Jump to content

OT good grief


j m shaw

Recommended Posts

Chip , if we follow your arguments to there logical conclusion, well anything is okay. Providing it's not against the law (maybe) it's alright. I suppose morals are for fools! or the Holier than I crowd.Seems to me a case of 'i,m all right Jack' who cares a damn about anyone else! And we wonder why the world is not such a nice place. Well, there is an old saying 'you reap what you sow'. Go figure.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

"No one is 'beating up Mark',just expressing their views! Your scenario is different, as you are aware."

 

Allen,

 

Is the situation really that different? Yes the woman went in looking to trade for what she thought would be a fair price. What she got was a fair price in her mind, otherwise she would have walked. Should the offer been higher? Probably should have been. Yet, without us looking at gear and seeing the overall condition; we can not truly pass judgment. The only thing that we know from Mark's description is that the M5 had fungus, and the rest was not mint. Given the fungus on the M5, we can only assume the rest of the gear may have issues too. We also do not know what the lenses were.

 

But lets look at the "deal". A bargain M5 is about $900, the IIIg same condition about $800, and the lenses about $200 each. For a total of $2300. Based on Mark's description the M5 repair might be $400, about $300 for the IIIg, and about $100 each on the lenses - for about $1000 in repairs. Depending on the condition of the gear it may not even be repairable. Most repairs carry only a 90 or 180 warranty from the day it is received back at the store. And most dealers offer a 90 to 180 day warranty themselves. So if the gear lingers on a dealers shelf AFTER the repair warranty, then the dealer pays the new repair cost. That could be $200 to $300 for each body. Lets say for discussion that the dealer then factors a $200 for future repairs for each of the bodies. That leaves a profit of $900 on the total kit. That works out to about 39% profit if they get the full $2300 for everything. That may seem like a lot; but consider that camera dealers try to get 25% to 40% margins (depends on the dealer and the type of gear) on used gear.

 

As to "beating up" Mark. I feel that some were too harsh on Mark and the situation (see my previous post). Some were down right personal IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing I find extraordianry about this story is that no-one has said it is actually a criminal offense, or at least it would be in the UK.

 

If a trader knowingly buys or sells at an 'outrageous' price in the UK, he is guilty of obtaining a pecuniary advantage under false pretenses and liable to a prison sentence of up to, I believe, five years. This law is applied, though seldom enough that it tends to make headlines. Does the U.S. not have a similar law?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allen,

 

Sorry I write posts in spurts, so this is following up to your last comment. You have a point about the direction of life in general. Sounds like Mark and I share a common belief system. My previous post was more to illustrate how it might not have been reason for the offer. (A point that I forgot there is that depending on where a repair is sent, Leica repairs can take many weeks - if not months to get back. That too can be a factor in how much may be offered)

 

In many shops it is customary to ask what they are looking to get for the gear. She herself may have offered the $150 or something close to it. Working for a dealer, I have seen people come in with gear that they want nearly what they paid for it. Others that have no idea as to what they have is worth, and they are so low ball. The question is asked so as to not to waste time. What we do with that information is what separates us morally. Fortunately for myself and my employer, we try to do what is right for all parties. So morally I ok with my employer. I guess that Mark may be relooking at his long term options with his.

 

But the question still begs how many of us would have responded if we came across that woman wanted to sell us the gear for $150? What would we have offered her for the gear? It is easy for us to say now, that "oh, I would have given her $1000!". One can only say what is in their heart at that precise moment in time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harvey,

 

I wish we did for CEO's that are paid millions for managing a failing company.

 

But more to your post, I wonder how this is enforced? Who decides what was a fair price? Closest thing that I can think of that is similar is "price gouging" laws. These come up more for a gas station that starts charging $3 for gallon of gas due to a shortage (while the wholesale price does not reflect that cost), or a merchant that might charge $10 for bottled water during a disaster.

 

In Maryland gas dealers can not charge less than what they paid for the product. So I am sure that some states may have laws similar to what you speak of. Though for the free market system here in the states the phrase "let the buyer beware" rules for the most part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trevor, having different personal codes doesn't make one sinner

or saint. You have your code, and others have theirs. It is a gray

area at times except where a law defines the boundries.

 

However, don't assume everyone has your mind set on the

subject. I recently responded to the "flea market find" thread with

a story about a young person that had stumbled across a mint

Nikon Rangefinder collectable. I could have easily got it from him

for under $1,000. and he would have been delighted. Instead I

connected him with a knowledgable and fair dealer, from whom

he received upwards of $20,000. It doesn't make me a saint,

just a regular, vanilla flavored, honest person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is this different from the "Garage Sale Finds" thread:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004z8D

 

People who got $x,000 of equipment for $y0. Should they speak up and pay more? Or should they rejoice in their "win"?

 

I'm sure some of my own behavior is morally reprehensible, :) , but I recently bought a lens from a poster on this forum. It was a fairly new 90mm Summicron AA. He had originally advertized it for $1,450 and then two weeks later for $1,000. I bought it from him, but before that I told him that the price of $1,000 was too low for such a lens, and that he could get much more for it. He was glad about my honesty, and we settled on a price of $1,250. Some people would call me a fool, but I couldn't do it any other way. I have paid more for other equipment that I felt was not priced fairly. At the end of the day I have to live with myself. There are many instances of criminal ripoffs in society, but one has to clean one's own house before talking about another's. The ripple effect would change the world.

 

There have been many cases of people on this forum who offer unfair and ridiculous prices to a seller in the off chance of securing a great deal from a not completely informed seller. Isn't that also criminal, according to the logic posted in this thread?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Gregory.

 

Mark, did the lady come asking for $135 thereabouts or was it offered as a Fair Price by your collegue? There is a difference here, and it doesn't matter if she was "happy" with the offer or not.

