Ebay is Unfair!

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:11:44 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:


"Padraic Brown" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 19:06:55 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:


"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:13:02 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:

However, it's often the case that you are buying an item that is
unique or offered by only one seller and priced at £1 value and £19
shipping. In that case, you have to either decide to reward shady
ethics or do without the item.

It's quite possible many would do without the item, on the basis,
uniqueness
and general rareness generally has a certain expectation of "willing to
pay
more". Paying £1 suggests the item may not be up to decent standards.

You are not paying £1; you are paying £20. The cost out-of-pocket is
what you are paying. The allocation of the item figure and the
shipping figure doesn't affect the buyer.

*sigh* The item is priced at £1. It's ridiculous low price suggests it is
below acceptable standard.

Not at all. It is a fairly widespread practice to start an auction at
such a low amount in hopes of attracting attention. Such a high
postage cost, however, will tend to counteract that attractant. So, as
Tony said, the price _isn't_ £1 at all, but the £20 total.

You (and Tony) are mis-understanding me. I'm not concerned with starting
bid, I am referring to final bid, which is, in this example £1. It is common
for seasoned buyers to avoid these auctions, on the simple basis, it just
doesn't look or feel right. I dare say, if I had ever made such purchases, I
would be more out of pocket than the few quid I have currently lost since
the late 90's!

As I'm sure you're aware, the final bid is not really the bottom line!
If you're not taking into account the cost of postage -- whether it's
47p or £19 -- then you really don't have a grasp on the actual price
and therefore value of the item.

At the end of the day, if people like you feel sky high postal prices are
acceptable, then so be it. I strongly disagree,

Fine. And once again, it's not a question of "sky high postal prices"
but a matter of "total auction price". If I can get a £20 note for £1
plus £19 postage, then I come out ahead (cos I don't have to pay the
exchange rate).

and I will continue to
strongly disagree until people "GET IT". Defending a rip-off is
unacceptable.

No one is defending "rip-offs".

Professional businesses cannot show profit on an
item that is sold at a loss (or minimal profit is shown).

True, but all retailers know what a "loss leader" is. It's a low
prices something that attracts people to the store where, hopefully,
they will buy much more than they actually need. That's all the £1
start bid is -- it's a loss leader offered in the hopes that
continually higher bids will be placed.

Not really, a loss leader is always sold at a loss, it isn't sold on the
assumption it will somehow make a profit. The term "loss leader" simply
means to lose on one to gain overall. Such a gain cannot exist within the
context of loss leading, when the gain is on the loss. As I understand it,
such a practice is impossible to account for.

Tony already answered this one.

It's basic auction psychology. If something is _worth_ £10 and the
opening bid is £9, chances are the first bidder will get it for £9
because the next bid will push the price over the top. No room for
bidding wars. On the other hand, if the opening bid is 10p, then
there's lots of room for wild and crazy bidding! There's a better
chance of selling the item for £11 or £12 that way.

We're not talking about auction psychology. If we were, then we'd both be
holding apples, and not one of us with a orange.

Well, if the bid is £1 (even with £20 postage) then this is exactly
what we're dealing with. Depending on the item of course! If it's only
worth a pound, then no one's going to bid at all.

i.e Psychology is true in the following instance:

A) 1p start bid, postal cost £1

B) £5 start bid, postal cost £1

A final bid = £7.40 + £1

B final bid = £5 + £1

A attracts attention, B doesn't.

Depends on the item. If the item is worth £50 and you start it at £5,
then it's all the same.

We're not talking about starting bids, we are talking about final bids, and
the sky high postal costs.

Once again, if the item is worth the £20, then all's well!

Income from
postage profit is a seperate income, and probabaly comes under service
income...

Not for Ebay auctions.

Actually, Yes.

Actually, no. The seller has several costs of doing business: stock
plus packing and postage plus Ebay fees. The buyer pays for all of
that and writes one cheque. The seller's income comes from sales made,
regardless of what he charges for postage. If he can get away with
charging more for postage than someone else, then bully for him!

Think paypal, and the little section for Postage Charge.

I have no use for Paypal and have never used it. If a seller won't
take a money order or cash, then he won't get my bid.

It's the same as paying 1p for litre of Diesel, and being charged by an
attendant 94.9p a litre to fill it. Customer cannot be given an accurate
invoice. (for example, some people can claim VAT and other taxes back).
VAT
on 1p? lol

It's really not as cut and dry as overall price.

There are probably laws in Britain against charging such a high
service price. In the end, it all evens out: the customer pays 96p for
that litre regardless of the "stated price" of 1p/l.

A new example, as that one doesnt seem to have got the point across.

The point is that the total price paid by the customer is 96p -- it
does not matter what goes into that price!

Cigarettes may cost £5 a pack. On a carton of 200 cigarettes, something like
£32 (could be more, not checked recently) is Excise Duty. As the £32 is not
an applicable duty on "service" charges, a retailer cannot sell cigarettes
for 1p and charge for the duty as a "service".

And where duty rebates are an option, it is impossible to claim them back,
if you havn't paid for them in the first place.

What's an "excise duty"? Is it a tax? Is it part of the £5 per pack
price? That's what, about £3.20 tax per pack? He can charge 1p for the
pack if he wants -- it'll get people into his shop for sure!, as £3.21
beats £5 any day.

It _all_ comes down to the final price, and whether that final price
is a good deal or not.

Also,
it might be hard to justify paying £20 for something that has no real
value
outside of personal desire.

A great deal of what I spend is for things that have no real value
outside of personal desire. My cable internet bill, for example.

Can you justify paying for your cable bill?

I rather think he just did: it's a matter of personal desire. He wants
to watch Coronation Street reruns, so he pays the cable bill. If he
wants a "£1" item off ebay that will cost him £19 to mail, then he'd
have to consider whether he desires a £20 item or not!

Or perhaps answering the question would help :-)

Already answered, friend! Cable tv is not a necessity. He says that
it's a "personal desire". He has weighed the options and has decided
that the price of the service is equal to the entertainment received.
Purchase justified.

i.e, a justification for paying for the internet is whether it forms an
essential part of your daily life. i.e, online shopping, staying in easy
contact with overseas relatives, school work etc.

Online shopping and staying in "easy" contact with overseas relations
is not essential either. The previous generation got on quite well
with neithe. They had the Sears and Roebuck Catalog and knew how to
address an envelope.

It really is as cut and dry as overall price -- for the consumer. We
don't care what the raw materials cost, shipping charges of same,
labour to make a finished product, or any of the various taxes and
fees involved (nor indeed the human cost (sweatshops and the like)).
We look at the price sticker on the item and make a decision whether
to buy or not based on that number. If it has to be mailed to me, then
the price of postage simply gets added on to that price sticker. If
the total price is OK, then we buy it; if it's too high, we leave it
be.

Padraic

If anyone is daft enough to pay £19 to have a £1 CD mailed then good luck,
that's all I can say. Personally, I'd rather pay £21 from a seller who has
ethics.

Of course! Why would anyone pay £20 for an item worth only £1!? Like I
said, you have to look at the _total_ price of the item and determine
if it's worthwhile! Ethics are really beside the point here.

Padraic

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 19:40:52 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:


"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:12:44 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:


"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
m...
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 17:53:44 -0400, Padraic Brown
wrote:

A great deal of what I spend is for things that have no real value
outside of personal desire. My cable internet bill, for example.

Can you justify paying for your cable bill?

I rather think he just did: it's a matter of personal desire. He wants
to watch Coronation Street reruns,

I'm in the US, and BBCAmerica hasn't carried _Coronation Street_.
I saw a few episodes on our PBS channel, but they were so old that
"Sally Webster" was still playing with Sindy dolls.

Think you mean Rosie. Sally is her mother.


I meant Sally. We get very old shows here, if at all.

Not THAT old. Sally was never in corrie as a child. Assumingly, she came
in
around the time Rosie was born...which would be about 15 years ago.

You couldn't possibly be THAT far behind!


Do look up "irony" next time you're near a dictionary.


So, what you really mean, is your original statement was bull****. Gee, how
shocked I am!

And TRUE irony is that Sally Webster (or whoever) is STILL playing with
"sindy" dolls. The reference to "that old" renders irony invalid. Of course,
as we dont know if she ever did, irony doesnt exist.

Sarcasm would fit better. But I dont really think you know what you're
talking about anyway.

l2oberto




--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:54:47 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:


"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 19:06:55 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:


"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
m...
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:13:02 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:

However, it's often the case that you are buying an item that is
unique or offered by only one seller and priced at £1 value and £19
shipping. In that case, you have to either decide to reward shady
ethics or do without the item.

It's quite possible many would do without the item, on the basis,
uniqueness
and general rareness generally has a certain expectation of "willing
to
pay
more". Paying £1 suggests the item may not be up to decent standards.

You are not paying £1; you are paying £20. The cost out-of-pocket is
what you are paying. The allocation of the item figure and the
shipping figure doesn't affect the buyer.

*sigh* The item is priced at £1.
It's ridiculous low price suggests it is
below acceptable standard.

Only to someone who refuses to reason out what's involved. The
knowledgeable person understands that he will pay £20 total, and that
how that £20 is arrived at between bid price and shipping makes no
difference to him. The £1 figure means nothing to him.

It means everything when you want a refund, and only get £1 back!


Professional businesses cannot show profit on an
item that is sold at a loss (or minimal profit is shown). Income from
postage profit is a seperate income, and probabaly comes under service
income...

Nonsense. Income is income. It is separated on paper for the benefit
of accounting purposes, but it all goes to bottom line.

So, given we are skipping over accounting and just going for the basic
approach that A - B = C.

Accounting *is* "A-B=C". We just use some A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, B3, etc
to get to the net of "C".

If you use A1,2,3 etc, then how on earth have you skipped over accounting?
You said income is income, and disregarded the accounting proceedure,
therefore, there is none of this A1,2,3 - B1,2,3 etc.

Apparantly, you can't keep track: having seperate incomes is considered, as
you previously described as "Nonsense", prompting me to use the single
figure method only for you to argue further and agree, accounting is made up
of seperate incomes (and expenses).

So, which is it? Make up your damn mind man!



Where does the refund of £1 on the cost of a £20 (£1 + £19) book fit in?
Hard to imagine how a bottom line can be reached accuratley, if 100 books
make your total bottom line of £2,000 and your total refunds as you were
unfortunate enough to refund all sales is £100.

It would also be difficult to get to the bottom line accurately if a
wisdom of wombats ate your working papers. Both scenarios are equal
in probability.





The seller of
the item in question puts £20 in his pocket when the sale is
completed. The seller's financial records show the income as £20. If
the seller paid £10 for the item, the P&L would reflect a £10 profit
less his actual shipping cost.

No, it would show £1 (£9) £19 (£3)¹

¹ Where postal charges are £3.

Yes. That's what I wrote.

No, what you wrote was (£10) ("seller paid £10 for the item") £20 ("income
of £20) (£3) ("less his actual shipping cost")

In my example, all income is easy to identify, and easy to chart out, the
actual gross profit on item AND postage.

VAT is not shown for the purposes of keeping it simple, and Books have no
VAT (either zero rated or exempt, cant remember which)...

READ THIS CAREFULLY.

The process of lumping all charges to 1 invoice wouldn't work for
importing
goods, as there is a exemption of VAT and Duty on products imported to the
UK under £18. If I pay £1 for a DVD, this is £1 in value that is to be
declared on the customs label, and needs to match the invoice. In the case
of a £20 declared overall lump sum, I would be required to pay VAT (17.5%
on
the £20) plus VAT on the postage charge (actual, not the sellers version!)
plus a fee of what used to be £4 to the royal mail for processing the
item,
this may be £8 now.

