eBay vrs42?

From: vrs <vrs_at_msn.com>
Date: Sat Feb 12 04:28:46 2005

From: "Vintage Computer Festival" <vcf_at_siconic.com>
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2005, vrs wrote:
>
> > Now, if I came to you and said "Don't buy the Ford; let me buy it when
> > it goes on half-price clearance, and I'll let you borrow it on
> > Saturdays", that would be more analogous, and not really fair to Ford.
> > (Though certainly, there are worse sins.)
>
> Excuse me, but where in the Capitalist creed does it state that Ford is
> entitled to sell a car to everyone and there's no sharing allowed?

No creed involved. I never said the the thing you alledge.

> This is such a terrible analogy and I can't believe you're arguing what
> you are.

You missed my point. It was the conspiracy to wait for half-price clearance
(in a contrived context, where it was important that the total demand and
supply were known) that was the dubious behavior. I have also consistently
maintained that this behavior is "slightly unethical". In my opinion, it is
the inefficiency of the market that makes this unfair to the seller, so
generalizing that to some claim that sellers are generally entitled to
everyone's bid would be silly.

All I am really trying to point out is that deliberately creating a market
inefficiency for personal gain is contrary to the spirit of fair play. In
my mind, the notion of a fair playing field is as key to the long term
success of a society as the drive for personal gain.

Where I claimed the real problem with this behavior lies with the eBay case,
is that I believe (though Jay disagrees) that the user agreement precludes
it.

While there may be an interpretation of the eBay user agreement that allows
this behavior, I don't believe that it is eBay's interpretation. And I
think that eBay has been pretty clear about it, from what I have seen of
their history on user complaints.

    Vince
Received on Sat Feb 12 2005 - 04:28:46 GMT