I think the OP's moral compass is right on.
He may have contacted the seller asking for a lower than asking price but ultimately the sale was made via the use of GB. That is, I presume that without GB as the market-maker, the buyer and seller would never have met and their deal would not have transpired. So due to the services of GB the transaction occurred. People can cite that an 'out of band' message asking for a different deal subverted the system but that seems like mouse parts. GB is a market maker, they hosted a transaction that otherwise would not have occurred and it thus seems that they are due their piece.
The real question is what should the buyer do? One recourse is for him to unwind the deal and start again. I don't think any moral compass would have the seller pay the fees. Alternatively the buyer can just feel like he should complete the transaction and move on, sleeping well enough at night knowing that he was not a bad actor in this play.
But I applaud the OP for bringing it up.
B
Well thanks, but I did not explain the situation well in my very first post. Mainly because I was a bit panicked at the time because I thought the seller meant for us to complete the sale without going through, GB.com.
This was always foremost on my mind. While I thought I was doing nothing wrong initially, at that point I thought I was complicit in minor fraud.
In my original post, I also changed a couple of the pertinent numbers just in case anybody here happened to be following that particular auction. The seller was actually charging $45 for shipping which is about $10 more than most do.
In my initial inquiry to him, I stated that I was interested in the rifle and would place the minimum bid if he would consider discounting the final total which I figured would basically come out of his after sale fees.
I told him I was willing to take my chance that I would win. In my mind, I thought all he had to do was to say yes or no, and I would enter the minimum bid. I would also have to decide if I was willing to bid more if somebody else outbid me. Either way, GB.com would not lose any money because they would still get their percentage of the final number entered in the bid box.
The seller on the other hand would eat the $10 out of his fees and/or profit.
I didn't hear anything form him until maybe 30 minutes before the auction was to end. He simply said that he was OK with my offer, but then mentioned holding the item--plus he added in his phone number and address. That confused me a bit, but then when I went back to place my bid, I saw the auction was closed out. That's when I panicked--because I thought he intended for us to sidestep GB.com completely--which of course would violate the user agreement.
I sent him an Email immediately with my concern and reemphasizing that this was not my intention. He finally replied to tell me not to worry and that he had relisted with a "Buy it now" price that was $10 less. This also was not what I wanted, but I figured at this point I was better off not to belabor the issue. I had already come very close to accusing him of much worse. The final outcome is that the seller took approximately $9.74 less and GB.com got 26 cents less.
I could have saved $35 minus the cost of a certified letter and a postal MO by not paying with my Discover card, but that would have delayed the seller from shipping by at least 4 or 5 days. I'm going out of town on Saturday for about 2 weeks, so it would have been sitting at my FFL for a long time. As it is, the rifle will be at my dealer tomorrow.
Regardless, I did not sleep well that night worrying about the whole thing
I also learned a good lesson from this in that I promised myself to never post any personal dilemma's or problems on a public forum again. Why should I be tell my problems to people I don't know when I have a family who is perfectly willing to insult and make me feel bad in person.
Cheers
