OK, time for a bit of a whinge.

I've had a couple of experiences this week when making enquiries about items for sale in the classifieds section that have irked me a little. On both occasions, the "for sale" listing contained no photos of the item, so I requested them from the seller.

One guy sent through the photos as requested, but then, when I didn't want to buy the item said:

"That's okay, just seemed to puzzle me why you asked for photos when you had no intention of buying it *shrug

Guess I don't have to take any now for ebay"

Obviously, the seller knows that photos are nearly always expected by potential buyers on eBay, so why not extend that courtesy to fellow members of SNA.

The other replied to my photo request with:

"If you're serious about buying them I am happy to post photos.."

Why do I need to be serious (whatever that means) about buying before I see a photo? It's catch 22: I don't know if I want to buy unless I see a photo of the item, but I'm not allowed to see a photo unless I'm serious about buying.

To my mind, photos are a basic requirement of a "for sale" listing and not a luxury only afforded to "serious buyers". After all, it's not a huge effort to take a picture....hell, even a bad pic taken with a phone would do.

Am I not seeing something here from a seller's perspective? Am I way off the mark? Do I need to re-align my expectations?

I think you are right to want to see the item for sale

yep if you dont want to be asked for pictures dont post a for sale notice - thats my view.

I think so too. And I don't think I need to be a serious buyer to see photos. EVERYONE should be able to see photos.

I think you are right to want to see the item for sale

Edited March 3, 201016 yr by johnnydarko
to --> too

Try not to let these sales get you down, plenty more is offered up, though I do understand how you might feel.

I too would ask for photos, Andy. I would not expect to be committed to buy on the basis of photos being supplied either!

One reason Ebay and others are successful is that it means we can browse anomously with no pressure to buy.

One major reason I hate buying a car is the pressure brought to bear by salesmen. Instead Ill go online, drive a freinds car if it is the type Im looking for and decide long before I set foot in a caryard.

Sellers need to chill and allow the proccess to proceed naturally.

I'm my opinion, you're not serious about selling, or are just being lazy, if you don't post a pic. How can you seriously expect someone to buy something without seeing it??

And really, good photos mean you have more chance of getting the price you want. As a buyer, if you see a few good quality, well lit photos which show the overall item as well as the details, the impression you are going to give potential buyers is much better than a snapshot quickly blasted from the hip. For proof, see my kettle shot in the "test" thread. It's not me by the way!

That's why advertisers spend so much money making their products look good in their ads. It's a pretty basic part of selling if you ask me.

Edited March 3, 201016 yr by Bunyip

Your comments are spot-on, JD. I hope the sellers concerned read this thread.

Cheers

wolster

I agree; if I was considering purchasing I would only do so if I could get some visual idea of the condition of the S/H item.

If I had something to sell I would not put it in the forum without pictures.

There is no requirement from SNA that a seller post pics of the items being tendered.

However, failure to do so can really make a sale difficult, and we often suggest that the member post some pics to help with their sale if they have not already done so by the time we approve the ad.

Personally, I would not purchase without at least seeing a pic. Nor would I try to make a sale without offering a pic. It's a simple marketing strategy that a seller ignores at the risk of an unsuccessful sale.

Cheers,

Jake

Does the picture have to be of the item for sale ? or one taken before it was smashed by an angry wife who has had bloody hi-fi up to here !!!

Yes, but the "sticky" advises - but doesn't require - sellers to hold off on posting the FS ad if they foresee photos being taken and posted later. Mind you, I've got no problem with sellers who say "will upload" in the pictures field of a "for sale" ad...as long as they make good on that promise when asked.

(For the record, I'm not proposing that sellers be subjected to requirements.)

There is no requirement from SNA that a seller post pics of the items being tendered.

Dude. You OK?

Does the picture have to be of the item for sale ? or one taken before it was smashed by an angry wife who has had bloody hi-fi up to here !!!

If you can can add a photo you'd be crazy not to. I don't think you need to re-align you exceptions.

I personally think that there should be a required posting number before members should be allowed to list items for sale. It seems to me there are a few members that hardly ever post unless it's in the classified section? Free advertising seems to be there only reason for becoming a SNA member. That’s my view anyway, but I could be wrong.

And yes pictures should be posted if you expect someone to purchase your goods.

I buy a lot of stuff on line and would not even consider doing so without seeing at least one photo of the item, preferably several.

If the listing has no photos I'm not interested and I'm not going to go begging for them from the seller. I treat the fact that photos are not included in the listing from the get-go as a warning that the seller is probably somebody I wouldn't want to deal with financially.

This is possibly an over-reaction, but there are too many risks associated with transacting online to take the chance.

The arguments for improving one's chances of selling notwithstanding, posting a photo comes down to a matter of courtesy, particularly when selling on SNA. I think we should go the extra mile for fellow members whenever possible...and many, many people here do!

It's no secret that I've bought a LOT of stuff via this website and I've met some fantastic sellers. I've also sold a couple of things too and in doing so I honestly believe that I've done everything possible to facilitate an easy transaction each time.

One of the great things about SNA is the level of collegiality between its members. For the most part, people on here are helpful, instructive, funny, full of advice and welcoming of new-comers. The community is inclusive. Claiming that photos are for "serious" buyers only is exclusive behaviour and - I think - runs contrary to the spirit of the SNA community.

(Sorry to crap on.)

johnny, will you stop crapping on.

Buy me a beer and I might.

johnny, will you stop crapping on.

Here ya go

I personally think that there should be a required posting number before members should be allowed to list items for sale. It seems to me there are a few members that hardly ever post unless it's in the classified section? Free advertising seems to be there only reason for becoming a SNA member.]

Dunno...It also seems to afford us some pretty good opportunities. IMO its worth keeping that postcount minimum away in order to keep the variety of sellers up. I'll bet there are plenty on here who've found something to appreciate about the easy advertising policy in the past

As for the photos thing...Gotta be a bit of a toss not to be willing to post photos IMO quickly and without harassment over willingness to buy ASAP. Either that or a bit dodgy.

[/i]Obviously, the seller knows that photos are nearly always expected by potential buyers on eBay, so why not extend that courtesy to fellow members of SNA.

So, was it a SNA'er who wouldn't provide the pic?

This can't be good.

Simple logic.

Only an idiot will buy anything second hand sight unseen.

Likewise, a seller who thinks he is doing a favour to provide a picture is one worth avoiding.

Unless of course the item is brand new and can be easily seen online - which still makes the seller one lazy bastard.

Yup. It's not that he flatly refused. He just wanted to know if I was a "serious" buyer before sending it to me.

*SIGH*

So, was it a SNA'er who wouldn't provide the pic?

This can't be good.

My complaint is a little more subtle than "seller refuses to provide pics" and the fact that I won't buy anything sight unseen. It's more to do with how two sellers have assumed interdependence between photo provision and intent to buy. I've said it before and I'll say it again: photos are standard within FS listings and not a luxury.

Edited March 3, 201016 yr by johnnydarko

I did provide the pictures, I sent them to you and was happy to take photos.

I just didn't see the point in you wanting the pictures when you had no intention of buying it.

I really don't think I am in the wrong in thinking like that, but go ahead, lifes a bit to short to be petty over such trial things imo.

I have sold a few other items through SNA that went fine before.

Edited March 4, 201016 yr by shanedudddy2