Would you take advantage of an uninformed seller?

[Old-N-Feeble]

As of this moment and per the poll, more than twenty percent of us would shaft the old lady.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

If it's Exa, offer more. If it's a retailer at an antiques mall or somewhere they have an obligation to themselves to do due dilligence and research the value, pony up the $20 and get out of the shop before they have a chance to change their mind.

I guess I can agree with this under certain reasonable limitations. More than likely, the retailer didn't care about the person he/she bought it from so 'what goes around comes around'.

 

[Hatchetman]

I'd tell the lady the camera is worth at least $500, but I'd buy it for $200 if she wants.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

I'd tell the lady the camera is worth at least $500, but I'd buy it for $200 if she wants.

Nothing wrong with that either, IMO, at least if she seemed lucid anyway.

 

[Fotoguy20d]

I have no problem buying on ebay as cheaply as I can get away with. But, I voted for telling Exa and negotiating a fair/researched price. I once met up with someone local who had two 8x10 cameras listed on Craigslist. Bought one since it was a fair price (and then she threw in a tripod and a bunch of holders). The second one was a much nicer, more modern camera, with a Fujinon 250/6.7 lens. I refused to buy it from her - told her to go research it b/c it was worth twice what she was asking, and that I couldn't afford it.

Dan

 

[removed account4]

i would tell her how much her stuff is really worth.

i sometimes email people the for sale section ( here on apug )
who have a item for sale for $30 that is actually worth $200
i have done the same thing on eBay, when people had things listed wrong
thought they were missing lens cells ( like a kodak portrait lens ),
a weird lens with 3 sets of stops ( triple convertible )
or a wollensak lens in a studio shutter that only "opens and closes"
screwingpeople over really does no one any good

 

[Two23]

I'm in the camp of not taking advantage of a widow. It's not what a stand-up guy would do. If it's a shop of some kind, then I'd certainly buy it. I would not screw a widow over. My integrity is worth more than a camera.


"You shall not mistreat any widow or fatherless child. If you do mistreat them, and they cry out to me, I will surely hear their cry, and my wrath will burn, and I will kill you with the sword, and your wives shall become widows and your children fatherless." Exodus 22:22


Kent in SD

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I've bought some high-end equipment from a widow, and we discussed the price and came up with something that was fair.

I've also made a few good deals on eBay on items that I later sold for much more than I paid. On eBay, I'd say it's a different game than working with a naive individual or even a dealer in a shop. I'm usually taking a risk in such cases to buy an item that is poorly described and poorly photographed, because I have a hunch that it's better than the seller is aware of or able to explain, and I'm potentially bidding against other sellers who are able to make the same judgment. If I'm outbid, because someone else is willing to take a greater risk, so be it. If the item isn't worth as much as I'd suspected, then I haven't lost more than I was willing to risk, and the seller got as much as they asked. If I don't bid, then the seller gains nothing. If no other seller is willing to take the same risk, and if the item is as good as I suspect, then fortune favors the prepared mind.

 

[Steve Smith]

I'd tell the lady the camera is worth at least $500, but I'd buy it for $200 if she wants.

I would do something similar. Point out what it is worth, but offer what I could afford (which would be lower). That way, it's possible for both parties to do better than they were expecting and both to feel good about the sale. It's not always about money.


Steve.

 

[apkujeong]

Hmm, bit of an aside, but the worst lens I ever bought (probably, there's a bit of competition for that title) was a Nikon 24mm F2 AIS from a little old lady in the US who was selling off her late husband's camera equipment. This was a good few years back, ebay photos in general weren't good and her description photos were almost charmingly terrible, but her genteel description stated that her late husband was a stout old pro who maintained his equipment to the very highest standards.

I took a risk, won the auction (a bit less than the going rate for such a lens, but not a bargain price) and when it arrived I discovered that the lens appeared to have been used as a football at some point (by which I mean soccer, for US readers), front and back surfaces scratched like crazy, the rubber on the aperture ring had been clumsily replaced and the aperture makes a squeaking noise when turned. Still sort of works, have to give Nikon credit. Still, it looks like a dog, sounds like a mouse and is about as sharp as butter.

There's no way of knowing if the little old lady secretly knew it was a king of the dog lens realm, or if she really did naively believe her dearly departed was the patron saint of camera maintenance. I hope it's the latter.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

This happened to me once, sort of. About 12 years ago a woman at my office saw I was into cameras and told me her ex-husband had left a couple older cameras at her house. She'd neither heard nor seen from him in like 4+ years and said the cameras were in a few boxes of junk he had left behind and despite her asking him many times to come get the stuff he never replied back. So she was ready to toss it all anyway. She asked if I wanted them. Which cameras does not matter lets just say it was two very nice cameras each worth about the same. I asked her how much? She said I could just have them. I told her no and told her about what I thought they were worth. I suggested how about I sell them for her and we split the proceeds? (after all she was going to throw them away and had offered them to me for free). She was thrilled. In the end I sold one and gave her all the money and decided to keep the other. And told her that's what I wanted to do. Sold the other one for $300, it's market value. She was over the moon happy and got $300 for what she was ready to toss anyway.

