Should PayPal Gift Option be permitted for sales?

[riz_aaroni]

It should be up to the buyer and seller. But too many people don't realize they lose protection by "saving" the seller that few bucks. Also, they may want the knife so bad they go along with the terms.

All a waste of attention span. How much do you want for the knife? Add in $8 for shipping, add in $4 for PayPal. Quote the total to the buyer "to your door". Simple. Pay the man, enjoy your new knife.

Good points. Definitely prefer all inclusive, paypal goods prices. Would definitely make things simpler.

 

[riz_aaroni]

Double post

 

[benthughes]

I think selling things shouldn't be so complicated . If someone is willing to pay with Paypal gift it's on them, really if it comes down to saving about $5 ... If its worth the savings with the risk of getting burned its on you. In the same vain, don't go bitching to the community if you decided to go that way and get burned. All in all I think BF is a great place to do buisness although some members can get a bit anal to say the least.

Personally I think knives should be sold at a price to include any associated fees, shipping and insurance. If I wanted to sell a Millie for $110 but shipping, insurance and fees would be $119.... So be it. Sell for $120. I do think there should be a standard so you don't have to compete against the $110+ insurance + fees listing. Frankly people see $110 . Sometimes it costs money to make money. Include all fees in asking price if you ask me and make a standard. Some people here ask the buyer to incur costs , some don't. If BF standardized it things would be more fair to everyone.

 

[Rhinoman]

No, it should not be allowed.

It's very simple, we all agreed to use Paypal in a certain way when we agreed to the terms of service.

Using GIFT for goods is stealing. It just is. There's no way to paint it any other way.

Don't like Paypal's rules? Don't use the service. Simple.

 

[Birnando]

Nay!
To allow anything that is in direct violation with Paypal's ToS, seems risky and wrong to me.
There have been more then enough incidents on the Exchange that I have seen to never ever attempt buying a single product on there in it's current form.

 

[Planterz]

Frankly, I think the service that PayPal offers is a bargain, at least for my purposes. I don't have to limit myself only to buyers that are willing to go buy a money order, I don't have to wait for the money order to arrive in the mail, and I don't have to cash/deposit the money order. My sales are typically under a couple hundred bucks or so, and the fees on that are only a few bucks.

I voted for "no", but I'm somewhat torn with the absoluteness of a Yes/No allowance or restriction to be required (and thus, somehow, enforced) by bladeforums. The Bladeforums Marketplace is not eBay. It's not the NYSE. It's not an internet "store". It's merely a bulletin board where people can connect with others to buy/sell/trade. And while BFC moderates and sometimes mediates and arbitrates deals-gone-wrong, BFC holds no responsibility or real authority over actual transactions. A scammer might get banned, but BFC can't force a reversal of funds (or, obviously, traded goods).

Bladeforums can certainly impose certain rules regarding PayPal (or similar payment methods). However, I wonder if Bladeforums has the right to say how we make our deals. Listings are public, but sales and agreements are often private, and frankly, really only concern the 2 parties involved. Expecting Bladeforums to enforce rules on how deals are negotiated would mean that it holds responsibility and accountability that it doesn't, and shouldn't have to bear. While it's true that the knife community is very tightly knit, and private sellers, craftsmen, and dealers have to pay a premium to sell here, when it comes down to it, the Bladeforums market is little more than a focused Craigslist or newspaper classified ads section. Obviously, Bladeforums doesn't want to be compared to the wretched hive of scum and villainy that is Craigslist, but neither can it be an all-powerful enforcer of barter, sales, purchases, and deals.

 

[knifehunt]

I feel the gift option should be banned here.....

1) The buyer has no recourse, and I don't care how much feedback a seller has I've seen too many people get screwed lately.

2) It is against Paypals rules period. If you like the convenience of using Paypals service then follow the rules. If BF allows the gift option, they are allowing the rules to be broken and that is not a good example.


One other thing if I may... I feel you should have some type of waiting period ro a set amount of posts to be able to sell or trade her. Way to many people make their first in the sale or trade forums. JMO.

 

[FLymon]

Frankly, I think the service that PayPal offers is a bargain, at least for my purposes. I don't have to limit myself only to buyers that are willing to go buy a money order, I don't have to wait for the money order to arrive in the mail, and I don't have to cash/deposit the money order. My sales are typically under a couple hundred bucks or so, and the fees on that are only a few bucks.

I voted for "no", but I'm somewhat torn with the absoluteness of a Yes/No allowance or restriction to be required (and thus, somehow, enforced) by bladeforums. The Bladeforums Marketplace is not eBay. It's not the NYSE. It's not an internet "store". It's merely a bulletin board where people can connect with others to buy/sell/trade. And while BFC moderates and sometimes mediates and arbitrates deals-gone-wrong, BFC holds no responsibility or real authority over actual transactions. A scammer might get banned, but BFC can't force a reversal of funds (or, obviously, traded goods).

Bladeforums can certainly impose certain rules regarding PayPal (or similar payment methods). However, I wonder if Bladeforums has the right to say how we make our deals. Listings are public, but sales and agreements are often private, and frankly, really only concern the 2 parties involved. Expecting Bladeforums to enforce rules on how deals are negotiated would mean that it holds responsibility and accountability that it doesn't, and shouldn't have to bear. While it's true that the knife community is very tightly knit, and private sellers, craftsmen, and dealers have to pay a premium to sell here, when it comes down to it, the Bladeforums market is little more than a focused Craigslist or newspaper classified ads section. Obviously, Bladeforums doesn't want to be compared to the wretched hive of scum and villainy that is Craigslist, but neither can it be an all-powerful enforcer of barter, sales, purchases, and deals.