Life is far too complicated for you in the UK. I suggest you emigrate
immediately. Don't take your DVD player. It is only causing you
grief.

How does that make life complicated for me? I would really love to hear your
logic on that. I import all the time. Never had a problem, and if you read
my statements, I DO NOT BUY CHEAP ITEMS WITH INFLATED POSTAGE!


I dont think it matters how I make my point, as long as
I am able to discredit the notion that overall price is cut and dry.

The term is "cut and dried". The origin of the term is not known for
sure, but probably refers to lumber having to be cut and dried before
it is marketable. It may refer to tobacco, though, for the same
reasons.

So, if it's cut and dried, explain how a £20 "item" can end up costing the
buyer over £30. You give bad advice.






It's really not as cut and dry as overall price.

Yes, from the buyer's viewpoint, it is.

See above!


Also,
it might be hard to justify paying £20 for something that has no real
value
outside of personal desire.

A great deal of what I spend is for things that have no real value
outside of personal desire. My cable internet bill, for example.

Can you justify paying for your cable bill?

Certainly. It satisfies my personal desire. That's the only
justification I need.

The internet may satisfy your personal desire...but can you justify paying
for it? What I am asking, is whether you would STILL pay for it, if
another
provider offered you a better service?

l2oberto

I see you were unable to answer that. I think that sums you and your
ridiculous responses up quite well!

l2oberto



--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL


--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

"Padraic Brown" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:54:47 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:


"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 19:06:55 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:


"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
m...
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:13:02 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:

However, it's often the case that you are buying an item that is
unique or offered by only one seller and priced at £1 value and £19
shipping. In that case, you have to either decide to reward shady
ethics or do without the item.

It's quite possible many would do without the item, on the basis,
uniqueness
and general rareness generally has a certain expectation of "willing
to
pay
more". Paying £1 suggests the item may not be up to decent standards.

You are not paying £1; you are paying £20. The cost out-of-pocket is
what you are paying. The allocation of the item figure and the
shipping figure doesn't affect the buyer.

*sigh* The item is priced at £1.
It's ridiculous low price suggests it is
below acceptable standard.

Only to someone who refuses to reason out what's involved. The
knowledgeable person understands that he will pay £20 total, and that
how that £20 is arrived at between bid price and shipping makes no
difference to him. The £1 figure means nothing to him.

It means everything when you want a refund, and only get £1 back!

You certainly have a point there! The lesson here, as it is with _any_
Ebay purchas, is to find out as much as possible about the seller and
the item in question. Even with a reputable seller, it's always a
crapshoot as to what you'll actually end up with.

Well, yes, I do agree there is a element of risk, BUT, consider "£1 + £19"
as a coin, the probability of risk is greater. (50%, 1 in 2)

Regular sellers, might be like a dice. The probability is 1 in 6. Odds in
your favour.


Professional businesses cannot show profit on an
item that is sold at a loss (or minimal profit is shown). Income from
postage profit is a seperate income, and probabaly comes under service
income...

Nonsense. Income is income. It is separated on paper for the benefit
of accounting purposes, but it all goes to bottom line.

So, given we are skipping over accounting and just going for the basic
approach that A - B = C.

Where does the refund of £1 on the cost of a £20 (£1 + £19) book fit in?

If you're going to talk about refunds, now, then obviously that should
be stated in the terms of the auction. Some sellers offer a _full_
refund (lot plus postage); others (most I think) offer a partial
refund (lot price only). Some offer no refund at all (as is where is,
buyer assumes all risks).

But, does it matter what the seller says, if, previous comments here testify
to, the only relevant factor is overall price. That is why I continually say
it is far from cut and dried! A lot more rides on purchase, such as other
variables.


This is where it pays to know the seller's refund policy. If his
policy is to refund the lot price only, then you get £1 back if you
don't like it!

Hard to imagine how a bottom line can be reached accuratley, if 100 books
make your total bottom line of £2,000 and your total refunds as you were
unfortunate enough to refund all sales is £100.

Income (£2,000) Minus all Income refunded (£100) = £1,900.

Perhaps skipping over accounting was a mistake!

The bottom line for that seller is £1900 pounds. What's so hard to
understand about that?

His bottom line will be a minus figure (whether it is or not). To show
anything other than a minus figure is incorrect accounting.

i.e the accounting proceedure, BASED on the mindless reasoning by people who
claim income is income.

INCOME £2,000. REFUNDS: £2,000 = £0 MINUS EXPENSES = (x)

Even if you make a partial refund, you have to show the basis for such a
refund, as you will have a auditing nightmare otherwise...


If it costs him less than that to stock his
auctions and pay all other associated costs, then he comes out ahead.

Accounting is not that simple!!



The seller of
the item in question puts £20 in his pocket when the sale is
completed. The seller's financial records show the income as £20. If
the seller paid £10 for the item, the P&L would reflect a £10 profit
less his actual shipping cost.

No, it would show £1 (£9) £19 (£3)¹

¹ Where postal charges are £3.

OK, then his pocketed income is £16 (less whatever the item originall
cost him). So what?

His pocketed OVERALL income is not £16....it £1 + £19 - £3 = £17.

It's just better accounting.

The principle applies to restaurant bills where service income is shown
seperatley as gratuity:

MEAL: £35
DRINK: £18
SUB TOTAL: £53
GRATUITY £5.30 (@10%)
TOTAL: £58.30

VAT breakdown may also be shown - and can be even more complex.



It's the same as paying 1p for litre of Diesel, and being charged by an
attendant 94.9p a litre to fill it. Customer cannot be given an accurate
invoice. (for example, some people can claim VAT and other taxes back).
VAT
on 1p? lol

I'm an American and I don't know how VAT works (but I have paid it on
items I've purchased when in the UK). If VAT is charged on labor, and
if it's charged at the same rate as it is on petrol, the VAT collected
would be the same as if the fuel were priced at £1.

Excise duty is collected product specific, i.e it is specific to fuel, not
labour.

READ THIS CAREFULLY.

The process of lumping all charges to 1 invoice wouldn't work for
importing
goods, as there is a exemption of VAT and Duty on products imported to the
UK under £18. If I pay £1 for a DVD, this is £1 in value that is to be
declared on the customs label, and needs to match the invoice. In the case
of a £20 declared overall lump sum, I would be required to pay VAT (17.5%
on
the £20) plus VAT on the postage charge (actual, not the sellers version!)
plus a fee of what used to be £4 to the royal mail for processing the
item,
this may be £8 now. I dont think it matters how I make my point, as long
as
I am able to discredit the notion that overall price is cut and dry.


I think you're making this _much_ more complex than it really is. This
is an Ebay sale, not an import-export business, nor a retail sales
business, not a restaurant. This is some bloke selling some trinkets
(presumably worth ~£20) for £1 plus £19 postage. He gets his £20, the
buyer gets his £20 trinket. End of story.

Which buyers? Not me, it would cost me over £30 if I imported it.


It's really not as cut and dry as overall price.

Yes, from the buyer's viewpoint, it is.

See above!

Yeah, see above! Without all the added complexities!

What complexities? I suppose paying income tax is a complexity too?


Also,
it might be hard to justify paying £20 for something that has no real
value
outside of personal desire.

A great deal of what I spend is for things that have no real value
outside of personal desire. My cable internet bill, for example.

Can you justify paying for your cable bill?

Certainly. It satisfies my personal desire. That's the only
justification I need.

The internet may satisfy your personal desire...but can you justify paying
for it?

He just did! It satisfies his personal desire!

What I am asking, is whether you would STILL pay for it, if another
provider offered you a better service?

What's the price? Is it 20x what he is paying now or half the price?
It _all_ comes down to final price for value received.

That's not how business works i'm afraid to tell you. If it was, everyone
would inflate their postage charges and nobody would get a decent service.


Whether it's
restaurant food,

If you think the lowest price is the deciding factor for retaurant food,
you're out of your mind!

QUALITY counts. You can either afford it, or you can't. You dont base it on
PRICE.

petrol,

Bad example, excise duty prohibits any daft pricing.

books,

2 Sellers: Both end up charging the same price. The padded postage price
seller, states he will send item by the slowest method and will post it in 5
days.

The other seller, has a flawless record for speedy dispatch, and uses a
insured service.

Is price really the only factor?? Get real man!

cable tv

I'd choose whichever offered me better value for money. Again, price does
not reflect the value for money consideration.

or a coin bought on Ebay. If
the amount of money spent is deemed to be "about right" for the item,
then the deal is good.

So, would you be happy to also pay the eBay fees that are due to the seller,
as a result of fee avoidance? Because I think you should pay them! aiding
and abeting circumventing fees should see the buyer equally as liable for
charges due.

Doesn't matter what the seller's breakdown is.

Padraic

Matters in the long run, the economy will tell you that if you often cheat
the system.

l2oberto

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 10:36:26 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:

Nonsense. Income is income. It is separated on paper for the benefit
of accounting purposes, but it all goes to bottom line.

So, given we are skipping over accounting and just going for the basic
approach that A - B = C.

Accounting *is* "A-B=C". We just use some A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, B3, etc
to get to the net of "C".

If you use A1,2,3 etc, then how on earth have you skipped over accounting?
You said income is income, and disregarded the accounting proceedure,
therefore, there is none of this A1,2,3 - B1,2,3 etc.

Apparantly, you can't keep track: having seperate incomes is considered, as
you previously described as "Nonsense", prompting me to use the single
figure method only for you to argue further and agree, accounting is made up
of seperate incomes (and expenses).

So, which is it? Make up your damn mind man!

I'm beginning to understand why dealing with eBay is a very
complicated thing for you. Accounting *is* "A-B=C" with A being
sales, B being costs, and C being profits. We *can* use B1, B2, etc
to break down the costs by reason of occupance to have a better
understanding of where the money goes before it affects "C", but we
don't need to if we are content to know that there is a "C".

"A" can come from separate sources (A1, A2, etc), but "A" is not
separate from another "A" because the "A-B=C" is the result of the
single entity. "Separate incomes" would indicate that there is
separate "A-B=C".

The seller of
the item in question puts £20 in his pocket when the sale is
completed. The seller's financial records show the income as £20. If
the seller paid £10 for the item, the P&L would reflect a £10 profit
less his actual shipping cost.

No, it would show £1 (£9) £19 (£3)¹

¹ Where postal charges are £3.

Yes. That's what I wrote.

No, what you wrote was (£10) ("seller paid £10 for the item") £20 ("income
of £20) (£3) ("less his actual shipping cost")

I fail to see the difference other than you have specified the actual
cost and I have just indicated that the actual cost is minused.


I dont think it matters how I make my point, as long as
I am able to discredit the notion that overall price is cut and dry.

The term is "cut and dried". The origin of the term is not known for
sure, but probably refers to lumber having to be cut and dried before
it is marketable. It may refer to tobacco, though, for the same
reasons.

So, if it's cut and dried, explain how a £20 "item" can end up costing the
buyer over £30. You give bad advice.

It's the term that is "cut and dried". Your "notion" is anything but.

Can you justify paying for your cable bill?

Certainly. It satisfies my personal desire. That's the only
justification I need.

The internet may satisfy your personal desire...but can you justify paying
for it? What I am asking, is whether you would STILL pay for it, if
another
provider offered you a better service?

If that's your question, then you are misusing the word "justify".
All that is required to justify paying for something is to be able to
apply reasons that the item is worth the price. To evaluate other
sources for the items, or substitute items, is an entirely different
process.

You can justify paying a provider with less service than another
provider by deciding that the cost of changing is not worth the gain
in service and that the additional service benefits are not
significant.

