02-09-2016, 09:06 AM
#41
User Info
What if I am selling an item not available in the US and I incurred high shipping costs to get the product here. Am I allowed to factor in the above average shipping charges I have incurred when determining price here?

158 1,018
 02-09-2016, 09:08 AM
#42
  • Agravic
  • Super Moderator
  • Pennsylvania, USA
User Info
(02-09-2016, 09:06 AM)nervosa1901 Wrote: What if I am selling an item not available in the US and I incurred high shipping costs to get the product here. Am I allowed to factor in the above average shipping charges I have incurred when determining price here?

Yes.

Nothing is completely black and white, and we ask that members exercise fair judgment, keeping in mind the spirit of the forum and said rules.

102 18,558
 02-09-2016, 09:27 AM
#43
  • Scoti
  • Member
  • Ontario, Canada
User Info
I like this new change. Sick of seeing jacked prices in every other thread. Well done guys.

3 227
 02-09-2016, 10:56 AM
#44
User Info
(02-09-2016, 08:58 AM)John Wayne Wrote:
(02-09-2016, 08:51 AM)ofercohen Wrote:
(02-09-2016, 08:26 AM)Starkicker Wrote: Sadly, I think this is what will happen.

I agree. This change may harm the BST as a change in a similar fashion harmed the BST of another large forum. I think that members are wise enough and no one will pay too high of a price, and no one pays a high asked price because it is a friendly environment. I think that retail price disclosure is a good idea I don't think that price caps will lead to any desirable outcome and will only "kill the market". I see no harm if someone sells a Wolfman at a price between the retail and the ebay/market price and all sides of the transaction are happy.

Problem is the owner of the site doesn't want it like that.  I read Phils post as a requirement not a discussion.  Like I said in my previous post his house his rules.

No offense, but obviously its his house and his rules.  However, any good forum should welcome discussion regarding what rules will best serve the members.  Forums that don't consider members opinions don't thrive.

52 1,177
 02-09-2016, 11:03 AM
#45
User Info
(02-09-2016, 10:56 AM)david1201 Wrote:
(02-09-2016, 08:58 AM)John Wayne Wrote:
(02-09-2016, 08:51 AM)ofercohen Wrote: I agree. This change may harm the BST as a change in a similar fashion harmed the BST of another large forum. I think that members are wise enough and no one will pay too high of a price, and no one pays a high asked price because it is a friendly environment. I think that retail price disclosure is a good idea I don't think that price caps will lead to any desirable outcome and will only "kill the market". I see no harm if someone sells a Wolfman at a price between the retail and the ebay/market price and all sides of the transaction are happy.

Problem is the owner of the site doesn't want it like that.  I read Phils post as a requirement not a discussion.  Like I said in my previous post his house his rules.

No offense, but obviously its his house and his rules.  However, any good forum should welcome discussion regarding what rules will best serve the members.  Forums that don't consider members opinions don't thrive.

No offense taken and I meant none either. I'm just a blunt person. I mean it's aggravating to me to want something that's hard to find ,I can't spend all day on the Internet looking for a product so what usually happens is the products are scooped up and sold for profit. 

NNow I'm not saying I want someone to loos their rear end on a purchase they made just to sell it online no. IMO if you pay say 200 for a rare razor new and you want to sell it at no loss including shipping and fees then thats ok. So if you pay 200 for something plus shipping to you, then you resell it I think you should be able to factor in your total cost spent vs the price tag on a website. 

Now what eerks me are these 200 dollar razors being sold for 400+ just because someone is faster on a computer.

0 127
 02-09-2016, 11:18 AM
#46
User Info
(02-09-2016, 11:03 AM)John Wayne Wrote:
(02-09-2016, 10:56 AM)david1201 Wrote:
(02-09-2016, 08:58 AM)John Wayne Wrote: Problem is the owner of the site doesn't want it like that.  I read Phils post as a requirement not a discussion.  Like I said in my previous post his house his rules.

