spridgets
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: E-bay

To: lists@woozy.com, b-evans@ix.netcom.com, type79@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: E-bay
From: Lancer7676@aol.com
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 07:21:27 EST
Cc: stefanr@bealenet.com, spridgets@autox.team.net
Reply-to: Lancer7676@aol.com
Sender: owner-spridgets@autox.team.net
Methinks this discussion is getting far out of hand.  Much ado about nothing, 
as Shakespeare would have said.  For my part, I will continue to treat E-Bay 
as a face to face auction--If I have bid on an item that I don't really need, 
but just can apply someday, then look across the crowd to see a friend 
bidding on the same item, I will not bid any longer unless they obviously 
drop out of the bidding and it is still below the maximum I have set for that 
item.  If I NEED the item, I will stay with it to that maximum.  Lawyer types 
can label that unethical, cartel, collusion, conspiracy, whatever. . .that is 
life. . .it's the way business in this country is done on a daily basis.

If one wants to ride a white horse, a crusade against quantity discounts 
would be a more apt target whereby a massive Wal-Mart type can buy a hammer 
for a fraction of what a mom and pop corner hardware store can buy it for, 
then proceed to drive Mom and Pop out of business.  With no intention of 
starting a new thread (no comment), Mom and Pop should be able to buy the 
hammer at the same price Wal-Mart gets it for whether they buy one or a 
hundred million, then let them compete on service.  THAT is conspiracy, 
collusion, and all those other nasty lawyer-oriented words.

So how bout we agree to disagree on that topic and go back to trying to 
figure out where that damned electrical short is?????  Oh, I am sorry I 
revealed my E-Bay name to everyone (Lancer7676)--I know you'da never figured 
it out!   ;^)

---David C.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>