WASP News

Double edged

Facebook Marketplace is an interesting place to do business, and in attempts to thin down my various collections, it has been incredibly useful.

From one perspective it offers a really quick, and easy method of reaching thousands of potential buyers completely free.

But that same level broad exposure brings with it other challenges, risks, and opportunities for stress, because that reach of thousands is sure to include some difficult people.

marketplace curveball

A simple sale, the likes of which I have completed countless times previously has recently delivered a real sting, many weeks after I thought it was all done, dusted, and the buyer was happy.

Having met the buyer in a public place, and allowed him time to inspect, handle, and play the instrument, he announced he was happy, said he had to get going, paid the money and left.

It all seemed fairly straightforwards at the time.

Four weeks later, and fairly late one evening, I received a rather abrupt message, accusing me of knowingly selling a damaged item.

The message talked of extensive damage causing some of the functions to fail, which stunned me.

When I sold it, the instrument was not damaged, dusty maybe, but not damaged, in fact, I didn’t really want to sell, but I had just bought the ZWO AM5N mount, and I really needed to liberate some funds.

During collection the buyer had inspected it to his satisfaction.

In the extensive messaging before we actually met, I had also provided him with hi-res photos, and a video of the condition,

The concept of extensive damage really surprised me.

Given the elapsed time since the sale I have no way of knowing what he has been doing with the instrument for the last four weeks, but whatever he has done, it is almost certainly not my problem.

First Time

What’s interesting is that throughout the initial email conversations, his responses made me feel very uneasy.

This growing unease, had very real impacts in how I chose to progress.

I very nearly blocked the buyer, and moved on, as his persistence, and intensity was intimidating.

I’ve sold hundreds of things on Marketplace, and in completing this transaction, it marked the very first time I chose not to invite the buyer to our home.

The nature of his messages really was odd, to the extent that there was a degree of reluctance, even meeting him in the very public location of our local shopping centre.

Contrast this with the fact that Jane and I have had so many people tinkering in my studio it sometimes feels like a public space.

We have met some lovely buyers, and in a few cases I have sent people on their way with gifts, and goodies.

Often when people see all the devices in my studio, they can’t help but want to play with some of the other instruments, and as long as they are respectful I am happy for them to do so.

This buyer really did trigger something in me, and I remain grateful that I did not bring him into our home.

Debated

I debated for some time about responding to his belated complaint, and ultimately elected to just simply ignore him.

Based on the tone of his late night message, it is easy to conclude that there is never going to be any sort of agreement between us, so I have left his comments unanswered.

Had he messaged me within a day or so of collecting the OP1-F I would have had an easier time entering into a dialogue.

However, raising the issue of unexplained “damage” that was not noted during his inspection, and after four weeks of ownership strikes me as very odd.

There is every likelihood that over the last few weeks he could have seriously abused the OP1-F and then simply decided he didn’t want it any more,

There is nothing I can do, but it bothered me sufficiently to write about it..

For me the overwhelming message in this whole experience is simple, “Listen to your instincts, “

If something doesn’t feel right, it probably isn’t.