No offense, but obviously its his house and his rules.  However, any good forum should welcome discussion regarding what rules will best serve the members.  Forums that don't consider members opinions don't thrive.

No offense taken and I meant none either. I'm just a blunt person. I mean it's aggravating to me to want something that's hard to find ,I can't spend all day on the Internet looking for a product so what usually happens is the products are scooped up and sold for profit. 

NNow I'm not saying I want someone to loos their rear end on a purchase they made just to sell it online no. IMO if you pay say 200 for a rare razor new and you want to sell it at no loss including shipping and fees then thats ok. So if you pay 200 for something plus shipping to you, then you resell it I think you should be able to factor in your total cost spent vs the price tag on a website. 

Now what eerks me are these 200 dollar razors being sold for 400+ just because someone is faster on a computer.

I think we are all in agreement that we don't want profiteering on this site.  The discussion boils down to two things for me:

1)  Items for which the rules can't reasonably or easily be complied with

2)  Items that will no longer (or rarely) be seen for sale on this site because of the new rules (apparently an unintended consequence)

I've said my piece (and more) and will end my participation in this discussion as I expect its starting to come off as sour grapes.  TSN is by far my favorite shave forum and expect it will continue to be.

52 1,177
 02-09-2016, 11:43 AM
#47
User Info
(02-09-2016, 11:18 AM)david1201 Wrote:
(02-09-2016, 11:03 AM)John Wayne Wrote:
(02-09-2016, 10:56 AM)david1201 Wrote: No offense, but obviously its his house and his rules.  However, any good forum should welcome discussion regarding what rules will best serve the members.  Forums that don't consider members opinions don't thrive.

No offense taken and I meant none either. I'm just a blunt person. I mean it's aggravating to me to want something that's hard to find ,I can't spend all day on the Internet looking for a product so what usually happens is the products are scooped up and sold for profit. 

NNow I'm not saying I want someone to loos their rear end on a purchase they made just to sell it online no. IMO if you pay say 200 for a rare razor new and you want to sell it at no loss including shipping and fees then thats ok. So if you pay 200 for something plus shipping to you, then you resell it I think you should be able to factor in your total cost spent vs the price tag on a website. 

Now what eerks me are these 200 dollar razors being sold for 400+ just because someone is faster on a computer.

I think we are all in agreement that we don't want profiteering on this site.  The discussion boils down to two things for me:

1)  Items for which the rules can't reasonably or easily be complied with

2)  Items that will no longer (or rarely) be seen for sale on this site because of the new rules (apparently an unintended consequence)

I've said my piece (and more) and will end my participation in this discussion as I expect its starting to come off as sour grapes.  TSN is by far my favorite shave forum and expect it will continue to be.

I know for me at least ,no hard feelings at all. If I came across anyway that sounded it like it wasnt meant. 

Maybe if someone has a problem pricing a rare or hard to find item they can contact the mods or someone that has more knowledge on the item to help come up with a fair price. They may want to stay out of it,but before someone breaks a rule by accident or does something that would make others think they were trying to make money someone could be contacted. 

I know for me it's not just razors I have a few hobbies. I have quiet a few items that are worth way more than sticker price on them. Whether it be rare or the history behind it whatever ,fact is the value is there and to he honest if offered sticker price for somethings I'd laugh at you, and it'd be the buyer trying to get over on the seller.

0 127
 02-09-2016, 12:05 PM
#48
User Info
I'm a relatively new member that thinks this slight change to the BST rules are fantastic. Thanks for keeping this site one of the better ones!

2 89
 02-09-2016, 12:07 PM
#49
User Info
(02-09-2016, 09:06 AM)nervosa1901 Wrote: What if I am selling an item not available in the US and I incurred high shipping costs to get the product here. Am I allowed to factor in the above average shipping charges I have incurred when determining price here?

(02-09-2016, 09:08 AM)Agravic Wrote:
(02-09-2016, 09:06 AM)nervosa1901 Wrote: What if I am selling an item not available in the US and I incurred high shipping costs to get the product here. Am I allowed to factor in the above average shipping charges I have incurred when determining price here?