My justification for paying for internet service is that having
internet access pleases me. My justification for staying with my
current ISP is that change would be disruptive and the level of
service is adequate for my needs.





--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

As I understand it, on Sat, 14 Apr 2007 14:51:12 +0100, "Roberto
Pirezzi" wrote:


[snips for brevity]


I'm the kind of person who will leave **** on someone's doorstep and watch
someone tread in it. Not literally of course, but provokation has a
general
habit of finding out more about someone, and how they react to being
called
arrogant to that comment, they could have explained it in more depth, they
chose not to.

Yep. The poster probably didn't and doesn't care.


Let's face it, if someone on the net, calls you arrogant...would you really
care? I wouldn't. People pick on me all the time. Bullies! That Worthog is
the worst lol

I have a pat answer I use when someone insults me.
"Oh doom. Someone who has NO influence on me in real life,
and outside of Usenet fodder, no influence on me on-line thinks ill of
me. Oh doom and gloom."
Sometimes I'll replace "Oh doom and gloom" with "How ever
shall I live with the shame?"
Either way, the point is made.


Enough people defended the poster though, always amusing to me
lol.

And people say *I'm* easily amused

I dont take life too seriously...it doesnt last long enough...gotta have
some fun with it, even if the things that amuse you can seem...pointless,
and meaningless.

Sounds like what I find entertaining; pointless and
meaningless.

[...]


That hadn't occurred to me. Having used eBay for several
years, and only having a (metaphorically speaking) handful of auctions
under my belt, I've never had a purchase I forgot.

But you also wouldn't expect one of your purchases to not turn up. :-) I
think you are like the majority of people, and it's usually the minority
(with very loud voices) that tend to have some kind of bad experiences. I
know you're down $28, but you're not about to slit your wrist over it, or
wage world war III over it. It sucks you lost money, but you know when to
let go. It doesn't make you cynical, it doesnt mean you expect the worst.


Definitely. And it's so unimportant, I can't even recall what
the item was. That's saying something since I have a phenomenal,
though not perfect, memory.

[...]


I've not had to make used of the feature, but it would likely
depend on the amount with me as well. $20.00? I'm not likely to lose
sleep over it and as such, not care enough to do a charge back.
$200.00 is another matter.

I'm not even sure if you are actually covered on UK cards under £100....you

I don't know what the amount is for such. If the card is
stolen and fraudulent purchases are made, the card owner is only
responsible for $50.00 under law.
Some issuers pay the $50.00 as well making the owner liable
for nothing. I think Chase Bank does this, but I can't say why I
think this.

might under actual law, but the issuers never really make that clear, and
just say protected for purchases over £100. Ive long since lost my
agreement, so cannot tell you the exact terms.

I looked around egg's (the only credit card I know that is
unique to the UK -- they advertise during Primeval) site but couldn't
find anything. The information may be there. That I didn't find it
only means I didn't find it.


My last CC transaction was for 500 (well, 499.97 but who's counting), but
not online.



I think Ive said it, not sure if I sent the post, but I do usually make
larger purchases on credit card, and of course international purchases
(small change or not, cant use any other method for many international
purchases).


Most purchases I make are done on the AmEx Delta card.

As you have a purpose to save the armiles up, it makes sense. I Did use my
amazon card for amazon purchases, but ended up paying more than the
incentive was offering.

Not much of an incentive then

[...]



My guess is pocket change items wouldn't cover the milegage from gate to
runway lol

I totally accept WHY you do use it though, as that is a great incentive.
Some would say you end up spending more to save the cost of flights, but
it
actually evens itself out to being in your favour. Especially if you only
spend on CC what you'd spend anyway.


That's how I do it. And I pay the bill in full every month.
Well, last year it took a bit longer, but that's because I
bought a Rolex. I *might* have been able to pay the whole $15,000.00
for the watch when the bill arrived, but I don't think Lindsay and our
son would have liked living in the car (our daughter wasn't yet born,
so she wouldn't have cared either way g).

£30 my watch cost. Paid cash lol

I don't wear the Rolex much. I usually wear a $10.00 watch
that I bought at Wal-Mart. It tells the time and date, like the
Rolex, AND has a stopwatch.
Of course, the Rolex is 18k gold. I don't know what the
$10.00 watch is made from. Probably steel and plastic.


I am having major trouble imaging spending 15K on a watch

I've wanted a Rolex for years. When I saw it, I thought to
myself, I'd really like to buy that.
I walked away and waited two days to make absolutely certain
it wouldn't be an impulse buy. When I still wanted it, I bought it.

- my car was
probably the most expensive purchase this year (but not that bad, private
sale of my old car = more cash than trade in). Toyota Landcruiser, was
*around* 20K with cash value of XC90. Landcruiser was around 50K on the
book, but had some other discounts :-)

The PT Cruiser I bought recently listed for $26,000 but I got
it for $20,000. It's last year's model and I suspect they wanted it
off the lot. I don't KNOW that this is why I got it for $6000.00 less
than list price, but it makes sense.

[...]


Having paid for 4 meals in a restaurant on our anniversary, when neither
of
us ate that many, and neither of brought secret lovers, I was rather
annoyed!!! Call to bank, all sorted. I agree, it can cause problems in
"limbo" if the current balance is used to settle other debts, which cannot
be settled, but it is even rarer for banks not to reimburse and sort that
out, than the actual overpaying in the first place.

Murder is illegal as well, but having been inside the Cook
County Morgue, I can assure you, it does. Or rather it did in the
early 1990s. I left the funeral industry in 1993, so while I'm sure
there are many murder victims to be found inside CCM, I can't honestly
say I KNOW there are.

But it is still a rare occurance, not that being dead has any real
advantages,

I think you're excused from personally paying taxes

Well.....there are stories of the dead receiving final demands!!

I've read about a woman who got a phone call from a collection
agency regarding her mom's credit card. Her mom had been dead for a
few months.


On the other hand, it has been known for spouses to claim benefits for their
deceased other half. If I can find the news stories, I'll post them, one
went on for years if I recall.

It doesn't surprise me. And I bet when caught each one
claimed it was the benefit giver's fault for continuing to send the
benefits.

[...]


I'm not that familiar with the UK system either, I do know that generally,
courts tend to be used for the purpose of debts, i.e CCJ (County Court
Judgement). I suppose a collection agency will lay it on thick to put the
****s up people, maybe the cease and desist letter works here, I'm not
sure
if people are all that clued up about it. Might be worth looking into for
the sake of knowledge I guess. You never know when you need to know
things!


The only reason I know about it is from the consumer groups I
read and post to. Every so often someone will post about a debt
collection agency calling them and wondering what to do.

I am sure the correct "proceedure" is not to take the threat
seriously...lol...no, that came out wrong. I think you are warned not to get
upset about threats from collection agencies, and I think it usually ends up
through the courts,

I don't know the numbers, but I think many are just written
off as a loss to the creditor. If the amount is great, several
thousand dollars or pounds, I expect court action would come into
play.

unless it's a private loan shark. Then we're back to the
advantages of being dead (or at least, the disadvantaged of perhaps, being
in a coma)


Don't pay the loan shark, and you could end up in a coma


The first time I saw one, I thought about replying with, "Pay
them if you owe it. If you don't, tell them to send you proof that
you owe it."

I would wait for the court to tell me to pay it, and then, after giving it
some serious consideration.

If the debt is owed, it should be paid WITHOUT having a court
order. And most creditors will work with a person to get a payment
plan arranged. Better to get the whole amount over a great deal of
time than none of it ever.

Pay it in weekly installments of 7p. Then we're
back to the advantage of eventually, dying.

You're boarding on evil. I like it


I chose to hold off, and others commented about applicable
law, offering cites and such.

I've been known to give bad advice...LOL

On misc.legal I often point out that I'm not a lawyer, if
anything I write could be viewed as actual legal advice.
My standard disclaimer:

"I am not an attorney. If anyone who is contradicts anything
I write, go with their opinion over mine."


I can imagine the uproar from folk if I say settle the bill, when they didnt
need to,

Ethically, the person should pay what is owed, if it is a
valid debt. There may be loop holes that allow someone to refuse
paying it without any legal consequences, but they should feel guilty
about it.
If they don't owe it, then they should fight it.

based on the fact, saying someone is arrogant, brings out warthogs
and Damn Sam, thankyou, Maam. lol Amongst others.





[...]


I know enough Italian to get my face slapped by any number of
Italian speaking women :-)

Who says you need to speak Italian for that to happen. - I have a mother in
law :-) - she's alright really, makes a fantastic seafood linguine. My Dad
tends to be pretty much tomato and basil (I mean, bland cooking). Frankie
(Franchescka..seeing as I figured Lin was Chinese...and not Lindsay lol)

It gets better. Lindsay isn't her real name, but rather a
nick-name her brother gave her when she was a baby. It's not related
to her real name in any way, and no one, her brother included,
understands why he did it.
When I first mentioned her on-line, I used Lindsay. It felt
natural since no one calls her by her first name. Having come afoul
of a cyber-stalker who wants to destroy her working life (she's a
psychologist), it's good that I've never used her real name.

takes after her mother for cooking. I've learn a lot over the years. Yeah,
thinking about the above, pretty damn off topic.


for the reason being, my Mother is British, and my
Dad didn't bother speaking Italian around the "family" here. IF there was
a
class in school for Italian, I'd have took it, but as I got older, and
relied less and less on the need to speak it, would be too late to start
now.

It's never too late. It is far easier for a child to learn.
For example, our son can speak English and Polish fluently, and
Spanish well enough to get his point across (but he INSISTS it's NOT
because he has a crush on the Mexican girl a few streets over, since,
of course, he doesn't have a crush on her).

I am mid 30's (seriously lol) so I guess I have time to learn.

I'm in my late 30's and am learning Japanese. I'm not sure
why as we have no plans on visiting Japan. Of course, 10 years ago,
we had no plans on visiting South America or Antarctica, so who knows?



Frankie is also of Italian heritage, but it's her Mother who is
Italian, and ended up in the same situation as me. Or eldest, speaks
Spanish
(spanish offered in school), so we have an Italian kid who speaks (fairly)
fluent Spanish lol

Our children are half Polish, half Salvadorian (Lin's parents
emigrated over 50 years ago).
What's really funny, IMO, is that Lin knows very little
Spanish. Her parents won't speak it to anyone but me, and their son's
wife. And we only speak it around gift giving occasions to keep Lin
and/or Bill (Lin's brother) from knowing what we're talking about.

Where I work, we have a lot of Poles, mostly doing the driving jobs, so I
don't really see much of them. Hard working people though. And rarely late
or off sick.

Since December of 1993, I've missed one day of work due to
illness. I did miss nearly two weeks in January while Lin and I
visited Antarctica, but other than when crossing Drake's Passage, I
wasn't sick.
Drake's is some ROUGH water! And of course, Lin didn't get
the slightest twinge of motion sickness! Grrrrrr!


Kiddo doesn't speak Spanish in the house, as noone can understand her - but
she has a friend who she talks to on the phone, in fluent Spanish. WHY I do
not know,

More privacy. She can be as open as she wishes and know no
one hearing her will understand. It's why our son and I will speak in
Polish and her parents and I will speak in Spanish when gift giving
times approach and Lin is within ear shot.

but it's good she can speak a 2nd language. Handy for later life.
She wants to work in the travel business.

