, but we love the community too much to do that.
I can't provide links as most classifieds where I recall seeing it were hardcopies.
When the JY was a single entity, I viewed single items an individual was selling (lets say a MR saber they've had for three years and no longer want) as open to negotiation and "runs" as a set price since the seller has hopefully calculated material and labor to determine a price.
Now that the two categories are split, its even more apparant.
The bottom line is an item is only as valuable as what someone is willing to pay. For a "run" it might not be worthwhile for a seller if material cost XX amount, but people are only willing to pay X amount. With an existing item the first part of the equitation no longer applies and only the latter.
I just don't see the need for the formality of a checkbox and believe it would be better to served to allow members to informally add "OBO" or "Firm", with the majority probably choosing neither.
If there exist chronic lowballers who harass sellers, they should be dealt with on an individual basis. If someone gets offended by a request for $10 off a $300 they just need to suck it up.
There's three people in this thread saying the checkbox isn't necessary, for those who want it, why not speak up? Several individuals relating their experiences and why it is necessary might change my opinion on the matter.
When the JY was a single entity, I viewed single items an individual was selling (lets say a MR saber they've had for three years and no longer want) as open to negotiation and "runs" as a set price since the seller has hopefully calculated material and labor to determine a price.
Now that the two categories are split, its even more apparant.
The bottom line is an item is only as valuable as what someone is willing to pay. For a "run" it might not be worthwhile for a seller if material cost XX amount, but people are only willing to pay X amount. With an existing item the first part of the equitation no longer applies and only the latter.
I just don't see the need for the formality of a checkbox and believe it would be better to served to allow members to informally add "OBO" or "Firm", with the majority probably choosing neither.
If there exist chronic lowballers who harass sellers, they should be dealt with on an individual basis. If someone gets offended by a request for $10 off a $300 they just need to suck it up.
There's three people in this thread saying the checkbox isn't necessary, for those who want it, why not speak up? Several individuals relating their experiences and why it is necessary might change my opinion on the matter.
JD
Master Member
Most of the ads just list a price, so it's not that big of a deal. But, I've seen the word "firm" used in pricing for a long time - it's common. The eBay system isn't really geared that way (unless they're doing a Buy It Now and use the 'Make an Offer' feature).
Frankly, any ad I see that just lists the price I see it as an OBO anyhow. If they add the word "firm," I might be more hesitant to make an offer - but I will take something's into consideration (going rate, age of the ad) and may consider making an offer - but, mostly those ads turn me off, unless their price is spot on.
I just think you're over complicating the process by adding options that could be handled by the seller in their wording. "I will consider lower offers" is just bad wording and a bad idea. But again, most folks don't use the option and it appears optional... so no big deal - people who use it might just want to reconsider their asking price.
Frankly, any ad I see that just lists the price I see it as an OBO anyhow. If they add the word "firm," I might be more hesitant to make an offer - but I will take something's into consideration (going rate, age of the ad) and may consider making an offer - but, mostly those ads turn me off, unless their price is spot on.
I just think you're over complicating the process by adding options that could be handled by the seller in their wording. "I will consider lower offers" is just bad wording and a bad idea. But again, most folks don't use the option and it appears optional... so no big deal - people who use it might just want to reconsider their asking price.
Last edited:
Rik1138
Sr Member
Not that I care about this issue one way or another, but two comments:
'Firm' is usually used in print classifieds (newspapers and such). I can't recall seeing it online myself a whole lot, and Craigslist does seem like an online version of a newspaper classified...
And even on eBay, when the "make an offer" option isn't used, I still frequently make (and get) offers on item's that are priced over $10 or so. Sometimes they are accepted (by myself or other sellers), sometimes not, but the option is _always_ there since eBay does not expressly forbid you from contacting the member and asking... The 'Make Offer' button just automates the process... The main reason I suspect they did that was to try to lower the instances of people offering sellers a slightly lower price to sell it directly outside of eBay (thus they loose their fees)...
This.How can someone be offended by an offer? And what is a "chronic lowballer" anyway? I suppose if someone has a 300.00 item and someone offers 10.00, the seller says no, the the lowballer offers 20.00 where the seller still says no then an offer of 30.00, etc. THAT is harassing. Anything else, I would think, is just making an offer. Now if you don't like an offer, like the fact that you're GETTING an offer or if you think the offer is silly, why can't you just simply ignore the PM? That's what I do and it works great. It tellers the person making the offer that there was something objectionable about the offer they sent.
Just got back into town. We will look into this in the next day or so and make a decision.
I can't seem to find the option to switch between thumbnail view and list view in the new junkyard? How exactly do I do this?
We don't have that ability yet. It is something we have on our list of things to look into.
I love the new JY. It gives all the important info (picture, price, shipping, etc..) in one easy to read format and I'm able to see more items with less clicking and less thread opening.
