User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 9 to 16 of 16

Thread: Info on the NASC BENEFIT AUCTION!

  1. #9
    Moderator Colieo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    724
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just a thought,will the donater set the price for the plant? Should there be a group of several people to look at the suggested price and "appraise" it based on rarity, age, size, health, ect? This would ensure the plant was priced fairly and prevent any price gouging or laughably high prices. Just a few questions [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img]

    Cole



    Duele no tenerte cerca, duele no escuchar tu voz. Duele respirar tu ausencia, pero, duele más decirte adiós.

  2. #10

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Oswego, New York, U.S.A.
    Posts
    5,290
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This isn't about someone getting a great plant for a great deal. It isn't for any individual at all. It's for the benefit of the Sarracenia. Charity dinners don't charge what a plate of dinner costs to prepare: they charge an outrageous sum: 200.00 a plate, and those attending don't go beacuse they want a good dinner.

    No one should feel disappointed when they see the price of a plant climb beyond their reach: they should be happy.

    If any of my W.E.I.R.D. talents can be of use in confirming authenticity, assigning merit, or whatever, I will be happy to review the entries and write a brief comment.
    "Grow More, Share More"

  3. #11
    Moderator Schmoderator Fluorescent fluorite, England PlantAKiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia/Zone 7
    Posts
    10,335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well...herein lies the snag. One person says "Yes we should have reserves!"...another says "No reserves!". Everyone has a different view. I do need to go amend the rules for opening bid and reserves. I forgot. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif[/img] That's why I wanted people to review them! Thanks.

    The temporary auction rules have been up for a while now and nobody has says anything til now...shortly before this all starts. I'm doing the best I can here...I'm not getting a lot of response.

    Thanks to you folks who have responded and questioned! [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img]

    PAKtioneer
    "Fox terriers are born with about four times as much original sin in them as other dogs." - Jerome K. Jerome

  4. #12
    Tony Paroubek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Far Away NY
    Posts
    4,640
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think it's looking good. I agree on the rules and the changes. Starting price posted by the donor sounds fine.

    The main issue I see that needs resolving ASAP:
    Who picks up the shipping fees? As mentioned already, I think it will hurt listings if the donor is required to pick up the fees.

    Ideally the way I see it the Donor would include in the item description the additional cost for shipping or if they are picking up the shipping fees themselves. This however causes some difficulties when the donor wishing to have the bidder pay the shipping:
    1. The bidder will then have to pay two people for one item.. not fun for the winning bidder. OR the person collecting the payments will have to reimburse donors for their shipping expenses as listed in each item. Not fun for the person handling the funds.

    I think to have the best success.. we want lots of items listed so it should be up to the donor who pays the shipping fees. We also want lots of people bidding so make payment as easy as possible. This means in cases where they are paying the additional shipping fee they should only have to make one payment. Which leads to the person handling the funds to reimburse the donors as necessary. Is this person willing to do that? If not is someone else willing? I would be willing to track it all and make shipping reimbursements...(probably should just shoot me now [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif[/img] )

    Tony
    Is that a Nepenthes in your pocket or you just happy to see me?

  5. #13
    Moderator Schmoderator Fluorescent fluorite, England PlantAKiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia/Zone 7
    Posts
    10,335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks for the input Tony. Did you see the change I made. I think it will work to solve one problem...the reserve issue.

    I amended the rules to require each item have an opening bid. That opening bid should be the least amount that is fair for the item yet still leave a chance for a "bargain." So we don't have to worry about reserves.

    Bid increments is still an issue I think. I don't know what to do about that.

    And also the money collection being split between shipping and purchase. I feel like the buyer should pay shipping. If they were purchasing from ANY vendor...whether it be PFT, eBay, a retail store or anything...the buyer knows they are paying for the shipping of the item. That does however leave the lister to have to post SOME kind of estimate for shipping costs so the bidder can figure that into the bid. But thats how all auctions work...its no different than bidding on eBay and there are lots of people here that buy CPs from eBay all the time and pay the shipping. I have at least for the moment amended rules to make buyer paying for shipping. This can be changed but must be changed BEFORE the listing period starts which is growing ever closer!

    Wow Tony...you'd track the shipping money?? [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/img] Last time this was discussed, Casper was handling the receiving of the auction money. I doubt he'd like to have to turn around and then dole it back out for shipping. I guess you COULD have the payment go to the seller but then the seller would have be responsible for passing on the actual payment (donation) to NASC (Casper).

    Oooooo...my head is starting to spin....... [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif[/img] Then again, that's nothing new for this dizzy broad...literally.

    Gotta go... more email and PMs to take care of...

    Any thoughts and ideas welcome...this is a COMMUNITY project, remember? [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img] Sooooo...speak up, community!

    Thanks again Tony. I better go pull my curtains back... [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif[/img]
    "Fox terriers are born with about four times as much original sin in them as other dogs." - Jerome K. Jerome

  6. #14
    Tony Paroubek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Far Away NY
    Posts
    4,640
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think having each donor collect their own payments, deducting the shipping portion and forwarding the correct amount to Casper would be an error.

    I would make it read in the rules that the Donor must list a shipping fee when listing an item if he expects the bidder to pay any additional fees. If there is no shipping fee listed then the donor is picking up the shipping expenses. And that shipping fees should be reasonable based on the item.

    The only way I can really see it working for the buyer to pay the shipping fees is if Casper is able to reimburse after all the money is collected and making a single payment to each donor based on the information in each listing. If this is too much for Casper to deal with on top of trying to notify each donor when payment is received so that shipping can commence, then I would be willing to send the individual payments out to each donor and Casper can reimburse just me for the net total. The ball is really in Caspers court on how he would like to handle it but I think it should be either donor picks up the shipping tab in all cases or we reimburse them for their listed costs. I think it would be a mistake to make bidders deal with sending out all sorts of payments to different people to cover shipping fees when they could instead send a single payment to Casper for all their won items and additional fees.

    T



    Is that a Nepenthes in your pocket or you just happy to see me?

  7. #15
    Somewhat Unstable superimposedhope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Where the Slime Live; Where the Slime Breed
    Posts
    1,697
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If it came push to shove, all shipping methods I know of give a receipt. That way shipping is billed as it is payed for instead of some schmuck trying to turn a penny on the shipping. Everything else sounds good to me.

    Joe
    \"There is nothing here of interest to any nation, as a matter of fact there is nothing here but humans!\"

  8. #16
    Tony Paroubek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Far Away NY
    Posts
    4,640
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    While I agree that actual shipping would be better that adds just another element of folks having to deal with sending their receipts to someone for reimbursement. The more layers of folks having to communicate back and forth complicates and slows the whole process down. It also doesn't give the bidders an idea ahead of time on what to expect for shipping. I think most bidders have a good idea what it costs to ship.. so it will be fairly obvious if someone is trying to make some bucks on this end. (Which won't please the moderators either)

    T
    Is that a Nepenthes in your pocket or you just happy to see me?

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •