|
 |
| | | Author: | Made_In_Bricks  | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 10:29 | | Subject: | Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 407 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| There was a thread earlier in the week about crazy prices on parts and how to
report them.
While there is no way to report things like this (because it isn't an actual
offense), I am suggesting that something is done about price guide manipulation.
My little experiment on taking one piece and setting it to an astronomically
high price and letting the messages flow in was quite helpful to gain insight
on ways that this ACTUALLY takes a toll on buyers and sellers.
Several things that were pointed out:
It only changes the ASKING price, not the price that this has actually sold for.
It really skews part out values (on asking price)
It causes more work for sellers who use the asking price to determine prices
for their actual part outs
There were many other issues pointed out, but they all had to do with ASKING
price, not SOLD price, which begs the question, what if some would have bought
this part from me and toyed around and stretched out the NPB (of course if they
paid I would go retire  ) I would have a headache from the fees bill on May
1.
That being said, nothing good comes out of such listings. They are either mistakes
that cause other headaches, intentional for some other reason to not sell that
part at that price.
So, my suggestion is that we ask bricklink to use clause 9 of the TOS for people
that are abusing the price catalog for any reason other than to legitimately
sell the listed item.
"9. Breach:
We reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete all of your data and
deny you access to any or all of your data stored at BrickLink.com if you breach
this Agreement or if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information
you provide to us. We also reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete
all of your data and deny you access to any or all of the site's features
at any time for any reason without prior notice."
This includes the people that have absurd prices to attract people to their store
to see custom items and even using the superlot function of listing popular minifigs
in large batches to draw attention to this.
Yes, I was guilty of using the superlot feature to draw people to my store, looking
back on this, I do see it as wrong.
I also apologize for listing a 2x4 dbg plate for just under $2,000,000.00 this
weekend.
Thanks,
Ken
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Leftoverbricks | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 10:51 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 77 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | There was a thread earlier in the week about crazy prices on parts and how to
report them.
While there is no way to report things like this (because it isn't an actual
offense), I am suggesting that something is done about price guide manipulation.
My little experiment on taking one piece and setting it to an astronomically
high price and letting the messages flow in was quite helpful to gain insight
on ways that this ACTUALLY takes a toll on buyers and sellers.
Several things that were pointed out:
It only changes the ASKING price, not the price that this has actually sold for.
It really skews part out values (on asking price)
It causes more work for sellers who use the asking price to determine prices
for their actual part outs
There were many other issues pointed out, but they all had to do with ASKING
price, not SOLD price, which begs the question, what if some would have bought
this part from me and toyed around and stretched out the NPB (of course if they
paid I would go retire ) I would have a headache from the fees bill on May
1.
That being said, nothing good comes out of such listings. They are either mistakes
that cause other headaches, intentional for some other reason to not sell that
part at that price.
So, my suggestion is that we ask bricklink to use clause 9 of the TOS for people
that are abusing the price catalog for any reason other than to legitimately
sell the listed item.
"9. Breach:
We reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete all of your data and
deny you access to any or all of your data stored at BrickLink.com if you breach
this Agreement or if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information
you provide to us. We also reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete
all of your data and deny you access to any or all of the site's features
at any time for any reason without prior notice."
This includes the people that have absurd prices to attract people to their store
to see custom items and even using the superlot function of listing popular minifigs
in large batches to draw attention to this.
Yes, I was guilty of using the superlot feature to draw people to my store, looking
back on this, I do see it as wrong.
I also apologize for listing a 2x4 dbg plate for just under $2,000,000.00 this
weekend.
Thanks,
Ken
|
THANKS, Ken!
Yeah, I got mad too... Now BL has to do something...
~Martin
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 11:08 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 111 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Voted no. As others have repeatedly mentioned, BrickLink should not be in the
business of policing, limiting, dictating, challenging or questioning prices,
or punishing sellers for their prices. Apart from the obvious legal constraints,
there is the arbitrary subjective element of defining what is an "absurd" price.
There are better ways to handle this so-called "problem" that don't involve
legal risks or arbitrariness:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483330
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483378
Thor
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Leftoverbricks | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 11:23 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Voted no. As others have repeatedly mentioned, BrickLink should not be in the
business of policing, limiting, dictating, challenging or questioning prices,
or punishing sellers for their prices. Apart from the obvious legal constraints,
there is the arbitrary subjective element of defining what is an "absurd" price.
There are better ways to handle this so-called "problem" that don't involve
legal risks or arbitrariness:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483330
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483378
Thor
|
"legal constraints"
"arbitrary subjective"
"so called 'problem'"
"legal risks"
"arbitrariness"
Please Thor, go back in your 'legal' man cave and don't bother us
with all your legal notes and opinions.
Things (legal, arbitrary etc.) that may seem important for you in the United
States of America are not considered likewise in other countries. America is
a great country but it's not ruling the world, so please relax a bit and
see it in world wide perspective.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 11:34 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 78 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Voted no. As others have repeatedly mentioned, BrickLink should not be in the
business of policing, limiting, dictating, challenging or questioning prices,
or punishing sellers for their prices. Apart from the obvious legal constraints,
there is the arbitrary subjective element of defining what is an "absurd" price.
There are better ways to handle this so-called "problem" that don't involve
legal risks or arbitrariness:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483330
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483378
Thor
|
"legal constraints"
"arbitrary subjective"
"so called 'problem'"
"legal risks"
"arbitrariness"
Please Thor, go back in your 'legal' man cave and don't bother us
with all your legal notes and opinions.
Things (legal, arbitrary etc.) that may seem important for you in the United
States of America are not considered likewise in other countries. America is
a great country but it's not ruling the world, so please relax a bit and
see it in world wide perspective.
|
Sure. Let's just ignore suggestions that could get BrickLink and sellers
in legal trouble. Oh, and BTW, the EU has even stricter laws about price-fixing,
pricing constraints and anti-competition. So this isn't the US versus Europe
nonsense you are trying to fabricate.
And even if legal concerns were non-existent, BrickLink simply has no business
telling sellers what their prices should or should not be. Nor should any seller
actually be PUNISHED for their prices, as this suggestion wants to do.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Leftoverbricks | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 11:57 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 87 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Voted no. As others have repeatedly mentioned, BrickLink should not be in the
business of policing, limiting, dictating, challenging or questioning prices,
or punishing sellers for their prices. Apart from the obvious legal constraints,
there is the arbitrary subjective element of defining what is an "absurd" price.
There are better ways to handle this so-called "problem" that don't involve
legal risks or arbitrariness:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483330
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483378
Thor
|
"legal constraints"
"arbitrary subjective"
"so called 'problem'"
"legal risks"
"arbitrariness"
Please Thor, go back in your 'legal' man cave and don't bother us
with all your legal notes and opinions.
Things (legal, arbitrary etc.) that may seem important for you in the United
States of America are not considered likewise in other countries. America is
a great country but it's not ruling the world, so please relax a bit and
see it in world wide perspective.
|
Sure. Let's just ignore suggestions that could get BrickLink and sellers
in legal trouble. Oh, and BTW, the EU has even stricter laws about price-fixing,
pricing constraints and anti-competition. So this isn't the US versus Europe
nonsense you are trying to fabricate.
|
I'm not trying to 'fabricate' anything. Where the hell did you get
this idea from??
| |
And even if legal concerns were non-existent, BrickLink simply has no business
telling sellers what their prices should or should not be. Nor should any seller
actually be PUNISHED for their prices, as this suggestion wants to do.
|
It's not about BL punishing what sellers can do or not. It all comes down
to reason: listing a brick for a million dollars is without reason and although
that be may ligit, it's not the way we want BL to operate.
And allowing this crazy practice just means that new buyers are being mislead
by the price guide.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 12:38 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Leftoverbricks writes:
| |
It's not about BL punishing what sellers can do or not.
|
Of course it is. Read the suggestion again. The OP wants to PUNISH sellers with
"absurd" prices by kicking them off BrickLink.
| | It all comes down to reason: listing a brick for a million dollars is without reason
|
Subjectively, I agree. But where do you draw the line? "Reason" is very subjective.
So a line will have to be drawn somewhere. Pricing a brick at $1,000,000 appears
without reason. But what about a $1,000 brick or a $100 brick or a $10 brick?
Sorry, but irrespective of the obvious legal constraints, I don't want BrickLink
telling me or any other seller what prices are or are not "reasonable" or punishing
me or other sellers if we don't agree with BL's notion of what is "reasonable".
Particularly when there are other suggestions that can adequately address this
"problem" much more objectively without creating any legal issues or additional
problems.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Leftoverbricks | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 13:43 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 59 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, Leftoverbricks writes:
| |
It's not about BL punishing what sellers can do or not.
|
Of course it is. Read the suggestion again. The OP wants to PUNISH sellers with
"absurd" prices by kicking them off BrickLink.
| | It all comes down to reason: listing a brick for a million dollars is without reason
|
Subjectively, I agree. But where do you draw the line? "Reason" is very subjective.
So a line will have to be drawn somewhere. Pricing a brick at $1,000,000 appears
without reason. But what about a $1,000 brick or a $100 brick or a $10 brick?
Sorry, but irrespective of the obvious legal constraints, I don't want BrickLink
telling me or any other seller what prices are or are not "reasonable" or punishing
me or other sellers if we don't agree with BL's notion of what is "reasonable".
Particularly when there are other suggestions that can adequately address this
"problem" much more objectively without creating any legal issues or additional
problems.
