Safe audiogon transactions; lowering the bar.

Hi Swampwalker,

I'm curious what part of what Bishopwill wrote you agree with? I for one am more usually a buyer not a seller. I am not in the audio business and never will be. I write only as an interested party who wishes to reduce risk in transactions to the extent possible. The emotionalizing of buyer vs. seller seems a waste of time to me. Rather, risk reduction would be more useful.

Unless buyer/seller meet in person, there is no way I can think of to eliminate the possibility that one or the other potentially is acting in bad faith and that is still not foolproof. But, even in cash in person transactions, it is also remotely likely that the transfer takes place in a parking lot alongside a highway, the goods are stolen, or one or the other is a thief. Certainly possible as well given that large amounts of cash can be involved.

Unless one side can be certain of the other sides history and character, a risk is being taken.

I was speaking with my wife, a lawyer, about this a few minutes ago. We considered what we thought were all possibilities. Then I pondered whether I would send $60,000 for a pair of speakers(an exceptionally large amount of money) I want by wire to someone, dealer or otherwise or go in person to inspect first prior to delivery of payment. My conclusion is that I would only trust one person here on Audiogon with that much money and that's Jonathan Tinn. Anyone else and I go in person. And that's independent of wealth, history or contribution to this site.

I clearly understand and appreciate the risks we all take. Most of us who have spent large amounts here know them all too well. But, gut feelings, bank references and verification are the yardsticks to reduce risk by not which side of the transaction is more righteous.

Every arrangement has faults and risks. Imagine selling your pair of Levinson 33's for a bargain $16,000 and agreeing to an escrow. The "buyer" sends a legitimate certified check to the escrow agent, it is deposited and clears. You're notified of good funds and you ship to the "buyer". He then notifies the escrow agent upon receipt not to release the escrow. He alleges fraud, misrepresentation, condition reduction, you're a liar or whatever. He has your amps and you don't have your money and your not going to get it! Anyone here prepared to sue in Federal Court to recover $16,000? I'm not! I'm reasonably certain that no lawyer here is. Just what would we do?

Any arrangement other than payment to seller up front is seller at risk period. Perhaps someone here can find a hole in that logic? If so, please post.

Other side, buyer at risk. Buyer sends payment, seller doesn't ship or ships stuffed box or sends goods in lesser condition that represented. Unless we can arrange buyer insurance??? buyer is not protected as would be in a credit card transaction to a dealer. Maybe that's the answer. Induce a insurer to be willing to guaranty against fraud for a fee with due diligence being on the part of the insurer.

Now the $$$$$ question. Who here is prepared to pay the premium to insure the purchase or sale of the items they buy or sell presuming a cost factor of say 2%?

If we want absolute protection, then we've got to pay for it.

i will do what ever i can to make the buyer happy. i also want the seller to do the same. I will NEVER buy or sell COD. Exchange telephone numbers and ask as many questions as needed. I will not deal with anyone who is not an Audiogon member. I also like to see the member as being verified. I will give any money back to the buyer if the item is not as described. As far as the sound of the item, I expect the buyer to do his/her homework. COD is the best way of getting ripped off. No offence my friend Bishopwell.

Hi Bill E.- I was agreeing with Bishopwill's statement: "Interesting point of view, Bill, in that you detail all the steps you take to protect yourself from uscrupulous buyers yet bristle at the idea that buyers might desire to protect themselves from unscrupulous sellers, as well."

Perhaps we both misunderstood you. I agree with most of the analysis in your most recent post. And if your statement about how escrow works is correct, then I guess I agree with all of it. However, in your example, I believe that escrow agent would not release funds back to buyer until seller verfied that the goods had been returned. Since I've not had a problem such as you describe, I cannot say which scenario is correct, yours or mine.

With regard to the $60K transaction; if I'm spending that much money you damn well better believe that I will inspect and accept goods in person ( my first house cost $55K.) The one time I make a $2K+ deal, I had a friend in the seller's city go check it out.

I do think that you are missing the boat in not feeling comfortable making a deal based on substantial feedback. If the guy has done 50 or 100 transactions, all to good reports, why would you be the one that went bad? Anyone can disagree on condition and if you're going to get cranked about 1 AGS point, then maybe internet is not the way for you to buy. However, if your concern is deliberate misrepresentation, then a significant feedback profile, followed by a phone call or two should do the trick for most items. Check the feedback and forum history of the 10 most recent feedback posters for the guy or gal you are considering doing business with. Drop them a line. My point is that since $ are often untraceable while goods are more so, the buyer is actually all of a risk when he sends an m.o./cashiers check out to buy.

BTW, I agree that a 3rd party insurer is worth a fee (1% each to buyer and seller, I would say is fair). How about it Audiogon? Also remember I said that so far, I have not felt a need to post negative feedback for any deal here or on ebay.

Hi again Swampwalker,

We seem to be getting closer on our ideas. I wonder why you think that I don't trust buyers/sellers with substantial feedback. If I read correctly, that's Bishopwill and others. I personally have 270+ positives with no negatives between here and Ebay while doing deals for well into 6 figures. Me?
I trust anyone with virtually all positives, who sounds and acts solid. Act flaky and scare the hell out of me. I don't need to buy or sell so, make me nervous and we've got no deal to do. Easy. Your personal choice to look only at recent feedback doesn't work for me. I care about character and history and subtance. I buy substantial items regularly and work to be cost effective but not be scammed.

I'm certain that Audiogon could expand the verification system and combined with verification and documentation enter into an insurance arrangement with a 3rd party provider to insure transactions.

BUT and I really mean BUT, if a thief wants to steal, it's going to happen. Maybe to me, maybe not, but certainly he'll find willing participants.

I'd really like to see the feedback include the amount of the sale, if buyer or seller and type of payment. It makes evaluating the prior transactions more effective.

Lakefrontroad, I'm not sure what the point is in your ad hominem argument. As to my negative feedback on ebay, I make no secret of it, or the reason for it. In fact, I made that reason clear a while back.

Email me privately, if you're interested, and I'll fill you in. In the meantime, attack my arguments if you like but don't attack me.

Fondly,

Will