I know it’s whatever two parties agree on, but why does a wine store make good on broken or undelivered purchases and yet custom dictates that buyer takes risk on CC?
I imagine it has more to do with the shipping regulations and the risk of it getting intercepted and confiscated/destroyed due to policies by the shipping companies. Not to mention any potential legalities if shipping across state lines.
The buyer can decide if the price is reasonable enough to take that risk or not.
Anything is negotiable.
I once shipped wine and a bottle broke in transit. I replaced it. Seemed like the right thing to do.
This. I can imagine that if a wine breaks during transport, that should be on the shipper, regardless of commerce corner or not. Just seems to be ‘the right thing to do’, no? But what about a corked wine? A cooked wine? A bretty wine? I guess all of these things could be considered ‘buyer beware’ - but as Victor said, they should be ‘negotiable’.
Cheers.
When I have purchased, I provided a shipping label. Makes it easier if I have a claim
in contracts for shipping, you always specify when title (and responsibility for loss) changes hands. eg., FOB shipping point, etc. to your point, you can contract for whatever you want, but the contracting and the specificity is the thing. that’s the backdrop. from a more practical perspective, since individuals here using fedex or UPS, etc., to ship wine violates those common carriers’ TOS, there’s an inherent risk. essentially what it comes down to is this “hey, i’m happy to ship to you and i’ll pack it in a styro, but once i give to fedex, anything bad that happens is on you.” neither party in such a transaction will likely be successful in filing an insurance claim, so as long as it’s set up in advance, both sides are on notice. and since these transactions are typically below retail, that risk is priced in. a store that is licensed to ship can avail themselves of the common carrier insurance because they’re abiding by the terms.
thanks for coming to my TED talk.
^^^^ THIS.
I often have the odd bottle of something unusual or rare that I get in trading or parcels and would like to offer up here. I do not use CC anywhere near like I used to anymore because increasingly people not only want lower and lower prices, but they expect individuals to offer the same guarantees and levels of service as businesses.
So more often than not I just say screw it and roll whatever I have into a future larger transaction with a broker or auction house. Why should I sell someone something well below retail and offer the full guarantees and service levels of retail?
To be fair Tom, most prices in CC are just below retail when in fact a retailer’s margin is 30-40% and it is an ask price, not a sell price. There should be a discount to retail since CC sellers don’t have brick and mortar operations with employees and stock on hand.
That is another thread.
As for the shipping its smart for a seller who doesn’t have a liquor license to pass ownership off as soon as their box of olive oil hits FedEx or UPS and defer the risk.
So you agree with me, but still wanted to criticize my comments by making a statement that makes no sense relative to what I said.
Actually had nothing to do with you, you sell wine for a living and should do as you see fit, be it auction or retail. It was more a general comment based on the pricing reduction requests you reference vs. the expectation a collector has to recoup thru CC, as I believe that happens due to random sellers expecting a full retail ask price flip vs. actual sell prices no one sees, not ITB sellers.
It’s the WSPro effect.
Understood. Thank you for clarifying. FWIW- I do not sell wine for a living- appraisal is my ITB sideline. When I sell or come here, it is with my own personal wines. Client transactions must be done in strictly proper fashion. I have a big network and often trade rarities for rarities- everyone sharing what they get in droves kind of thing. And sometimes I get things I do not want that I know someone else would like.
I have been sensitive on the topic, perhaps overly so, because I see the eBay effect kind of creeping in- i.e. expecting a private seller to be able to offer the same guarantees as a business. I have done lots of personal transactions over the years on the CC- or its equivalent- on many forums, and never for a profit flip FWIW. I do think that gets into dangerous territory. It is always at cost- or less if I decide I do not like something- and I think it would be a shame if the balance of expectations changed and have a negative effect.
Nice Ted talk, Yaacov!
From retailers or individuals?
Individuals, if we are talking about commerce corner
unless you’re a licensed shipper, you won’t be successful in having a claim approved.
I never added buyers risk (as far as I can recall) for shipping to my CC posts, and if anything ever happened to one of my transactions, I would have shared the loss with the buyer.
It doesn’t make sense to me either.
+1. No reason a buyer couldn’t propose to reverse the risk or specify 50% split of loss.
Even if a private seller agreed to take the risk, it would be hard to enforce it as the buyer. So maybe easier all around to just say “it’s on you after it leaves me.”
I would never sell wine on CC without risk passing to the buyer.