Yes.

Nothing is completely black and white, and we ask that members exercise fair judgment, keeping in mind the spirit of the forum and said rules.
This was also my concern. I'm happy to see that shipping and the like can be factored into the price.

3 1,484
 02-09-2016, 03:53 PM
#50
  • Jovan
  • Banned
  • Traveling USA
User Info
I like the rule.  Keeps flippers out and will let others purchase who want to use the item.  I have to wonder if someone has a Wolfman and wants to profit why they really purchased the item in the first place.  If they did not like it I think they would be happy getting their cost out of it.  Same with M&F brushes.

2 479
 02-10-2016, 10:09 AM
#51
User Info
I have nothing to say in regards to either agreeing or disagreeing with the rule itself but I do however find fault with asking the members to self police. 

Now I have some insight as to why some people here dislike me, it is because self-appointed BST police by membership is extremely obnoxious. 

I understand you want to make a new rule, but as moderators, it is your job to police this stuff. Asking the members to do it for you is going to result in a mass amount of disagreement between members which DIRECTLY contradicts your point of making the board a more "friendly environment."

61 1,710
 02-10-2016, 10:12 AM
#52
  • bullgoose
  • The Enabler
  • Redondo Beach, California, U.S.A
User Info
(02-10-2016, 10:09 AM)NSmalls Wrote: I have nothing to say in regards to either agreeing or disagreeing with the rule itself but I do however find fault with asking the members to self police. 

Now I have some insight as to why some people here dislike me, it is because self-appointed BST police by membership is extremely obnoxious. 

I understand you want to make a new rule, but as moderators, it is your job to police this stuff. Asking the members to do it for you is going to result in a mass amount of disagreement between members which DIRECTLY contradicts your point of making the board a more "friendly environment."

I disagree...we cannot be everywhere. The members should self police in a respectful manner.  There really is not a lot of gray area...post the retail price and list for below that figure. We rely on members to keep everyone honest.

46 18,092
 02-10-2016, 10:15 AM
#53
User Info
(02-10-2016, 10:12 AM)bullgoose Wrote: I disagree...we cannot be everywhere. The members should self police in a respectful manner.  There really is not a lot of gray area...list the retail price and list for below that figure.

Understood but with members constantly disagreeing with each other directly in BST listings, how is that making the place more friendly?

I strongly suggest that members do this by simply sending the seller a PM rather than posting directly in the thread. So far there have already been several arguments, which I hope will get ironed out as people get used to the new rule.

61 1,710
 02-10-2016, 10:18 AM
#54
  • bullgoose
  • The Enabler
  • Redondo Beach, California, U.S.A
User Info
(02-10-2016, 10:15 AM)NSmalls Wrote:
(02-10-2016, 10:12 AM)bullgoose Wrote: I disagree...we cannot be everywhere. The members should self police in a respectful manner.  There really is not a lot of gray area...list the retail price and list for below that figure.

Understood but with members constantly disagreeing with each other directly in BST listings, how is that making the place more friendly?

I strongly suggest that members do this by simply sending the seller a PM rather than posting directly in the thread. So far there have already been several arguments, which I hope will get ironed out as people get used to the new rule.

Why would they constantly disagree? The retail price may include a range but, it is fact.

46 18,092
 02-10-2016, 10:33 AM
#55
User Info
I'll of course play along but I do agree with those that say caveat emptor - people are smart enough to Google something before buying. I also do agree with those that can see the downward turn towards being like "that other site".

Those are my $0.02 Phil.

6 682
 02-10-2016, 10:56 AM
#56
  • bullgoose
  • The Enabler
  • Redondo Beach, California, U.S.A
User Info
The down word turn was when people started buying items in order to flip them for a profit. We made an announcement about BST prices and the philosophy behind our BST but many members chose to ignore the advice and instead tried to justify making a profit . We had no choice but to institute this rule. People should be satisfied with recouping money for an item that does not work for them. Why they think it is their right to earn a 50% profit on the BST is beyond me.

46 18,092
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)