 

Obviously she didn't know the real worth.

 

Mark, you'll see more things like these Im sure. When you make your daily decisions whether to interfere or not, you learn from these decisions.

 

One day, when you are in a position to call the shots, make sure you act based on these lessons learned. Only you will know what's right , what's fair and what's wrong.

 

cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well guv, us commen types...well, we know how to look after our old mum.Would'nt see her being done wrong. Or for that matter anyone elses old mum! Okay! we might nail the odd 'toe rag' to a garage door.Well ,that's how it works here. Not like you posh nobs with all the money, always waiting for you're family to croke. Running around the place grabbing the silver. You know what you toffs are like.Nuff said, i'm off to play jolly hockey sticks. Might pinch the Queens bum, can be a bit saucy that one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark,

 

You have been presented with a discomforting dilemna and I can understand how you might be feeling about it. You were a witness, not a participant, to the transaction. You could not reasonably have intervened at the time without perhaps betraying your employer's trust. Anyway, the event has happened now and you can't turn the clock back even if you wanted to.

 

Good on you for deciding to talk to the boss about it. This doesn't need to be any sort of confrontation, mind.......perhaps just an expression that you were uncomfortable with what you saw and asking if he thinks it was fair enough.

 

The boss then has the option of saying whether or not he is happy about it. He may even explain to you how he sees the transaction fitting in with his business. It is just possible that his profit is not as large as it appears, as was suggested in a previous post. In any event, the Boss can run the business as he sees fit. That's life.

 

You will then know if what happened is company policy, or the actions of an individual acting on his own under the company umbrella. This will simplify things.

 

If the Boss says he is OK with what happened, then you can decide how much allegiance you feel you should give to this company. You can decide, privately, whether you stay or not, and if so for how long, depending how it sits with you.

 

On the other hand, its just possible the Boss might figure that if you are not prepared to take advantage of customers....then you probably aren't looking to take advantage of him either. You might find that you now stand out from the other employees in his estimation.

 

You are in an awkward position but it has been my experience that it never hurts ( sometimes in the short run, but always in the long run ) to stand on your principles. Everyone gets to decide for themselves the rules they will live their own lives by. And you don't have to decide anything this second, or even tomorrow. It is quite understandable that you might need this paypacket badly. Only you can decide...... I hope talking to the Boss will clarify things for you.

 

 

I do hope you don't think my post presumptuous. It is not meant like that at all. I usually do not buy into such matters and am wary of offering unsolicited advice. But your post touched a nerve in me......and I must say, surprised me by doing so. I was in a similar situation once and it bothered me too at the time.

 

I sincerely wish you succes in resolving this to your own satisfaction. Good Luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark, i think what you did was enough given the situation at hand.

 

in these times, you have priorities. you said that job you have right now pays for your rent, so by doing something (confronting co-worker) without being fired is i think the practical thing to do...

 

and if i was at your shoes i probably would have just done the same thing.

 

imho, you did nothing wrong. don't sweat it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in these times, you have priorities

 

Mmm, the start of great injustices. I'm only doing my job, i had little choice. Unless folk are prepared to make a stand on small things(are they!)where will they be on big things. Correct, the same place! You do not have to think back far to hear the same words. I had little choice, i was only keeping my job. Sorry, to be so hard, but it's the little things what count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>I wonder how this is enforced? Who decides what was a fair price? <<

 

Chip,

 

The last case to hit the papers was about a plumber who charged a pensioner £2,000 to do a job that other plumbers said was worth £50. They sent him down for two years. In the UK we have officials called Trading Standards Officers who are expected to know what's fair and what's not, which they often do by reference to trade associations and similar bodies.

 

You can often tell Trading Standards Officers in South London, they're the ones trailing Alan and Trevor around the markets watching for them shifting dodgy Leicas stamped 'made in the USSR'. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe things like a roof over your head, food on the table, and small things like that? I haven't seen anyone yet offer Mark a subsidy while he looks for a more moral or ethical place to work.

 

BTW, I wasn't trying to rationalize anything with my expnading on the possible realities of the situation. Just trying to show that costs to the dealer MAY be higher than we think just from Mark's brief description. They are the realities of dealing used cameras.

 

I also noticed nobody tried to counter my speculation on getting these particular pieces resold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can often tell Trading Standards Officers in South London

 

Well, me and my mate Trevor, are going to have to check some of you lot out, get it. I've got the hammer, Trev the nails. But we are nice lads really, so we thought, we would let you choose the colour of the garage doors. Like white myself, goes well with red. Now Trev, being a bit posh, likes black. Me, cannot stand the screamers. I usually skin them alive. Cor Blimey, that makes them shut up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark didn't do anything wrong, I don't know why people are ragging on him. Im my work experience I have heard many derogatory jokes/statements made about gays, blacks, Jews, and so on. I spoke up when I could, but there were times when I couldn't, because I had a wife and her three daughters to feed. Am I part of the problem? I don't know. It depends if the discomfort outweighs the potential personal cost.

 

I once walked away from a nice job because I couldn't deal with the dishonesty in their dealings. It was a tremendous financial sacrifice and I wouldn't recommend it unless one has reached the zone of pain, where life becomes intolerable, no matter how good the money.

 

People tend to only focus on local situations. For example, we buy diamonds, yet ignore the murder and genocide that goes on in the diamond producing African countries. It is laughable that some diamonds are now certified as "blood free."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, me and Trev, have dipped our sky rockets( pockets to you colonists) and have a got a one way ticket for that Russian bloke Chip Leik something. We'll take him to Milwall, and Chelsea, get him some posh grub. Yeah, then show him around South London AND STUFF. Then we'll see how well he can sing..if you get my meaning. All right!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...