Ebay is Unfair!

"Kris Baker" wrote in message
...

"Roberto Pirezzi" wrote in message
...

"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.

d

I just couldn't be bothered!!

This thread had long since run its original point, the rest (with maybe a
exception) was completley off topic.

l2oberto

With one exception, we enjoy completley.

That's what you get, with a cross-post.

I just reply the way they are posted!

I'm on two of the groups anyway, coins and collection are two I am not on. I
wouldnt admit it if I was :-)

If we're being honest, I have a hard time making a point on a thread where
there is more than one topic! Especially if the point made applies to the
other topic and not the one i'm referring to lol

It confuses the hell out of me!

Now where was I...ah yes...the end lol

l2oberto

"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
...
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.

eBay is about as complicated as making a cheese sandwich. It seems as you
and someone else sees what I say as complicated, the problems lies with you,
not me. I've not made anything complicated...yet.

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".

They are seperate. It's how you get a thing called "cost of sale".

If Apples cost 5p each, how much profit do I make selling 7 Oranges?

And if i'm not making a profit, why am I selling them?

and if i'm selling them, how much are they?

How many apples in a kilo?

how many idiots does it take to think "handling charge" is a item?




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.

You fail to see quite a lot!

The difference is specification is greater than assumed guesswork.

I was quite surprised to hear that a bakers dry cleaning bill was actually a
loaf of bread, or that one of our truck drivers is actually a pallet of
sardines.



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.

So, what's the reason a brick will fall to the floor faster than a feather?

Oh, I get your attitude now "Because it does!"

"It is what it is" - even when it isnt. right?


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.

I doubt you know what is and what isn't "significant", as the smallest
details confuse you with complexity.

could you really decipher "a little of this, less of that, more of the
other" and claim confidence?

YOU are the reason poor service exists, because you don't really give a
damn!

YOU are the reason prices continually rise, because you're daft enough to
pay them!

Your attitude here is like taking the gun from a robber and shooting
yourself with it, but having a serious issue with the robber shooting you.

For once in your life, do the right thing. Please. Don't shoot yourself in
the foot anymore, and don't let anyone else shoot you down. Inflated postage
sellers love people like you. You help them cheat the system, while everyone
else is forced to wipe your backside for you.

And quite frankly, I'm bored with telling you the proper way to buy. If you
havn't got the hang of it now, god help you, and good luck to you. You need
it.



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.

While you have the net, you might want to put it to better use, instead of
getting confused by VERY simple and VERY basic scenarios.

Still, I am sure you have put enough ideas into the heads of idiots with
your inflated postage propaganda.

Me, I'll stick to buying the bargains.

Would you like to buy packets of instant water? They are only 1p each.
Bottles of water to mix the powder are £10. Buy 2 get a third at 90% of the
price.

l2oberto





--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 19:01:10 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
wrote:


"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
.. .
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.

eBay is about as complicated as making a cheese sandwich. It seems as you
and someone else sees what I say as complicated, the problems lies with you,
not me. I've not made anything complicated...yet.

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".

They are seperate. It's how you get a thing called "cost of sale".

No, they are separate sources for the same entity. You don't read, or
spell, well.

If Apples cost 5p each, how much profit do I make selling 7 Oranges?

And if i'm not making a profit, why am I selling them?

and if i'm selling them, how much are they?

How many apples in a kilo?

how many idiots does it take to think "handling charge" is a item?

Anyone in business knows that handling charges are an item. On an
invoice, they are often called "handling", but that's just a catch-all
term that includes the labor to pack and ship and the materials used
in packing and shipping.


--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 18:34:14 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
spake thusly:

Now where was I...ah yes...the end lol

show us yer tits, er, dick.

d

Tony Cooper wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 09:49:11 -0500, Mr. Clean
wrote:


On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:51:43 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
spake thusly:


Now, go and take a shower. You are not living up to your name! You dirty
nazi you!

i do need to take a shower, actually, having just returned from a
three mile run.


Did you catch him?


Why is there no beverage alert on this post????? I am running out of
paper towels, and that was the last of the coffee. Sheesh!!!
--
Joanne
stitches @ singerlady.reno.nv.us.earth.milky-way.com
http://members.tripod.com/~bernardschopen/

"Kris Baker" wrote in message
. ..

"PC" wrote in message
...

I have not taken a stance so stop ASS YOU. Thanks.

Hey! I've got a new tagline!

Kris
So stop ASS YOU


Glad I could help. :-D

"Mr. Clean" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 18:34:14 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
spake thusly:

Now where was I...ah yes...the end lol

show us yer tits, er, dick.

d

Do I have to??

l2oberto

In article ,
"Roberto Pirezzi" wrote:

"Mr. Clean" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 18:34:14 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
spake thusly:

Now where was I...ah yes...the end lol

show us yer tits, er, dick.

d

Do I have to??

l2oberto

But he wants a meal, not a snack.

--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 19:58:09 -0700, Kurt
spake thusly:

In article ,
"Roberto Pirezzi" wrote:

"Mr. Clean" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 18:34:14 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
spake thusly:

Now where was I...ah yes...the end lol

show us yer tits, er, dick.

d

Do I have to??

But he wants a meal, not a snack.

no vienna sausage for me, thanks!

"Kurt" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Roberto Pirezzi" wrote:

"Mr. Clean" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 18:34:14 +0100, "Roberto Pirezzi"
spake thusly:

Now where was I...ah yes...the end lol

show us yer tits, er, dick.

d

Do I have to??

l2oberto

But he wants a meal, not a snack.

HEHE how mature!!!!

Yours is like a fat persons worst nightmare. An empty plate.

l2oberto


--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"