Subject:
|
Re: Informing people of better deals (Was: Re: 6093 Ninja's Flying Fortress)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade
|
Date:
|
Thu, 7 Sep 2000 02:49:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
412 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, Jude Beaudin writes:
> I was
> wondering if it would have been wrong for me to reply to the original post
> indicating that S@H had it cheaper than him.
Not per se: it would depend on how you did it. My reply to Eric's post about
4291s a day or two ago was a little dicey, because it was "low on tact", and
I should have taken more time to phrase it well. Yelling "ripoff!", without
of any proof of intent, *would* be wrong.
> Obviously I didn't, mostly
> because I thought it might have offended free market fans.
A genuine free market depends on the free flow of information, so that both
buyer and seller can make informed choices. Anybody who depends on concealing
information from buyers to make a sale is, by definition, defrauding them.
It's reasonable to be annoyed when someone points out that what you thought
was an opportunity to make a profit (or cut your losses) has been blown away
by another seller. But it's *not* reasonable to expect people to keep quiet
when you're (accidentally or intentionally) doing buyers a disservice.
(And, yes, I do know what it's like to be on the other end of the situation:
I bought an extra Droid Developer Kit, and two extra RDSes, on "sale" just
before the price reductions were announced :-( Luckily, I'll roughly break
even on them, but my hope of paying for part of the sets I wanted by sharing
only part of the price break I got went "Poof!". Sometimes you get the deal,
sometimes the deal gets you. <shrug>)
Ran
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
5 Messages in This Thread:
   
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