Thor
|
OK, see your point about where to draw the line. What's your suggestion to
address this problem?
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | maggiec | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 19:42 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 68 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Voted no. As others have repeatedly mentioned, BrickLink should not be in the
business of policing, limiting, dictating, challenging or questioning prices,
or punishing sellers for their prices. Apart from the obvious legal constraints,
there is the arbitrary subjective element of defining what is an "absurd" price.
There are better ways to handle this so-called "problem" that don't involve
legal risks or arbitrariness:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483330
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483378
Thor
|
I agree. I also would vote no but this shouldn't even be a suggestion. IANAL
but I can't imagine it would be legal to dictate the prices at which sellers
can list their items, no matter how outrageous.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Made_In_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 20:07 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, maggiec writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Voted no. As others have repeatedly mentioned, BrickLink should not be in the
business of policing, limiting, dictating, challenging or questioning prices,
or punishing sellers for their prices. Apart from the obvious legal constraints,
there is the arbitrary subjective element of defining what is an "absurd" price.
There are better ways to handle this so-called "problem" that don't involve
legal risks or arbitrariness:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483330
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483378
Thor
|
I agree. I also would vote no but this shouldn't even be a suggestion. IANAL
but I can't imagine it would be legal to dictate the prices at which sellers
can list their items, no matter how outrageous.
|
not dictating prices, but behavior that is detrimental towards others
If a member was doing something that caused you to put more time and effort in
to your work on BL just because they are being a butt head, this is fine?
the problem is the price guide is used to bring traffic to and from our stores.
People have learned how to manipulate this to divert traffic to their stores,
which means they go to that store and not yours first...
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 20:18 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, maggiec writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Voted no. As others have repeatedly mentioned, BrickLink should not be in the
business of policing, limiting, dictating, challenging or questioning prices,
or punishing sellers for their prices. Apart from the obvious legal constraints,
there is the arbitrary subjective element of defining what is an "absurd" price.
There are better ways to handle this so-called "problem" that don't involve
legal risks or arbitrariness:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483330
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483378
Thor
|
I agree. I also would vote no but this shouldn't even be a suggestion. IANAL
but I can't imagine it would be legal to dictate the prices at which sellers
can list their items, no matter how outrageous.
|
Bricklink is a corporation that sets its own terms of use for this site. It could
tell us we have to sell all bricks for 5 cents each if it wanted, and our options
would be sell bricks for a nickel here or go sell bricks somewhere else.
It can't tell you what to do in transactions outside of Bricklink, but it
certainly can set whatever terms it wants as conditions of using its service.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 20:28 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 63 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, maggiec writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Voted no. As others have repeatedly mentioned, BrickLink should not be in the
business of policing, limiting, dictating, challenging or questioning prices,
or punishing sellers for their prices. Apart from the obvious legal constraints,
there is the arbitrary subjective element of defining what is an "absurd" price.
There are better ways to handle this so-called "problem" that don't involve
legal risks or arbitrariness:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483330
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483378
Thor
|
I agree. I also would vote no but this shouldn't even be a suggestion. IANAL
but I can't imagine it would be legal to dictate the prices at which sellers
can list their items, no matter how outrageous.
|
Bricklink is a corporation that sets its own terms of use for this site. It could
tell us we have to sell all bricks for 5 cents each if it wanted, and our options
would be sell bricks for a nickel here or go sell bricks somewhere else.
It can't tell you what to do in transactions outside of Bricklink, but it
certainly can set whatever terms it wants as conditions of using its service.
|
Hogwash! Nothing would be more blatant illegal price-fixing than BrickLink telling
multiple competing sellers to price things at the same price. It is these sort
of erroneous lay opinions about the law that keep lawyers so busy and well off.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | FigBits | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 20:51 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, maggiec writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Voted no. As others have repeatedly mentioned, BrickLink should not be in the
business of policing, limiting, dictating, challenging or questioning prices,
or punishing sellers for their prices. Apart from the obvious legal constraints,
there is the arbitrary subjective element of defining what is an "absurd" price.
There are better ways to handle this so-called "problem" that don't involve
legal risks or arbitrariness:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483330
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483378
Thor
|
I agree. I also would vote no but this shouldn't even be a suggestion. IANAL
but I can't imagine it would be legal to dictate the prices at which sellers
can list their items, no matter how outrageous.
|
Bricklink is a corporation that sets its own terms of use for this site. It could
tell us we have to sell all bricks for 5 cents each if it wanted, and our options
would be sell bricks for a nickel here or go sell bricks somewhere else.
It can't tell you what to do in transactions outside of Bricklink, but it
certainly can set whatever terms it wants as conditions of using its service.
|
Hogwash! Nothing would be more blatant illegal price-fixing than BrickLink telling
multiple competing sellers to price things at the same price.
|
You exaggerate. "Nothing would be more blatant[ly] illegal price-fixing..." --
actually, there would be plenty of examples that are much clearly examples of
illegal price-fixing.
Because BrickLink is not one of the competitors, it is less clear if their influence
in prices would be illegal. I'm not saying that it would be or it wouldn't
be. I am saying that it is less obvious than the case of a group of competitors
conspiring to fix prices.
Meanwhile, here are some cases involving other parties (not direct competitors)
holding sellers to particular prices, where it was deemed legal:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Oil_Co._v._Khan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leegin_Creative_Leather_Products,_Inc._v._PSKS,_Inc.
I, of course, am not a lawyer, and none of the above should be interpreted as
legal advice of any kind.
--
Marc.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Made_In_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 20:59 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | |
Hogwash! Nothing would be more blatant illegal price-fixing than BrickLink telling
multiple competing sellers to price things at the same price. It is these sort
of erroneous lay opinions about the law that keep lawyers so busy and well off.
|
not when people are free to sell elsewhere for what ever price they want.
Also, collusion laws are in place to protect consumers, if bricklink were to
act in the best interest of buyers and sellers to weed out bad seller practices
that actually do manipulate the market place, and in doing so, freeing up the
market place to open and fair competition, I hardly think BL would be sought
out for collusion.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Brettj666 | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 10:31 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 55 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | | |
Hogwash! Nothing would be more blatant illegal price-fixing than BrickLink telling
multiple competing sellers to price things at the same price. It is these sort
of erroneous lay opinions about the law that keep lawyers so busy and well off.
|
not when people are free to sell elsewhere for what ever price they want.
Also, collusion laws are in place to protect consumers, if bricklink were to
act in the best interest of buyers and sellers to weed out bad seller practices
that actually do manipulate the market place, and in doing so, freeing up the
market place to open and fair competition, I hardly think BL would be sought
out for collusion.
|
What if that power was used, not to protect consumers, but to create a floor
in practice. The higher the prices are, the more fees are paid. Putting in
a ceiling would be more of a cap of their own businesses.
I personally don't really trust a corporation, whose goal is to make a profit,
to make an ethical decision to protect buyers that would result in poorer performance
for that company.
(side note: when I was looking for a job, I got invited to a company whose name
I didn't recognize, but they were a cigarette company. In their waiting
room, they had a no-smoking sign. Under that sign, was another small sign saying
that "this sign is posted in accordance with the law, but .." I don't recall
the exact wording after that, but it was essentially, the law is making us put
this up, but we don't want to, smoke freely")
The other thing about this concept is, how does Bricklink determine what are
mistakes and what are blatant attempts to manipulate.
Some people put prices (example is more for sets) that are really high.. at the
time.
But when that set retires and the lower prices get bought up, that price, even
though it was once considered quite high, now becomes more and more attractive.
If that's the price that the person was willing to sell it for, then maybe
it's not price manipulation, but a true reflection of what they value it
at.
I've seen sets catch up to my price so that at some point, I am the lowest,
even though I may have been in the top 10% at one point.
I'm sure when someone posted their at $4000 when they were selling
for $1400, people thought they are nuts or greedy, but I'm sure that item
sold.
Last point, if bricklink doesn't take the time to take definitive action
against the scam sellers or the sellers that don't really care about customer
service and can rack up 100's of negatives (and send out retaliatory negatives),
then I am certain that looking for the outliers in the price guide (for sale)
and determining if they are manipulation or error, is probably something they
don't have the manpower for.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 21:29 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 80 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, maggiec writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Voted no. As others have repeatedly mentioned, BrickLink should not be in the
business of policing, limiting, dictating, challenging or questioning prices,
or punishing sellers for their prices. Apart from the obvious legal constraints,
there is the arbitrary subjective element of defining what is an "absurd" price.
There are better ways to handle this so-called "problem" that don't involve
legal risks or arbitrariness:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483330
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483378
Thor
|
I agree. I also would vote no but this shouldn't even be a suggestion. IANAL
but I can't imagine it would be legal to dictate the prices at which sellers
can list their items, no matter how outrageous.
|
Bricklink is a corporation that sets its own terms of use for this site. It could
tell us we have to sell all bricks for 5 cents each if it wanted, and our options
would be sell bricks for a nickel here or go sell bricks somewhere else.
It can't tell you what to do in transactions outside of Bricklink, but it
certainly can set whatever terms it wants as conditions of using its service.
|
Hogwash! Nothing would be more blatant illegal price-fixing than BrickLink telling
multiple competing sellers to price things at the same price. It is these sort
of erroneous lay opinions about the law that keep lawyers so busy and well off.
Thor
|
Well now this is interesting that you criticize my response for being a "lay
opinion," because that implies that your opinion is not a "lay opinion."
That in turn implies that you are an attorney eligible to practice law.
But I don't think you are.
