Online gun transactions

[cpttango30]

Why is it that everyone on Gun Broker and the such want you to add money if you pay with a credit card? This is just wrong if you ask me. I am bidding on an item at a price now when I win I have to all of a sudden pay more?

Do you go into a store and go to the check out counter then get charged an extra 3% if you pay with a credit card? NO. Sure it is added in to the mark up on all products.

This is the one thing that keeps me away from doing business on line with the gun auction or buying sites.

Does anyone else see this is a bad business pratice? I for one do. I mean 99% of all auction on gun broker have a reserve so why do they just not add at least 3% to that price? If they are getting more than that good for them.

 

[brickeyee]

Technically it is a violation of law AND the card agreement to charge extra.

 

[jdc1244]

I’m sure someone will correct me if I’m wrong…

Merchants – on or offline – pay a fee when a credit card is used; that’s how Visa, MasterCard, et al make money. I assume when an item is sold at an auction the seller can’t offset the fee like they can on items sold in a store or online at a fixed price. I don’t know if it’s illegal or not but one should not pay the card fee if an auction purchase is made via BIN as the seller can add the card fee to the BIN price.

 

[hotpig]

We pay a fee plus a % for transactions. The % is considerably smaller when the customer is here in person with the credit card.

Its the credit card companies that jack the rate up for us internet/telephone businesses.

Most new guns on gunbroker are being sold just above dealer price. Everyone assumes that there is a hugh mark up like 20% or more on guns. I was shocked and disappointed after I got my FFL and started getting dealer prices.

Thanks to the internet new guns are really not worth selling. I sale them just to keep my FFL. Used guns can be profitable thou.

I do not charge either on gunbroker or my web site. This puts me at a disadvantage on new gun sales. I have to figure fees into my prices.

There is no way to not do that because the difference between profit and loss can come down to pennies.

 

[Starship1st]

I ordered a rifle from R&R Arms and was surprised they do not add the 3% to use a credit card.

 

[asknight]

Well, you have a few choices here.

1. Sellers put a reserve on each item with the credit surcharge included, so even the folks paying cash take the penalty. Not fair to everyone. That'd PO a lot of folks.

2. Pass the surcharge directly to the customers who are the cause of the surcharge. The credit users themselves. As a credit/debit card user, you should realize that there is always a fee for the convenience. Ever buy a canned Coke at a convenience store? $0.75 or more! Grocery stores have them for $0.40/can! Heresy!

3. Don't accept credit or debit cards, period. Now how many people would that tick off? Too, how much damage would that cause a business?

Whether it is against law or not, a credit card is NOT "legal tender for all debts, public and private." A company or seller has no legal obligation to accept a debit/credit card as payment for services or goods. If they choose to offer the convenience to the customer, then there is a charge for that convenience. The buyer of the service or item is responsible for paying for his/her own convenience. Isn't that one of the top tenets of Capitalism 101?

If it is illegal for a seller to pass his surcharges down to the customer that made him incur them, then it should not be.

On the other hand, if a credit/debit card is to be made legal tender for all debts, then it should be illegal for the authorization companies to profit merely for passing the transaction through their company if the law isn't going to allow the cost to be passed down to the consumer.

 

[moosehunt]

Asknight pretty well nails it. The way a lot of businesses do it is to say "Our prices are cash discounted. We do do not give the 3% discount if using a credit card" or something very similar. That's basically what the guy on the auction is saying, just not very plainly. Why should the sellar pay that for your convience? In an auction, he can't do like a full size store and work it into the price of all his merchadise.

 

[cpttango30]

1. Sellers put a reserve on each item with the credit surcharge included, so even the folks paying cash take the penalty. Not fair to everyone. That'd PO a lot of folks.

What do you think a normal retailer does? So that little factoid is null and void in my eyes.

Don't accept credit or debit cards, period. Now how many people would that tick off? Too, how much damage would that cause a business?

Hello how many auction out are there on gun broker that accept only USPS money order or Banck check? There are more than a few. So again The point is really null.

It is a cost of doing business if you do not want to pay it then don't do it. To me it is wrong for them to to tell you you are going to make my life easy so there for I am going to charge you for it. HAHAHAHA.

 

[cgs500]

If you don't like the idea of getting charged 3-4% for the CC service at an online auction. Don't go to a real auction...they charge a "buyers premium" anywhere from 10-15% tacked onto the total of your won items.

I go but the premium is figured into my bid. Lots of folks don't notice the sign and are shocked at checkout.

I charge my clients for any credit card transactions, it's an incured expense to me. I am a speaker and charge for any and all travel and incidentals, the credit card fee is an added expense.

 

[Standing Wolf]

Do you go into a store and go to the check out counter then get charged an extra 3% if you pay with a credit card?

Some places charge the extra percentage over the counter, too. They're charging what the market will bear.