It will come in handy then.
In the U.S., Spanish is becoming more and more necessary. We
don't have an *official* language, though the American dialect of
English is most widely spoken, so many immigrants from Mexico, Central
and South America don't bother to learn English.
That reminds me of a time, YEARS ago, when I worked at a
convenience store. A good number of our shoppers were of Hispanic
origin. I spoke what Spanish I knew when they came in (it gave them
an incentive to shop with us versus another store).
A man of Anglo descent commented that they should learn
American. I replied with, "They don't have a strong understanding of
English. What better chance do they have of speaking Apache?" I
don't think he ever caught on to what I said.

[...]



But the main point is that you obviously found something you enjoyed
doing,
and thats more important than doing what you didn't like :-)

Yes. As I often tell people, find something you enjoy, then
find a way to make a living doing that.

Not everyone is lucky enough to work with Jenna Jameson!

I had to Google her. EEK!

[...]


We have a few dollar coins here that aren't well liked by
anyone. The Susan B. Anthony dollar has a similar look and feel to
the quarter dollar coin. And as I learned one day, some "bubble gum"
stand alone machines will take them as if they were quarters.

I hate it when machines think a coin is something else. Especially when
you're down to the last coin and you are itching for the can to appear lol

In my case it was a handful of Hot Tamales candy, but the
feeling upon realizing what I did would be the same.


The Sacagawea dollar coin is gold in color, so it isn't
confused with anything else. Still, few people like it.

Our £2 coins used to be poorly made, middles fell out. As the same happened
in Canada, why didnt we learn from their mistake?

Why did *we* learn from *our* mistakes? The dollar coins are
NOT wanted by the general public.
I do understand why the government wants to issue them. They
last longer than paper notes. A $1.00 note may last a few months
before being so warn and damaged that it must be destroyed. A coin
could last decades. Certainly a few years.

[...]


Reverse the roles, and you have my family. Of course, our
daughter is only eight months old, so she doesn't ask for
anything...yet
Our son... The less said, the less I look like a softy

Our 3 are all teenagers now, hence the previous point about pace, and they
are all going through their teen phases, wanting rides here and there,

I'm not looking forward to that.

As long as you let them have their own space, it's not much of a problem.
Ours are all fiercly independant (except when independance runs out and they
NEED (ok Require with a lot of desire) A ride somewhere.

What's worse for me is the transisition from innocence to not so innocent,
and it seems to happen so fast, everytime.


Our son knows the mechanics of how babies are made though I
doubt he's tried to make one himself. He's old enough to know he
wants to spend time around the little Mexican gal a few streets over
(but not because he has a crush on her, because he doesn't. Just ask
him), but I don't think he fully understands why.
When Lindsay told him she was going to finally be a brother,
his first comment was, "Ew! You and dad had sex?"


sooner our eldest gets her own car the better for me. Worse for me, is she
has a boyfriend who doesn't drive, and I am not a fan of him by any
stretch
of the imagination. I told her, that boy is a ****ing loser. She says
"Well,
he's MY ****ing loser". Watch your language or your mother will ground
you.
Hypocritical I know. I have a tendency to swear. Do as I say, not do as I
do.

For shame!

The fact is, any guy she dates will never be good enough for me. Not yet,
not till she's older anyway. I hope. lol

I've already decided no man will meet my standards for The
Princess. However, if he meets hers, that's what will really matter.
She's not yet a year old, so I've got a little time to get
used to it. Not enough, of course. She's nine months old and already
can stand for short times if she's holding onto something.

[...]



I fully understand.
Our rental account is separate from our joint account, which
is separate from mine and Lin's personal accounts, and my Paypal
account.


I like joint accounts as it seems like a LOT of money comes in to it!!!

2 sets of wages, both paid monthly....looks good!

Until the mortgage is taken out anyway

Not got a mortgage anymore, very lucky to have purchased houses cheap enough
to sell for a profit, and over the years, it's allowed us to take a smaller
mortgage and pay it off. We now have our dream home...(well, I dont think we
want to move again put it that way lol) - it was always the biggest strain
when we had one though.

We've bought MANY distressed properties and sold them on the
open market. It's allowed us to buy a condo in Aruba, a vacation home
in Arkansas, and has enabled us to visit every continent.
We also have rental properties. We don't make a great deal of
profit on them though. We charge just slightly more than the total
monthly cost of owning it (the cost presumes no major repairs). You
might think we're crazy for not charging more, but we rarely have any
open units.
When I fist got into the rental business I did it with a
single apartment building. I charged $315.00 a month. Everyone else
on the street charged at least $400.00 for the same square footage.
They could have open units for months. The longest I had one
open was three weeks, and that's only because I couldn't get motivated
to clean it up for a new tenant. Once I did get it ready (fresh
paint, steam clean the carpets, etc), it was open for less than 12
hours.
I only made about $700.00 a month profit, which isn't much in
rentals, but I was making money.

[...]



Our join and personal accounts usual have more than enough,
even the day before payday. But then, *generally* speaking, we don't
spend a great deal.
I do have a tendency to buy flashy gold and diamond rings for
myself (platinum for Lin). And I do love new cars (recently bought a
PT Cruiser because... well... It was Saturday).

We buy a lot of cheaper products (Frankie though, likes to splurge of
clothes and shoes in a big way). When we do make huge purchases, we tend to
make it worth the while. I wont be buying a PT Cruiser anytime soon, not
enough space in the garage lol. Frankie has a BMW (325 Tourer, silver-grey.
Not my colour, but not my car lol)

Nice ride.


I only wear a wedding ring, and that's getting on a bit now lol


I wear my wedding ring as well. It's showing its age. And
it's showing its sheaving been re-sized. When Lin and I got married,
I was around 300 to 350 US pounds (roughly 21 to 25 stone).
I've lost *a lot* of weight and the ring had to be made
smaller.

[...]


I ended up winning (profit of) just over $20,000
in the casinos, so luck was with me.

Better than losing.

I do a fair bit of online gambling....

I think you could count the number of times I've gambled on
both hands, and have a finger or two to spare.
One time wasn't *really* gambling. Back to the convenience
sto

A customer bought six of the $5.00 scratch game. None of them
a winner. He shrugged his shoulders and said something to the effect
of, "Maybe next time." and left.
I knew a winner was due. Even if it was nothing more than a
free play, there was something.
The next morning (we weren't allowed to buy tickets on our own
shifts) I went in and bought two or three of them. $50.00 winner.

and I lose more than I win...Much
preferred Vegas, not just because I won, but I got to visually play and see
myself win. Also found Vegas to be a great place to see. I couldnt do it
too often (places lose their buzz when I see them too often).

I understand. It's why we only visit Aruba once a year,
usually around Carnival.

[...]


I regret never having flown on the concorde. I've wanted to
for ages, but never did.

If you ever come to the UK, Concorde is available for viewing at Manchester
Airport. I think you can board it. It won't be the same as going anywhere,
but at least you can have a taste of the dream.

We have no plans on visiting England or Ireland. Having
recently heard about how the police came down on a child because he
called another child gay, and how the local police visited a friend of
mine to remind him the Tax disk for his car was due in two weeks (he
bought the new one a day or two before), rather than do something
about crime, and we aren't real motivated to visit.


Maybe someone will come out with a new sonic plane for
passengers before I'm too old to enjoy the speed. I don't hold out
much hope, since I don't think anyone is seriously looking into it.

They seem to be going more for capacity than speed at the moment.

That's where the money is, so I can't blame them.


On a different note, ryanair are supposed to be launching, in 2009, low cost
flights to the USA from the UK from as little as 10 Euros (£7 as we dont use
the Euro lol).
787 or Airbus they're supposed to be using. Should be good
for bringing airline prices down!


How the [BLEEP] can they expect to do at that price? £7 is
roughly $13.00. I just can't see how they can do it.


[...]

the seller about it.

It would help if eBay allowed for longer, more detailed
feedback.

It would help if buyers actually gave a reasonable feedback with the space
that exists lol


That would be nice as well. Most use the same positive
feedback for every auction they do. I have two from one seller that
says, "Visit [SELLER'S NAME] again. A pleasure doing business
with-quick payment A++ (ô¿ô)"
I've blocked the seller's name because of my stalker. My name
on eBay isn't used anywhere else, so he hasn't been able to find me
there.

I saw on Amazon, "fine". Rated seller, 5 out of 5.


In the case where I was ripped off, it's clear others were as
well. This only means this one seller was flawed. It didn't soil my
view of eBay. And other than using Paypal whenever possible, nothing
else has changed with my eBaying.

For me, I stopped buying because I continually found items I wanted
elsewhere cheaper, and so, every other place got the sales and ebay lost a
lot. Not their fault, not the sellers fault, just the way the game played
out!

Definitely.
I don't know if I could have gotten the items I won cheaper
elsewhere, as I never looked. I don't think I could since the bulk of
what I've bought is in some way related to Xuxa (A Brazilian actress
and singer).

So, highly specific, and probabaly hard to find...even on eBay i'd imagine.

A quick check shows only 11 items related to the word Xuxa at
this time.

I guess if I wanted something collectable like that, Id look on eBay first.

I keep my eyes open when shopping in Latino target stores, but
I've yet to find anything outside of eBay.


I used to collect Marilyn Monroe items, all since gone, except a mirror,
and I kept that out of respect for the person I bought it from. One of my
closest friends, tragically died in his shop fire, whilst trying to save his
stock. He has been sorely missed for the past decade.

That is tragic. My condolence for the loss of your friend.


She had a show in the U.S. back in 1993, but it only lasted
one season, so there isn't much in the way of related merchandise to
be found.

My hands are up. I don't really know who Xuxa is, but i'll find out :-)

Short answer: Brazilian singer and actress.


One season shows suck. l2achela used to be into Tru Calling, till it got
cancelled in it's 2nd season.

ACK! I hated that show.

Bad for her, good for me, saved money not
buying box sets n DVD for her lol. Just ordered Season 8 of Charmed, and i'm
told that's the last one. Phew!


Never was into Charmed, so I can't comment on it.
I've found the BBC is making money off of me with the new
Doctor Who. They'll not make anything off of me from Torchwood.
While I'll watch the episodes sent to me (I know someone with
connections), I wouldn't go out of my way to see it.
They could eliminate all the sex and foul language and have a
great show (I'm of the opinion the sex and language is put in solely
to make it adult). Of course, then they'd have Primeval, which is a
GREAT show.
Not that I've seen it, of course. It's on ITV, and my friend
would NEVER get me stuff from ITV ;-)

[...]


Our daughter is called Rachela, and it's become a thing for us to sign our
name "l2" on cards and notes. It's just stuck. She started it! I even sign
my cheques that way lol maybe that is too much info!

Meh... I don't expect I'll end up needing to know it on a quiz
show, but just in case I end up on some show on ITV1 (it's
*possible*), I'll make a mental note :-)

I like useless facts...but I like other people's lives. I'm a nosey sod. lol

It's my understanding that ITV1 used to have quiz shows on
Saturday nights, before the unexpectedly popular Primeval aired.

They did, and plenty of other ****e too! TV has improved generally, but I
think TV on the whole is still fascinated with US shows. Bewitched is a
great show!

Bewitched with Dogwood ?
I really like Doctor Who. I wish Christopher Eccleston would
have stayed longer than one season. He was very good.
This is not a cut on David Tennant's Doctor. He is very good
as well, but he's not Ecclestion.
Of course, the best looking Doctor was Joanna Lumley from
"Doctor Who and the Case of Fatal Death."

[...]



You could get away with lent....OK..maybe not LOL


Nah. I'll stick with the traditional K

Best way!!

I concur.



But thanks for comment, nice to know someone noticed it. I'm sure my
nonsense makes me stand out even more though lol


While our conversation has evolved from things we disagree
about to things we do, I haven't seen anything from you that would
qualify as nonsense.

I probably had you wrong at the beginning, you're a decent guy.