But regardless; Those of us with practical experience selling online at other
venues can attest that setting maximums for prices and other fees is in fact
a common practice. Amazon, for example, has a cap on prices of $10,000 except
for certain categories like rare, collectible books. Ebay restricts how much
sellers are allowed to charge for shipping. It also sets a minimum price for
items sold through its site, depending on category and format.
None of this is an argument in favor of or against Bricklink doing something
similar. It's just a reality check from outside of Cloud Cuckoo Land. Bricklink
is not our government. It does not have a monopoly on the second-hand brick market.
If it were to adopt policies similar to other venues, it would not be a violation
of your inalienable rights or price fixing or the end of civilization. We're
paying to use a service, here, not participating in some utopian experiment for
brick lovers.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 22:34 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 68 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, maggiec writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Voted no. As others have repeatedly mentioned, BrickLink should not be in the
business of policing, limiting, dictating, challenging or questioning prices,
or punishing sellers for their prices. Apart from the obvious legal constraints,
there is the arbitrary subjective element of defining what is an "absurd" price.
There are better ways to handle this so-called "problem" that don't involve
legal risks or arbitrariness:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483330
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483378
Thor
|
I agree. I also would vote no but this shouldn't even be a suggestion. IANAL
but I can't imagine it would be legal to dictate the prices at which sellers
can list their items, no matter how outrageous.
|
Bricklink is a corporation that sets its own terms of use for this site. It could
tell us we have to sell all bricks for 5 cents each if it wanted, and our options
would be sell bricks for a nickel here or go sell bricks somewhere else.
It can't tell you what to do in transactions outside of Bricklink, but it
certainly can set whatever terms it wants as conditions of using its service.
|
Hogwash! Nothing would be more blatant illegal price-fixing than BrickLink telling
multiple competing sellers to price things at the same price. It is these sort
of erroneous lay opinions about the law that keep lawyers so busy and well off.
Thor
|
Well now this is interesting that you criticize my response for being a "lay
opinion," because that implies that your opinion is not a "lay opinion."
That in turn implies that you are an attorney eligible to practice law.
But I don't think you are.
But regardless; Those of us with practical experience selling online at other
venues can attest that setting maximums for prices and other fees is in fact
a common practice. Amazon, for example, has a cap on prices of $10,000 except
for certain categories like rare, collectible books. Ebay restricts how much
sellers are allowed to charge for shipping. It also sets a minimum price for
items sold through its site, depending on category and format.
None of this is an argument in favor of or against Bricklink doing something
similar. It's just a reality check from outside of Cloud Cuckoo Land. Bricklink
is not our government. It does not have a monopoly on the second-hand brick market.
If it were to adopt policies similar to other venues, it would not be a violation
of your inalienable rights or price fixing or the end of civilization. We're
paying to use a service, here, not participating in some utopian experiment for
brick lovers.
|
Sigh... It is pointless to argue law with laypersons who have no legal training
or experience. They think all they have to do is cite snippets of some law, brief
Wikipedia summaries of a case or two (not even the actual case itself), or examples
of others doing something they want and that makes everything OK and legal. They
think it is really that easy. LOL. But they have no understanding of how seemingly
similar cases can be distinguished from each other based on small but important
factual differences. They have no understanding of the many nuances, complex
inter-connected relationships with numerous different laws, or the legal precedent
and caselaw that result in vastly different outcomes. They are incapable of THINKING
like a jurist because they don't have the training or experience to do so.
Law schools provide this essential training. It opens one's eyes and teaches
you to think differently about the incredible variety and complexity of laws
in our modern societies and how to interpret and apply them in a manner that
is attentive to minor details that can greatly influence one's conclusions.
Much the same way medical school trains one to think like a doctor and diagnose
complex medical problems. Most people would agree that they should not rely
upon medical advice or diagnoses provided by laypersons. Yet many seem perfectly
content to believe legal opinions provided by laypersons. And again, this partly
explains why so many people find themselves in legal trouble and keep the legal
profession so busy.
So yes BrickLink... PLEASE rely on 62Bricks' opinion that BL can require
every seller to price every item at the exact same price. PLEASE follow the OP's
opinion that it is OK for BL to dictate the minimum or maximum prices that nearly
10,000 competing sellers must follow. PLEASE! Because it would be a great retirement
bonus for me. 
And to 62bricks... Since you seem to have done some research on my off-BrickLink
life (which is kind of creepy), let me complete it for you and respond to your
not so veiled comments questioning my background and qualifications to comment
about the law. I graduated with honors from Tulane Law School in 1985 and received
my license to practice law in the State of Hawaii. In 1986, I was admitted to
practice before the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the US Supreme Court.
I practiced business law for nearly a quarter century. Among other things, I
actually represented clients in the USA, Europe, Canada and Japan in antitrust
matters, including one of the biggest and longest price-fixing cartels in history.
A price-fixing scheme involving sorbates that cost a half dozen or so companies
(one of whom was my client) collectively more than one BILLION dollars in fines
and civil class action settlements. I am currently RETIRED from legal practice
because I moved outside of Hawaii and started an international consulting business
in North Carolina focused on biotechnology transfer between the USA and Japan.
My legal license in Hawaii is no longer active because I am RETIRED, no longer
practice law in Hawaii or elsewhere, and because I saw no need to continue paying
nearly $1000 each year in bar association dues. This, however, does not detract
from the fact that, unlike you and your fellow laypersons in this thread, I have
the necessary legal training and experience to know what I am talking about.
And because implementation of this suggestion could affect me and my continued
enjoyment of BrickLink, I have every right to express my legal and other concerns
about it.
But of course, you know much more about this complex legal issue.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 23:33 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 74 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, maggiec writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Voted no. As others have repeatedly mentioned, BrickLink should not be in the
business of policing, limiting, dictating, challenging or questioning prices,
or punishing sellers for their prices. Apart from the obvious legal constraints,
there is the arbitrary subjective element of defining what is an "absurd" price.
There are better ways to handle this so-called "problem" that don't involve
legal risks or arbitrariness:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483330
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483378
Thor
|
I agree. I also would vote no but this shouldn't even be a suggestion. IANAL
but I can't imagine it would be legal to dictate the prices at which sellers
can list their items, no matter how outrageous.
|
Bricklink is a corporation that sets its own terms of use for this site. It could
tell us we have to sell all bricks for 5 cents each if it wanted, and our options
would be sell bricks for a nickel here or go sell bricks somewhere else.
It can't tell you what to do in transactions outside of Bricklink, but it
certainly can set whatever terms it wants as conditions of using its service.
|
Hogwash! Nothing would be more blatant illegal price-fixing than BrickLink telling
multiple competing sellers to price things at the same price. It is these sort
of erroneous lay opinions about the law that keep lawyers so busy and well off.
Thor
|
Well now this is interesting that you criticize my response for being a "lay
opinion," because that implies that your opinion is not a "lay opinion."
That in turn implies that you are an attorney eligible to practice law.
But I don't think you are.
But regardless; Those of us with practical experience selling online at other
venues can attest that setting maximums for prices and other fees is in fact
a common practice. Amazon, for example, has a cap on prices of $10,000 except
for certain categories like rare, collectible books. Ebay restricts how much
sellers are allowed to charge for shipping. It also sets a minimum price for
items sold through its site, depending on category and format.
None of this is an argument in favor of or against Bricklink doing something
similar. It's just a reality check from outside of Cloud Cuckoo Land. Bricklink
is not our government. It does not have a monopoly on the second-hand brick market.
If it were to adopt policies similar to other venues, it would not be a violation
of your inalienable rights or price fixing or the end of civilization. We're
paying to use a service, here, not participating in some utopian experiment for
brick lovers.
|
Sigh... It is pointless to argue law with laypersons who have no legal training
or experience. They think all they have to do is cite snippets of some law, brief
Wikipedia summaries of a case or two (not even the actual case itself), or examples
of others doing something they want and that makes everything OK and legal. They
think it is really that easy. LOL. But they have no understanding of how seemingly
similar cases can be distinguished from each other based on small but important
factual differences. They have no understanding of the many nuances, complex
inter-connected relationships with numerous different laws, or the legal precedent
and caselaw that result in vastly different outcomes. They are incapable of THINKING
like a jurist because they don't have the training or experience to do so.
Law schools provide this essential training. It opens one's eyes and teaches
you to think differently about the incredible variety and complexity of laws
in our modern societies and how to interpret and apply them in a manner that
is attentive to minor details that can greatly influence one's conclusions.
Much the same way medical school trains one to think like a doctor and diagnose
complex medical problems. Most people would agree that they should not rely
upon medical advice or diagnoses provided by laypersons. Yet many seem perfectly
content to believe legal opinions provided by laypersons. And again, this partly
explains why so many people find themselves in legal trouble and keep the legal
profession so busy.
So yes BrickLink... PLEASE rely on 62Bricks' opinion that BL can require
every seller to price every item at the exact same price. PLEASE follow the OP's
opinion that it is OK for BL to dictate the minimum or maximum prices that nearly
10,000 competing sellers must follow. PLEASE! Because it would be a great retirement
bonus for me.
And to 62bricks... Since you seem to have done some research on my off-BrickLink
life (which is kind of creepy), let me complete it for you and respond to your
not so veiled comments questioning my background and qualifications to comment
about the law. I graduated with honors from Tulane Law School in 1985 and received
my license to practice law in the State of Hawaii. In 1986, I was admitted to
practice before the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the US Supreme Court.