 

[Polishrifleman]

You should take a look at the Alaska Outdoors Forum! Yes I said forum, much like this one. They ask for a fee for Their Help in brokering the transaction of some % or $50 whichever is less. How would we all feel if THR, TFL, AR15, S&W, forum did that.

We ask a 5% or $50 (whichever is less) commission on any sale or contract that publication on this forum makes possible.

 

[NGIB]

When I was in the private sector this used to come up all the time. The CC companies charge the merchant a % and FTF it's usually absorbed.

One reason the Discover card made such a fast entry into the market was they charged the lowest percentage for many years. American Express was the highest and that's why it isn't widely accepted in the retail world.

If paying the percentage bothers you, there's always the Money Order route. As for me, I generally pay the percentage as then I at least have some basic fraud protection and my CC company has lots of lawyers...

 

[asknight]

What do you think a normal retailer does? So that little factoid is null and void in my eyes.

Most local retailers I know add a 3% surcharge to credit/debit transactions.

Hello how many auction out are there on gun broker that accept only USPS money order or Banck check? There are more than a few. So again The point is really null.

You're probably saving 3% on those auctions, but then again you have to buy gas to drive to your post office, buy the money order, then buy the postage to send it to the seller. Sometimes the 3% surcharge is a heck of a nice bargain for the convenience. Then you have to add in how much time it took to handle the transaction, and how much your time is worth to you.

It is a cost of doing business if you do not want to pay it then don't do it. To me it is wrong for them to to tell you you are going to make my life easy so there for I am going to charge you for it. HAHAHAHA.

Your first sentence is spot on. It is a cost of doing business, so if a buyer wants the convenience, he should be prepared to pay for it. The buyer is the one who is benefitted by the convenience of debit/credit cards. Not the companies and sellers. Actually, many might say it is a burden to get set up to accept debit/credit cards for the customer's convenience. Which it is a huge burden with most transaction companies.

Nothing is free in this world.

 

[SundownRider]

And there are those rare occasions where they won't charge the 3% for the credit card fee. I personally find 3% not to be too bad of a convenience fee, especially when I can fax an FFL these days and have my merchandise that much sooner.
Who wins? I'm at the range while you're waiting for your check to arrive, for them to pack up your goods, send them out at their convenience, and be checked in by your FFL.

New guns faster and more range time is worth it to me.

 

[Hawk]

The pain and agony associated with processing checks has long been a normal part of business. They have to be schlepped to the bank. A follow up has to be maintained to ship product after funds clear. If it bounces, he's out the fee unless the buyer makes good as opposed to simply sticking the seller with the product to relist.

Some of us are old enough we view check pain and the lesser money order pain as part of life as if it didn't really exist or have costs even though it exists quite well and costs real money.

OTOH, CC charges to the seller are easy to spot - they stand out starkly on the paper. However, all the other costs have vanished - no megabuck gasoline, filling out deposit slips, trying to extract NSF fees from zero-feedback bidders - it's like the money fairy just visits the bank in the middle of the night and, instead of a tooth, extracts 3% (actually a good deal less with any reasonable volume at all). A declined charge generates no bounced check charges or associated pain and agony.

Of course, if one continues to charge 3% surcharges on CCs while taking it in the shorts for all personal check associated costs, the personal checks will continue to be a major part of the business - people want to save 3% after all and why not do it with the seller bearing all the costs? Assessing a surcharge pretty much guarantees a relatively low CC volume, thus insuring the highest possible transaction costs along with maintaining the costs and overhead associated with check and MO processing - the worst of all possible worlds: all pain, no gain. How special.

But a couple of mavericks will try taking CCs as intended and watch their paper banking costs drop accordingly. Several may see their overall volume benefit - apparently due to the "no surcharge" policy though such things are difficult to pin down.

My personal wild guess is that those applying surcharges aren't so much mathematically challenged as simply possessed of a mid-20th century blind spot relative to charges associated with non-CC transactions.

Checks and money orders have never been and never will be without costs to the seller - they're just harder to see.

 

[Gator]

My local gun shop does the same thing. It is offering a 3% discount to cash buyers and I don't see anything wrong with it.

It is illegal in California and possibly some other states, however.

 

[HK G3]

I'm going to show my ignorance here, but...

If you can't purchase something online with a CC, then what can you purchase the item with? Debit card? Do you have to give the seller your checkings account # or something absolutely ridiculous like that?

Everything I've ever bought online has been with a CC, and as far as I can tell, you're always prompted to enter your card info when purchasing anything online,

 

[Hawk]

My local gun shop does the same thing. It is offering a 3% discount to cash buyers and I don't see anything wrong with it.

It is illegal in California and possibly some other states, however.

The 3% discount for cash is in accordance with the merchant agreement. A 3% surcharge for use of the card isn't.

Not really a subtle distinction but I've often wondered why more didn't offer the 3% credit simply to honor their agreement. There's no real difference on fixed price items although the "buy it now" would be 3% higher which would then be discounted for cash. They may simply be concerned that the typical buyer would skate past the listing.

On "penney auctions" and the like, the closing price could be further reduced by non-CC payment but could not be increased for CC usage.

From here:

Note that a cash discount is legal and permitted under all credit card companies rules. A cash discount offers a lower price for cash than credit; for example, many gasoline stations offer cash discounts. While this may merely be a loophole, it is permitted.

However,

...if a buyer wants the convenience, he should be prepared to pay for it. The buyer is the one who is benefitted by the convenience of debit/credit cards. Not the companies and sellers.

Bushwah.
Any merchant that believes CC transactions are simply costs with no offsetting savings or benefits is in dire need of advice from an accountant. Not being able to see costs associated with processing personal checks and MOs may, in part, explain why most demanding surcharges are small and doomed to remain so.

 

[asknight]

I'm going to show my ignorance here, but...

If you can't purchase something online with a CC, then what can you purchase the item with? Debit card? Do you have to give the seller your checkings account # or something absolutely ridiculous like that?

You mail them a check and wait until it clears, or if they won't take a check because too many people like to bounce the rubber things, then you drive to the post office, buy a money order, buy an envelope, buy the postage for the envelope, and put it on the slow train.

See how CC and DC's are so much more convenient?

 

[hotpig]

If you can't purchase something online with a CC, then what can you purchase the item with? Debit card?

It does not matter if you pay with a cc or debit card. They both have to be run as a transaction and the business pays both fees.

 

[asknight]

One of the first lines on the page you linked, Hawk

Many merchants engraft their own rules to your use of a credit card, usually without the right to do so.

It's really quite clear and simple if you'd look at it from ANY other perspective than the "victim." Playing the victim card gets old after so long. If you don't want to pay for the convenience of using a debit/credit card, don't use the dang thing. Drive to the USPO and buy an envelope, money order, and stamp and be prepared to wait a few weeks. Or ya know, you could fall back on the "legal tender for all debts, public and private" green stamps.

Expecting a dealer to lose a portion of his livelihood for your mere convenience is beyond comprehension.

I wonder, do you always think you're getting gouged when you buy an item out on the market?

 

[budspawn]

I just bought a couple of guns from a seller on Gunbroker. I originally wanted the items I was buying to be placed on the auction site for a buy it now price. He told me if he did that he would have to do the 3% charge for the use of CC because it was something that gunbroker required or charged when using CC. So I opted out of doing that and feel I got a good price and still was able to use my CC to purchase them. They should be here tomorrow (Sat) So I think its something gunbroker charges and the sellers have the buyers pay for it.

 

[Hawk]

It's really quite clear and simple if you'd look at it from ANY other perspective than the "victim." Playing the victim card gets old after so long. If you don't want to pay for the convenience of using a debit/credit card, don't use the dang thing. Drive to the USPO and buy an envelope, money order, and stamp and be prepared to wait a few weeks. Or ya know, you could fall back on the "legal tender for all debts, public and private" green stamps.

Expecting a dealer to lose a portion of his livelihood for your mere convenience is beyond comprehension.

I wonder, do you always think you're getting gouged when you buy an item out on the market?

You're reading stuff I didn't write - the link was to illustrate that cash discounts for use of non-CC payment methods is OK per law and merchant agreements.

No victimhood here - I buy some from "surcharge dealers", generally by check and some from "non-surcharge" dealers, generally by card.

It's simply been my observation that the surcharging dealers are usually smaller and don't generally have better prices. When there's a deal, I don't have issue with it. I tend to wonder how they think they're not paying for processing checks but it's no skin off my nose.

The only victims I'm seeing are the surcharging dealers, but since they're making victims of themselves, it doesn't impact me.

You seem to be reading stuff between the lines - I'm not suggesting that surcharging dealers are victimizing me or even that I don't buy from them. I'm suggesting they might be shooting themselves in the foot, impacting their volume in a negative manner, insuring that thier CC transaction costs remain higher than their non-surcharging competition and still incurring the full brunt of pre-electronic banking overhead costs.

If I'm correct that their policies result in overall lower volume, there's likely a negative impact to their purchasing power as well, further reducing margins.

I like some of them but my opinion is that, for some, a lack of business acumen will put them out of business and that would be regrettable.

 

[asknight]

Hawk, you're right. I was reading something between the lines. I must have been jumping back up to posts above yours and interpolating them. Sorry for going off in left field.

 

[Gator]

The 3% discount for cash is in accordance with the merchant agreement. A 3% surcharge for use of the card isn't.

Not really a subtle distinction but I've often wondered why more didn't offer the 3% credit simply to honor their agreement.

I'll take your word on it, but the distinction is too subtle for me.