Shhhh... I have most of Usenet convinced I'm a nasty, mean,
vindictive man. It just wouldn't do for people to know the truth

It's been
great discussing things with you, and getting to hear about your
experiences. Long may it continue!

feel free to drop me a line by e-mail anytime, address is valid.

As is mine. I expect I'll move this to E-mail in time. It's
gotten so far off-topic that it's getting hard to justify keeping it
on Usenet.
Yes, conversations rarely remain on-topic, but I think we're
pushing it here


Take care, and all the best to Lindsay and your family


Muito obrigado. That Portuguese for Merci Bueacoup.
Tell your wife and kids I say, "Hello." We've never met, of
course, but I don't want to appear rude.


--
Kent
Take too many pictures, laugh too much, and love like you've never
been hurt because every sixty seconds you spend upset is a minute of
happiness you'll never get back

"Kent Wills" wrote in message
...
As I understand it, on Sat, 14 Apr 2007 14:51:12 +0100, "Roberto
Pirezzi" wrote:


[snips for brevity]


I'm the kind of person who will leave **** on someone's doorstep and
watch
someone tread in it. Not literally of course, but provokation has a
general
habit of finding out more about someone, and how they react to being
called
arrogant to that comment, they could have explained it in more depth,
they
chose not to.

Yep. The poster probably didn't and doesn't care.


Let's face it, if someone on the net, calls you arrogant...would you
really
care? I wouldn't. People pick on me all the time. Bullies! That Worthog is
the worst lol

I have a pat answer I use when someone insults me.
"Oh doom. Someone who has NO influence on me in real life,
and outside of Usenet fodder, no influence on me on-line thinks ill of
me. Oh doom and gloom."
Sometimes I'll replace "Oh doom and gloom" with "How ever
shall I live with the shame?"
Either way, the point is made.

Exactly right, Kent. Noone here has the power or influence to make our daily
lives any different than the way we live them.

I admit, I am not the easiest person to get on with on usenet, for the
reason, too many people purposely say daft things and make comments and
opinions that don't make any sense!

That's just the way it is, if people get bothered by strong opposing
arguments, not my problem. :-)



Enough people defended the poster though, always amusing to me
lol.

And people say *I'm* easily amused

I dont take life too seriously...it doesnt last long enough...gotta have
some fun with it, even if the things that amuse you can seem...pointless,
and meaningless.

Sounds like what I find entertaining; pointless and
meaningless.

The way I see it, is it is better to smile at something meaningless, than
cry over tragedy.


[...]


That hadn't occurred to me. Having used eBay for several
years, and only having a (metaphorically speaking) handful of auctions
under my belt, I've never had a purchase I forgot.

But you also wouldn't expect one of your purchases to not turn up. :-) I
think you are like the majority of people, and it's usually the minority
(with very loud voices) that tend to have some kind of bad experiences. I
know you're down $28, but you're not about to slit your wrist over it, or
wage world war III over it. It sucks you lost money, but you know when to
let go. It doesn't make you cynical, it doesnt mean you expect the worst.


Definitely. And it's so unimportant, I can't even recall what
the item was. That's saying something since I have a phenomenal,
though not perfect, memory.

I can tell you what I lost £8 on, Angel Season 1 (region 1, USA Import). Was
for my daughter, had to buy it elsewhere (and only ended up paying £12 brand
new). Had bought 2 other Discs off the same seller, but well, I kinda ****ed
him off a bit (not my fault he took offence to being told not to type in ALL
CAPS). I learnt my lesson to complain AFTER goods are received. Still, I can
still laugh at how mad he got, even though I am 8 quid in the hole!


[...]


I've not had to make used of the feature, but it would likely
depend on the amount with me as well. $20.00? I'm not likely to lose
sleep over it and as such, not care enough to do a charge back.
$200.00 is another matter.

I'm not even sure if you are actually covered on UK cards under
£100....you

I don't know what the amount is for such. If the card is
stolen and fraudulent purchases are made, the card owner is only
responsible for $50.00 under law.

I think we have a similar excess, and it might be £50. I really should read
the terms and conditions again, rather than just guessing, but i've never
had cause to use the protection measures, so it's not something I have in my
head.

Some issuers pay the $50.00 as well making the owner liable
for nothing. I think Chase Bank does this, but I can't say why I
think this.

might under actual law, but the issuers never really make that clear, and
just say protected for purchases over £100. Ive long since lost my
agreement, so cannot tell you the exact terms.

I looked around egg's (the only credit card I know that is
unique to the UK -- they advertise during Primeval) site but couldn't
find anything. The information may be there. That I didn't find it
only means I didn't find it.

I wasn't even aware the egg credit card was unique to the UK! We bank with
HSBC, and have HSBC Mastercards (Visa also available). My Mother banks with
Alliance & Leicester and has a MBNA Visa Card. My Dad has a Barclaycard,
which I think...is Visa. Nobody knows what the excess is on their cards lol.

My last CC transaction was for 500 (well, 499.97 but who's counting), but
not online.



I think Ive said it, not sure if I sent the post, but I do usually make
larger purchases on credit card, and of course international purchases
(small change or not, cant use any other method for many international
purchases).


Most purchases I make are done on the AmEx Delta card.

As you have a purpose to save the armiles up, it makes sense. I Did use my
amazon card for amazon purchases, but ended up paying more than the
incentive was offering.

Not much of an incentive then

It is...and it isn't. I mean, the more you spend, the more you get back to
spend on Amazon, but to do that, required continual spending on goods I
probabaly wouldnt bother buying, had there not have been a incentive
offered. (i.e you got more back by spending at amazon)




[...]



My guess is pocket change items wouldn't cover the milegage from gate to
runway lol

I totally accept WHY you do use it though, as that is a great incentive.
Some would say you end up spending more to save the cost of flights, but
it
actually evens itself out to being in your favour. Especially if you
only
spend on CC what you'd spend anyway.


That's how I do it. And I pay the bill in full every month.
Well, last year it took a bit longer, but that's because I
bought a Rolex. I *might* have been able to pay the whole $15,000.00
for the watch when the bill arrived, but I don't think Lindsay and our
son would have liked living in the car (our daughter wasn't yet born,
so she wouldn't have cared either way g).

£30 my watch cost. Paid cash lol

I don't wear the Rolex much. I usually wear a $10.00 watch
that I bought at Wal-Mart. It tells the time and date, like the
Rolex, AND has a stopwatch.
Of course, the Rolex is 18k gold. I don't know what the
$10.00 watch is made from. Probably steel and plastic.

Mine is a seconda, and is a excellent time keeper - it's basic, i.e it
doesnt have a stopwatch or date, but I only need it for the time lol, and I
hate LCD type watches.



I am having major trouble imaging spending 15K on a watch

I've wanted a Rolex for years. When I saw it, I thought to
myself, I'd really like to buy that.
I walked away and waited two days to make absolutely certain
it wouldn't be an impulse buy. When I still wanted it, I bought it.

I see nothing wrong with that at all, it's not everyday you get that chance!


- my car was
probably the most expensive purchase this year (but not that bad, private
sale of my old car = more cash than trade in). Toyota Landcruiser, was
*around* 20K with cash value of XC90. Landcruiser was around 50K on the
book, but had some other discounts :-)

The PT Cruiser I bought recently listed for $26,000 but I got
it for $20,000. It's last year's model and I suspect they wanted it
off the lot. I don't KNOW that this is why I got it for $6000.00 less
than list price, but it makes sense.

A lot of dealers will knock money off if you ask the right questions, and
last years models always end up with money knocked off if you ask them. The
problem with cars, is the moment you drive it, it's value decreases.

Some of the old classics can be cheap to buy, but *very* expensive to fix if
something goes wrong.


[...]


Having paid for 4 meals in a restaurant on our anniversary, when neither
of
us ate that many, and neither of brought secret lovers, I was rather
annoyed!!! Call to bank, all sorted. I agree, it can cause problems in
"limbo" if the current balance is used to settle other debts, which
cannot
be settled, but it is even rarer for banks not to reimburse and sort
that
out, than the actual overpaying in the first place.

Murder is illegal as well, but having been inside the Cook
County Morgue, I can assure you, it does. Or rather it did in the
early 1990s. I left the funeral industry in 1993, so while I'm sure
there are many murder victims to be found inside CCM, I can't honestly
say I KNOW there are.

But it is still a rare occurance, not that being dead has any real
advantages,

I think you're excused from personally paying taxes

Well.....there are stories of the dead receiving final demands!!

I've read about a woman who got a phone call from a collection
agency regarding her mom's credit card. Her mom had been dead for a
few months.

Sometimes they don't believe the death certificate either....but some
collection agencies are really bad apples, but they just want their money.



On the other hand, it has been known for spouses to claim benefits for
their
deceased other half. If I can find the news stories, I'll post them, one
went on for years if I recall.

It doesn't surprise me. And I bet when caught each one
claimed it was the benefit giver's fault for continuing to send the
benefits.

Cant recall the specifics, I think is some extreme cases, someone has
pretended to be the said dead person, and signed the forms required for
(continued) benefits!

Our Benefits agencies are a joke even for honest people, let alone crooks!


[...]


I'm not that familiar with the UK system either, I do know that
generally,
courts tend to be used for the purpose of debts, i.e CCJ (County Court
Judgement). I suppose a collection agency will lay it on thick to put
the
****s up people, maybe the cease and desist letter works here, I'm not
sure
if people are all that clued up about it. Might be worth looking into
for
the sake of knowledge I guess. You never know when you need to know
things!


The only reason I know about it is from the consumer groups I
read and post to. Every so often someone will post about a debt
collection agency calling them and wondering what to do.

I am sure the correct "proceedure" is not to take the threat
seriously...lol...no, that came out wrong. I think you are warned not to
get
upset about threats from collection agencies, and I think it usually ends
up
through the courts,

I don't know the numbers, but I think many are just written
off as a loss to the creditor. If the amount is great, several
thousand dollars or pounds, I expect court action would come into
play.

Low value debts, would probabaly end up being written off, or long term low
payment plans agreed on "something is better than nothing".

Even through the courts, they decide what you can afford to pay, or in the
cases of secured loans and/or mortgages, bye bye house!


unless it's a private loan shark. Then we're back to the
advantages of being dead (or at least, the disadvantaged of perhaps, being
in a coma)


Don't pay the loan shark, and you could end up in a coma

I'd never borrow from a loan shark. One of Frankie's friend needed £250, so
went to a loan shark, ended up paying over £1000 back.



The first time I saw one, I thought about replying with, "Pay
them if you owe it. If you don't, tell them to send you proof that
you owe it."

I would wait for the court to tell me to pay it, and then, after giving it
some serious consideration.

If the debt is owed, it should be paid WITHOUT having a court
order. And most creditors will work with a person to get a payment
plan arranged. Better to get the whole amount over a great deal of
time than none of it ever.

Not all creditors allow payment plans, for some silly reason. It ends up in
court when they start refusing offers for (lower)re-payment from their
debtor. They think the court will order them to pay more than has been
offered.


Pay it in weekly installments of 7p. Then we're
back to the advantage of eventually, dying.

You're boarding on evil. I like it

I do know someone who offered £1 on a £25,000 debt, and was refused lol. He
eventually worked with a debt management company to get his monthly loan
payment down from £481 p/m to £230 (I think), this was also refused - but,
the creditor is still taking the "£230" until they make a decision whether
to go to court or not. As it's been 4 or 5 months, I think they are just
glad to be getting something back lol.



I chose to hold off, and others commented about applicable
law, offering cites and such.

