| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Renard Graham writes:
> > > > So you're a scalper.
>
> snip
>
> No, I don't sell them for higher than the face value, that is the definition
> of a scalper. I actually sell them for less than retail on ebay, so how
> does that fit into your definition of scum. If you have been following the
> shopping newsgroup you will see that these sets were not on clearance in
> other areas of the country. I was lucky enough to have them on clearance
> here. I bought them and I sell on ebay, most of the time below $89.99 that
> your retail store will charge. If however you still wish to pay full retail
> then be my guest and go to TRU where there are plenty for you to buy at the
> retail price of $89.99. I know personally that I made several parents happy
> that they could get the set for their children for Christmas and they didn't
> have to pay the full retail price, even when S&H is included. How do you
> explain that?
Our definitions are clashing.
I have not accused you of jacking up the prices.
You fall under the definition of a new, "modern" scalper. One who clears
shelves of items and sells them on a secondary market for a profit. It
doesn't matter if that profit is greater than the retail price or not. What
matters is that someone walked into that same store and could have received
the same deal you did, but you robbed them of that opportunity, several
times over.
How can you justify this by claiming to have "...made several parents
happy..."? Did you set out to only make others happy? Or is this simply a
coincidental justification? I'm sure you made some sellers *unhappy* by
offering a profitable discount that they could only dream of.
My point is that I am often plagued by scalpers in my neck of the woods. It
could be a sale item, or just a popular item. I walk into a store and see
empty shelf space where the item is supposed to be only to find it bare,
almost bare, or filled with something else just to eliminate wasted shelf
space. But if I browse E-Bay... there it is; marked up, marked down, it
doesn't matter... it's there instead of the store that it should have been.
I'm am fortunate to have a computer as well as internet access. Many other
people are not.
I don't think I have anything more to say on this subject. I thought it
would be worth arguing, but now see no worth in it. It's a personal matter
for me and perhaps I should not have made it a public issue.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: scalpers
|
| (...) What do you mean "should have been"? The goal of a store is to sell things. Stores are within their rights to put quantity limits in place, if they so choose. They are also within their rights to sell as many as they like to the first person (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: scalpers
|
| snip (...) No, you have every right to speak your personal opinion, that is why this forum, and this country are so great. I won't say I agree with you but never feel you shouldn't have stated your opinion, it's what you believe and that should be (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: scalpers
|
| (...) snip No, I don't sell them for higher than the face value, that is the definition of a scalper. I actually sell them for less than retail on ebay, so how does that fit into your definition of scum. If you have been following the shopping (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
33 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
