Low-Balling

[kc-steve]

Low balling is also like a $500 item on ebay and you bid $1, it should be a starting point, but if the market has no demand for the item then the $1 will win it. No one is being unethical, but I feel some of you low ball haters would would refuse to sell the item and you were obviously too cheap to pay the reserve auction fee! who is unethical now? I love good arguments(discussions).

Nope that's not the same Strouty. The seller is the one who posted the $1 starting point, not you. He had the option of any $ starting point above one dollar. So any offer of $1 or more is a good one.

Steve

 

[pj_rage]

I think maybe I can see the other side of this a little bit, as I think about it more...

How about this for a rule of thumb. If you would be embarassed to purchase the item from a good friend of yours, for the price you're offering, it's a lowball offer. If you'd offer more to a friend, you're probably counting on never having to see the seller again and look them in the eye, knowing that the deal you made was not fair for both parties. I think most people probably would not want to make a deal with their friends that is not at least arguably fair to both of you. I guess it's just easier to make unfair deals with strangers you'll never have to see or hear from again.

So, let's pose this question: if you would make an offer and go through with a deal on an item with a stranger that you would not make with a friend, is that morally or ethically questionable?

 

[bsaint]

My bike is listed at 2700. Someone offers me 2000. That's low balling.

 

[earlthegoat2]

I will lowball based on what I think the item is worth, what I think the owner will take, what I think the owner thinks its worth, how desperate the owner seems.....on and on.

If it is a moving sale and everything must go, lowballs will commence. Divorce, ditto. Any other bad situations in which people have to sell things quick and cheap. I will lowball offer on prices that are already a steal.

Only to people I dont know though and will (hopefully) never have to communicate with again.

 

[db130]

If I see a car that's:

1) listed for $2800/obo on craigslist
2) the same car is listed for $2500/obo on a car forum
3) the seller offers to go down to $2300 right after the test drive....
4) and honestly, I don't NEED the car

if I tell the seller

5) again, I don't need the car and that I hope he gets a higher offers
6) that I would offer $1800 for the car if no one else makes an offer

is that low-balling? i guess it depends on who you ask...

the seller emailed me back the next day and asked ME if my offer was still good.

 

[honcho]

Prospective buyers sometimes respond to my ads asking if I'll take X dollars or if the price is negotiable. I never say "OBO" (or best offer) and I rarely ever say a price is firm. Just about everything in life is negotiable but just because you negotiate on the price doesn't mean that both parties will agree.


That said, time is the most valuable thing we all have and if a buyer (or seller) wastes my time with ridiculous offers (or demands) I either ignore them or just tell them no thanks and move on. There is always another deal.........

 

[pragmatist]

My bike is listed at 2700. Someone offers me 2000. That's low balling.

I think you missed the whole point of the thread. Reread it while taking notes. Highlight if you have to. Write a 1200 to 1500 word essay and have it on my desk by Friday. Otherwise I'm afraid you'll have to repeat the course.

 

[back2class]

I will throw a lowbal offer once in a while. Always let them know I realize it is a crapy offer but it is what I have, or the price that would make sense for me. People respond well to that. I get them too, and I most often ignore them. It is odds, you throw 100 low balls and you may get a few for a silly low price. I hate the ones I get where the buyer takes the approach that I am desprate or a drug addict and is somehow my white knight. They get a insulting reply. I may one day be in a bad mood and send one of those loosers on a goose chase.

What I hate is some overpriced fool who thinks you gave him a insulting lowball when you gave him a very fair offer.

 

[kc-steve]

. . . What I hate is some overpriced fool who thinks you gave him a insulting lowball when you gave him a very fair offer.

Yup, there are game players on both sides of a transaction. And even when not playing games sellers OFTEN will add an extra 10 or 20 percent knowing someone will make an offer lower than the stated price. But they risk losing out on a sale because it is priced too high to begin with.

For these reasons, I think it is VERY difficult to define the term "low-balling." Every circumstance is different and you have to decide how to approach each situation.

But as I stated way back on the first page, a "good deal" is when EVERYONE feels good about a transaction. Everyone wins, no losers.

Steve

 

[Chris Adams]

I don't think there is a heated discussion except from those early in the thread that were called out for being unethical.

It's really no big deal. If someone low balls me I ignore it. But it seems there is hope for some people here so I will reiterate what I said using an EXTREME example.

EXTREME EXAMPLE:
If you tell someone you need a dollar to make your house payment this month after losing your job, and the buyer then says "okay I'll give you a dollar for you car since you won't need it anymore" then the offer and buyer is unethical. No need to get hot about it. Just turn it down. The fact is everyone knows the car is worth much more than the offer. The buyer is simply taking advantage of someone in a bad situation.

HOWEVER, the buyer has shown us that he has no integrity or ethics and we would be better off not doing business with him in the first place. Someone that uses unethical practices once will VERY likely be unethical in all aspects of their life. It's best to steer clear.

It's too bad schools stopped teaching ethics and most parents rarely ever teach ethics or integrity to the children . . . and so we have a number of those who have no clue as shown here in this thread. But "pj" I wouldn't categorize you that way, as well as a few others here.

Maybe some people need a better definition of "low-balling."

Steve

A lot of what you say makes sense, but you are wrong that they don't teach 'ethics' anymore.

They spend much more time on it now. There was almost none when I was in school.

Now they teach it everyday.
Point is, they now teach that making a profit is unethical, working for yourself is unethical, working to better yourself, etc. is unethical.
Serving the state, the union or 'green worship' is considered the peak of ethics.

I could use with less 'ethics' in school and more simple math and science. History is obviously a lost cause.

 

[kc-steve]

A lot of what you say makes sense, but you are wrong that they don't teach 'ethics' anymore. . . .

Now they teach it everyday.
Point is, they now teach that making a profit is unethical, working for yourself is unethical, working to better yourself, etc. is unethical.
Serving the state, the union or 'green worship' is considered the peak of ethics.

I could use with less 'ethics' in school and more simple math and science. History is obviously a lost cause.

What you are describing is not teaching ethics as much as it is indoctrination. On that point, I agree. In fact, I think that might be unethical as well. Ironic isn't it?

Steve