Sellers and their descriptions

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Nothing

[mhosea]

I see this as false advertising in an attempt to generate competitive bidding.


I agree with you on the false advertising point. Because I think it's stupid, however, I'm not sure what the seller intends to accomplish by it. As-stated it doesn't generate competitive bidding unless we "parse" it so that a 'first "BEST" offer' is not the same as a 'first "Best Offer"'. It seems to me that it encourages people making a low offer as soon as possible. It's weird because, if followed literally, it would be a ridiculous policy, very much to the seller's disadvantage.

[Spikey Mike]

You gotta love Ebay - every Parker 45 was made in the 1960's, the word vintage means "more then a year old" and everything is extremely "rare"

[Chrissy]

When you list an item for sale on ebay as Buy it Now with Best Offer, as a seller you actually pick a price that you are prepared to sell at as the Best Offer price. So I believe (and I may be wrong) that the seller may have put in his Best Offer price, and you didn't meet it. If you had met it, it would have been automatically accepted immediately and you would have 'bought' the item.

He may not have been there for a day reviewing the offer, he could have been away. But if he says he is selling to the 'First Best Offer' he might mean the one he has set up in his listing.

[catbert]

Incompetence is a simpler explanation than conspiracy, especially given how little the statement benefits the seller. I would tend to interpret 'best' here as 'acceptable' (as determined by the seller). It's poorly worded, but many eBay listings are.

[Rusty888]

I agree with catbert. Interpretation is key. It would be hard to convince what "best" means. The best offer according to eBay bidding guidelines. Best price offer.

Agree the wording is not that great however I don't feel you will have a chance to buy the pen.

[david i]

Okay folks, here's the thing. I put a Best Offer bid for a pen on eBay. The seller "thought" about it for a day and sent a counteroffer. Nothing unusual in that, you may say, however, in the description for this pen (actually a dip pen) the opening line states (quoted in full here): Sold to the first "BEST" offer..

Now, the questions is this: should the seller honour this statement?

While this may well be an error or an example of ill-conceived wording, when I placed my Best Offer - which, incidentally, was the only offer - I also sent a note pointing out this statement and suggesting that they change it as it was potentially misleading. The seller's counteroffer came with no acknowledgement of my reminder, and no change to the listing description.

So, now I feel that, given fair warning, I could pursue this. I see this as false advertising in an attempt to generate competitive bidding.

I've refrained from mentioning the seller's eBay identity, but I will if you think it appropriate.

Hmmm... my thoughts include... "get a grip"... and "rotsa ruck with that".

Not to mention that the meaning of "best" leaves huge ambiguity.


regards

David

[mhosea]

Not to mention that the meaning of "best" leaves huge ambiguity.


There is a factor here that might impinge on how reasonable it would be for a seller to purposefully indulge in such ambiguities. "Best Offer" is the label of the box where you make an offer (any offer). It's also the label of the check-box to add the feature when the seller lists the item.

20712

I think if we wanted to get truly snarky, we would say that if the seller can get you to agree to a counter-offer, then you didn't actually make your "best" offer, but if you don't go for it...

[Chrissy]

When you list an item for sale on ebay as Buy it Now with Best Offer, as a seller you actually pick a price that you are prepared to sell at as the Best Offer price. So I believe (and I may be wrong) that the seller may have put in his Best Offer price, and you didn't meet it. If you had met it, it would have been automatically accepted immediately and you would have 'bought' the item.

This is incorrect. If the seller had set a reserve price then my offer would have been automatically declined with a notice to the effect that the reserve had not been reached - I have had this happen and it is clear how it worked. I do not believe the seller put in a price he was willing to accept as a lower limit. Of course that's not to say that he doesn't have a price in his head. The question I am asking here concerns the wording and intent of the listing.

I wasn't referring to a reserve price. You might have misunderstood. When you list something with a Best Offer price, you can opt to choose the lowest price that will qualify for it to sell at. That seller may have chosen a price that was higher than your offer, in which case, your offer has to go to the seller for consideration. There is only automatic acceptance, not an automatic decline.

[Chrissy]

You can't have a reserve on a Buy it Now listing, they only apply to auction listings

[catbert]

The way I read it is this. The listing invites offer, with a button to press in order to input your Best Offer. No ambiguity there really. The seller though has stated that he will sell to the first Best Offer that he gets. I don't really see any ambiguity with the wording there either. The intent is a whole other thing though.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIP6EwqMEoE

No ambiguity about 'first', but (Inigo voice) I do not think 'best' means what you think it means. :)

To the buyer, 'best' is the balance between the most they are willing to pay for the item and the least they think they can get away with.