 

[blansky]

Very often morality and the accumulation of wealth are at odds. As we are well aware these days.

Laws are made because most people have no morals.

Unfortunately lawmakers today don't have any either.

 

[benjiboy]

I don't rob widows, I would tell her what it's worth, I was brought up to be an honest man and if I took advantage of a bereaved woman I wouldn't be able to live with with myself and I wouldn't enjoy owning it because every time I picked up the camera it would remind me what I had done to get it.

 

[benjiboy]

I don't screw old ladies

I do Frank, I'm married to one.

 

[BradleyK]

If it's Exa, offer more. If it's a retailer at an antiques mall or somewhere they have an obligation to themselves to do due dilligence and research the value, pony up the $20 and get out of the shop before they have a chance to change their mind.

+1. Sort of: With Exa, I would promptly inform her of a more accurate/realistic price for the items she wanted to sell. In the case of an antiques seller or commercial establishment, I am in accord.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Very often morality and the accumulation of wealth are at odds. As we are well aware these days.

There's no reason a wealthy person should have less or worse morals than a poor one. It depends on the values that were established when they were growing up, no matter the environment. A person who has become wealthy through hard work, such as starting one's own business, provided a valuable service to others, and who has treated employees well, may have better empathy and morals than a person who has been born into wealth or fame. Unfortunately, the media sensationalizes the actions of the latter. Those who contribute most to places like Childrens' Hospital or the American Cancer Society are the wealthy - usually the self-made wealthy who didn't cheat their way into wealth. Anecdotally, I know several multi-millionaires whose status you'd never guess based on their lifestyle and appearance (unless you met them at certain events, as did I). Anyway, they are truly the most generous, decent, and tolerant people you could meet. I think this is the more likely case than the exception - but the exceptions get the most visibility.

Laws are made because most people have no morals.

Can that be? If so many have no morals, would laws be sufficient to maintain civilization?

I am hoping you are just more pessimistic or jaded than I am.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Some of us have very good reason to be pessimistic and jaded.

 

[Rick A]

You cannot legislate morality, or common sense.

 

[blockend]

It would depend on the circumstances. If the lady clearly had money, a nice house, car, access to family and showed every sign of being comfortably off, I'd probably think it was my lucky day and tell her I considered the camera an absolute bargain. If she showed any sign of needing the cash, I'd say it was worth much more than the asking price. Not being an expert on M3 prices, I would suggest she took it to a dealer and not accept less than £400 (if it was in good condition), or offer to sell it for her on ebay as a favour.

Some dealers offer prices that are little short of usurious, on the basis they have overheads, staff and to make a profit to stay in business. I once sold a car full of books to a dealer, who offered me £25 for the lot "take it or leave it". As we'd just moved into a tiny house and had a young baby, I knew my wife would be furious if I returned with a stack of boxes, so I accepted his offer. Individual books would sell for more than the offered price, we both knew it, but he would have factored in the time it took to sort them, value and label them, keep them on the shelves and for all I know, wash his hands afterwards. He would have considered the transaction sound business practice.

A good dealer (and there are some) will tell the potential vendor what percentage he intended to add, and leave him to make up his mind. Apologies for the sidetrack.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Interesting...

 

[jeffreyg]

This poll should be an alert to all of us who have valuable camera equipment etc should have it listed with approximate values along with a will.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

The 20 percent of us who admit to "shafting the old lady" continues...

 

[blansky]

The 20 percent of us who admit to "shafting the old lady" continues...

Luckily the poll didn't include knocking her over the head and taking it.

Your respect for mankind would have taken a really disturbing downward trend.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Luckily the poll didn't include knocking her over the head and taking it.

Your respect for mankind would have taken a really disturbing downward trend.

That's quite possibly true. The first option was "Just take it, since no one is looking anyway". I think that was somewhat unclearly stated to mean "Just steal it while no one is looking".

 

[Saganich]

I find it funny that many people lied on this poll, including myself. I agree that the context is important, lone poor widow versus wealthy matriarch. Are you with your spouse or friends or are you alone with no witnesses? Perhaps you would feel guilty later and go back and give her more cash? Maybe everywhere you go, in the middle of the night, your tormented by that unmistakable smooth shutter release until you finally go mad an bury the abomination in the yard or better yet donate it to the Society for Ethical Photography.