My New Zero Tolerance Craigslist Attitude.

[40Hz]

You’re going to write whole pages but not actually read other ppls responses nor the op’s responses? Shooting the moon with a blindfold.

I’m not shooting for anything. I’m just trying to share my own impressions and reasons for my take on the subject. And maybe offer a little food for thought which anyone should feel free to: take to heart, argue against, or disregard.

I’ve confined my comments to two things:

(a) The information as given in the original post, which I assume was presented accurately and honestly by the OP - and - (b) The outcome that emerged from it. Which is to say that the deal was called off by the seller in response to that text exchange.

After that I have only responded to the people who have quoted from my original or subsequent posts. And so far nobody (including the OP) has mentioned anything to me I may have missed that changes anything about items (a) and (b) above.

Or my opinion.

P.S. If I have missed something in a post that materially alters anything above. (and I’m surprised somebody hasn't already called me to task on it if I did) please point me toward it? I’m not someplace where I can read through 15 or 16 pages worth of posts right now. I’m time-slicing this discussion with something else I’m supposed to be doing right now. Thx!

 

[catcauphonic]

A few things I dislike even more than the "art of haggling" are conflict, people wasting my time, and traffic.

As the buyer I wouldn't have pushed my luck past the $50 off which you were kind enough to honor due to your own mistake, but after that text exchange my first inclination would have been to drive straight to OPs house and punch him in the nose.

I know the 'art of texting', and his "haha" was an out for you to just say "no I can't go any lower."

 

[Rabidhamster]

Disagree. Inquiring about a better price is to be expected. Seller throwing his toys and withdrawing while buyer is en route is not nice or classy.

Sure on the initial contact. Once price is agreed it’s agreed. The legal standard is that the “agreed” offer was rejected by the counter offer, it’s not really subjective.

 

[40Hz]

That is wrong. Look at the order of events:

1. Seller lists bass.
2. Buyer and seller agree on price of $600.
3. Buyer calls seller afterwards, and says he'll agree to $550. Buyer goes back on his word and reopens negotiation before inspecting the bass.
4. Seller can counter back with his intended price of $650 or higher if he wants to, but decides to end the circle jerk from the buyer.
5. Buyer is butt-hurt because he wants not to keep his word, but force the seller to.

Buyers don't get to re-open negotiations without some risk. And in this case, the risk is losing the originally agreed upon price. At least the buyer should have inspected the bass first. Then claim a further $50 deduction of price due to something not described. BUT, he didn't do that.

Furthermore, this is a common tactic by unscrupulous buyers that have no intention of keeping their word, and had always planned to offer a lower price at the moment near making the deal. They are hoping the seller is weak, and just want to reach the finish line to conclude the deal.

OP did not fall for this shenanigans. I would have countered his $550 offer with a $700 offer, but that's just me.

Again, assuming that actually is the case (and there’s no way anybody here can positively say if there was some subtext in the buyer’s message) the seller could have just reiterated the agreed $600 price tag and confirmed the deal was still on. No need for ego or drama. This is a business transaction: offer, tender, acceptance.

But that’s not what happened.

The seller walked away even after the buyer reiterated their intention to pay the agreed price.

Whatever why you want to try and spin it, the seller copped an attitude over what he condidered a personal slight or faux pas on the part of the buyer, and killed the sale because if it. That’s not a business reason. That’s “No soup for you!”

And it’s not a smart way to do business.

 

[Sixgunn]

Another thing to consider: The spurned buyer could very well post a warning "RE" on CL about the seller or item which could have scared away other potential buyers. Best to not make enemies.

 

[Coolhandjjl]

There is a ton of used gear out there. It is a buyers market right now.

If a buyer shows up with cash-in-hand and the amount is close enough, accepting is always better than walking away with nothing, because the seller has no way of knowing when the next buyer may materialize. Could be months.