The only changes I would suggest are:
1. Increase the number of JY items per page, or let people change the number themselves as their own default. When searching eBay they let you choose 50, 100, 200 items per page when browsing. I'd like to set mine high so I can scan items for sale and not have to turn so many pages.
2. Increase the text size of the info (seller, price, etc..) so it's easier to see and read at a glance. The format is great, the text is tiny compared to the overall size for each listing.
For anyone complaining the new JY is slow I say fantastic. It means only serious sellers who want to make the RPF better are using it, and we're getting quality over quantity.
The only changes I would suggest are:
1. Increase the number of JY items per page, or let people change the number themselves as their own default. When searching eBay they let you choose 50, 100, 200 items per page when browsing. I'd like to set mine high so I can scan items for sale and not have to turn so many pages.
2. Increase the text size of the info (seller, price, etc..) so it's easier to see and read at a glance. The format is great, the text is tiny compared to the overall size for each listing.
For anyone complaining the new JY is slow I say fantastic. It means only serious sellers who want to make the RPF better are using it, and we're getting quality over quantity.
I understand where you are coming from and if you think about this in a single instance, it totally makes sense. However, let me share with you part of our reasoning on this. Where we see offers become an issue is with patterns and digital files. You may not appreciate just how popular those are when they come up and the sellers get inundated with low-ball offers because many people don't value a digital item like they do a physical item. It has gotten so bad we have had to ban people.
Now, some have said we should switch OBO to FIRM and remove this rule, but the truth is, that is doing little more than reversing the same situation and it is a choice the seller has to make, not you, the buyer. If a seller is willing to accept offers, they click a button. If they are not willing to accept offers, and limit their possibility of selling the item at a lower price, well, that is their choice and all we are asking is that you respect their choice.
Can we stop you from making them an offer regardless? No... but in doing so, if they do not have OBO checked, you are rolling the dice and if they report you making an unsolicited OBO, we are going to have a not-so-nice conversation.
Again, this is a decision the seller makes and we are only asking that you respect that decision. We don't feel like that is too much to ask.
JD
Master Member
I think the issue(s) I have with it have already been outlined (and I don't really want to beat a dead horse). But, just to once again voice some opposition and hopefully persuade you against this (not likely)....
I think the existing statement is very poorly worded. It's basically saying "you're a moron if you pay the price I've decided to show you here." The seller is opting to have a (again what I think is very poorly worded) statement that despite his given, listed price isn't just suggesting that they will take a lower price it seems pretty clear that they will.
Throwing more rules into the mix just makes it more difficult to figure out what's going on. If I see an old ad with a price that's way above the going rate and I opt to submit a respectful lower price via PM - I could potentially get in trouble with the staff here? I think the respect should be a two-way street and if someone's going to overprice something, I think it's more than fair for a potential buyer to PM in a respectful manner... obviously, this looks like it might be going against the rules. Having more rules and the potential for more staff involvement just seems silly and unneeded.
I think just adding the very simple word "firm" to a price makes more sense than the current wording.
So am I wrong in thinking if the wording " I will consider lower offers" does not appear that the price is considered firm and contacting anyone that does not have the wording is to be considered a "firm/do not contact with a different offer or I can report you and you might get in trouble"?
Again, I think it makes much more sense to add the word "firm" and remove "I will consider lower offers."
TymerDC
Sr Member
Art,
Something bothering me concerning becoming a premium member.......am I to understand that you require a credit card number be kept on record on the RPF for auto renewal purposes? If I am correct then isn't that opening up every member on this forum to more thieves like our Russian hacker who once took over the entire forum? Can't we just renew on our own once the year is up....maybe an auto reminder via email or just make a time period in Jan a time to renew and credit card info deleted once the transaction is done? It just doesn't set right with me to have my credit card number stored on this forum or anywhere if I can help it. Am I correct on how this works or have I been misinformed?
Something bothering me concerning becoming a premium member.......am I to understand that you require a credit card number be kept on record on the RPF for auto renewal purposes? If I am correct then isn't that opening up every member on this forum to more thieves like our Russian hacker who once took over the entire forum? Can't we just renew on our own once the year is up....maybe an auto reminder via email or just make a time period in Jan a time to renew and credit card info deleted once the transaction is done? It just doesn't set right with me to have my credit card number stored on this forum or anywhere if I can help it. Am I correct on how this works or have I been misinformed?
Serenity
Master Member
I'm not Art, but payments are made through PayPal, so your credit card (if you have one) isn't stored anywhere but in your PayPal account. The issue with having a credit card on file relates to certain countries and their PayPal rules, not RPF records or rules.
In addition, you can go in and cancel the automatic renewal for Premium if you wish. Just remember that you'll have to set your own reminder to renew before it expires.
In addition, you can go in and cancel the automatic renewal for Premium if you wish. Just remember that you'll have to set your own reminder to renew before it expires.
Since Memberships are handeled through PayPal, there are no CC numbers stored on and RPF database. Everything is stored at PayPal.
- Status
Similar threads