To the seller, 'best' is the balance between the most they think they can get for the item and the least they are willing to let it go for.

The buyer doesn't have to buy and the seller doesn't have to sell. For the transaction to occur, the offer has to be acceptable to both.

Thus, in practice, 'best' means 'acceptable' and the item will be sold to the first acceptable offer.

[catbert]

Ah, I see. I told you I was a bit simple, yes? For me, as the buyer, I offer the best price I can afford in this kind of listing. I do not seek to drive the price down for the sake of it. This is a point of principle for me. My exceptional lack of anything resembling an education is probably at the heart of most of my poor experiences on eBay. I see no that I am in error again in bringing the current issue into the public spotlight. My apologies.

By FPG standards my pen hoard is small, my eBay transaction number smaller. I've had maybe three transactions that were 'buy it now' with a 'best offer' option. My approach was similar to yours: offer the highest fair (i.e. mutually acceptable) price I felt I could afford. Did I think for a moment afterwards that I might have got away with less? Of course. But I got what I wanted and didn't feel I'd overpaid.

This question helped clarify my own views about transactions generally and, who knows, the discussion may be useful to others. I don't see what education, error or apology have to do with it.

Relax and enjoy your pens. :)

[mhosea]

No ambiguity about 'first', but (Inigo voice) I do not think 'best' means what you think it means. :)


I take a different view. I think "BEST" in this context is part of the name "Best Offer", not just an adjective (except insofar as you wish to pick the name apart). Similarly "Buy It Now" is a name. Yes, "Buy" is a verb, "It" is a pronoun, and "Now" is an adverb, but this misses the point. The "Best Offer (http://pages.ebay.com/bestoffer/)" feature is defined by eBay, and I don't see how to excise eBay's definition from the seller's statement without killing the patient, or at least without leaving him in critical condition. A "Best Offer" in eBay parlance is an offer submitted using the "Best Offer" feature. Assuming the "Buy It Now" price is too high for you, there is no legitimate way to provide a "best offer", or a '"BEST" offer', without using the "Best Offer" feature.

I think the confusion stems not from the seller meaning something different by "BEST", rather from the seller not indicating that the offer need be acceptable. Perhaps they thought it was obvious. In other words, what I think they meant to convey was that that they wouldn't "sit" on acceptable offers in the hopes of getting a better one. That is to say, they pledge to respond to each offer as it comes in, and consequently, they will sell to the first acceptable "Best Offer". That isn't what they actually said, but it's the only reasonable interpretation I can come up with that doesn't require tossing out context that is inextricably linked to the matter at hand.

[catbert]

No ambiguity about 'first', but (Inigo voice) I do not think 'best' means what you think it means. :)


I take a different view. I think "BEST" in this context is part of the name "Best Offer", not just an adjective (except insofar as you wish to pick the name apart). Similarly "Buy It Now" is a name. Yes, "Buy" is a verb, "It" is a pronoun, and "Now" is an adverb, but this misses the point. The "Best Offer (http://pages.ebay.com/bestoffer/)" feature is defined by eBay, and I don't see how to excise eBay's definition from the seller's statement without killing the patient, or at least without leaving him in critical condition. A "Best Offer" in eBay parlance is an offer submitted using the "Best Offer" feature. Assuming the "Buy It Now" price is too high for you, there is no legitimate way to provide a "best offer", or a '"BEST" offer', without using the "Best Offer" feature.

I think the confusion stems not from the seller meaning something different by "BEST", rather from the seller not indicating that the offer need be acceptable. Perhaps they thought it was obvious. In other words, what I think they meant to convey was that that they wouldn't "sit" on acceptable offers in the hopes of getting a better one. That is to say, they pledge to respond to each offer as it comes in, and consequently, they will sell to the first acceptable "Best Offer". That isn't what they actually said, but it's the only reasonable interpretation I can come up with that doesn't require tossing out context that is inextricably linked to the matter at hand.

Yup, 'best offer' is eBay parlance and could be treated as a unit - i.e. 'best offer' = 'acceptable offer'. A transaction, on eBay or elsewhere, requires agreement on what is mutually acceptable.

Your interpretation of 'first' in terms of not waiting for a better 'best' makes total sense.

So actually neither 'first' nor 'best offer' mean what they appear to mean. Interesting. :)

[Chrissy]

What I mean is why not simply have an auction with a reserve price? The dynamics of the various selling strategies are a bit beyond my understanding I'm afraid. I am a simple person really. (for simple read uneducated :))

There is a simple explanation for that one. Ebay listing fees apply to Auction listings with a reserve price. Nowadays, many sellers can list Auction or Buy it Now items for free.