I've been known to give bad advice...LOL

On misc.legal I often point out that I'm not a lawyer, if
anything I write could be viewed as actual legal advice.
My standard disclaimer:

"I am not an attorney. If anyone who is contradicts anything
I write, go with their opinion over mine."

That disclaimer would suit my former lawyer too! Mind you, his advice wasn't
too bad, he just had a nasty habit of encouraging his clients to bend the
law without actually saying it i.e "You didn't hear this from me, but..."

I can imagine the uproar from folk if I say settle the bill, when they
didnt
need to,

Ethically, the person should pay what is owed, if it is a
valid debt. There may be loop holes that allow someone to refuse
paying it without any legal consequences, but they should feel guilty
about it.
If they don't owe it, then they should fight it.

The UK council tax is refused by many. Some end up in prison for it! Other,
just have it attached to their earnings.


based on the fact, saying someone is arrogant, brings out warthogs
and Damn Sam, thankyou, Maam. lol Amongst others.





[...]


I know enough Italian to get my face slapped by any number of
Italian speaking women :-)

Who says you need to speak Italian for that to happen. - I have a mother
in
law :-) - she's alright really, makes a fantastic seafood linguine. My Dad
tends to be pretty much tomato and basil (I mean, bland cooking). Frankie
(Franchescka..seeing as I figured Lin was Chinese...and not Lindsay lol)

It gets better. Lindsay isn't her real name, but rather a
nick-name her brother gave her when she was a baby. It's not related
to her real name in any way, and no one, her brother included,
understands why he did it.
When I first mentioned her on-line, I used Lindsay. It felt
natural since no one calls her by her first name. Having come afoul
of a cyber-stalker who wants to destroy her working life (she's a
psychologist), it's good that I've never used her real name.

I dont think anyone will try to destroy my working life, unless they want to
stop stores getting their goods delivered! Mind you, Tesco's distribution
team is threatening to strike, so there will be uproar, and maybe I'll get
blamed! The spokeperson for TESCO said "we are not changing what we pay
them, only how we pay them". What she meant was, "rather than pay long term
drivers overtime at time and a half or double time, we will give overtime to
new starters at standard rates". They're also trying to pass through some
daft rules to the contractor (Wincanton) that requires a much longer
employment stretch to get their (extra) service days.

I did a spell for the TESCO contract with Wincanton, and even back then,
they were penny pinching. Can't blame the distribution network, as it's
TESCO calling the shots.


takes after her mother for cooking. I've learn a lot over the years. Yeah,
thinking about the above, pretty damn off topic.


for the reason being, my Mother is British, and my
Dad didn't bother speaking Italian around the "family" here. IF there
was
a
class in school for Italian, I'd have took it, but as I got older, and
relied less and less on the need to speak it, would be too late to start
now.

It's never too late. It is far easier for a child to learn.
For example, our son can speak English and Polish fluently, and
Spanish well enough to get his point across (but he INSISTS it's NOT
because he has a crush on the Mexican girl a few streets over, since,
of course, he doesn't have a crush on her).

I am mid 30's (seriously lol) so I guess I have time to learn.

I'm in my late 30's and am learning Japanese. I'm not sure
why as we have no plans on visiting Japan. Of course, 10 years ago,
we had no plans on visiting South America or Antarctica, so who knows?

Japan is one of the cleanest countries i've ever been to, very impressive. I
can't speak a word of Japanese, but managed to get by. lol You'll enjoy it
if you do go. The train network is also very reliable. If you've ever used
the British train network, you'll know the excitement of sampling something
reliable.

I regularly visit Dublin, but have only used the train system a few times
(few years ago) and it was shocking.


Frankie is also of Italian heritage, but it's her Mother who is
Italian, and ended up in the same situation as me. Or eldest, speaks
Spanish
(spanish offered in school), so we have an Italian kid who speaks
(fairly)
fluent Spanish lol

Our children are half Polish, half Salvadorian (Lin's parents
emigrated over 50 years ago).
What's really funny, IMO, is that Lin knows very little
Spanish. Her parents won't speak it to anyone but me, and their son's
wife. And we only speak it around gift giving occasions to keep Lin
and/or Bill (Lin's brother) from knowing what we're talking about.

Where I work, we have a lot of Poles, mostly doing the driving jobs, so I
don't really see much of them. Hard working people though. And rarely late
or off sick.

Since December of 1993, I've missed one day of work due to
illness. I did miss nearly two weeks in January while Lin and I
visited Antarctica, but other than when crossing Drake's Passage, I
wasn't sick.
Drake's is some ROUGH water! And of course, Lin didn't get
the slightest twinge of motion sickness! Grrrrrr!

I dont think we'll ever see Antartica, but never say never. I was quite
surprised to go to the Grand Canyon, as it was never something I ever
thought i'd get to see. The Pyramids in Egypt are next on the to do list.



Kiddo doesn't speak Spanish in the house, as noone can understand her -
but
she has a friend who she talks to on the phone, in fluent Spanish. WHY I
do
not know,

More privacy. She can be as open as she wishes and know no
one hearing her will understand. It's why our son and I will speak in
Polish and her parents and I will speak in Spanish when gift giving
times approach and Lin is within ear shot.

Yes, I was being sarcastic :-) she knows her parents are nosey. I'm tempted
to learn spanish to make sure she's not having phone sex with a spanish
waiter lol


but it's good she can speak a 2nd language. Handy for later life.
She wants to work in the travel business.

It will come in handy then.
In the U.S., Spanish is becoming more and more necessary. We
don't have an *official* language, though the American dialect of
English is most widely spoken, so many immigrants from Mexico, Central
and South America don't bother to learn English.
That reminds me of a time, YEARS ago, when I worked at a
convenience store. A good number of our shoppers were of Hispanic
origin. I spoke what Spanish I knew when they came in (it gave them
an incentive to shop with us versus another store).
A man of Anglo descent commented that they should learn
American. I replied with, "They don't have a strong understanding of
English. What better chance do they have of speaking Apache?" I
don't think he ever caught on to what I said.

It still amazes me that people don't understand the origins of Americans. I
have a circle of online friends in the states (mostly into road
haulage/trucking) and a great number are Navajo or Cherokee in origin (some
others that I can't pronounce let alone spell).


[...]



But the main point is that you obviously found something you enjoyed
doing,
and thats more important than doing what you didn't like :-)

Yes. As I often tell people, find something you enjoy, then
find a way to make a living doing that.

Not everyone is lucky enough to work with Jenna Jameson!

I had to Google her. EEK!

She's too blonde for me, I used her as an example, as she is pretty well
known in the world of porn. lol


[...]


We have a few dollar coins here that aren't well liked by
anyone. The Susan B. Anthony dollar has a similar look and feel to
the quarter dollar coin. And as I learned one day, some "bubble gum"
stand alone machines will take them as if they were quarters.

I hate it when machines think a coin is something else. Especially when
you're down to the last coin and you are itching for the can to appear lol

In my case it was a handful of Hot Tamales candy, but the
feeling upon realizing what I did would be the same.


The Sacagawea dollar coin is gold in color, so it isn't
confused with anything else. Still, few people like it.

Our £2 coins used to be poorly made, middles fell out. As the same
happened
in Canada, why didnt we learn from their mistake?


Why did *we* learn from *our* mistakes? The dollar coins are
NOT wanted by the general public.

I hated the pound note. I much prefer the coin. I think the scottish pound
note still exists, but not certain. Remember, the pound note was phased out
in the UK a LONG time ago, so the entire population has become very used to
the coin.

I do understand why the government wants to issue them. They
last longer than paper notes. A $1.00 note may last a few months
before being so warn and damaged that it must be destroyed. A coin
could last decades. Certainly a few years.

I actually still own a bunch of mint condition, consecutive serial pound
notes - I must have put them in a book when I got them and forgot about
them, Frankie found them a few months ago, so I've put them back in the book
and kept the book safe. In better condition than a note issued 2 days ago!


[...]


Reverse the roles, and you have my family. Of course, our
daughter is only eight months old, so she doesn't ask for
anything...yet
Our son... The less said, the less I look like a softy

Our 3 are all teenagers now, hence the previous point about pace, and
they
are all going through their teen phases, wanting rides here and there,

I'm not looking forward to that.

As long as you let them have their own space, it's not much of a problem.
Ours are all fiercly independant (except when independance runs out and
they
NEED (ok Require with a lot of desire) A ride somewhere.

What's worse for me is the transisition from innocence to not so innocent,
and it seems to happen so fast, everytime.


Our son knows the mechanics of how babies are made though I
doubt he's tried to make one himself. He's old enough to know he
wants to spend time around the little Mexican gal a few streets over
(but not because he has a crush on her, because he doesn't. Just ask
him), but I don't think he fully understands why.
When Lindsay told him she was going to finally be a brother,
his first comment was, "Ew! You and dad had sex?"

Ours knew a long time ago, but it doesnt stop them from trying it. I used to
like the days when they would freak when there was kissing on TV, now its
the parents who do the freaking out!

You can't really keep people innocent though, and they're not bad kids, just
sometimes need to come down to earth every now and then.



sooner our eldest gets her own car the better for me. Worse for me, is
she
has a boyfriend who doesn't drive, and I am not a fan of him by any
stretch
of the imagination. I told her, that boy is a ****ing loser. She says
"Well,
he's MY ****ing loser". Watch your language or your mother will ground
you.
Hypocritical I know. I have a tendency to swear. Do as I say, not do as
I
do.

For shame!

The fact is, any guy she dates will never be good enough for me. Not yet,
not till she's older anyway. I hope. lol

I've already decided no man will meet my standards for The
Princess. However, if he meets hers, that's what will really matter.

Nothing you say will change how she feels about some guy. Unfortunatley for
me, I've had to put up with all kinds of losers (in MY eyes). It's the
downside to having 3 girls. When they were little, they used to love riding
around in a truck with me (the 18 wheeler type), then they stopped being
into that, and found it to be not fun anymore. Basically, the eldest said it
was boring, and the younger two followed her lead. I did smile, however,
when I saw photos on our middle daughters myspace of me at work "My Dad and
his trucks". Cute. :-)

She's not yet a year old, so I've got a little time to get
used to it. Not enough, of course. She's nine months old and already
can stand for short times if she's holding onto something.

About average, our were all walking by the time they were 1, I LOVED seeing
those first steps.


[...]



I fully understand.
Our rental account is separate from our joint account, which
is separate from mine and Lin's personal accounts, and my Paypal
account.


I like joint accounts as it seems like a LOT of money comes in to it!!!

2 sets of wages, both paid monthly....looks good!

Until the mortgage is taken out anyway

Not got a mortgage anymore, very lucky to have purchased houses cheap
enough
to sell for a profit, and over the years, it's allowed us to take a
smaller
mortgage and pay it off. We now have our dream home...(well, I dont think
we
want to move again put it that way lol) - it was always the biggest strain
when we had one though.

We've bought MANY distressed properties and sold them on the
open market. It's allowed us to buy a condo in Aruba, a vacation home
in Arkansas, and has enabled us to visit every continent.
We also have rental properties. We don't make a great deal of
profit on them though. We charge just slightly more than the total
monthly cost of owning it (the cost presumes no major repairs). You
might think we're crazy for not charging more, but we rarely have any
open units.

The way I see it, if you fill the units, and make a profit, you are doing
something right.

When I fist got into the rental business I did it with a
single apartment building. I charged $315.00 a month. Everyone else
on the street charged at least $400.00 for the same square footage.
They could have open units for months. The longest I had one
open was three weeks, and that's only because I couldn't get motivated
to clean it up for a new tenant. Once I did get it ready (fresh
paint, steam clean the carpets, etc), it was open for less than 12
hours.
I only made about $700.00 a month profit, which isn't much in
rentals, but I was making money.

