 | | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
James Brown ranted (or is it raved?): (...) Yes. (...) Not only that, but they all seem to end past midnight my time which means that people who work probably won't be up to compete in the sniping. (...) I like it when they answer their own (...) (26 years ago, 9-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) Ah, a firm, solid agreement! (now, if only I could figure out which part of the sentence he was responding too...) Pet peeve: people who answer 'a or b' questions with yes. (...) been (...) I've noticed that part too, but I'm perfectly willing (...) (26 years ago, 9-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) Peeve: people who ask a or b questions. (...) Hey, M:tG was still alive last time I checked. I should hope so, I've still got some :) Jasper (26 years ago, 9-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) Yeah. (...) Well, at least you've got your priorities straight. (...) I doubt that this is a huge group. (...) Unfortunately, those 'morons' are right. (...) I assume some of them are in this group too, but not the majority. (...) Right, (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
<snipped a lot of stuff that has already reached conclusion> (...) I agree. I find that the former appear when selling unusual items, and the latter appear when selling big items. The rest tends to even out. (...) I think (2) only occurs when the (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) <more snipping> (...) Oh, I'm not arguing against the minimum incriment! My point is that its a very seductive trap that e-bay uses (and most auctions, to be fair) to get more money out of the marks. Most people, everytime they're outbid, they (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) And one that appears, I believe, because the seller agreed to give eBay a bigger cut (someone correct me if I'm wrong). (...) Nope. Profiteers will just claim a set is complete, without having fully verified the contents. Steve (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) Unless they've changed things (and they may very well have), the "hot" graphic appears after an item incurs a certain quantity of bids. (...) I *hope* that becomes the biggest problem. It's much easier to determine how reliable a lego seller (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
<snip> (...) And that I have no explanation for. I agree 100%, but I cannot explain this "seduction", nor why it happens to some people and not others. <snip> (...) I understand (and thank you! :) but if using an external auction service is (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, bwappo@ee.net (Adam Yulish) writes: [...] (...) I wonder if there are exceptions to this... Certainly if someone has a brand new 6074 Black Falcon's Fortress which typically goes for (say) $100- $150 in auctions, and (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) I suppose exceptions are possible, but other than momentary fluctuations, The general "level" of set worth continues to be pretty even across the board. (...) <Adam digresses for a moment> Are you serious? The 6807 is worth *that* *much*? It (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) Hmm, Good point. I would be inclined to argue that the good you bring into the community more than outweighs the (contestable) detriment of using an outside auction service. Actually, it would be more than an inclination - I am arguing it. :) (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) I may have misunderstood what you said before and responded in a rather offended tone in a previous post. Forgive me if it offended you. But I don't agree with this either. If a set will sell for $100 on RTL but might go for $150 on eBay (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) Thanks again :) Yet if using an outside auction service is detrimental, then it doesn't matter how how much good I do--I'm still responsible for detrimental actions. Which is why the question of detriment is important. (...) Ahhh...I think (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) That just demonstrates the level of insanity some completists can achieve. :) To some a set is worth the some of its parts. To others the set as an entity has value that far outweighs the sum of its parts. I fall into one of those groups. :) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, bwappo@ee.net (Adam Yulish) writes: [...] (...) I don't know if it's -worth- that much, but I was happy to get it for $400. (...) But the box and instructions were in mint condition. Essentially, I paid $395 for the box (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) No problem. I flared up too. (...) Understood. I would just prefer that the buyer who gets it is someone who participates online. From what others have said, about half the winning bids go to people who don't participate in RTL or Lugnet, and (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) Although in this case, completism was 100% of the motivation, it's not always about completism. For example, Suz and I were bidding on an extremely rare old '75 Wild West set, (URL) an auction Matt Chiles held about a year ago. The set was (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) I'm snipping everything else because for this post at least I want to focus on this thought that using an outside service is even possibly detrimental to the community. Sorry to be blunt, but do you know what the hell you're talking about when (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) You're right, I haven't. To-date, I've done nothing more complicated than a straight sale. I am gearing up for a small set auction, and am considering if the amount of work that would go into a parts auction is worth it to me. I am aware that (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) On my desk, but that's it :) Does anyone have a spare 6067 flag? :) Jasper (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) That's rather sad. A box of Beta currently goes for... $2000, I think. Possibly more. Arabian Nights go for $4000, which is totally silly - I calculated once what cards you'd get out of it (pretty good guess, as in each box you get 120 out of (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) Steve (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Dual value sets in a single legonomic system
|
|
<snip> (...) I can't fault that. That's not my thing, but that doesn't make it any less legitimate, and obviously it works very well for you (and many others). It does have an effect on legonomics, which I'll go into in a moment.... <snip> (...) A (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | MSRP? Tangential question Was(re CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote: <major snippage> (...) 1975 and that it cost 8.85 pounds MSRP. Why not either show the price in USD converted, or show it in pounds? Or is that a future enhancement? (26 years ago, 15-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: MSRP? Tangential question Was(re CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) Yes, showing MSRP in non-US$ is a future enhancement... (But conversion is not; aside from temporal eddies in the exchange rates, things may simply cost more or less in another country... For example, in Germany this year you can buy for DM (...) (26 years ago, 15-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.database)
|