I practiced business law for nearly a quarter century. Among other things, I
actually represented clients in the USA, Europe, Canada and Japan in antitrust
matters, including one of the biggest and longest price-fixing cartels in history.
A price-fixing scheme involving sorbates that cost a half dozen or so companies
(one of whom was my client) collectively more than one BILLION dollars in fines
and civil class action settlements. I am currently RETIRED from legal practice
because I moved outside of Hawaii and started an international consulting business
in North Carolina focused on biotechnology transfer between the USA and Japan.
My legal license in Hawaii is no longer active because I am RETIRED, no longer
practice law in Hawaii or elsewhere, and because I saw no need to continue paying
nearly $1000 each year in bar association dues. This, however, does not detract
from the fact that, unlike you and your fellow laypersons in this thread, I have
the necessary legal training and experience to know what I am talking about.
And because implementation of this suggestion could affect me and my continued
enjoyment of BrickLink, I have every right to express my legal and other concerns
about it.
But of course, you know much more about this complex legal issue.
Thor
|
Maybe pay those bar dues and get a class action suit together against Amazon
for setting maximum prices for sellers using their venue service, since you have
the expertise. Why waste your time among all us laypeople? You obviously know
more than the legal departments of eBay and Amazon. Seems kind of pathetic to
waste that superior knowledge bullying bricksellers.
I think you probably understand that "sell every brick for a nickel" was meant
to be a rhetorical exaggeration to make the larger point that Bricklink could
indeed address the inflated list price practice if it wanted, and it could do
it without getting into legal trouble for price fixing. But your regular practice
is to sieze on these obviously rhetorical statements, treat them literally, and
drive them into oblivion with what you imagine is an overwhelming legal argument,
but is actually just sarcastic bluster and insult based on your apparent belief
that a law career has qualified you to run a retail business.
But my own 20 years in retail and 30 years in business altogether informs me
that your legal experience has not educated you very well on how to run a retail
operation. Your views are impractical and do not reflect modern business practices
or standards of customer service. You are unfamiliar with how other venues have
addressed the same issues Bricklink faces. Neither are you willing to learn more,
apparently, because your typical response to anyone pointing out that you are
misinformed is to do exactly what you have done here, which is to say, in essence,
"I used to be a lawyer, so everyone should shut up."
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 00:23 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
| | his usual hostility and baiting sarcasm
|
Like I said, you don't know what you are talking about. Mainly because you
don't understand the law and, like almost every other layperson, over-simplify
things and use anecdotal examples with subtle distinctions that really don't
say much.
Since nuances in the English language came up in this thread, I will use that
as an analogy to illustrate my point about how laypeople don't understand
the law.
To a non-native English speaker who has only a rudimentary knowledge of the English
language and its complex grammatical rules, these statements all appear to be
similar and have essentially the same meaning:
"She told him that she loved him.”
“She only told him that she loved him.”
“She told only him that she loved him.”
“She told him only that she loved him.”
“She told him that only she loved him.”
"She told him that she only loved him.”
“She told him that she loved only him.”
However, native English speakers and those more extensively trained in English
will understand that while these sentences appear similar, the movement of one
single word significantly changes the meanings of each sentence.
Another example:
"My brother’s friend’s dogs..."
"My brother’s friends’ dogs..."
"My brothers’ friend’s dogs..."
"My brothers’ friends’ dogs..."
Here, the slight change in placement of an apostrophe changes the meaning of
each sentence. A small change those having only a basic knowledge of English
can easily miss.
And another example:
"We invited the dogs, William, and Harry.”
“We invited the dogs, William and Harry.”
Even to native English speakers, these two sentences may appear the same. But
they are not. Those having a more thorough education in English grammar and punctuation,
especially the Oxford Comma, will understand that a single comma greatly changes
the meanings of these two sentences. In the first sentence, we’re talking about
two people called William and Harry as well as more than one dog. In the second
sentence, however, the missing Oxford comma makes it sound as though the dogs’
names are William and Harry.
Law is very much like these examples. Two factual scenarios may seem virtually
identical to the untrained layperson. But the presence or absence of a single
seemingly minor variable (easily missed by laypersons) can result in completely
opposite legal outcomes. Lawyers are trained to notice these minute differences
and the legal significance they can have.
When I use the term "layperson", it is not meant to insult anyone or suggest
they are stupid. Not at all. It just means they aren't trained in legal analysis.
Doctors certainly aren't stupid. But they are as much a layperson as a plumber
when it comes to the law. The same way a lawyer is a layperson when it comes
to medicine or aeronautical engineering.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | legoman77 | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 01:06 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 63 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
| | his usual hostility and baiting sarcasm
|
Like I said, you don't know what you are talking about. Mainly because you
don't understand the law and, like almost every other layperson, over-simplify
things and use anecdotal examples with subtle distinctions that really don't
say much.
Since nuances in the English language came up in this thread, I will use that
as an analogy to illustrate my point about how laypeople don't understand
the law.
To a non-native English speaker who has only a rudimentary knowledge of the English
language and its complex grammatical rules, these statements all appear to be
similar and have essentially the same meaning:
"She told him that she loved him.”
“She only told him that she loved him.”
“She told only him that she loved him.”
“She told him only that she loved him.”
“She told him that only she loved him.”
"She told him that she only loved him.”
“She told him that she loved only him.”
However, native English speakers and those more extensively trained in English
will understand that while these sentences appear similar, the movement of one
single word significantly changes the meanings of each sentence.
Another example:
"My brother’s friend’s dogs..."
"My brother’s friends’ dogs..."
"My brothers’ friend’s dogs..."
"My brothers’ friends’ dogs..."
Here, the slight change in placement of an apostrophe changes the meaning of
each sentence. A small change those having only a basic knowledge of English
can easily miss.
And another example:
"We invited the dogs, William, and Harry.”
“We invited the dogs, William and Harry.”
Even to native English speakers, these two sentences may appear the same. But
they are not. Those having a more thorough education in English grammar and punctuation,
especially the Oxford Comma, will understand that a single comma greatly changes
the meanings of these two sentences. In the first sentence, we’re talking about
two people called William and Harry as well as more than one dog. In the second
sentence, however, the missing Oxford comma makes it sound as though the dogs’
names are William and Harry.
Law is very much like these examples. Two factual scenarios may seem virtually
identical to the untrained layperson. But the presence or absence of a single
seemingly minor variable (easily missed by laypersons) can result in completely
opposite legal outcomes. Lawyers are trained to notice these minute differences
and the legal significance they can have.
When I use the term "layperson", it is not meant to insult anyone or suggest
they are stupid. Not at all. It just means they aren't trained in legal analysis.
Doctors certainly aren't stupid. But they are as much a layperson as a plumber
when it comes to the law. The same way a lawyer is a layperson when it comes
to medicine or aeronautical engineering.
Thor
|
For those that are fluent in English and may be plumbers, I take it that no offense
was meant.
Also punctuation is important. Take the sentence,
Woman without her man is nothing. Now add a coma.
Woman without her, man is nothing.
Woman without her man, is nothing.
John P (who likes plumbers)
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 01:16 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 83 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, legoman77 writes:
| |
Also punctuation is important. Take the sentence,
Woman without her man is nothing. Now add a coma.
Woman without her, man is nothing.
Woman without her man, is nothing.
John P (who likes plumbers)
|
Commas, in particular, can be life-saving. Consider, for example:
"Let's eat, grandma!"
and
"Let's eat grandma!"
And then there is this:
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 05:09 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| It's nothing new though ...
Ibis redibis nunquam per bella peribis
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 07:31 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 87 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
| | his usual hostility and baiting sarcasm
|
Like I said, you don't know what you are talking about. Mainly because you
don't understand the law and, like almost every other layperson, over-simplify
things and use anecdotal examples with subtle distinctions that really don't
say much.
Since nuances in the English language came up in this thread, I will use that
as an analogy to illustrate my point about how laypeople don't understand
the law.
To a non-native English speaker who has only a rudimentary knowledge of the English
language and its complex grammatical rules, these statements all appear to be
similar and have essentially the same meaning:
"She told him that she loved him.”
“She only told him that she loved him.”
“She told only him that she loved him.”
“She told him only that she loved him.”
“She told him that only she loved him.”
"She told him that she only loved him.”
“She told him that she loved only him.”
However, native English speakers and those more extensively trained in English
will understand that while these sentences appear similar, the movement of one
single word significantly changes the meanings of each sentence.
Another example:
"My brother’s friend’s dogs..."
"My brother’s friends’ dogs..."
"My brothers’ friend’s dogs..."
"My brothers’ friends’ dogs..."
Here, the slight change in placement of an apostrophe changes the meaning of
each sentence. A small change those having only a basic knowledge of English
can easily miss.
And another example:
"We invited the dogs, William, and Harry.”
“We invited the dogs, William and Harry.”
Even to native English speakers, these two sentences may appear the same. But
they are not. Those having a more thorough education in English grammar and punctuation,
especially the Oxford Comma, will understand that a single comma greatly changes
the meanings of these two sentences. In the first sentence, we’re talking about
two people called William and Harry as well as more than one dog. In the second
sentence, however, the missing Oxford comma makes it sound as though the dogs’
names are William and Harry.
Law is very much like these examples. Two factual scenarios may seem virtually
identical to the untrained layperson. But the presence or absence of a single
seemingly minor variable (easily missed by laypersons) can result in completely
opposite legal outcomes. Lawyers are trained to notice these minute differences
and the legal significance they can have.
When I use the term "layperson", it is not meant to insult anyone or suggest
they are stupid. Not at all. It just means they aren't trained in legal analysis.
