Friday, October 14, 2005

"DENIED!" - Apples to oranges???

My previous post stated that I made an offer to the seller's in response to the "dare to find it cheaper." And I now have a response from the seller -- Denied. The seller replies with the following:
They do not incurr ebay fees therefore we cannot compare apples to oranges.
Let me be frank and bold to say... bullshit, complete and utter bullshit. The response is less than professional when I got the email. And I am furious as to the person's tone and reasoning in declining my offer.

The auction is completely misleading those like me into believing that I won't be able to find a better deal than what the guy is offering. I have met the dare. And there was nothing to indicate anything that has to be specific regarding to the rules of the dare. It was just a simple and straightforward dare. Being the price-concious buyer that I am, I went ahead and scoured the 'net for a deal that is better. And I found one... at ZipZoomFly.

The offer was submitted with an URL to indicate proof that I have met the dare. However, I only recently got the response that my offer was declined and I am outraged at the reasoning behind it. There was absolutely nothing on the auction listing that indicates there has to be a rule or a limit to that dare. I have rightfully met that dare and was declined wrongfully so.

Now, when you put up an open call/dare for anyone to find an item for less, you are aiming that nobody will ever meet it. As such, you are aiming that nobody will put you at a loss (in $$$). That's the point of a dare... to bolster your superiority of something because you believe nobody can beat you in that something. If no rules are set, anything goes. It's a free-for-all. Dirty tactics will and can be then used.

Apples and oranges are indeed two completely different things. However, nobody said that it has to be restricted to a certain place or to a certain limit. It's wrong to tell me that they're different. It's the same item. And the seller is only selling it through a medium. The seller would then have lost out on two fronts -- not being true to their words and me being a customer. A seller's goal is not to simply profit but to garner as many customers as possible. The more customers you have, the more profits you make. But like any business, there's always a loss somewhere. Sometimes a customer found a typographical error. Without any kind of terms to say that typographical errors cannot be honored, the customer has every right to purchase an item for the misprinted price, despite that it is higher or lower.

I'm truly disappointed in how this turns out. If this is how the seller operates, then they are operating in a deceptive manner. I am frustrated by this and it's only going to reinforce the notion that some items are better off getting from reputable e-tailers.

No comments: