Ethical question / Paypal

[bbcard1]

I am not a hard liner on much so far as ethics goes, but is it really right to ask someone use paypal gift (which pays no transaction fee) when making a transaction? You are using a product...if you do so under false pretense isn't that the same as stealing? Seems a growing trend to request payment via paypal gift and while I'm not a lover of fees, it seems to me if you're going to use a service you should pay for it...if you don't want to, there's always the old send a check way around things.

[Leon]

For me, I used to feel the exact way you describe. I don't anymore. The way I see it now is that you don't get the same protections from paypal when you do a gift type payment. I also justify it, right or wrong, by the almost monopolistic way ebay is now. Tit for tat in my book. They require me to use an online payment and own paypal so know they are going to get the large majority of payments that way and will make billions off of it. No harm no foul to me. But again, I used to be against it except in extraordinary situations. And actually I don't think you can just send a check with ebay.....I think sellers have to take some form of online payment. (I could be wrong but don't think so)

[markf31]

I don't consider it stealing and I'm pretty certain that if Paypal thought they were losing too much money to the gift option, they would have done something about already.

I dislike Paypal immensely, I never throw around the hate word but with Paypal it’s pretty darn close and I avoid them like the plague. I don’t have a Paypal account, I only have Paypal process my payments for Ebay auctions so they never make a cent off my money, not on my end. There are other options out there for selling on Ebay too outside of Paypal that allow you to process credit card payments as a merchant.

Just my 2 cents.

[tonyo]

I haven't put enough thought into it to form a hard and fast opinion.

If someone asks to be paid by gift, I just shrug my shoulders and send a gift. Or decide if I want to add the paypal fee to my payment. If someone suggests it's up to me to decide, I usually send gift if a small amount and regular paypal if large. I'm fairly confident that paypal would stop the service if it became a big problem for them.

I usually mix in a "payment owed" here and there. I haven't read the fine print, but it seems to have the same results.


There was one occasion when I tried to send a gift, but paypal didn't allow it for some reason. I seem to recall thinking it had to do with the receiving address resembling a possible business name.....



I don't sell much, but come to think of it, I think my current practice is to not request a gift, but gladly accept it. I build in the cost of paypal gift to my asking price. My last sell I posted an asking price, the buyer asked if I would accept a lower price, I met him in the middle "if he used paypal gift" ........... not sure what that says about my ethics or lack thereof



Also a bit of an aside since Leon mentioned ebay's near monopoly......I bought a card on ebay last night. When I went to pay, I was directed to Propay. Huh?... what's this? I back tracked looking for a paypal option (since I try to run my collecting through a seperate account tied to paypal), but didn't see one. Thought about emailing the seller to ask to use paypal, but decided to not go thru the hassle. It worked fine I suppose.

[bbcard1]

don't get me wrong, it's not my biggest ethical delimma...but i am interested in hearing other guy's take. I don't mind to use PPGift if I know someone or if it's someone I have seen on the board a lot.Lately, I have had more and more people pay me by check on on-board transactions, which suits me fine. It gives me an excuse to walk my dog out to the bank.

[T206Collector]

PayPal once sent me a nasty email saying I was receiving payments for goods as a gift and that I had to stop at once or risk losing my account. I am always careful to just say "Congratulations!" or "Happy Birthday!" in my emails when I send payment via gift.

It has become so common a practice on Net54 that when I sell something I hardly even have to ask whether I want it as a gift. It is basically accepted practice. And PayPal certainly doesn't have to permit that service.

[kcohen]

This subject came up in a thread some time ago. I normally add the fees and pay by regular Paypal. I'm uncomfortable with gift as using it under false pretenses like that is on it's face fraudulent and I'm uneasy with that. One's opinion of Paypal is irrelevant in my view. And no, I don't see people who hold the opposite view as bad people. I probably hold this view because of the inordinate amount of guilt instilled in me by my Jewish mother.

[SetBuilder]

Ethical dilemma? No.

PayPal + eBay is a multi-billion dollar monopoly.

I have no problem finding ways around their fees.

[celoknob]

When I am selling something I never ask for "gift"; I'm not comfortable with that at all.

With that said, if someone is offering something I really want and requests paypal "gift" I will usually oblige without comment, and I don't lose sleep over it. So maybe my ethics are a little soft on this one but I definitely prefer no "gifts" for true transactions.

[rainier2004]

I'm a very anal person and analyze the hell out of things like this topic and here is my logic:

PP gift is eligible for "family and friends" per their policy, not mine. On ebay I would never do gift, ever. On net54 I will do gift every time. You guys meet my definition of "friend" as I can trust you, some of you guys actually look out for me, I have communicated with several of you several times and if I bumped into a guy wearing a net54 shirt on the street, I certainly would say hi and be excited to talk to them. I feel comfortable w/o any coverage in the transaction and thats what it is for, per THEIR policy. To use someone's service you must abide by their rules, I consider that ethical irregardless of the law as I feel law and the history of law sheds shadow on ethic debates (I'm not bashing laws either, but ethics are a different issue).

The fact that their billion dollar companies, monopoly, etc is irrelevant to me but all about "taking down the man" too so to each their own. I'd be willing to pay other ways as well but pp gift is sooo easy.

[smtjoy]

I pretty much dont use it for most of the reasons listed. Many times I have purchased something from the BST and it list gift and I just pay the fee (if you have a balance no fee is charged) so that I get buyer protection and seller gets the full amount.

I think the seller just wants to get the total amount, I have had a buyer or two on here that paid for a card and I had to pay the fees which sucked, I always feel like when I sell a card $45 on the BST I should receive that amount and twice lately that has not happened I get $45 less the 4% fee. Anyone else have that issue?

[rainier2004]

Originally Posted by smtjoy

Many times I have purchased something from the BST and it list gift and I just pay the fee (if you have a balance no fee is charged) so that I get buyer protection and seller gets the full amount.

I think the seller just wants to get the total amount, I have had a buyer or two on here that paid for a card and I had to pay the fees which sucked, I always feel like when I sell a card $45 on the BST I should receive that amount and twice lately that has not happened I get $45 less the 4% fee. Anyone else have that issue?

I've never had that option to have the fee waived with a balance...I need a balance/or link straight to bank account to send pp gift w/o a fee. Am I missing something?

Also, last I looked pp charged 2.9% plus 30 or 60 cents per transaction, did that go up?

[HRBAKER]

To me, it's the same thing as going into a store and changing the price tag on something. It's irrelevant how much money PP makes. The seller is enjoying all the benefits of using PP (instant access to funds from a confirmed buyer) but not paying for the service.

Tell a buyer you will accept a check or money order or ask them to pay the fees. It's a cost of doing business. Or have a cash or PP price.

On the other hand I guess if you work for free then you might expect other companies to do so.

It's human nature to want something for nothing.

I believe that ebay forces you to offer paypal as an option for payment, I don't think that they can force you to use it exclusively. Most if not all use it bc it is convenient - is that not worth something?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

I believe that ebay forces you to offer paypal as an option for payment, I don't think that they can force you to use it exclusively. Most if not all use it bc it is convenient - is that not worth something?

That is a common misconception about eBay/PayPal. Ebay states that the buyer must accept some form of electronic payment, not necessarily PayPal. They have a list of approved payment companies on their site. They can't force you to accept PayPal. Yes, most use it because it is convenient.

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by celoknob

When I am selling something I never ask for "gift"; I'm not comfortable with that at all.

With that said, if someone is offering something I really want and requests paypal "gift" I will usually oblige without comment, and I don't lose sleep over it. So maybe my ethics are a little soft on this one but I definitely prefer no "gifts" for true transactions.

That's my approach. I use PP tied to a CC, so when I pay by gift the fees are added on my end and the seller nets the full amount. Bottom line, it's not a gift (as much as I like and trust the folks here) and PP is not in business to provide their service to me for free by manipulation.

[sycks22]

I paid and got paid via paypal gift all the time in previous years until they shut down my gifting ability. I still use them all the time to pay / receive funds, but they take out their fees now. It kind of blows, but it's ok. The best thing about paypal is you get the money immediately and can ship the next day and don't have to worry about if the person is sending the check.

[tonyo]

Pete,
What prompted them to shut down your gifting ability?

[SMPEP]

My biggest issue with the non-gift option on Paypal is that they now report to the IRS. I very rarely sell anything at a profit, and frequently sell at a slight loss. I am a collector, not dealer. Yet the full amount of the sale shows up as taxable "income"? If this were buying and selling stocks you adjust these figures for your cost basis. But for baseball cards you're expected to pay full tax, even when selling at a loss?

Said differently, if I simply traded the cards I had for the ones I want, there is no tax. But if I trade the ones I have for cash, to buy the ones I want (because I can't arrange a direct trade of 1973 Topps cards for a T206), then I owe taxes on it?

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

My biggest issue with the non-gift option on Paypal is that they now report to the IRS. I very rarely sell anything at a profit, and frequently sell at a slight loss. I am a collector, not dealer. Yet the full amount of the sale shows up as taxable "income"? If this were buying and selling stocks you adjust these figures for your cost basis. But for baseball cards you're expected to pay full tax, even when selling at a loss?

Said differently, if I simply traded the cards I had for the ones I want, there is no tax. But if I trade the ones I have for cash, to buy the ones I want (because I can't arrange a direct trade of 1973 Topps cards for a T206), then I owe taxes on it?

Don't you still have a "cost basis" on a card you sell and receive regular payment through paypal on? I can't imagine that all full time dealers are forced to report the full amount of a sale as profit.

[SetBuilder]

Yeah, good luck trying to use an electronic payment system other than PayPal.

I used Auctiva linked to Authorize.net once. It allowed me to accept CC payments through the Auctiva gateway.

Everyone avoided my auctions. I even got neutral feedbacks from people with comments like "He doesn't accept PayPal...beware".

Never again. PayPal is a monopoly and it is absolutely required to sell on eBay.

Why do you think eBay banned Google Checkout? They want zero competition.

[HRBAKER]

As a buyer I have actually used several other electronic payment options on ebay. It is rare but it does happen.

I guess I look at it like this; if I want to buy something at a store and they tell me the only way I can pay for it is using their credit card or account - I have two options, agree to their terms or don't buy it. I don't consider just taking it a viable option.

It actually happens at dept. stores quite often, "extra 25% off if you use your house credit card."

And I agree, they would love ZERO competition.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by kcohen

This subject came up in a thread some time ago. I normally add the fees and pay by regular Paypal. I'm uncomfortable with gift as using it under false pretenses like that is on it's face fraudulent and I'm uneasy with that. One's opinion of Paypal is irrelevant in my view. And no, I don't see people who hold the opposite view as bad people. I probably hold this view because of the inordinate amount of guilt instilled in me by my Jewish mother.

+1

Would add to that: Here, we have the choice to use Paypal or not, so it isn't like we are forced to use it. My feeling is that if I choose freely to use a service I should pay for it. I give the buyers the option of check/cash/MO or paypal +3% and as a buyer I add the 3% to the purchase rather than use the gift function in a manner that I feel does not comport with my view of business ethics.

I take a similar tack with tipping valet parking attendants. If I am forced to use a valet service to park my car, as is often the case at a hotel, I won't tip for the 'privilege' of being forced to use a service I don't want. If I choose to use it, however, rather than park the car myself I am willing to tip for it. That [with other things] probably makes me a jerk, but that's how I roll...

[HRBAKER]

Well said Adam.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

My biggest issue with the non-gift option on Paypal is that they now report to the IRS. I very rarely sell anything at a profit, and frequently sell at a slight loss. I am a collector, not dealer. Yet the full amount of the sale shows up as taxable "income"? If this were buying and selling stocks you adjust these figures for your cost basis. But for baseball cards you're expected to pay full tax, even when selling at a loss?

Said differently, if I simply traded the cards I had for the ones I want, there is no tax. But if I trade the ones I have for cash, to buy the ones I want (because I can't arrange a direct trade of 1973 Topps cards for a T206), then I owe taxes on it?

The threshold for a 1099 from Paypal is relatively high--over $20,000 in gross payment volume AND over 200 separate payments in a calendar year-- and if you are doing sales in excess of that threshold you need to speak to a competent accountant about getting everything squared away as a business.

[tonyo]

Originally Posted by SetBuilder

Yeah, good luck trying to use an electronic payment system other than PayPal.

Never again. PayPal is a monopoly and it is absolutely required to sell on eBay.

Originally Posted by tonyo

Also a bit of an aside since Leon mentioned ebay's near monopoly......I bought a card on ebay last night. When I went to pay, I was directed to Propay. Huh?... what's this? I back tracked looking for a paypal option (since I try to run my collecting through a seperate account tied to paypal), but didn't see one. Thought about emailing the seller to ask to use paypal, but decided to not go thru the hassle. It worked fine I suppose.

But it is true, I may hesitate to bid on an item, or bid less if I can't use paypal......just because I try to run my collecting through paypal.

[Leon]

Paypal gift is a different, less secure product than the regular paypal payments. I have no issue using it. If anyone thinks they are doing something wrong by using it then they shouldn't use it. Pretty easy decision.

[alanu]

I don't like the paypal fees, but I love the service anyway for the convenience.

[kcohen]

Originally Posted by rainier2004

PP gift is eligible for "family and friends" per their policy, not mine. On ebay I would never do gift, ever. On net54 I will do gift every time. You guys meet my definition of "friend" as I can trust you, some of you guys actually look out for me, I have communicated with several of you several times and if I bumped into a guy wearing a net54 shirt on the street, I certainly would say hi and be excited to talk to them.

Man, now THAT is a juicy rationalization.

[freakhappy]

I can see most everyone's points here, but I like using it and will continue using it on Net54 because I feel comfortable with it. If Paypal tells me to stop using it, I will but until then no issues here.

If you believe that there are ethical issues with using it, don't use it. There are clear cut ethical dilemmas and there are situations that people "believe" are ethical dilemmas...

[freakhappy]

Originally Posted by kcohen

Man, now THAT is a juicy rationalization.

See how easy it is to see the other side of paypal gift

[HRBAKER]

If you’re making a purchase, there are 3 payment types:

Goods - Select this payment type when you’re paying for something that you didn’t buy on eBay.
Services - Use this payment type when your purchase is not a product but a service (for example, work performed for you by someone else).
eBay Items - Select this payment type to pay for things you buy on eBay.
When you make a purchase, the seller pays a small fee to receive your money.

If you’re sending a personal payment, payment types include:

Gift - Select this payment type when you’re sending money as a gift for a birthday or other special occasion.
Payment Owed - Use this payment type for things like reimbursing a friend for your share of a restaurant check, or repaying money that a family member loaned you.

This topic always makes for interesting discussion much like trying to define a "rookie" card or the great "To Slab or Not to Slab" dilemma.

[kcohen]

Originally Posted by tonyo

Pete,
What prompted them to shut down your gifting ability?

Could be this from the Paypal User Agreement:

"4.1 Receiving Personal Payments. If you are selling goods or services, you may not ask the buyer to send you a Personal Payment for the purchase. If you do so, PayPal may remove your ability to accept Personal Payments."

[HRBAKER]

Sort of like speeding tickets, sooner or later they take your license away.
My guess is that they don't spend a lot of time tracking it but when it starts to involve large sums eventually they will get around to it.

[tonyo]

Originally Posted by kcohen

Could be this from the Paypal User Agreement:

"4.1 Receiving Personal Payments. If you are selling goods or services, you may not ask the buyer to send you a Personal Payment for the purchase. If you do so, PayPal may remove your ability to accept Personal Payments."

Thanks, I was just curious what reason they cited...... I suppose they would have cited exactly what you posted ; P.U.A. 4.1

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

Sort of like speeding tickets, sooner or later they take your license away.
My guess is that they don't spend a lot of time tracking it but when it starts to involve large sums eventually they will get around to it.

Now that you mention speeding tickets, I have another moral question for those that believe sending/receiveing PayPal gift is taking away from PayPal's revenue.

If you blow past a cop on the freeway at 85 mph (assuming speed limit is 65mph) and he didn't see you for whatever reason, do you feel morally obligated to pull over and admit to the cop you were speeding and ask for a ticket? After all, writing speeding tickets is one way that the local law enforcement generates revenue. Or is it okay to cheat (you were breaking the law) the local law enforcement out of their revenue?

[Leon]

Great, I only recently came over to the dark side of actually using the paypal gift payments on anything but true gift-like payments (as our contests are, or at least I consider them to be that). I think I see clear cut issues so will refrain from it in the future unless the other party mandates it. If they do then I will probably just let it go, but I probably won't ask for it anymore in sales, or I will split the fees. For the record, and not that it matters, I do pay paypal fees almost daily, one way or another...so it isn't like they don't make good money off of me but I know that's not the point, they should. It's their business. That all being said, when there is nothing changing hands I will probably still use it.

[ArchStanton]

When I buy cards on this board or the PSA board, I nearly always use the payment owed option. I never read their definition before. I guess I have been misusing that option. I have been a paypal user for about as long as they have been around. They make my life easier, and I help them make money. I do not spend or receive a ton of money through paypal.

My local bank offers some services to me as a customer. They will give me paper rolls for my change or give me a money order or chashiers check. They don't make any money from that, but I am a good, long-time customer.


I plan to continue to use the payment owed option whenever I feel comfortable with a seller. If you have a T206 Abbaticchio blue sleeves to sell, I'll show you.

[Sterling Sports Auctions]

Here's a crazy idea, use payment owed instead of gift. Same results less guilt for those that feel guilty.

I have no remorse for using either and not paying fees. I have had to try to deal with them once and it was a nightmare, and when they required "electronic payments/Paypal" that took the cake for me.

Lee

[HRBAKER]

David,
Interesting question. One that would make for interesting debate in a college ethics course I assume. Besides there being plenty of other good reasons not to drive 85 (and I have and have paid for it) besides the potential for lost revenue if you are not caught there might be a nuance or two differences in the pair. I would have to think more about it. On the surface I would say; a.) the police departments reason to be is not revenue generation, unlike paypal, and b.) I am already paying for their "goods and services" by conscription, unlike paypal which I only pay for when I choose to use and pay for it if I have agreed to their Terms and Conditions, c.) the revenue in that instance is designed to be punitive and behavior modifying not to serve solely as a source of income.

At the end of the day, when you choose to speed you have chosen to break the law/rules/T&C of the road so to speak.
Very good question.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

David,
Interesting question. One that would make for interesting debate in a college ethics course I assume. Besides there being plenty of other good reasons not to drive 85 (and I have and have paid for it) besides the potential for lost revenue if you are not caught there might be a nuance or two differences in the pair. I would have to think more about it. On the surface I would say; a.) the police departments reason to be is not revenue generation, unlike paypal, and b.) I am already paying for their "goods and services" by conscription, unlike paypal which I only pay for when I choose to use and pay for it if I have agreed to their Terms and Conditions, c.) the revenue in that instance is designed to be punitive and behavior modifying not to serve solely as a source of income.

At the end of the day, when you choose to speed you have chosen to break the law/rules/T&C of the road so to speak.
Very good question.

Ticket writing isn't revenue generation? Understanding a PD is not solely there to collect revenue but I would bet lunch on the fact that revenue is budgeted and counted on.
And do you really think police departments don't discuss the ticket revenue?

[HRBAKER]

I didn't say it wasn't revenue generation and that didn't discuss it, of course it is and they do. I said it wasn't the sole purpose of the fine and I referred to it as revenue. What I said was their reason to exist wasn't revenue generation like a publicly or privately held company. And of course they discuss it and budget for it. Unlike PP, we are also already paying for their services as well whether we don't speed, speed and get caught or not.

Like I said at the end of the day if you choose to speed you are making a choice to break the law.

[tonyo]

When I first started using paypal, they didn't charge a fee for payments sent using the balance, or maybe it was that they didn't charge fees if my account type didn't allow credit card payments. I believe that was it. Regardless, that policy changed and suddenly that account type was no longer an option.

It also seem there was a period where paypal gift didn't exist. I could be wrong on that.. my memory stinks these days.


My point is, paypal will probably remove the "gift/payment owed/ living expense/ other" option when they decide they aren't making enough money overall.


I think I'll choose "other" next time and see what happens.

[kcohen]

Originally Posted by bowlingshoegiverouterguy

Here's a crazy idea, use payment owed instead of gift. Same results less guilt for those that feel guilty.

I have no remorse for using either and not paying fees. I have had to try to deal with them once and it was a nightmare, and when they required "electronic payments/Paypal" that took the cake for me.

Lee

I had thought of that at one time but, irrespective of your degree of guilt or absence thereof, it's still the same violation of the User Agreement if you're selling something. The "payment owed" option is still a personal payment as opposed to a payment for goods.

[sycks22]

Originally Posted by tonyo

Pete,
What prompted them to shut down your gifting ability?

I was just using it too much I think. It was great not paying the fees, but I see where you pay for a service.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Leon

Ticket writing isn't revenue generation? Understanding a PD is not solely there to collect revenue but I would bet lunch on the fact that revenue is budgeted and counted on.
And do you really think police departments don't discuss the ticket revenue?

I had occasion to discuss this with a retired LAPD precinct captain. He told me that there are no ratios or budgets per se for ticket writing or revenue--the infamous quota does not exist--but that when a cop's rate of ticket writing starts to fall below his average the PD considers it evidence that the patrolman isn't paying attention to what is going on in his patrol area and he will be questioned about it.

As for whether self-reporting a traffic infraction is the same as not using Paypal gift for purchases, the two are not equivalent. The equivalent would be speeding or not speeding. Also, the argument that because I speed I should not have an issue with cheating paypal is a form of false logic called Two Wrongs Make A Right (Tu Quoque): a charge of wrongdoing is answered by a rationalization that others have sinned, or might have sinned.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I had occasion to discuss this with a retired LAPD precinct captain. He told me that there are no ratios or budgets per se for ticket writing or revenue--the infamous quota does not exist--but that when a cop's rate of ticket writing starts to fall below his average the PD considers it evidence that the patrolman isn't paying attention to what is going on in his patrol area and he will be questioned about it.