Doctors certainly aren't stupid. But they are as much a layperson as a plumber
when it comes to the law. The same way a lawyer is a layperson when it comes
to medicine or aeronautical engineering.
Thor
|
Classic troll-jitsu - ignore the substance of the matter by deflecting it into
a discussion on grammar, punctuation or semantics.
When I use the term "layperson" I mean someone not professionally qualified in
a field. You are not professionally qualified in the field of law. You are not
an attorney. You are a layperson - in the same way a doctor who retires and no
longer maintains his medical license becomes a layperson. He would not, ethically,
treat patients.
Likewise, a retired attorney who does not have a license, would not, ethically,
pretend to give a qualified legal opinion. He is a layperson, no matter how many
nifty grammatical exercises he copies and pastes from the internet.
But, again, you are avoiding the substance of my remarks. Why - in your informed,
but non-expert opinion - is Amazon allowed to place a cap on prices but Bricklink
would not be?
My lay opinion is that this would not lead to any legal issues. My lay opinion
is based on my first-hand knowledge of current, accepted business practices among
online marketplace venues like eBay and Amazon, where I have been doing business
for many years.
Your lay opinion is based on sorbates and (I think?) on a language game you found
on reddit or somewhere.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 09:11 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
| | Classic troll-jitsu - ignore the substance of the matter by deflecting it into
a discussion on grammar, punctuation or semantics.
|
Yo dude, why all the hostility and name-calling? Dial it back a bit.
The "substance of the matter" is your claim that BrickLink can legally mandate
prices ALL 10,000 competing sellers on BrickLink can charge for their items.
I and others have already addressed that erroneous claim several times. My above
post admittedly went off on a tangent by using an ANALOGY to explain why laypersons
not trained in the law are so often wrong in their opinions about the law. But
it was a tangent YOU fully participated in.
| | When I use the term "layperson" I mean someone not professionally qualified in
a field. You are not professionally qualified in the field of law. You are not
an attorney. You are a layperson - in the same way a doctor who retires and no
longer maintains his medical license becomes a layperson. He would not, ethically,
treat patients.
Likewise, a retired attorney who does not have a license, would not, ethically,
pretend to give a qualified legal opinion. He is a layperson, no matter how many
nifty grammatical exercises he copies and pastes from the internet.
|
Thank you for your OPINION. An opinion that apparently only applies to me but
not you. Somehow, despite my legal education, law degree and quarter century
of experience I am not "qualified" to express my opinion about things I actually
studied and practiced for many years simply because I retired a few years ago.
But you, who apparently has no legal training, degree or work experience in the
law, ARE somehow qualified to render an opinion on the legal issue of price-fixing.
Wonderful twist there! Let's just ignore your twisted redefinition of layperson
and simply say my education, experience and background make me immensely MORE
qualified to discuss the law than you.
| | But, again, you are avoiding the substance of my remarks. Why - in your informed,
but non-expert opinion - is Amazon allowed to place a cap on prices but Bricklink
would not be?
|
I don't buy or sell on Amazon. So I have not studied their lengthy terms
in detail. But a quick 10-minute review shows that this so-called Amazon price
cap you claim is not as simple as you make it out to be. Nor is it similar to
what has been proposed for BrickLink. It is much more complex. For example,
it applies only to a small percentage of the millions of items sold on Amazon
and is an opt-in feature offered to sellers in return for paying lower Amazon
fees while at the same time allowing sellers who don't opt in to charge whatever
prices they want and pay slightly more fees to Amazon. These and other differences
very likely explain why no one has challenged Amazon yet on these price caps.
As noted earlier, even slight differences in the fact can result in completely
opposite legal outcomes. Moreover, Amazon's price caps have not been found
legal. They haven't even been reviewed yet by any authority outside Amazon.
For decades, Ma Bell operated a monopoly on phone service in the USA. It took
decades for this monopoly to be deemed illegal under laws almost as old as the
monopoly itself.
| |
My lay opinion is that this would not lead to any legal issues. My lay opinion
is based on my first-hand knowledge of current, accepted business practices among
online marketplace venues like eBay and Amazon, where I have been doing business
for many years.
Your lay opinion is based on sorbates and (I think?) on a language game you found
on reddit or somewhere.
|
Yeah, that must be it. My opinion on this has absolutely nothing to do with my
legal education, law degree, quarter century of work experience as a business
lawyer, and actual representation of clients in price-fixing matters. Whereas
yours is based on merely observing someone else supposedly using price caps and
getting away with it thus far. In your world, stealing would apparently be legal
if the thief were not caught.
I can't compete against this "logic", or the notion that your complete lack
of legal training and experience somehow trumps my actual training and 25 years
of experience.
It is the same "logic" this person uses to call me a poor BL seller when I have
25 times more feedback than him, 99.74% of which is positive.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Made_In_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 11:48 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| explain this:
https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A301WJ6XCJ8KW0
listings price limits....
again, Price Fixing Laws are in place to PROTECT consumers.
As either a lay person or expert, you should know that there is the intention
of the law and the letter of the law. When arguments are made in court, especially
precedent setting cases, the intention of the law is often brought up to help
interpret the letter of the law.
Bricklink can most certainly do something a long the same lines.
They can also say that the BEHAVOIR of manipulating prices in order to drive
traffic to your store is prohibited. They don't have to say, you must price
at X, Y or Z but rather state the BEHAVOIR that consumers do not want is prohibited.
Using the amazon example, why do they set price limits? What is the purpose?
Who does it protect?
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 12:14 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | explain this:
https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A301WJ6XCJ8KW0
listings price limits....
again, Price Fixing Laws are in place to PROTECT consumers.
As either a lay person or expert, you should know that there is the intention
of the law and the letter of the law. When arguments are made in court, especially
precedent setting cases, the intention of the law is often brought up to help
interpret the letter of the law.
Bricklink can most certainly do something a long the same lines.
They can also say that the BEHAVOIR of manipulating prices in order to drive
traffic to your store is prohibited. They don't have to say, you must price
at X, Y or Z but rather state the BEHAVOIR that consumers do not want is prohibited.
Using the amazon example, why do they set price limits? What is the purpose?
Who does it protect?
|
Price-fixing laws protect more than just consumers. They protect competing sellers
as well and society at large by promoting competition and healthy commerce.
Judicially, the "intention" of a law is irrelevant and inadmissible of the letter
of the law is clear. Evidence about legislative intent only gets considered if
there is some genuine confusion about what the law says.
The law also makes no distinction between "behavior" and acts. Legally, they
are the same thing.
As for why Amazon has price limits on the sale of Kindle books, I suspect it
mainly has to do with making sure Amazon makes a fair profit on each sale after
paying payment processing fees. So this is more like retail B&M stores requiring
a minimum purchase for you to pay by credit card, or BrickLink shops having
a minimum order amount. Amazon and eBay also have vastly different business models
than BrickLink. Unlike BrickLink, Amazon and eBay don't have single sellers
where buyers can purchase 1000 different penny parts in 100 different lots. There
are likely other factual differences at play here. But since I don't buy
or sell on Amazon or eBay, I can't really say what those other distinguishing
facts might be.
And I will also remind you again that my objection to your suggestion is not
merely based on legal concerns. Like others who posted here, I simply don't
like the idea of BrickLink telling sellers what they should price things at or
punishing them for not having the "right" prices.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Made_In_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 12:25 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | |
And I will also remind you again that my objection to your suggestion is not
merely based on legal concerns. Like others who posted here, I simply don't
like the idea of BrickLink telling sellers what they should price things at or
punishing them for not having the "right" prices.
|
Technically, bricklink already dictates a "price window" I cannot price a part
less than $0.001 and I typed in a boatload of numbers and at some point the system
won't allow me to sell for that high of a price, whatever the max input is
for a price, there is a limit.
So is this illegal? Why can't I sell a part for $0.0001 or fifty bazillion
dollars?
If bricklink adopted a "listing policy" that states the behavior of pricing items
in a manner to divert traffic to your store that requires buyers to purchase
unwanted items is prohibited OR it could remove items bound in super lots from
wanted list searches.
Either one is not price fixing, it is setting standards of selling behavior.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | qwertyboy | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 12:42 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | | |
And I will also remind you again that my objection to your suggestion is not
merely based on legal concerns. Like others who posted here, I simply don't
like the idea of BrickLink telling sellers what they should price things at or
punishing them for not having the "right" prices.
|
Technically, bricklink already dictates a "price window" I cannot price a part
less than $0.001 and I typed in a boatload of numbers and at some point the system
won't allow me to sell for that high of a price, whatever the max input is
for a price, there is a limit.
So is this illegal? Why can't I sell a part for $0.0001 or fifty bazillion
dollars?
|
Those limits sound more like limits caused by the way information is stored in
the BL database. As a programmer you can either set limits, or rely on the defaults
provided by the database engine to refuse certain values. (And just so everyone
knows, I am a trained IT professional with 40+ years working at the keyboard
and 30+ years developing software.)
I will leave the question whether this makes the BL implementation illegal up
to the legal experts in the forum.
Niek.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | rikitikitaviguy | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 12:49 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| http://www.bricklink.com/store.asp?p=Olba&itemID=85545780
Is this an error or....maybe the person lists this just to 'brag' but
if it sells? Then he/she made a HUGE profit...
But I would guess it throws the PG out the window...but "illegal"?
