Oh boy...I'm back with a 15" MBP

You guys are missing my point. I have absolutely no problem with the $1200 offer. I have a problem with LYING.

But then, I have a problem with used car salemen who lie to make a sale, lying mechanics, lying bank loan managers etc etc. They all use the same argument "well the buyer could have refused, nobody put a gun to his head"

JM, I'm very disappointed


Get the best possible deal. While being truthful.

 

I absolutely could not care less.

 

My statement of "You'll have a tough time selling for more than $1200" was not a lie.

I said he would have a hard time, I didn't say he wouldn't get more than $1200.

 

Well said.

 

Weartheborg, and to others, lets just drop it ok?

I'm a con artist, I am deceitful, I am a bad person. Ok I get it.

Case closed, and point taken.

I didn't mean to decieve anyone, I was just happy at the price I got this for. I was excited, and that clouded my judgement.

 

The case is here, however, that the statement was near what would have been a correct number. Even so, if the situation permits it, make the offer to assure the best deal.

And disappointed as you may be, I'm a Corporate major and grew up being taught to make the deal the priority and maximize cost savings, efficiency, and value. I'd expect the same of someone if I was selling something quickly and didn't know the specific value behind it, and other related details, and I wouldn't care if I found out later. It would have been my fault for being impulsive and lacking of knowledge to properly assess the situation to be able to properly and knowingly enter into a business/sales agreement without knowing the terms and values of said unit/item.

 

tell that to microsoft...and apple...and all those who make tv commercials...

 

ToshibaDude, I dont think you are a con-artist, and in the grand scheme of things, the $400 or so doesnt really matter (we all know MBP owners are rich SOBs )

I think what happened here was an inadvertant conjob. In the heat of the moment you said that thing. I'm pressing on this issue here because there seem to be a lot of business minided people here (including JM) who see nothing wrong with it. Who see it as part of the negotiation process. I am afraid these people will continue to have that attitude in their business dealings. And THAT is what scares me. Especially in todays economic mess which is partly due to such attitudes.

Hence, I'm just trying to convince people that there is a line that should not be crossed in dealings, and that it was crossed here.

 

Well if it helps, that guy was sporting a nice Tag Heuer Link watch which goes for $2-3000. I noticed it because I am into watches...but that's another hobby.

I agree with what you said about the mindedness, but I doubt it will ever change. When it comes to money buying things people are always on the lookout for cheap cheap and cheap, regardless of ethical issues or taking advantage of other people. It is the way it is.

 

If corporate finance majors are told that lying is OK in order to maximise profit; then I've lost all respect for that field

I used to wonder why there were "business ethics" courses.

 

And then the same could be debated that, why was research not done before accepting the terms of the transaction?

The current economic "mess" was a mix of poor laws and people simply signing a document without searching what exactly they were getting into or what they were signing. Simply because a loan officer wears the badge of a company doesn't mean they or the company are ethical, or to be trusted.

Everyone, and I mean everyone, need to do research before making any type of transaction, whether it be $100 or $100,000. Never ever take face value as truth from someone. Never trust ANYONE in a business transaction. Do your research.

If you don't, you have no one to blame but yourself, in my view.

 

I never said lying - however, taking appropriate actions within legal means to maximize and extend any return from a transaction, is something that does and always will happen in any industry. Research and due diligence needs to be taken by both sides, not simply the corporation. If the end user doesn't research and it results in a lower value or high fees/charges, they are to blame. Terms and agreements, and in the case of personal transactions, researching options, exist in writing for reason.

It is the world of business.

 

I agree totally. There is a big difference between getting the best business deal and obtaining something by deception.

The OP has admitted he 'duped' (or, conned) someone out of '$4-500', and says 'I absolutely could not care less.'

That's a horrible way to treat people.

 

I 'abolsutely could not care less' about what you say or think I did.

I guess then, most companies are 'horribly' treating their customers because they are 'duping' people to pay more for something that isn't worth that much?

I guess Apple treated you 'horribly' because they stole your money.

I guess Apple treats people 'horribly' because they say Macs are better than PC?

I guess food manufacturers are 'horrible' deceitful for labeling their products "Fat Free" when in fact it is loaded with sugar that will lead to fat gain anyway?

 

I am not absolving end users from not doing due diligence.
I do think Corporations lying is unacceptable to me.


While ToshibaDude's statement may have been legal, I do not think it obeyed the intent of the law. To me it WAS a lie. There are a lot of things that are legal, but unethical. And I absolutely am not OK with dealings that are unethical.


I view the role of due deligence as being the counterparty bringing their expertise and viewpoints to analyse the deal; and not as having the sole purpose of catching lies. If I'm the counterparty, and I look at a proposal, and my findings differ from what the end user says, I will be fine with it if its due to an honest mistake of the end user, or due to his ignorance. If its due to the end user trying to decieve me, I am absolutely not OK.

 

If they are not lying, then its not a dupe.

Do they explicitly say it Or do they rather give some advantages of macs ?

Thats not being deceitful, thats just being factual. But you are getting very close to deceit here...(not the labelling, but their advertisements)

 

Did you guys see Jon's roast of Jim Cramer, on how wall street encourages spreading of rumors to do short sales and profiting; and how its all legal ?

 

I think its time to let this thread float away.

 

Or pehaps move it to political subofrum with a changed thread title like "Was this ethical?

IMHO this is a pretty important issue (not the $400, but the rest of the discussion).

 

It's not all legal. Spreading rumors to manipulate a stock's price for profit is absolutely illegal. I don't think Stewart or Cramer ever claimed it was legal.

(But, like other illegal things, it certainly does happen.)

EDIT: I should add though that stocks and other securities are kind of a special case... there are all sorts of laws that apply to securities trading that don't apply to buying and selling other things.

 

Companies in the UK have to abide by the law. If they knowingly 'dupe', or 'con' a customer then they would be fined by Trading Standards.

No, Apple have been brilliant. The fault was entirely mine, I should have tested the MBP with a mouse before I bought one. Apple didn't mislead or con me and they certainly haven't stolen my money - I had an email this morning saying they're processing my refund.

 

I agree with JM that this kind of thing is typical of business transactions. But I also agree with borg that it's a bit unethical.

And ToshibaDude... if duping someone out of $400-$500 isn't enough for you to feel guilty over... remind me to stay away from your For Sale posts...

 

I am sorry,but didn't the seller have his own brains to think?He could take TD number and say "I ll think" and do some research @ home.

ROFL guys,you are like kids...C'on,if someone sells his staff for cheap,do you tell him that the price is too low for what it is worth and you want to pay more?

If that guy sold it for that price,w/o research and in that rush,then he didn't care about the money.

 

Toshibadude did nothing wrong. Given the circumstances, both parties probably walked away happy. It is obvious that the person who was trying to return the Macbook required cash on the spot. If he had time, he could've easily sold it on eBay or somewhere at a higher price, or even better, kept it in good condition for half a century or more and sold it off as an antique to a collector for much more money. Toshibadude simply charged a premium for offering cash on the spot.

If that is your definition of duping, then pretty much every profitable business fits the bill, since they all charge a margin (usually quite high) for the services and products they offer.

Anyway, thread closed for good measure.