As for whether self-reporting a traffic infraction is the same as not using Paypal gift for purchases, the two are not equivalent. The equivalent would be speeding or not speeding. Also, the argument that because I speed I should not have an issue with cheating paypal is a form of false logic called Two Wrongs Make A Right (Tu Quoque): a charge of wrongdoing is answered by a rationalization that others have sinned, or might have sinned.

I just did a Google search and got approximately 3.5 million hits. While "quotas" are almost never allowed there are thousands of instances and hundreds of hours of testimony concerning the officers being pressured to write more tickets. This whole forum could be about this subject and it would be very active. There are certainly no "quotas" but there is also reality. Reality is that there are "requirements" to write a certain amount of tickets at many precincts. We can call it what we want to but perfuming the pig does no good. It still stinks. And no doubt two wrongs don't make a right. Speeding is a crime. Using paypal gift isn't.

[4815162342]

I've never understood why bad behavior is taxed, whether it's speeding, smoking, drinking, etc. There's even been discussion of a "fat tax" on good--I mean unhealthy food and soft drinks. All it does is make local and/or state budgets dependent on people continuing to participate in the behavior; otherwise they face budget shortfalls. What if one day everyone quit speeding?

[steve B]

Lots of interesting comments.

I'm conflicted about Paypal gift. Looking at it from a strict perspective it is wrong unless it's actually a gift.

But there are lots of rationalizations that get used.

I won't ask for a payment sent as a gift, but I won't get wound if someone sends it that way or requests it. Yes, a bit hypocritical, but it's the only compromise I see as workable.

When I did industrial work I had a chance to quote some work for the government. They have a little clause in their conditions about giving the government the same pricing as "your best customer or client". I spent a bunch of time working out how much of a discount to give them. Then the boss asked me "who is actually our best customer? The one that seldom buys and always expects a discount or the one that promptly pays list price without comment?" That totally changed my thinking.

Sometimes I view it as me sending someone a gift of cash and later they send me a gift that happens to be a card. Yep, a justification.

On the police/tickets thing, there are odd situations. Similar to a lower ticket rate being seen as a sign of slacking, Massachusetts was held to a similar thing by the feds. Too many tickets issued on rt 93 was seen as evidence that speeding enforcement wasn't being taken seriously. What was needed to release the federal highway funds? Writing even more tickets!
------------------------------
And for anyone wondering about the government quote......The agency in question also had a track record of getting detailed technical specs including part numbers in a quote held out as non-competetive then putting it out to bid using our quote as the required specs and eventually giving the job to someone else. I gave them a quote with some very obscure specs, OEM part numbers from a variety of suppliers and a confusing array of units of measurement. Like Instead of gallons/minute deciliters/hour. And some that while legit were even more obscure. Plus a schematic with errors.
All the other quotes were way overpriced, and the place they gave it to (despite them not being the low bidder) couldn't get it working. I got to take over the project at their price plus some extra. And came in under budget AND about 15% better on performance. I didn't get run around on quotes after that

Steve B

[majordanby]

sellers use the gift option to avoid the fees. otherwise, you have a few options

1.) request only for M.O. or check. Now, the question is does limiting your payment options to just these two limit your probability of selling the item (i.e. shrink your buying pool)? In other words, do buyers, for whatever reason (e.g. instant gratification, laziness, postage fee), prefer to pay via paypal?

2.) request upfront that the buyer pay the paypal fee. Once again, does this request limit your probability of selling the item? On average, do buyers turn away from net54 BST posts if they see that the seller offers paypal, but requests the buyer pay the fee?

If the answer to the questions in #1 are no, and you're worried about the fees (and you want to abide by paypal regulations), then just limit payment to check or M.O. Ditto for #2 - say upfront that paypal is a payment option, with the buyer paying the additional fee.

im not entirely sure what were the reasons for including a paypal gift option in the first place.

[Clutch-Hitter]

My opinion is in the thread "just a little concerned about this.".

To me, before this issue was mentioned as a dilemma, the only difference was that one included risk while the more expensive included their so called buyer protection. They're making their money either way and when you opt for the more expensive form and have a problem, you may not receive the help you deserve. That's how simply I viewed this issue.

Now I'm going to read all of this thread...