LM
In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | | |
And I will also remind you again that my objection to your suggestion is not
merely based on legal concerns. Like others who posted here, I simply don't
like the idea of BrickLink telling sellers what they should price things at or
punishing them for not having the "right" prices.
|
Technically, bricklink already dictates a "price window" I cannot price a part
less than $0.001 and I typed in a boatload of numbers and at some point the system
won't allow me to sell for that high of a price, whatever the max input is
for a price, there is a limit.
So is this illegal? Why can't I sell a part for $0.0001 or fifty bazillion
dollars?
If bricklink adopted a "listing policy" that states the behavior of pricing items
in a manner to divert traffic to your store that requires buyers to purchase
unwanted items is prohibited OR it could remove items bound in super lots from
wanted list searches.
Either one is not price fixing, it is setting standards of selling behavior.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 14:07 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| It may be an error given other items have more sensible prices, or could be
intentional given rarity although is clearly absurd. There is the downside that
if they do things like this then they may put off some genuine buyers of other
sets they have if buyers feel the seller is not pricing correctly / being a joker.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 12:58 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| |
Technically, bricklink already dictates a "price window" I cannot price a part
less than $0.001 and I typed in a boatload of numbers and at some point the system
won't allow me to sell for that high of a price, whatever the max input is
for a price, there is a limit.
|
True. There are, indeed, practical limits to the number of digits you can put
in the price box when listing something for sale. On BrickLink, this ranges from
$0.0001 to $9,999,999,999.99.
| |
So is this illegal? Why can't I sell a part for $0.0001 or fifty bazillion
dollars?
|
No, because it is not intended to limit prices and its primary effect is not
to limit prices or restrain trade. There is simply a practical limit to how many
digits you can enter into any given box or machine. Legality does not require
giving members the means to price something to infinity or 50 digits out.
| |
If bricklink adopted a "listing policy" that states the behavior of pricing items
in a manner to divert traffic to your store that requires buyers to purchase
unwanted items is prohibited OR it could remove items bound in super lots from
wanted list searches.
|
No buyer is forced to buy anything they don't want. And ALL listings are
intended to divert traffic to that seller's store. If the listing is false
or a "bait and switch", there are already ways to deal with that.
As for removing super lots from wanted list searches, don't we already have
this? If not, giving buyers the option to exclude super lots from their search
results should not be a problem.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Made_In_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 13:01 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | |
No, because it is not intended to limit prices and its primary effect is not
to limit prices or restrain trade. There is simply a practical limit to how many
digits you can enter into any given box or machine. Legality does not require
giving members the means to price something to infinity or 50 digits out.
|
Primary effect is not to limit prices or restrain trade...
Thanks for using this language. Because what prevents putting in BEHAVOIR restrictions
that might do this, but again, it is not the primary reason to limit prices or
restrict trade?
Again, putting practical retractions on selling behavior.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 11:58 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Not sure which terms you're looking at, perhaps the ones for larger businesses.
The language in the terms for individual sellers really couldn't be simpler:
"Individual sellers may not list items at a price in excess of $10,000 (US Dollars).
Individual sellers approved to list in the Collectible Books category are not
subject to this limitation."
(I would link to it, but amazon sells Lego, of course, so not allowed. Google
will get you there.)
In other words - in lay terms, if you will - amazon caps prices at US$10,000
for all categories but one, for which a seller needs approval.
So, again, if this is price fixing, or is a restraint of trade, or is otherwise
illegal, there's some money to be made, here.
If, on the other hand, this is none of those things, then it is something BL
could consider.
You have given your informed opinion. It conflicts with actual practice at other
similar sites. That's a fact that is pretty clear without any special legal
training required.
If you are just concerned about who is "right" about this, take your beef to
amazon. I didn't come up with Amazon's policy, so it's not I who
am claiming to know more than you. I'm just pointing out that your theoretical
bluster on the legal issues here do not align with the real world, as is often
the case.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Made_In_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 12:11 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
| | Not sure which terms you're looking at, perhaps the ones for larger businesses.
The language in the terms for individual sellers really couldn't be simpler:
|
this was the price listing requirements for Kindle Direct Publishing,
hmm, amazon dictates the minimum and the maximum.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToddMyers | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 09:18 | | Subject: | (Cancelled) | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | (Cancelled) |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 09:46 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToddMyers writes:
| | You are quite a special snowflake, aren't you? Your twisted definition of
who is a "layperson" did give me a good laugh this morning, so thanks for that.
lol
|
LOL. You saw that too. For a minute there I thought it was just me imagining
someone with no legal experience pretending to be more qualified to give a legal
opinion than someone with 25 years of legal experience. Like one of those silly
nonsensical dreams you have and vaguely remember in your morning drowsiness.
Gee, I am so sorry some here take such offense and become so hostile when I explain
why my background gives me insight on a particular issue. 
If a medical issue should ever be discussed in the forum, I wonder if these same
people would also take offense and become so hostile if someone said they were
a doctor able to discuss the matter.
It's funny how commenting on my legal background always seems to ruffle the
feathers of the same few people who have been hostile and contentiously disagreeable
with me in the past.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | bb414973 | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 09:23 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
Dammit! Made me spit my drink out. Never heard that before...
Thing is, Thor is quick to dismiss any 'lay' opinion but is not afraid
of giving his own 'lay' opinion. He has made statements in the past about
EU consumer rights which were demonstrably wrong, and when challenged simply
responded with an essay about him being an international legal expert. So, in
summary, he's happy to discuss anything in 'lay' terms until and
unless he has nowhere else to run but his legal experience. I've seen him
use it many times in an attempt to stomp someone into submission. Not that it
ever seems to work, it usually just irks the other person into replying further,
which - in classic troll-jutsu(!) - is probably his aim.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 09:34 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, MarieA writes:
| | He has made statements in the past about
EU consumer rights which were demonstrably wrong, and when challenged simply
responded with an essay about him being an international legal expert.
|
Please provide examples of my past statements "about EU consumer rights which
were demonstrably wrong" and posts where I claimed to be "an international legal
expert." Or are you STILL upset I questioned YOUR qualifications to give legal
opinions about EU law?
Thor
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | bb414973 | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 10:18 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Please provide examples of my past statements "about EU consumer rights which
were demonstrably wrong" and posts where I claimed to be "an international legal
expert."
|
Oh please! Can I, please! You gave a lengthy speech about US consumer norms and
said they were almost identical to EU consumer law. Except you were wildly wrong,
never apologised or retracted your claims.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 11:00 | | Subject: | (Cancelled) | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | (Cancelled) |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | bb414973 | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 11:08 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | This is a classic example of how you distort and misrepresent what actually happened.
In this thread - http://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=200727 - you claimed
that it was unlawful discrimination for sellers to require IBAN payments over
PayPal payments.
|
Wait a minute. Without reading the thread again I remember what I said, and that
was it might amount to discrimination if it could be linked to the protected
characteristic of nationality. It is neither here nor there whether or not other
people agreed with me, in your own words they are 'lay' opinions. And
if you're allowed to give your weight to your unsubstantiated legal experience,
I too should be allowed to give weight to my unsubstantiated consumer law experience.
Or do you get to play by different rules because you're you?
My memory of that debate was that you equated US discrimination law with EU discrimination
law, and in particular stated that the protected characteristic of nationality
wasn't a thing. I showed you that, in the EU, it was. We then argued about
indirect discrimination, which is where the protected characteristic of nationality
might come into play. So far as I remember you never recanted your statement,
merely chose to bluster on about your legal experience. But you do it so often
I accept my memory may be incorrect. If so, I apologise.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 11:41 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, MarieA writes:
| | My memory of that debate was that you equated US discrimination law with EU discrimination
law, and in particular stated that the protected characteristic of nationality
wasn't a thing.
|
Wrong again. I expressly acknowledged that nationality was mentioned in the
UK statute you cited. See:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=966643
I simply disagreed with your claim that requiring IBAN payments over PayPal payments
was unlawful discrimination based on nationality.
| | I accept my memory may be incorrect. If so, I apologise.
|
Apology NOT accepted. Not when you continue to deliberately misrepresent things
and preface your farce of an apology with mocking derogatory ad hominem attacks.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Made_In_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 11:51 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | | Apology NOT accepted. Not when you continue to deliberately misrepresent things
and preface your farce of an apology with mocking derogatory ad hominem attacks.
|
I apologized to using a loud tone with my wife last night after operating a chain
saw for about an hour. I was almost screaming because of the ringing in my ears
but didn't realize it. She certainly did not accept my apology because she
could not relate to why I would talk louder after operating a chain saw for an
extended period of time (I was wearing ear muffs, ears were still ringing) she
saw it as a lame excuse.
anyway, it isn't needed to say you don't accept someone's apology,
it does nothing positive.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | bb414973 | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 11:57 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Wrong again. I expressly acknowledged that nationality was mentioned in the
UK statute you cited. See:
|
That was after I pointed it out ffs.
| | Apology NOT accepted. Not when you continue to deliberately misrepresent things
and preface your farce of an apology with mocking derogatory ad hominem attacks.
|
"Misrepresent" and "ad hominem" in the same sentence, that almost gave me a line
on the pink BINGO card. Thor, you are the KING of misrepresentation. Perhaps
by exposing me to your tactics you are unwittingly teaching me to become a master.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 11:00 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, MarieA writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Please provide examples of my past statements "about EU consumer rights which
were demonstrably wrong" and posts where I claimed to be "an international legal
expert."
|
Oh please! Can I, please! You gave a lengthy speech about US consumer norms and
said they were almost identical to EU consumer law. Except you were wildly wrong,
never apologised or retracted your claims.
|
This is a classic example of how you distort and misrepresent what actually happened.