What he said! :thumbup:


We shouldn't expect Bladeforums to protect us beyond banning known scammers/thieves.
The first and second rules in the exchange should be:
1. Caveat emptor
2. CYA, no one else will.

 

[FLymon]

Obviously a rule banning the gift option would mean you cant offer the option in your thread, but what about the "net to me" verbiage? Would that also be banned?

What if a sale is made, and it comes to light later that a price was privately negotiated that included the use of the gift option?
Does anyone get banned?
Does it matter if we know who's idea it was, or are both guilty of violating the rule and subject to sanction?
Maybe Bladeforums wasn't the only place the item was offered for sale even though both parties are BF members. If you don't leave feedback on Bladeforums, was it really a BF deal?


Could a seller say "contact me for payment options", and dodge the rule?

And on,

and on, and on.

 

[RevDevil]

Stu, you nailed it squarely on the head. Part of the overall problem is that we would have to enforce the rules of a 3rd party "PayPal", and take that burden/responsibility off the hands of the people doing the transaction. All that means is a lot more work for us. The benefits are that sales would conform to the current PP guidelines and buyer protection would be available for all purchases. The burden of actually following the rule after the fact (in private) is something we cannot and would not want to control.

So, what about folks that offer an item for $100 via MO and $103 PayPal? I've done this before, as have a truckload of people.

 

[graham_s]

In my opinion, anyone asking for Paypal as a gift shouldn't be trusted.

 

[jujigatame]

So, what about folks that offer an item for $100 via MO and $103 PayPal? I've done this before, as have a truckload of people.

That's like a gas station having a cash price and a credit price. Costs them more to process the latter than the former, so you bear some of that cost. I have no problem with it. This is only applicable to those who take both forms of payment. Many folks are PP only so they don't have to worry about that scenario by their own choice.

If people want to negotiate their own terms of sale privately I do believe that is their business. However, as a forum-wide policy I would support the idea that sale listings cannot explicitly or exclusively ask for the gift option or "net to me." As has been said, if you want to realize a certain dollar amount from a sale then you should figure out how to price things accordingly so you get that number after shipping, fees, etc. It's not hard to do but some people just don't want to take the time. Selling here is easy and friendly but it's not quite as casual as sitting on your porch and taking cash in hand.

 

[Big Mike]

I encourage buyers to be careful when buying from folks online.

As such I recommend not using the gift option.

But Ban it, No; I will often use it when dealing with people I know and trust, to save them a few dollars.

The Informed buyer must make his own decisions when it comes who to trust and when to hedge your bets.




Big Mike

 

[Birnando]

It is quite fun to note that not one seller has, in my time on these boards, offered to split the paypal cost evenly between the two parties.
Not even a hint of recognicing the ease and speed of such a service, no, put it all on the buyer...
As said earlier in this thread, I will buy from proper vendors and let this whole exchange thingy sail its own sea so to speak

 

[philllll]

I would not want to be told how I can accept payment for items I choose to sell.

Except you are told how you may accept payment when using paypal to sell your items, and by using their service you are agreeing to their terms. Just because they haven't caught you doing it doesn't mean it's allowed under their terms of service.

 

[philllll]

Nay!
To allow anything that is in direct violation with Paypal's ToS, seems risky and wrong to me.
There have been more then enough incidents on the Exchange that I have seen to never ever attempt buying a single product on there in it's current form.

While plenty of people have gotten screwed in the exchange, your thoughts of not even attempting to buy anything there are pushing tin-foil hat territory. There are plenty of good, honest people on the exchange, and it's not that hard to pick them out if you use your noggin a little bit and look at their reputation on the forums.

 

[RevDevil]

@Nate :thumbup:
The gas station example is exactly what I was thinking too.

 

[Lone_Wolfe]

..... However, as a forum-wide policy I would support the idea that sale listings cannot explicitly or exclusively ask for the gift option or "net to me."..........

I'm going to disagree with this, because it can be used for money orders, too. I say that in my sales threads, and I'll take a MO at the net to me price. I do also accept pp gift, it the person chooses, and regular pp if the buyer wants to pay the fees.

 

[Birnando]

While plenty of people have gotten screwed in the exchange, your thoughts of not even attempting to buy anything there are pushing tin-foil hat territory. There are plenty of good, honest people on the exchange, and it's not that hard to pick them out if you use your noggin a little bit and look at their reputation on the forums.

Well, I will continue to not get screwed by reputable businesses all the same.
If it's so easy to pick them out, why do you start your reply the way you did?
And why would you want to support people that so easily breaks the ToS they have agreed to?

A place that allows such an opportunity for buyers to be out of pocket if something should occur, is not a place my money will ever be put to play.
Simple as that!

 

[Hairlesstwinkie]

I vote no because I like having some protection than no protection at all. Despite reputations, anyone can decide to screw someone over at any moment. I do remember seeing a few threads of people with good feedbacks, and yet they decided to rip people off. I don't know about you guys, but I don't want to be the victim. It's part of the reason why I don't really do trades anymore. If there' s chance to reduce the number of people getting cheated out of their money then I don't see why not.

The "paypal gift or add x%" business needs to go. Why not just have it included in the asking price? Is it that hard to figure that in? Most if not all of us own calculators and I'm sure we have learned to figure out and add percents since elementary school.