 

[74hc]

Again, assuming that actually is the case (and there’s no way anybody here can positively say if there was some subtext in the buyer’s message) the seller could have just reiterated the agreed $600 price tag and confirmed the deal was still on. No need for ego or drama. This is a business transaction: offer, tender, acceptance.

But that’s not what happened.

The seller walked away even after the buyer reiterated their intention to pay the agreed price.

Whatever why you want to try and spin it, the seller copped an attitude over what he condidered a personal slight or faux pas on the part of the buyer, and killed the sale because if it. That’s not a business reason. That’s “No soup for you!”

And it’s not a smart way to do business.

You're putting a bunch of parameters to frame your viewpoint favorably. First, OP is not a business. Second, you still refuse to recognize the fact that the buyer didn't want to keep his word. Keeping his word means not trying to get the seller to agree to $550 before inspection.

Now, after inspection and asking for a justified $50 discount is fine. I'm thinking this is the basis for your viewpoint.

Clearly, you fight for your viewpoint here in TB. So, I'm likely to believe that you use this negotiation tactic as a buyer.

Keeping one's word means not asking for a lower price later without inspecting the item. That's my book, and how I approach CL deals as a buyer.

 

[Coolhandjjl]

There can be lots of slips between the cup and the lip.

 

[74hc]

There is a ton of used gear out there. It is a buyers market right now.

If a buyer shows up with cash-in-hand and the amount is close enough, accepting is always better than walking away with nothing, because the seller has no way of knowing when the next buyer may pop up. Could be months.

That is true, but it's up to the seller to decide for himself or herself to agree to the "new" price. If a buyer agrees upon a price, shows up with less cash than that agreed upon price, the buyer is at fault.

However, the fault is no big deal, just a cancelled deal.

We won't know if the buyer only had $550 cash in hand, or whether he would lie and say that he only had $550, but had $600 in hand. He didn't show up.

Besides, he could have showed up anyway, and offered $620 to patch things over, but he failed to do that. Or even just apologize and hand over $600, but yet he failed to do that.

 

[InhumanResource]

Sure on the initial contact. Once price is agreed it’s agreed. The legal standard is that the “agreed” offer was rejected by the counter offer, it’s not really subjective.

What is also not subjective is the decision to refuse contact instead of just declining the proposed new price, even after buyer agreed again to the higher price.

Not a great way to interact with other human beings.

 

[Coolhandjjl]

Maybe the buyer only brought $500

Better yet, he may have actually brought $650

 

[WardEarth]

I’m not shooting for anything. I’m just trying to share my own impressions and reasons for my take on the subject. And maybe offer a little food for thought which anyone should feel free to: take to heart, argue against, or disregard.

I’ve confined my comments to two things:

(a) The information as given in the original post, which I assume was presented accurately and honestly by the OP - and - (b) The outcome that emerged from it. Which is to say that the deal was called off by the seller in response to that text exchange.

After that I have only responded to the people who have quoted from my original or subsequent posts. And so far nobody (including the OP) has mentioned anything to me I may have missed that changes anything about items (a) and (b) above.

Or my opinion.

P.S. If I have missed something in a post that materially alters anything above. (and I’m surprised somebody hasn't already called me to task on it if I did) please point me toward it? I’m not someplace where I can read through 15 or 16 pages worth of posts right now. I’m time-slicing this discussion with something else I’m supposed to be doing right now. Thx!

Nice, I like that business quote about expecting to be treated like you treat ppl.
There was a bit of info later on from the op. An easy way to find that info is to go into their profile and find all their quotes. Most ppl aren’t going to do that but it’s not that hard and you get to see a clearer picture of the thread when you do.

