[Parallax]

I see it this way; if he had asked you what it was worth, or what you would give him for it and you offered $20.00 you could, arguably, have a reason to feel guilty. I say arguably because in the internet age he could easily have researched the value of the lens. With that premise in mind, combined with the fact that he made you the offer, you have no reason to feel guilty.

[EarlVonTapia]

One of the many great things about this forum. A really great group of people!

Definitely. I'm very used to Craigslist "manners" (basically very impersonal and straight to business). Dealing within a community is refreshing.

[MSM]

I am probably in the minority here. My gut would tell me that if I felt guilty it was probably wrong. That may just be me. I would add a few points at the high likelihood of inflaming some. But, I am okay with that. I was raised to do the right thing and stand up for what you believe in. I don't always get things right. But, I don't use that as an excuse to willfully choose to do something wrong. Willfully taking advantage of someone is always wrong. No amount of justification will change that fact. Sorry. Still wrong.

1. How do you know that the seller didn't do his/her internet research? That's a big assumption given that most of the replies hinge on it being the seller's 'fault' for being ignorant. Consider for a moment how many Pentaxians here have confused the 50 mm 1:1.2 and 50 mm 1:2. (At least one poster here admitted to such). This happens all the time to people that should know but still make a mistake. Perhaps the seller did a quick search and saw that the 50/2 were not that rare and $20 was ok to not have to hassle with Craigslist or eBay, etc.

2. How would you feel if you found out that the seller was an 85 yo widow selling off stuff around the house so she can buy prescription medications or food or rent? I would feel awful! What if the seller was your niece raising money for college? Would you not be pissed and think that she was taken advantage of? Should it matter? Shouldn't we treat everyone fairly?

3. Lastly, I find it somewhat hypocritical that having been a member of PF since 2007, I have seen so many posts/threads complaining about misleading eBay/craigslist listings. Especially common now include asking outlandish prices for common lenses. This all done to in hopes catch someone who hasn't done his/her 'internet research.' We get worked up that these people are cheats and shameful. By the logic in this thread, we should be applauding them and encouraging them. If a buyer is too ignorant to do his/her 'research', too bad...screw 'em. It's two sides of the same coin.

[Kerrowdown]

oh yes it does!

+1 just because I can, quite right.

[EJMzagsfan]

I am probably in the minority here. My gut would tell me that if I felt guilty it was probably wrong.

I would tend to agree to this.... hence the post, but nobody's perfect. I try to live a moral and honest life, but sometime my conscience takes some dings. Lately that has been when I fired a person who I knew deserved it, so I guess you could say your conscience isn't always realistic lets say. You can what if it all you want no real telling the guys circumstance unless I had dug a little deeper,( I didn't obviously). I don't think people were knocking the guys door down to buy it in the first place, he had the post up for about two weeks. He "could have" gave up and donated the thing to goodwill or something if we are playing that game. He said he had some other things he might contact me about, so I think I might make an attempt at amendment. I think I might sounds convincing though right?

[EJMzagsfan]

I shot all day today though and thoroughly enjoyed it without a thought otherwise. Missed the focus again on this one, should have stopped down a bit more.

[bdery]

if he had asked you what it was worth, or what you would give him for it and you offered $20.00 you could, arguably, have a reason to feel guilty.

I agree. Different (hypothetical) situation.

But, I don't use that as an excuse to willfully choose to do something wrong. Willfully taking advantage of someone is always wrong.

Taking advantage is wrong. Accepting a requested price is not taking advantage.

Let's say you've decided to purchase an item for 1000$. You go to the store and the salesman tells you there is an instant rebate of 30%! You were willing to pay more but got a better deal. Is that wrong?

2. How would you feel if you found out that the seller was an 85 yo widow selling off stuff around the house so she can buy prescription medications or food or rent? I would feel awful! What if the seller was your niece raising money for college? Would you not be pissed and think that she was taken advantage of? Should it matter? Shouldn't we treat everyone fairly?

You're stretching it. You're implying accepting the lower price will prevent a nice girl from going to college. In my humble opinion, you're justifying the fact that your gut tells you its wrong, just like you're saying others are justifying their opinion that it's wrong to accept the asked price.

Especially common now include asking outlandish prices for common lenses. This all done to in hopes catch someone who hasn't done his/her 'internet research.' We get worked up that these people are cheats and shameful.

I don't get worked up, but I do laugh a bit.

The principal point of disagreement spins around the fact that the seller fixed the price himself. I think it boils down to this : the seller is happy. you can't know the reasons why he set that price. You shouldn't presume to decide that he didn't know what he was doing and that he was "cheated". It's arrogant, sorry. All you know is that someone was happy to sell something, somebody happy to buy it, and that the asked price is lower than other prices for similar items. End of story.

[DeadJohn]

The OP took advantage of an opportunity but did not take advantage of the seller. He bought something for the listed price, and it wasn't a clerical error like an extra digit missing from a price tag. The seller wanted $20 and received it.

In Utopia, maybe the OP would inform the seller to relist the item for more, and the seller would pay the OP a consulting fee for his time and knowledge. That's impractical in the real world where a dishonest buyer could make a false claim as to a product's price, extract that consulting fee, and leave the seller hanging.