In this thread - http://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=200727 - you claimed
that it was unlawful discrimination for sellers to require IBAN payments over
PayPal payments. I and pretty much everyone else disagreed with you. But when
I expressed disagreement, you attempted to dismiss me by saying I was an American
and, as such, I knew nothing about EU law. When I tried to explain that I had
some experience with discrimination and international law (not an "essay" - just
one or sentences - and no claim of being an "expert"), you became sarcastic,
mocking and condescending.
In any event, when pressed to support your claim that forcing buyers to pay via
IBAN instead of PayPal was unlawful discrimination, you cited a UK statute on
discrimination. I read that statute and commented that it was virtually identical
to US law and did not support your claim. I commented on THAT PARTICULAR STATUTE.
Contrary to your false exaggerated claim, I did NOT say that "US consumer norms
... were almost identical to EU consumer law". I commented on the specific statute
you cited and discrimination in general. And again, contrary to what you claim,
neither you or nor anyone else proved me "wildly wrong". In fact, EU posters
continued to disagree with you and agree with me. So much so that in that very
thread you backtracked and later said it was merely "questionable" whether requiring
IBAN over PayPal payments was unlawful discrimination.
I am sure you will want to argue this back and forth. But it has already been
done. If anyone is truly interested, I suggest they just reread this thread again
- http://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=200727 - to see what really happened.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Made_In_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 21:17 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| both of your suggestions deal with what is displayed in the price guide, but
does not address people manipulating the price guide to divert traffic to their
stores.
These items would come up on people's wanted lists when they are excluded
from the price guide.
if I list something that usually sells for a penny, but bind it to a WAY over
priced item, I can get a lot of people "in the door" and see other items in my
shop.
This should not be allowed, because it is manipulating the consumer into an action
they would not want to take.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | par016 | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 01:13 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | Voted no. As others have repeatedly mentioned, BrickLink should not be in the
business of policing, limiting, dictating, challenging or questioning prices,
or punishing sellers for their prices. Apart from the obvious legal constraints,
there is the arbitrary subjective element of defining what is an "absurd" price.
There are better ways to handle this so-called "problem" that don't involve
legal risks or arbitrariness:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483330
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=483378
Thor
|
Thor has it exactly right. If BrickLink somehow gets involved in what prices
a store can list their parts at then THAT is Price Manipulation. Who is
to say what a fair price is or isn't? It's not BrickLink, it's the
seller and more importantly the buyer when they decide to buy it or not.
How would BrickLink even set their price limits or determine what is "too high"
a price? Would they use the price guide? Maybe the current listing prices?
That wouldn't make sense because that would akin to circular reasoning -
using the price guide to set the price guide. Maybe they would use the 6 month
sold average? First off that shouldn't be the end all, because parts retire
or change demand quickly in the LEGO world. That often changes their value.
And if the sold value is all important then why don't sellers just use that?
I found a 3937 in brown the other day. There is absolutely no price guide data
on this part and no catalog information on it at all (other than the fact that
it is on 21 wanted lists)
So what would BrickLink's so called "fair price" be for this part? Nobody
has one listed, and I may think that it is incredibly rare and worth $1000.
What right does BrickLink have to tell me that is too expensive? It's up
to the buyers to determine what is fair. And when it most likely doesn't
sell at my $1000 price point, it will be up to me to lower my price until a buyer
deems my price acceptable or risk never selling it.
As is often posted on the forum, the price guide is just a guide --
the word "guide" is literally part of the name. Use it as such.
-Pete
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | greyshadow | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 16:54 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| As I buyer, I see it as a problem as well. When a piece typically priced at
and as such shouldn't be included in the average price calculation.
One other solution would be to have BL list both the mean average price and the
median or mode average price - helps control outlier pricing.
In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | There was a thread earlier in the week about crazy prices on parts and how to
report them.
While there is no way to report things like this (because it isn't an actual
offense), I am suggesting that something is done about price guide manipulation.
My little experiment on taking one piece and setting it to an astronomically
high price and letting the messages flow in was quite helpful to gain insight
on ways that this ACTUALLY takes a toll on buyers and sellers.
Several things that were pointed out:
It only changes the ASKING price, not the price that this has actually sold for.
It really skews part out values (on asking price)
It causes more work for sellers who use the asking price to determine prices
for their actual part outs
There were many other issues pointed out, but they all had to do with ASKING
price, not SOLD price, which begs the question, what if some would have bought
this part from me and toyed around and stretched out the NPB (of course if they
paid I would go retire ) I would have a headache from the fees bill on May
1.
That being said, nothing good comes out of such listings. They are either mistakes
that cause other headaches, intentional for some other reason to not sell that
part at that price.
So, my suggestion is that we ask bricklink to use clause 9 of the TOS for people
that are abusing the price catalog for any reason other than to legitimately
sell the listed item.
"9. Breach:
We reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete all of your data and
deny you access to any or all of your data stored at BrickLink.com if you breach
this Agreement or if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information
you provide to us. We also reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete
all of your data and deny you access to any or all of the site's features
at any time for any reason without prior notice."
This includes the people that have absurd prices to attract people to their store
to see custom items and even using the superlot function of listing popular minifigs
in large batches to draw attention to this.
Yes, I was guilty of using the superlot feature to draw people to my store, looking
back on this, I do see it as wrong.
I also apologize for listing a 2x4 dbg plate for just under $2,000,000.00 this
weekend.
Thanks,
Ken
|
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | ScootersBricks | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 20:37 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Voted no as such a practice may be illegal under US anti-trust and price fixing
laws.
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | jamesuniverse | | Posted: | Apr 10, 2016 21:19 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | There was a thread earlier in the week about crazy prices on parts and how to
report them.
While there is no way to report things like this (because it isn't an actual
offense), I am suggesting that something is done about price guide manipulation.
My little experiment on taking one piece and setting it to an astronomically
high price and letting the messages flow in was quite helpful to gain insight
on ways that this ACTUALLY takes a toll on buyers and sellers.
Several things that were pointed out:
It only changes the ASKING price, not the price that this has actually sold for.
It really skews part out values (on asking price)
It causes more work for sellers who use the asking price to determine prices
for their actual part outs
There were many other issues pointed out, but they all had to do with ASKING
price, not SOLD price, which begs the question, what if some would have bought
this part from me and toyed around and stretched out the NPB (of course if they
paid I would go retire ) I would have a headache from the fees bill on May
1.
That being said, nothing good comes out of such listings. They are either mistakes
that cause other headaches, intentional for some other reason to not sell that
part at that price.
So, my suggestion is that we ask bricklink to use clause 9 of the TOS for people
that are abusing the price catalog for any reason other than to legitimately
sell the listed item.
"9. Breach:
We reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete all of your data and
deny you access to any or all of your data stored at BrickLink.com if you breach
this Agreement or if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information
you provide to us. We also reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete
all of your data and deny you access to any or all of the site's features
at any time for any reason without prior notice."
This includes the people that have absurd prices to attract people to their store
to see custom items and even using the superlot function of listing popular minifigs
in large batches to draw attention to this.
Yes, I was guilty of using the superlot feature to draw people to my store, looking
back on this, I do see it as wrong.
I also apologize for listing a 2x4 dbg plate for just under $2,000,000.00 this
weekend.
Thanks,
Ken
|
This is a major issue of sellers relying on the BrickLink Price Guide as their
pricing source. What prevents a random person/kid from listing a dozens of common
parts for $1,000,000 each and creating other account to buy them? Never pays
fees, 1000s of sellers are doomed for months, no one gets punished besides the
"junk" account.
Look. BrickLink is great, but the fact that so many sellers rely on a platform
they do not control is extremely dangerous.
~JU
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | DallasBricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 10:13 | | Subject: | The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 68 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| All of this goes away if Bricklink will either replace the average with the median
price or Add the median price as a part out value option.
David
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 10:34 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, DallasBricks writes:
| | All of this goes away if Bricklink will either replace the average with the median
price or Add the median price as a part out value option.
David
|
Median of what though? If someone wants to skew the data, they can just add 1000*
listings for a single part at $5M*. *numbers depend on how many "real" listings
/ parts are currently available. Then people would also want the median with
all the outliers taken away.
Or they could start publishing skewness or kurtosis measures for those that
want them. Or better still publish the raw data so that anyone can determine
whatever they like, eliminating whichever data they like. Which they already
do.
If they were going to improve the means that are displayed, especially for part
outs, the one thing that would be useful in my opinion is the six month sale
price for a specific country.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Made_In_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 11:36 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, DallasBricks writes:
| | All of this goes away if Bricklink will either replace the average with the median
price or Add the median price as a part out value option.
David
|
Again, this is only half the issue, no one is addressing the fact that sellers
can manipulate this data to drive traffic (mostly unwanted) to their stores,
this is with Super Lot binding and also making absurd prices to drive traffic
to stores.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 11:46 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | In Suggestions, DallasBricks writes:
| | All of this goes away if Bricklink will either replace the average with the median
price or Add the median price as a part out value option.
David
|
Again, this is only half the issue, no one is addressing the fact that sellers
can manipulate this data to drive traffic (mostly unwanted) to their stores,
this is with Super Lot binding and also making absurd prices to drive traffic
to stores.
|
I have an easy solution to this. Whenever I see a seller manipulating the super
lot feature with absurd low and high prices, I don't ask BrickLink to do
anything about it. Instead, I simply least favorite them and shop elsewhere.
