discreet Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 [b]The Postal Penalty of Moving Things On[/b] Here we go then, just a thought... this is the scenario. You've bought something from the for sale forums and decided that it's not really for you so consider putting it back up for sale. The price you paid included the cost of postage - so do you put it back up for the same price and include the cost of postage? If you do this, then obviously you take a hit because you will need to pay for the postage. Or do you advertise it for what you paid PLUS the cost of postage, so you're not out of pocket? Logical, but this then means you are apparently selling it for more than you only recently paid for it and you look like an arse! I don't think I could advertise something for more than I paid for it, so I would probably take the hit. After all, technically the item is now third-hand as opposed to second-hand - isn't it? What would you do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrismuzz Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I'd do the same personally, but I did once sell a Sansamp on here for double what I paid in cash converters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnDave Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 Surely if you bought the item for £100 plus postage, there is no problem in re-advertising it at £100 plus postage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted April 30, 2014 Author Share Posted April 30, 2014 [quote name='chrismuzz' timestamp='1398853360' post='2438201'] I'd do the same personally, but I did once sell a Sansamp on here for double what I paid in cash converters [/quote] That's perfectly acceptable - it's just cynical profiteering of the type approved of by the government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted April 30, 2014 Author Share Posted April 30, 2014 [quote name='FinnDave' timestamp='1398853638' post='2438208'] Surely if you bought the item for £100 plus postage, there is no problem in re-advertising it at £100 plus postage? [/quote] Not at all, but what I'm saying is if you bought it for £100 [i]including[/i] postage. Would you then re-advertise it at £100 [i]plus [/i]postage? Otherwise you'd be losing out, wouldn't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BassBod Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 Unless its big and heavy, I'd take a hit and not worry - that's the cost of trying something out. Remember the days of having to trade things in with shops? Now that was taking a hit.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnDave Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I must be missing something here. If you paid £100 including postage, then you didn't pay postage on top of the price, so what's the problem with re-advertising at £100 incl. postage? Sure the new buyer pays the postage then, as you did when you bought it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul S Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I always look upon it as the cost of getting to try the instrument for a while. Like a rental charge. And unless I got something incredibly cheaply, I usually take a bit of a hit on the selling price, too. I buy and sell basses because I am curious and want to try them, not to make money. Maybe that is why I will never be wealthy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted April 30, 2014 Author Share Posted April 30, 2014 (edited) [quote name='FinnDave' timestamp='1398854147' post='2438222'] I must be missing something here. If you paid £100 including postage, then you didn't pay postage on top of the price, so what's the problem with re-advertising at £100 incl. postage? Sure the new buyer pays the postage then, as you did when you bought it. [/quote] If you re-advertise at £100 including postage then you need to pay for the postage on top of the £100 you paid for the item in the first place - which [i]included [/i]the postage! Edited April 30, 2014 by discreet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnDave Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I still having trouble getting my head around this. If you paid £100 incl postage, then you really paid, say, £80 plus postage, so when you move it on at £100 incl postage, you are simply paying the postage you saved in the first place. You're going to have to pay one of the costs of postage unless you do collect only. Personally, I've bought and sold a few things through BC and the only thing I had posted was a strap, everything else has been collected. When I collect I am out of pocket for the petrol when people collect from me, they are. That's life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted April 30, 2014 Author Share Posted April 30, 2014 (edited) [quote name='FinnDave' timestamp='1398854731' post='2438230'] I still having trouble getting my head around this. If you paid £100 incl postage, then you really paid, say, £80 plus postage, so when you move it on at £100 incl postage, you are simply paying the postage you saved in the first place. [/quote] 1. You buy an item for £100. The seller pays for the postage. 2. You put it back up for sale for £100 - including postage. 3. You get £100 for it, sure - but then you need to pay for the postage - remember the seller paid for this before. 