 

[PJMustangFreak]

Wow, 17 pages (so far)
Having done literally hundreds of Craigslist deals, I can sympathize with both the seller and the buyer in this situation.
They had agreed on a price, the buyer wanted to drop it further, and the seller aborted the deal. Ok.
Wait... the buyer pulled the "I'm thinking about turning around" thing? - Kinda crummy, but really, along with the "haha" he started with, he was gingerly trying to go lower. He didn't say "knock off an additional $50 or I'm leaving." Yes, that would have been a real jerk move. He tried to gingerly make the suggestion, what with mentioning traffic and all. Personally, that's not enough for me to say "I don't want to sell it to you anymore," but I could both see and respect why it may for someone else. It's kind of insulting. I feel for the seller.
However, I also feel for the buyer. Sure, he kinda pulled a jagoff move, but he quickly said "forget it, I'll pay what we agreed."
I feel for both... but if I had to choose, I'd have to side with the seller.
Not only that, but then the buyer threw an obscenity at him.
Crappy situation. Could've been handled better by all parties involved. That being said, to pseudo-threaten to turn around unless the price is dropped, get refused, and then swear at the seller is more of a jerk move than the seller telling him no.
End of story

 

[Cliff Colton]

When the seller became aggressively offensive, the buyer was obliged to respond agressively to make absolutely clear the transaction was terminated. That strategy worked and the seller went home without further confrontation. I disagree with anyone here who thinks the op should have invited the guy over for tea.

But I must admonish the op here because he didn’t say “HAHA” when he wrote that he wasn’t selling the bass anymore. If he had said haha this never would have happened.

 

[DuluthDank]

This is why I found myself a local guitar shop to consign at. They give me 75 percent of what they sell it for, which is well worth whatever loss I might be taking for not dealing with that BS. I would have to be nearly at the level of dumpster diving to be willing to put up with the BS that is craigslist.

 

[WardEarth]

My point was the erosion of the truth. Some people seem to have gotten to the point that they don't even know when they are lying. I agree that if you agree on a price, both sides should honor it.

Yes and the buyer said he would pay the agreed on price after his ham-handed negotiating tactic was rebuffed. So the only damage done was that the OP was butt hurt.

I don’t know, I guess I don’t see where the lies came in.
The op was Definitely in the grey area as far as conduct but I don’t think he was that wrong. He felt the guy was screwing him around and he responded by taking it up a notch or three.

 

[WardEarth]

When the seller became aggressively offensive, the buyer was obliged to respond agressively to make absolutely clear the transaction was terminated. That strategy worked and the seller went home without further confrontation. I disagree with anyone here who thinks the op should have invited the guy over for tea.

But I must admonish the op here because he didn’t say “HAHA” when he wrote that he wasn’t selling the bass anymore. If he had said haha this never would have happened.

Ha! Or maybe he could just throw it in and still not sell it, that’d be even better

 

[DuluthDank]

If he tries to threaten you by wasting your time with no sale, how is it rude to respond by taking him up on his offer? Anyways, i'm sure the buyer had his big boy pants on when he read those bad words.

 

[HamOnTheCob]

He did not say that. And it’s a stretch to infer that was even what was meant. Read the original post again.

Furthermore, the buyer immediately reaffirmed his commitment to the agreed on $600 price.

It was the seller who called off the entire sale with no warning or real reason. A classic flounce if there ever was one.

The buyer had zero to gain by walking away. He was ready, willing, and able to meet the original price.

The seller had a chance to recoup his $50 misquote. Which in his own words was something he could “get any day.”

“ Cui bono?” as a certain cynical but wise Renaissance man once said.

I’m not saying that was the OP’s motivation. But what I am saying is that the buyer had absolutely nothing to gain by letting the deal fall through. And apparently the buyer felt the same way. Because he tried to immediately get it back on track before bring rebuffed.

I’m all for rallying behind a fellow TB member. But that doesn’t mean I’ll rubber stamp approval on something I think was a major misjudgment on the OP’s part.

This. Jesus, the fact you even had to spell all this out makes my head hurt.

 

[Coolhandjjl]

Even real estate transactions with accepted/signed offers containing multiple pages of legalese sometimes fail to close for whatever reason. Not a perfect world.