There’s a bike I keep seeing for sale that mentions ‘downhill’ in the description without specifically saying that it’s a downhill bike but I can see that someone less knowledgeable might not realise the distinction.

Is it ok to mention that it’s clearly not a DH bike (arguably it’s barely capable of XC 🙂 ) or is that spoiling? for me, that’s the kind of thing I take issue with.

the PRST-4 clubber?

I’ve bitten my tongue on that one.

welll

I’m simply disagreeing. I don’t agree that posts in the classifieds forums are different to posts in the other forums, as Mark does. I do see this as a community, and as such the kind of place where we help other people by warning them of dangers and pointing out bargains and things of interest.

I shall be considering whether to cancel the subscription I’ve had running for ten years. I, like many others, fail to see how the new rule benefits anyone other than the sellers, and Mark’s posts have in no way helped me understand

and Mark’s posts have in no way helped me understand

Really? They haven’t helped you understand his logic behind the decision at all? He’s broken it down quite well to give an indication as to how he came to that decision and why he believes it is fair.

Apparently, those in favour of the new rule outweigh those against “by an order of magnitude”© Mark

As I said by way of example on the thread in the classifieds, you are free to advise Tesco that their beans are more expensive than ASDA’s but not by sticking a big poster on their front door for everyone to see.

Agreed.

Lynching a seller for no reason other than to try and obstruct their sale is wrong. If you are trying to negotiate a better price on your own behalf, that is a different matter altogether and is simple negotiation.

In summary, to quote my nan, “mind your own business”. If you’re not interested in the purchase, stay out of the thread.

he’s broken down a lot, I still down’t see how it can be a good thing for anyone other than the seller. still, as duidh points out, I’m in a minority so that;s fine

@wwaswas – no comment…

That’s a carp comparison with tesco and baked beans!! Tesco own their shop, pay the cost of running and maintaining the buying environment, so yes it would be entirely unreasonable to put a poster up on their front door.

Sellers on STW use a free service in the public domain. If individuals want to charge their own prices without feedback then maybe they should set up and run their own classifieds site (in the same way as Tesco run their own shops…)!!

And as for profiteering, I’d claim someone is profiteering if they buy an item, have x months of use from it, and then try and sell it for similar to what they paid. Depreciation and wear and tear have a “cost” so it’s not as simple as “I bought it for £50 so now I can sell it for £49”.

I think STW towers should stop being so bloody petty and concentrate more on the numerous real rip-offs and scams in the classifieds.

I think mark is right that on pricing it is nobodies business but the seller and potential buyers. But I do think members should be able to point out when something is clearly not as it should be in an ad. As above, someone describing a XC frame as a downhill frame or someone stating that certain cranks are compatible with certain bottom brackets when they are not etc.

It just seems to be this simple- the new rules are pro-seller, anti-buyer. Certain sellers think this is great, for some mysterious reason. Buyers can’t possibly gain from it and can potentially lose out. Decent sellers had nothing to fear from reasonable criticism in the first place. (and fwiw, I sell as much as I buy)

There’s a case for some restriction on thread spoiling, frinstance I’ve seen (on another forum) “Bike for sale”, with a page of responses critiquing the spelling, slagging off the bike, etc. That’s not cool. But then on here the other day we had a light for sale, meanwhile in the main forum we had a PSA showing where you could get the same light, brand new with warranty, for less. That’s not cool either.

What happened to the 7 page thread in the For Sale section on exactly this topic? Did the Truth Police get it?

I’m also one of the tiny minority that thinks the new rule is shit for everyone except dodgy sellers.

it just got de-stickied, and being in the ad forum it’s dropped right down

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/ad-spoiling-new-rule-dont-do-it-its-very-annoying

I’m in the minority aswell.

Anyone know where I can get a VW transporter that will TURN HEADS ?

News just in. We have just received our first classified donation in 3 months. It is for £5. Glad to see someone felt we were worth their money.

PS. Just got another fiver.

Careful Scruff – you’ll get a warning for trolling(allegedly)

PS. Just got another fiver.

*Thanks for your order
Your payment of £5.00 GBP is complete.

You’re now going back to Gofar Enterprises Ltd

*waves

If the chap with the camper van gives me proof of his sale, Cancer Research will get £20. Doubt he’s donated anything

We have just received our first classified donation in 3 months.

Lost in the post?

If you’re getting a fiver a quarter, by my reckoning, I’m owed the classifieds for 6 months (possibly 9). As such, I demand that I can spoil ads for that period.

PS. Just got another fiver.

could have got it for less from CRC

Interfering. Hmmm.

I suppose it’s now more likely that people will do “particularly well with a sale” so might donate from their extra profit 😉

Adding my voice to the tiny minority. Agree with this:

It just seems to be this simple- the new rules are pro-seller, anti-buyer. Certain sellers think this is great, for some mysterious reason. Buyers can’t possibly gain from it and can potentially lose out. Decent sellers had nothing to fear from reasonable criticism in the first place. (and fwiw, I sell as much as I buy)

I struggle with long sentences – (whatever that stands for)

wysiwyg – Member
Would I be right in thinking what I choose to charge for an item is between myself and any potential buyers, or should I expect busy bodies sticking their oar in telling me something’s available from Germany for £1 more.

This is STW, expect it.

What happened to the 7 page thread in the For Sale section on exactly this topic? Did the Truth Police get it?

No its still there and that is unfair

STW are very good at bothering to discuss with us when they change things [ generally] and let us have our say on the issue – even if they dont always listen 😉

Would I be right in thinking what I choose to charge for an item is between myself and any potential buyers, or should I expect busy bodies sticking their oar in telling me something’s available from Germany for £1 more.

The person sticking their oar in is a potential buyer
Do you think £1 off is a bargain over the new price or something or is it just that this information will reduce your pool of potential buyers and you dont want them to know this?

fervouredimage – Member
I think mark is right that on pricing it is nobodies business but the seller and potential buyers. But I do think members should be able to point out when something is clearly not as it should be in an ad. As above, someone describing a XC frame as a downhill frame or someone stating that certain cranks are compatible with certain bottom brackets when they are not etc.

From Mark’s post above, sounds like you can help ‘clarify’…. So long as you’re not ‘spoiling’ the advert, you’re on firm ground. Sounds a bit subjective mind….

Something that the “pro-spoilers” (for want of a better title) have conveniently overlooked is the frequency of non-availability of items at the online stores.

We’ve all seen the CRC pages where only bizarre sizes are available at the headline price, and plenty of people have posted on here about German sites letting them get all the way to the shopping cart with their “bargain”, only to find it is out of stock.

The classifieds are private listings, posted by someone who actually has that item with them and so users can be confident it exists, at the price it is posted up for.

I suppose it’s now more likely that people will do “particularly well with a sale” so might donate from their extra profit

Donate? wouldn’t payola be a better term given the ‘protection’ the sellers get now? 😉
They probably get 2 points on the ‘Shy’ action generated from the Wonga ads too 🙂

now that the “sticky” has gone can we plead ignorance? 😀

Junkyard – if it’s still there then I apologize (how very un-STW of me). I’d fogotten the way the Classifieds forums ordered posts.

Sorry Jota, if you donated on the 1st of November, Thanks very much!

Sorry as well i did not realise they had Unstuck it either so it will take some searching unless you have posted on it already

Can I get a “D” prefix now? or I’ll do a claim back 😉

Sorry Jota, if you donated on the 1st of November, Thanks very much!

Did I?
I can’t remember, really 🙂

bruneep – was that the kind of D you were looking for? 🙂

I want one too!

Very funny

Yey that’ll do