And if this manipulation becomes too much, I just exclude all superlots from
showing in my search results.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Made_In_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 11:56 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | In Suggestions, DallasBricks writes:
| | All of this goes away if Bricklink will either replace the average with the median
price or Add the median price as a part out value option.
David
|
Again, this is only half the issue, no one is addressing the fact that sellers
can manipulate this data to drive traffic (mostly unwanted) to their stores,
this is with Super Lot binding and also making absurd prices to drive traffic
to stores.
|
I have an easy solution to this. Whenever I see a seller manipulating the super
lot feature with absurd low and high prices, I don't ask BrickLink to do
anything about it. Instead, I simply least favorite them and shop elsewhere.
And if this manipulation becomes too much, I just exclude all superlots from
showing in my search results.
Thor
|
yes, but you and I are experienced buyers/sellers, but there are tons of people
that are not
a lot of consumer protection laws are put in place to protect the lowest common
denominator...
Since you are not a seller here anymore, the issue of diverting buyers to sellers
they are not going to buy from isn't something that you have standing in
anymore. But for other sellers, I don't want new and green buyers being
diverted to stores they have no intention on buying from.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 14:02 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| It is if he is a buyer.
Anyway, high prices don't get new buyers confused and looking in stores where
they wouldn't buy.
Low prices of superlots do, and I remember when I first saw this. I backed out
of the store and looked at next cheapest, saw the same thing and looked up what
a superlot was. Then excluded all superlots.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | graphite37 | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 11:54 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | In Suggestions, DallasBricks writes:
| | All of this goes away if Bricklink will either replace the average with the median
price or Add the median price as a part out value option.
David
|
Again, this is only half the issue, no one is addressing the fact that sellers
can manipulate this data to drive traffic (mostly unwanted) to their stores,
this is with Super Lot binding and also making absurd prices to drive traffic
to stores.
|
They could change it so that you set the total price for the superlot and the
prices of the individual items are automatically set to a prorated value based
on the average prices of the items in the lot.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Made_In_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 12:16 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, graphite37 writes:
| | In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | In Suggestions, DallasBricks writes:
| | All of this goes away if Bricklink will either replace the average with the median
price or Add the median price as a part out value option.
David
|
Again, this is only half the issue, no one is addressing the fact that sellers
can manipulate this data to drive traffic (mostly unwanted) to their stores,
this is with Super Lot binding and also making absurd prices to drive traffic
to stores.
|
They could change it so that you set the total price for the superlot and the
prices of the individual items are automatically set to a prorated value based
on the average prices of the items in the lot.
|
again this formula could be manipulated by adding extra crud lots to the super
lot. but it is an idea in the right direction.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 14:09 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | In Suggestions, graphite37 writes:
| | In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | In Suggestions, DallasBricks writes:
| | All of this goes away if Bricklink will either replace the average with the median
price or Add the median price as a part out value option.
David
|
Again, this is only half the issue, no one is addressing the fact that sellers
can manipulate this data to drive traffic (mostly unwanted) to their stores,
this is with Super Lot binding and also making absurd prices to drive traffic
to stores.
|
They could change it so that you set the total price for the superlot and the
prices of the individual items are automatically set to a prorated value based
on the average prices of the items in the lot.
|
again this formula could be manipulated by adding extra crud lots to the super
lot. but it is an idea in the right direction.
|
I think the most useful information for both buyers and sellers would be neither
the mean nor the median but the mode - the most common price. That's really
what people want to know; what is the price most shops are selling the item for?
Both the median and the mean can be skewed by outliers, but the mode is unaffected
by the odd very low or very high listing.
As an example, look at the black 3001 brick. The average list price new (the
mean) is $0.19. The median is $0.18. The mode is $0.17. And the actual average
selling price is $0.17.
It's a similar story for the used ones - Mean list price is $0.13, mode is
$0.10, average sale price is $0.10.
Outliers are easy to spot if you go to the full price guide, but if you want
to sum things up in one number, the mode gets closest to the information people
really want. If you want to charge the "going rate" you can charge the mode.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 14:18 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| That is not so good for a multi currency site though, where prices can be slightly
different due to rounding and people pricing slightly differently are not pricing
the same. If someone is selling at 19.43c and someone else at 18c and 20c and
someone else at 20.2c, then two people sell at $8, do buyers want to be told
$8 is the mode?
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 15:33 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | That is not so good for a multi currency site though, where prices can be slightly
different due to rounding and people pricing slightly differently are not pricing
the same. If someone is selling at 19.43c and someone else at 18c and 20c and
someone else at 20.2c, then two people sell at $8, do buyers want to be told
$8 is the mode?
|
I don't know if there's a setting to change this, but the default setting
in the price guide rounds to two decimal places, so that would smooth things
out, especially for parts under 1 unit of currency. For more expensive items,
like sets, a range could be defined. This is just simple math, something computers
are very good at doing quickly.
Your example is very small, and it's the case with any method that a small
number of data points are going to give less certain results. There are some
parts and sets with only a few listed, but for most items the mode will not be
skewed.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | paulvdb | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 16:13 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | That is not so good for a multi currency site though, where prices can be slightly
different due to rounding and people pricing slightly differently are not pricing
the same. If someone is selling at 19.43c and someone else at 18c and 20c and
someone else at 20.2c, then two people sell at $8, do buyers want to be told
$8 is the mode?
|
I don't know if there's a setting to change this, but the default setting
in the price guide rounds to two decimal places, so that would smooth things
out, especially for parts under 1 unit of currency. For more expensive items,
like sets, a range could be defined. This is just simple math, something computers
are very good at doing quickly.
Your example is very small, and it's the case with any method that a small
number of data points are going to give less certain results. There are some
parts and sets with only a few listed, but for most items the mode will not be
skewed.
|
To show price guide rounded to more decimals, go to http://www.bricklink.com/priceGuideSettings.asp?viewFrom=P
and you'll see a drop-down box to round prices to 2, 3 or 4 decimals in the
price guide.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 16:28 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| How are you going to range the data when all data is varying by 1c, then someone
lists a $1m price?
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | FigBits | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 16:40 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | How are you going to range the data when all data is varying by 1c, then someone
lists a $1m price?
|
Also, the seller could just list 100 lots at $1000 each to affect the mode.
--
Marc.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 16:49 | | Subject: | Re: The simple solution is "give us the median Price" | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | How are you going to range the data when all data is varying by 1c, then someone
lists a $1m price?
|
No matter what method is used, you can dream up some data set where it would
not work as expected. But the pool of BL sellers is large enough that for the
vast majority of parts you can obtain an accurate mode. Then you can define a
range on either side of it to allow for variations from currency conversions,
rounding, etc.
Yes, it could still be gamed, by the method Marc mentions, for example, but it
would take more effort than it currently takes to shift the mean.
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | bb200521 | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 10:45 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:
| | There was a thread earlier in the week about crazy prices on parts and how to
report them.
While there is no way to report things like this (because it isn't an actual
offense), I am suggesting that something is done about price guide manipulation.
My little experiment on taking one piece and setting it to an astronomically
high price and letting the messages flow in was quite helpful to gain insight
on ways that this ACTUALLY takes a toll on buyers and sellers.
Several things that were pointed out:
It only changes the ASKING price, not the price that this has actually sold for.
It really skews part out values (on asking price)
It causes more work for sellers who use the asking price to determine prices
for their actual part outs
There were many other issues pointed out, but they all had to do with ASKING
price, not SOLD price, which begs the question, what if some would have bought
this part from me and toyed around and stretched out the NPB (of course if they
paid I would go retire ) I would have a headache from the fees bill on May
1.
That being said, nothing good comes out of such listings. They are either mistakes
that cause other headaches, intentional for some other reason to not sell that
part at that price.
So, my suggestion is that we ask bricklink to use clause 9 of the TOS for people
that are abusing the price catalog for any reason other than to legitimately
sell the listed item.
"9. Breach:
We reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete all of your data and
deny you access to any or all of your data stored at BrickLink.com if you breach
this Agreement or if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information
you provide to us. We also reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete
all of your data and deny you access to any or all of the site's features
at any time for any reason without prior notice."
This includes the people that have absurd prices to attract people to their store
to see custom items and even using the superlot function of listing popular minifigs
in large batches to draw attention to this.
Yes, I was guilty of using the superlot feature to draw people to my store, looking
back on this, I do see it as wrong.
I also apologize for listing a 2x4 dbg plate for just under $2,000,000.00 this
weekend.
Thanks,
Ken
|
Voted NO. I don't feel it make sense to set price depending of other's
expectations (asked price) which rely on believes, when the will to pay is more
obvious in past sale (real data)... Furthermore, since for many item average
price it is sold is cheaper than "expected" average, if setting price at "asked"
average, you may never sell the item since others may keep adding inventory at
lowest price and sell first (keeping the average sold steady).
The exceptions are almost new items (or not rare anymore) which prices tend to
decrease.over time.
Hence working on avoiding lost average to be "manipulated" (like incomplete items
sold as complete) could be more relevant than this "asked" average question IMO
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | LordSkylark | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2016 12:18 | | Subject: | Re: Price Manipulating - What Prevention? | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I think it would be much better, if there was an option to flag any entry which
a particular user did not want to be factored into any sort of price calculation
for that user alone.
Andrew
|
|
|
|
|
USA, Idaho
Netherlands, Overijssel
Canada, Ontario
United Kingdom, England
Belgium, Flemish Brabant
France, Grand Est