4. In effect, the cost of the postage will need to come out of the £100 you get for the item 5. So £100 PLUS postage cost (say £10) = £110. Edited April 30, 2014 by discreet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lozz196 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I know what you mean Mark, this is something I`ve looked at as well - buy something in total for £100, but when you sell, if it costs £15 to post, and you sell it at the £100 you paid out, you only end up with £85. Depending on the items, the way I look at it is it`s a rental charge, the £15 is what I`ve spent on having a good bit of kit for a while. Not the worst deal in the world. A bit different with basses, as they cost a fair bit more to ship, so I treat each one on an individual basis. Depends on the deal/location etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beer of the Bass Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 (edited) As Lozz says above, really. You have used the thing for a time. That has a value, surely? I'd say that the delivery charges are a small price to pay. Edited April 30, 2014 by Beer of the Bass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFRC Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 someone paid the postage! 300 including postage would be a bit cheaper if you picked it up. even if it wasnt for the cheap price of postage you get to try something out. imo creeping the price up to cover the postage cost is a bit cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diablo Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I guess if you buy something off BC, then to sell it on, unless you've done some upgrade or repair, then selling back for the same price and take the postage hit yourself is the right way. If you choose to sell via another medium then charge what you want! The gear merry-go-round on here it great if you can control yourself to a 1-in-1-out policy. It gets expensive if you go for the 1-in-another-1-in approach which I'm currently suffering from My attitude is generally I can sell it all on at any time for close to what I paid, so it is not wasted, just secured funds. Cheers, Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted April 30, 2014 Author Share Posted April 30, 2014 I agree totally, I don't think I could add the cost myself - I just wondered what the general consensus would be. I kind of expected this ethical stance, and it pleases me! Basschatter are great guys (and gals)! ...Mostly! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roland Rock Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 (edited) No brainer. You paid the agreed price for the instrument, and then paid for someone to deliver it to your door. That delivery money is gone, spent, irredeemable. Edited April 30, 2014 by Roland Rock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BassTractor Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 [quote name='Diablo' timestamp='1398855727' post='2438258'] the 1-in-another-1-in approach [/quote] Sounds brilliant! Teach me! [color=#ffffff].[/color] [color=#ffffff].[/color] [color=#ffffff].[/color] Oh, wait. I need to learn 1-out-another-1-out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted April 30, 2014 Author Share Posted April 30, 2014 (edited) I suppose it's because the cost is hidden if postage is included. If it were advertised at £90 [i]plus [/i]postage (£10), then you re-advertised it in the same way, then that would seem more logical somehow. Edited April 30, 2014 by discreet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted April 30, 2014 Author Share Posted April 30, 2014 [quote name='BassTractor' timestamp='1398856108' post='2438268'] I need to learn 1-out-another-1-out. [/quote] Is that what it's all about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimR Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 Put it up for whatever you want. No one knows what you've done to it. If it's a bass you could have put new strings on or set it up properly etc. If it's an amp you could have cleaned the pots etc. People will only buy it for what it's worth. That's the nature of buying and selling and speculating. You speculated that you would get a good deal, buying second hand. You didn't. You now have to try and make good. I don't think anyone thinks you're being opportunistic if you put it up for more than you bought it for. People don't have to buy it. They're at liberty to knock you down based on the price they think it's worth with the knowledge of what they think you might have paid for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BassTractor Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 [quote name='discreet' timestamp='1398856254' post='2438270'] Is that what it's all about? [/quote] Aye, in my case, right now, it is. We don't condone it though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyfisher Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I'm with TimR on this - price it for whatever you want. Who cares how many owners something has had or what was previously paid for it, the item is what it is and available for whatever price you want. If someone is happy with the price, they'll buy. If no-one is happy with the price you won't be able to sell. Selling at less than you bought and regarding the difference as the rental cost is a fine sentiment, but what if you had bought, say, a Fender USA Jazz in 1970 for £25 (or whatever it would have been back then). Would you seriously sell it for a bit less today and regard the loss as rental? I somehow doubt it - you'd likely sell it for what it was worth to someone today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lozz196 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 Yes, only a "rental charge" if short-term, best to not be applied to vintage instruments, especially if owned from new Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted April 30, 2014 Author Share Posted April 30, 2014 Good point, but I suppose I was thinking more of something you had bought, discovered it wasn't for you then moved it on straight away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.