$700 is not a profit to be sneezed at.

One of my businesses was truck repair, and unfortunatley, was competing with
an established business, who I eventually sold out to. Also, I wasnt very
good at it - but dont tell anyone, or they might want a refund!

I also tried going into HGV training, but found I wasn't good at training
someone to drive. I still do it now, but tend to be more about the theory
than the actual driving, and only do it when it is absolutley essential (i.e
I am the last resort). I'm the only manager who actually holds a HGV
licence! My boss has never even sat in a truck, but is knowledge about the
warehouse side of things, as that is all he's ever done.




[...]



Our join and personal accounts usual have more than enough,
even the day before payday. But then, *generally* speaking, we don't
spend a great deal.
I do have a tendency to buy flashy gold and diamond rings for
myself (platinum for Lin). And I do love new cars (recently bought a
PT Cruiser because... well... It was Saturday).

We buy a lot of cheaper products (Frankie though, likes to splurge of
clothes and shoes in a big way). When we do make huge purchases, we tend
to
make it worth the while. I wont be buying a PT Cruiser anytime soon, not
enough space in the garage lol. Frankie has a BMW (325 Tourer,
silver-grey.
Not my colour, but not my car lol)

Nice ride.

She had the same car, but the lower powered 318i (actually a 2 litre, not
1.8 as one might assume!) - quite common cars actually, it's amazing how
many people drive BMW's these days. I actually filled up at the petrol
station behind a black PT Cruiser yesterday. She hadnt started filling it
when I pulled in, but she was driving half way down the road and I was still
filling mine! 45 litres. Dont know how all my diesel was used up!



I only wear a wedding ring, and that's getting on a bit now lol


I wear my wedding ring as well. It's showing its age. And
it's showing its sheaving been re-sized. When Lin and I got married,
I was around 300 to 350 US pounds (roughly 21 to 25 stone).
I've lost *a lot* of weight and the ring had to be made
smaller.

Mine has been resized too. I was 17 stone when we got married, and I blamed
that on lack of excersise stuck behind a wheel all day. When I started being
more active, the weight just dropped off. Good news that you lost a lot of
weight though, I'd have probabaly reached your prior weight had I kept
driving.


[...]


I ended up winning (profit of) just over $20,000
in the casinos, so luck was with me.

Better than losing.

I do a fair bit of online gambling....

I think you could count the number of times I've gambled on
both hands, and have a finger or two to spare.
One time wasn't *really* gambling. Back to the convenience
sto

I used to have a gambling addiction - and it was BAD. Now I gamble for fun,
and on lower amounts. At my worst, I gambled the house in a poker game and
lost. At my best. I won it back, and a porche 911 in a re-match. Porche long
gone unfortunatley.

The final straw for me, and a wake up call, was when I ran out of money, and
the guys said they'd take Frankie as a "alternative". I didnt mind losing
the house, but wasn't about to risk my wife on the turn of some cards...it
would have taken far more than good luck to have ever won her back. I never
played a hand of poker since. If i'm being totally open, quitting poker
saved my marriage.

A customer bought six of the $5.00 scratch game. None of them
a winner. He shrugged his shoulders and said something to the effect
of, "Maybe next time." and left.
I knew a winner was due. Even if it was nothing more than a
free play, there was something.
The next morning (we weren't allowed to buy tickets on our own
shifts) I went in and bought two or three of them. $50.00 winner.

I guess working there gives you the upper hand of knowing when winners are
due!

Might have to apply for a job lol



and I lose more than I win...Much
preferred Vegas, not just because I won, but I got to visually play and
see
myself win. Also found Vegas to be a great place to see. I couldnt do it
too often (places lose their buzz when I see them too often).

I understand. It's why we only visit Aruba once a year,
usually around Carnival.

Yeah, when a place loses the buzz, it doesnt seem enjoyable anymore.


[...]


I regret never having flown on the concorde. I've wanted to
for ages, but never did.

If you ever come to the UK, Concorde is available for viewing at
Manchester
Airport. I think you can board it. It won't be the same as going anywhere,
but at least you can have a taste of the dream.

We have no plans on visiting England or Ireland. Having
recently heard about how the police came down on a child because he
called another child gay, and how the local police visited a friend of
mine to remind him the Tax disk for his car was due in two weeks (he
bought the new one a day or two before), rather than do something
about crime, and we aren't real motivated to visit.

Those are just bad examples of unfortunate circumstances.

The police dont normally visit you for unpaid tax discs, they stick a notice
on your windscreen telling you it has expired and if it is not paid, it will
be towed away and destroyed- I've had 2 cars towed away, and not one visit
from the police. Neither car was destroyed once i'd paid the fees.

As for calling a child gay, well, we do try to practice equality, and that
is generally only possible through the younger generation. If my kids ever
called another person gay I'd take away their music rights. :-)



Maybe someone will come out with a new sonic plane for
passengers before I'm too old to enjoy the speed. I don't hold out
much hope, since I don't think anyone is seriously looking into it.

They seem to be going more for capacity than speed at the moment.

That's where the money is, so I can't blame them.

Makes better sense - and I'd rather pay less than get there faster, but
concorde was an awesome experience (if a bit on the noisey side!)



On a different note, ryanair are supposed to be launching, in 2009, low
cost
flights to the USA from the UK from as little as 10 Euros (£7 as we dont
use
the Euro lol).
787 or Airbus they're supposed to be using. Should be good
for bringing airline prices down!


How the [BLEEP] can they expect to do at that price? £7 is
roughly $13.00. I just can't see how they can do it.

Same way megabus.com do it...low fares start on selected seats and dates,
and gradually rise. We frequently do Dublin for 1p each way. Sometimes 49p -
some trips I've seen for £40.

Plus they make up money in food and drink, and entertainment also on those
long haul flights apparantly.





[...]

the seller about it.

It would help if eBay allowed for longer, more detailed
feedback.

It would help if buyers actually gave a reasonable feedback with the space
that exists lol


That would be nice as well. Most use the same positive
feedback for every auction they do. I have two from one seller that
says, "Visit [SELLER'S NAME] again. A pleasure doing business
with-quick payment A++ (ô¿ô)"
I've blocked the seller's name because of my stalker. My name
on eBay isn't used anywhere else, so he hasn't been able to find me
there.

With stalkers on the loose, it pays to be careful.


I saw on Amazon, "fine". Rated seller, 5 out of 5.


In the case where I was ripped off, it's clear others were as
well. This only means this one seller was flawed. It didn't soil my
view of eBay. And other than using Paypal whenever possible, nothing
else has changed with my eBaying.

For me, I stopped buying because I continually found items I wanted
elsewhere cheaper, and so, every other place got the sales and ebay lost
a
lot. Not their fault, not the sellers fault, just the way the game
played
out!

Definitely.
I don't know if I could have gotten the items I won cheaper
elsewhere, as I never looked. I don't think I could since the bulk of
what I've bought is in some way related to Xuxa (A Brazilian actress
and singer).

So, highly specific, and probabaly hard to find...even on eBay i'd
imagine.

A quick check shows only 11 items related to the word Xuxa at
this time.

11 ot of several million makes those items highly uncommon.


I guess if I wanted something collectable like that, Id look on eBay
first.

I keep my eyes open when shopping in Latino target stores, but
I've yet to find anything outside of eBay.

I bet the search is exciting though, I know for the things I collect,
finding them in another country always gives a rush that is unbeaten.



I used to collect Marilyn Monroe items, all since gone, except a mirror,
and I kept that out of respect for the person I bought it from. One of my
closest friends, tragically died in his shop fire, whilst trying to save
his
stock. He has been sorely missed for the past decade.

That is tragic. My condolence for the loss of your friend.


She had a show in the U.S. back in 1993, but it only lasted
one season, so there isn't much in the way of related merchandise to
be found.

My hands are up. I don't really know who Xuxa is, but i'll find out :-)

Short answer: Brazilian singer and actress.

I had a sudden thought I had a CD of hers, but I remembered it was someone
who had entered the eurovision song contest lol.



One season shows suck. l2achela used to be into Tru Calling, till it got
cancelled in it's 2nd season.

ACK! I hated that show.

It wasn't a bad show actually - the concept was good, and had potential.


Bad for her, good for me, saved money not
buying box sets n DVD for her lol. Just ordered Season 8 of Charmed, and
i'm
told that's the last one. Phew!


Never was into Charmed, so I can't comment on it.
I've found the BBC is making money off of me with the new
Doctor Who.

Never got into that, even the original series.


They'll not make anything off of me from Torchwood.

Not seen that actually, but I keep seeing the DVD set leaping out at me lol

Frankie's just finished the Medium dvd's and is about to start Ghost
Whisperer.

As for me, Finished season 3 of JAG and am onto season 3 of NCIS. (Disc 1
finished this morning, 5 to go)

While I'll watch the episodes sent to me (I know someone with
connections), I wouldn't go out of my way to see it.
They could eliminate all the sex and foul language and have a
great show (I'm of the opinion the sex and language is put in solely
to make it adult).

I dont mind some sex, if it is relevant to the story, and language can help
to keep some things real.

Of course, then they'd have Primeval, which is a
GREAT show.
Not that I've seen it, of course. It's on ITV, and my friend
would NEVER get me stuff from ITV ;-)

ITV is ****. BBC doesnt have commercial breaks, whereas ITV does, and it
ruins the flow for me (even though most US shows that are aired with ads are
designed that way)


[...]


Our daughter is called Rachela, and it's become a thing for us to sign
our
name "l2" on cards and notes. It's just stuck. She started it! I even
sign
my cheques that way lol maybe that is too much info!

Meh... I don't expect I'll end up needing to know it on a quiz
show, but just in case I end up on some show on ITV1 (it's
*possible*), I'll make a mental note :-)

I like useless facts...but I like other people's lives. I'm a nosey sod.
lol

It's my understanding that ITV1 used to have quiz shows on
Saturday nights, before the unexpectedly popular Primeval aired.

They did, and plenty of other ****e too! TV has improved generally, but I
think TV on the whole is still fascinated with US shows. Bewitched is a
great show!

Bewitched with Dogwood ?

Bewitched either made witches more accepted, or more hated. Can't decide
which :-)

I really like Doctor Who. I wish Christopher Eccleston would
have stayed longer than one season. He was very good.

He was quite good in gone in 60 seconds too. Some of us sound like him too
:-)

This is not a cut on David Tennant's Doctor. He is very good
as well, but he's not Ecclestion.
Of course, the best looking Doctor was Joanna Lumley from
"Doctor Who and the Case of Fatal Death."

Joanna is ok, but not my type :-)


[...]



You could get away with lent....OK..maybe not LOL


Nah. I'll stick with the traditional K

Best way!!

I concur.



But thanks for comment, nice to know someone noticed it. I'm sure my
nonsense makes me stand out even more though lol


While our conversation has evolved from things we disagree
about to things we do, I haven't seen anything from you that would
qualify as nonsense.

I probably had you wrong at the beginning, you're a decent guy.

Shhhh... I have most of Usenet convinced I'm a nasty, mean,
vindictive man. It just wouldn't do for people to know the truth

I think usenet are convined I am the same, without me ever wanting them to!


It's been
great discussing things with you, and getting to hear about your
experiences. Long may it continue!

feel free to drop me a line by e-mail anytime, address is valid.

As is mine. I expect I'll move this to E-mail in time. It's
gotten so far off-topic that it's getting hard to justify keeping it
on Usenet.
Yes, conversations rarely remain on-topic, but I think we're
pushing it here

I think the depth of life and experience prohibits anyone from sticking to
the point lol

I especially hate reading posts that don't show any outside flavour. I enjoy
making a point, and then providing a example to illustrate it further, if
that means also talking about non-topic things, I'm fine with that!