[Diggoar]

I wish I had that kind of luck some time! I bought the K Version for plenty of money! But it´s a great lens anyhow!

[MSM]

Taking advantage is wrong. Accepting a requested price is not taking advantage.

Let's say you've decided to purchase an item for 1000$. You go to the store and the salesman tells you there is an instant rebate of 30%! You were willing to pay more but got a better deal. Is that wrong?
The problem with this is that it is in no way analogous. The salesman knows the value and cost basis of the item. He has made conscience decision to lower the price for other gains such as clearing old inventory



You're stretching it. You're implying accepting the lower price will prevent a nice girl from going to college. In my humble opinion, you're justifying the fact that your gut tells you its wrong, just like you're saying others are justifying their opinion that it's wrong to accept the asked price.
Not really a stretch. I am just saying that many have made assumptions about the seller to justify their point. I am simply giving a countpoint. Such as my example of mistaken a 1.2 for a 2.0 while doing a internet search.



I don't get worked up, but I do laugh a bit.

case in point

... You shouldn't presume to decide that he didn't know what he was doing and that he was "cheated". It's arrogant, sorry.....
In doing so, you are presuming for the sake of your conscience that he knew what he was doing and that he consciencely made the decision to sell for at least 20x less than market value. Arrogant? One last example: If you saw an old woman crossing a busy intersection with a cane and grocery bags and I went out to help her cross, would you think I was being arrogant? With your logic, I must be because a presumed she was incapable of crossing the street unaided. Presuming is not always arrogant.

just some thoughts.

[Parallax]

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

[MSM]

I would tend to agree to this.... hence the post, but nobody's perfect. I try to live a moral and honest life, but sometime my conscience takes some dings. Lately that has been when I fired a person who I knew deserved it, so I guess you could say your conscience isn't always realistic lets say. You can what if it all you want no real telling the guys circumstance unless I had dug a little deeper,( I didn't obviously). I don't think people were knocking the guys door down to buy it in the first place, he had the post up for about two weeks. He "could have" gave up and donated the thing to goodwill or something if we are playing that game. He said he had some other things he might contact me about, so I think I might make an attempt at amendment. I think I might sounds convincing though right?

Well stated. I don't doubt you are an honest person. The fact that you examined you conscience tells me that. Kudos to you. I am certainly not perfect- far from it. My apologies if my post implies otherwise.

[MSM]

Angry Old Lady Crossing The Road! Extreme Funny! - YouTube

Jim, that is too funny!

[Heie]

I'm sorry, but I am with Doc here. There is a very significant difference between a retailer and an individual. I am just like everyone in that I try to find deals too. But 95% off the asking price because the seller is ignorant? That is akin to someone having a priceless treasure - i.e. a painting from Van Gogh that was kept hidden in their basement and they just found it when cleaning - and asking $5 for it. What makes this worse, is the justification. "I like to live a moral life, but it sometimes takes some dings." That is not what this was - this was a case of laziness, greed, and frankly a lack of consideration for the opposite party. You actively realized the situation and despite your gut telling you what you should do, you instead chose the easier wrong over the harder right. There's a Golden Rule for a reason - were you the seller, would you have wanted to know what the lens was worth? I am 100% confident that you did not do unto another what you would have wanted done unto you.

I don't mean this in a condescending way, however the "OK, I feel much better now" is utterly disheartening. It's under a guise, and one apparently reinforced by those who've shared the hypothetical mimicing were they in your shoes. But it's theft nonetheless as I see it.

What's done is done and there is no way to undo it (should you accept that there is something needing undoing) except if you still had his contact information and then handed him $500 with a heartfelt apology stating that you took advantage of his naivete but wanted to set things right.

There's a reason you posted this here and in the manner and tone that you did.

There are some things worth more than money...

-Heie

[MSM]

I'm sorry, but I am with Doc here. There is a very significant difference between a retailer and an individual. I am just like everyone in that I try to find deals too. But 95% off the asking price because the seller is ignorant? That is akin to someone having a priceless treasure - i.e. a painting from Van Gogh that was kept hidden in their basement and they just found it when cleaning - and asking $5 for it. What makes this worse, is the justification. "I like to live a moral life, but it sometimes takes some dings." That is not what this was - this was a case of laziness, greed, and frankly a lack of consideration for the opposite party. You actively realized the situation and despite your gut telling you what you should do, you instead chose the easier wrong over the harder right. There's a Golden Rule for a reason - were you the seller, would you have wanted to know what the lens was worth? I am 100% confident that you did not do unto another what you would have wanted done unto you.

I don't mean this in a condescending way, however the "OK, I feel much better now" is utterly disheartening. It's under a guise, and one apparently reinforced by those who've shared the hypothetical mimicing were they in your shoes. But it's theft nonetheless as I see it.

What's done is done and there is no way to undo it (should you accept that there is something needing undoing) except if you still had his contact information and then handed him $500 with a heartfelt apology stating that you took advantage of his naivete but wanted to set things right.

There's a reason you posted this here and in the manner and tone that you did.



There are some things worth more than money...

-Heie

+1 Wow no mincing of words. More direct than my post (see #55). I was honestly disheartened to see so few people from this great forum stand up for what is right. Thanks and thanks for your service for our country.