Like, the conversations i've had recently with someone who truly believes it
is OK to pad out postage charges on ebay sales. No amount of proving with
outside examples it is wrong has any effect on him (they) budging from their
stance.



Take care, and all the best to Lindsay and your family


Muito obrigado. That Portuguese for Merci Bueacoup.
Tell your wife and kids I say, "Hello." We've never met, of
course, but I don't want to appear rude.

Danke Schon

One of them said "Hello County". :-)

Speak to you soon!

Cheers!

l2oberto



--
Kent
Take too many pictures, laugh too much, and love like you've never
been hurt because every sixty seconds you spend upset is a minute of
happiness you'll never get back

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 12:08:22 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
spake thusly:

Exactly right, Kent. Noone here has the power or influence to make our daily
lives any different than the way we live them.

you seriously need to learn how to edit posts before posting.
you could have cut over half of the crap you quoted and your
point would still have been made.

d

On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 11:24:33 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:


"Padraic Brown" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:54:47 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:


"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 19:06:55 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:


"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
om...
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:13:02 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:

However, it's often the case that you are buying an item that is
unique or offered by only one seller and priced at £1 value and £19
shipping. In that case, you have to either decide to reward shady
ethics or do without the item.

It's quite possible many would do without the item, on the basis,
uniqueness
and general rareness generally has a certain expectation of "willing
to
pay
more". Paying £1 suggests the item may not be up to decent standards.

You are not paying £1; you are paying £20. The cost out-of-pocket is
what you are paying. The allocation of the item figure and the
shipping figure doesn't affect the buyer.

*sigh* The item is priced at £1.
It's ridiculous low price suggests it is
below acceptable standard.

Only to someone who refuses to reason out what's involved. The
knowledgeable person understands that he will pay £20 total, and that
how that £20 is arrived at between bid price and shipping makes no
difference to him. The £1 figure means nothing to him.

It means everything when you want a refund, and only get £1 back!

You certainly have a point there! The lesson here, as it is with _any_
Ebay purchas, is to find out as much as possible about the seller and
the item in question. Even with a reputable seller, it's always a
crapshoot as to what you'll actually end up with.

Well, yes, I do agree there is a element of risk, BUT, consider "£1 + £19"
as a coin, the probability of risk is greater. (50%, 1 in 2)

Regular sellers, might be like a dice. The probability is 1 in 6. Odds in
your favour.


Professional businesses cannot show profit on an
item that is sold at a loss (or minimal profit is shown). Income from
postage profit is a seperate income, and probabaly comes under service
income...

Nonsense. Income is income. It is separated on paper for the benefit
of accounting purposes, but it all goes to bottom line.

So, given we are skipping over accounting and just going for the basic
approach that A - B = C.

Where does the refund of £1 on the cost of a £20 (£1 + £19) book fit in?

If you're going to talk about refunds, now, then obviously that should
be stated in the terms of the auction. Some sellers offer a _full_
refund (lot plus postage); others (most I think) offer a partial
refund (lot price only). Some offer no refund at all (as is where is,
buyer assumes all risks).

But, does it matter what the seller says, if, previous comments here testify
to, the only relevant factor is overall price.

Overall price is one thing -- if I can get a £20 note for £1 plus £19
postage, that's a good thing, as I said before. If I receive a £10
note in stead and ask for a refund, then it is a different matter
altoghether! My "auction price" was £1, so unless the seller is
offering a full refund of all costs, then I'm better off keeping the
£10 note and eating the lost £10!

That is why I continually say
it is far from cut and dried! A lot more rides on purchase, such as other
variables.

The reason why it's not cut and dried for you is you keep adding
variables and extraneous situations.

99% of all Ebay transactions I've ever had have been good and trouble
free. I haven't had to worry about extraneous situations like the
above.

The end price of a transaction (assuming no difficulties, that can
even arise with otherwise good transactions) _is_ cut and dried: if
the final number represents a good value for item received then
considerations like relative amount of postage to auction price paid
is not relevant.

This is where it pays to know the seller's refund policy. If his
policy is to refund the lot price only, then you get £1 back if you
don't like it!

Hard to imagine how a bottom line can be reached accuratley, if 100 books
make your total bottom line of £2,000 and your total refunds as you were
unfortunate enough to refund all sales is £100.

Income (£2,000) Minus all Income refunded (£100) = £1,900.

Perhaps skipping over accounting was a mistake!

The bottom line for that seller is £1900 pounds. What's so hard to
understand about that?

His bottom line will be a minus figure (whether it is or not). To show
anything other than a minus figure is incorrect accounting.

Accounting is irrelevant. If the seller gets more for his Ebay
offering than he put into it, he's got a profit on the deal.

i.e the accounting proceedure, BASED on the mindless reasoning by people who
claim income is income.

INCOME £2,000. REFUNDS: £2,000 = £0 MINUS EXPENSES = (x)

Even if you make a partial refund, you have to show the basis for such a
refund, as you will have a auditing nightmare otherwise...


If it costs him less than that to stock his
auctions and pay all other associated costs, then he comes out ahead.

Accounting is not that simple!!

Could be. You're still making the scenario _far_ more complex than it
really is.

The seller of
the item in question puts £20 in his pocket when the sale is
completed. The seller's financial records show the income as £20. If
the seller paid £10 for the item, the P&L would reflect a £10 profit
less his actual shipping cost.

No, it would show £1 (£9) £19 (£3)¹

¹ Where postal charges are £3.

OK, then his pocketed income is £16 (less whatever the item originall
cost him). So what?

His pocketed OVERALL income is not £16....it £1 + £19 - £3 = £17.

It's just better accounting.

Accounting is irrelevant. His profit is the amount of money left over
after all costs are subtracted.

The principle applies to restaurant bills where service income is shown
seperatley as gratuity:

MEAL: £35
DRINK: £18
SUB TOTAL: £53
GRATUITY £5.30 (@10%)
TOTAL: £58.30

VAT breakdown may also be shown - and can be even more complex.



It's the same as paying 1p for litre of Diesel, and being charged by an
attendant 94.9p a litre to fill it. Customer cannot be given an accurate
invoice. (for example, some people can claim VAT and other taxes back).
VAT
on 1p? lol

I'm an American and I don't know how VAT works (but I have paid it on
items I've purchased when in the UK). If VAT is charged on labor, and
if it's charged at the same rate as it is on petrol, the VAT collected
would be the same as if the fuel were priced at £1.

Excise duty is collected product specific, i.e it is specific to fuel, not
labour.

READ THIS CAREFULLY.

The process of lumping all charges to 1 invoice wouldn't work for
importing
goods, as there is a exemption of VAT and Duty on products imported to the
UK under £18. If I pay £1 for a DVD, this is £1 in value that is to be
declared on the customs label, and needs to match the invoice. In the case
of a £20 declared overall lump sum, I would be required to pay VAT (17.5%
on
the £20) plus VAT on the postage charge (actual, not the sellers version!)
plus a fee of what used to be £4 to the royal mail for processing the
item,
this may be £8 now. I dont think it matters how I make my point, as long
as
I am able to discredit the notion that overall price is cut and dry.


I think you're making this _much_ more complex than it really is. This
is an Ebay sale, not an import-export business, nor a retail sales
business, not a restaurant. This is some bloke selling some trinkets
(presumably worth ~£20) for £1 plus £19 postage. He gets his £20, the
buyer gets his £20 trinket. End of story.

Which buyers?

Me. Or any hypothetical buyer you care to name.

Not me, it would cost me over £30 if I imported it.

Too bad for thee! I can get it for £20, so that makes it a better deal
for me.

It's really not as cut and dry as overall price.

Yes, from the buyer's viewpoint, it is.

See above!

Yeah, see above! Without all the added complexities!

What complexities? I suppose paying income tax is a complexity too?

You're going on about all sorts of accounting nonsense that doesn't
play into the matter. It's simple. You got a bloke. The bloke's got an
old £20 note. He sells it on Ebay, but doesn't want to pay the highest
fees, so he starts the bid at £1 and charges £19 to get it to the
winner. I put in a bid of £1 and win. He gets £19.53 (still has to
pay 47p or so to mail it here), I get $39.60 (costs me a little to
send payment) . Ebay loses a small portion of its possible fee intake,
the bank doesn't get exchange fees from me and both seller and buyer
are happy with the deal.

Also,
it might be hard to justify paying £20 for something that has no real
value
outside of personal desire.

A great deal of what I spend is for things that have no real value
outside of personal desire. My cable internet bill, for example.

Can you justify paying for your cable bill?

Certainly. It satisfies my personal desire. That's the only
justification I need.

The internet may satisfy your personal desire...but can you justify paying
for it?

He just did! It satisfies his personal desire!

What I am asking, is whether you would STILL pay for it, if another
provider offered you a better service?

What's the price? Is it 20x what he is paying now or half the price?
It _all_ comes down to final price for value received.

That's not how business works i'm afraid to tell you. If it was, everyone
would inflate their postage charges and nobody would get a decent service.

Doesn't matter to the buyer, I'm NOT afraid to tell you! Our concerns
are not the same as the retailer's or service provider's.

Whether it's
restaurant food,

If you think the lowest price is the deciding factor for retaurant food,
you're out of your mind!

It is when you're the one actually _buying_ the food. I can spend
either $3 or $33 for a quick lunch, depending on what restaurant I
choose to eat at. All I'm after is a reasonable meal that doesn't
contain obvious poison or gristle and bones and is palatable. I can
get that for $3 -- so why pay $33 for the highest possible quality?

QUALITY counts. You can either afford it, or you can't. You dont base it on
PRICE.

Quality is a nicety. If I can get it at a reasonable price, that's
wonderful!

petrol,

Bad example, excise duty prohibits any daft pricing.

Anyway, petrol is petrol. Regardless of the label, it comes from two
or three big producers -- the quality is comparable.

books,

2 Sellers: Both end up charging the same price. The padded postage price
seller, states he will send item by the slowest method and will post it in 5
days.

The other seller, has a flawless record for speedy dispatch, and uses a
insured service.

Is price really the only factor?? Get real man!

Yes, it is. I don't need to read the book tomorrow afternoon, so don't
need to have it overnighted at a much higher cost. I can wait a
fortnight for it to arrive, so will pay the lower cost.

cable tv

I'd choose whichever offered me better value for money. Again, price does
not reflect the value for money consideration.

It does if you're deciding between two or three providers of similar
quality.

or a coin bought on Ebay. If
the amount of money spent is deemed to be "about right" for the item,
then the deal is good.

So, would you be happy to also pay the eBay fees that are due to the seller,
as a result of fee avoidance? Because I think you should pay them! aiding
and abeting circumventing fees should see the buyer equally as liable for
charges due.

The only thing the buyer is liable for is paying the final auction
price. Doesn't matter to the buyer how that price is broken down.
Auctions regularly start at 1c (while this _does_ avoid a high
insertion fee, it is also done to attract attention) -- I as the buyer
am not liable for any fees that Ebay _thinks_ it is due if the item is
really worth more than the 1c starting bid.

Padraic

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Mr. Clean" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 12:08:22 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
spake thusly:

Exactly right, Kent. Noone here has the power or influence to make our
daily
lives any different than the way we live them.

you seriously need to learn how to edit posts before posting.
you could have cut over half of the crap you quoted and your
point would still have been made.



Thank you! I quit following this thread a while ago because it is too much
trouble to wade through the rubbish and find out where he is giving a
meaningful reply.