Over valuing of second hand bikes ?

querhoch

where did I say it was equal to another part? I asked how one that did the same job was neccessarily better than another, thats not the same thing at all.

bennett_346

Cos its shinier innit.

rrsodl

MountainMonster wrote:

RRSODL wrote:

milko9000 wrote:

The ones that do my head in are the guys trying to persuade you to end the auction early. I had a really persistent one who wanted my netbook for a not particularly good (for me) price, busting to get it before he went away on holiday. When I deliberately didn't respond til after his 'flight' it turned out he was still on email and could send his brother to pick it up so it's still all good. Amazing! By then the auction had gone way past his offer anyway, the cheeky git. Every auction I ever do seems to have a few like this, with cash now end now gotta hurry messages.

The other day I offered this guy to buy his saddle outside ebay but he said he would let the auction run till the end, however, he pointed out he had an identical saddle which he would auction too. Well I was prepared to pay £160 for the saddle I think the saddle went for £165. After paying ebay and Paypal fees he was worse off than taking my money. I offered £140 for the second saddle and he took the money. I ended up quite happy and I guess he did too.

Ebay fees are scandalously high, I'm sure they used to be about 3% for the first part then another % the last time I sold something, a few years ago.

This is exactly why I wait for either free listings to come up, or just don't bother at all.

In this case, he would pay £16.50 just for end of auction fee + whatever he had to pay for listing the item and whatever he paid Paypal. Ebay & Paypal are making millions and I understand they pay hardly any corporation tax :evil:

cooldad

Diddums. Making millions - how unfair. Thought of moving to North Korea?
Ebay allows you to reach millions of people, worldwide. I think the fees are reasonable under the circumstances.
There's always Gumtree for cheap rubbish.

querhoch

i dont think anybody has a problem with eBay making money, its thier UK tax avoidance thats the issue. especially when the UK is in its worst financial crisis in history, partly due to corporations like eBay, Google and Starbucks not paying tax and the banks facilitating thier schemes.

bennett_346

In the grand scheme of things it's nothing really. I wont be losing any sleep over it.

cooldad

querhoch wrote:

i dont think anybody has a problem with eBay making money, its thier UK tax avoidance thats the issue. especially when the UK is in its worst financial crisis in history, partly due to corporations like eBay, Google and Starbucks not paying tax and the banks facilitating thier schemes.

Companies have an obligation to their shareholders to minimise tax. If you don't like the UK tax regulations write to your MP. Who is probably using every trick in the book to minimise their own.
Or simply just didling their expenses.

Clank

querhoch wrote:

partly due to corporations like eBay, Google and Starbucks not paying tax and the banks facilitating thier schemes.

No. No, it really isn't.

querhoch

yes, it really is. Vodafone avoided 5 billion in tax. that 5 billion would have covered every single cut to services that the chancellor has implemented over the last 6 months or so, and its about to get worse.

bennett_346

It clearly didn't harm the economy that much else theyd just change the tax rules so they couldnt avoid paying it. As they haven't done so it indicates to me that there's a lot more to it than simply "we lost out on 5 billion because vodafone didnt pay us it directly". Hint: there's more to be gained from businesses than simply "tax"

cooldad

querhoch wrote:

yes, it really is. Vodafone avoided 5 billion in tax. that 5 billion would have covered every single cut to services that the chancellor has implemented over the last 6 months or so, and its about to get worse.

I suggest a strongly worded letter to the Daily Mail.
Hint - keep it simple and use monosyllables.

But please, think before you spout garbage. Avoiding tax is perfectly legal, and is using the rules set out by the government. I assume you don't take the tax deductions allowed to you and donate the extra money to the exchequer.

Clank

querhoch wrote:

yes, it really is. Vodafone avoided 5 billion in tax. that 5 billion would have covered every single cut to services that the chancellor has implemented over the last 6 months or so, and its about to get worse.

And where was Vodafone in the list above?

And again - no it wouldn't. The country would still be trillions in debt with an inbalance of payments (which is our big issue) and massively increasing debt top pay. It would a temporary 'get out' at best, not a long term solution.

I quote from Wkipedia:

Due to the Government's significant budget deficit, which must be financed by borrowing, the national debt is increasing by approximately £121 billion per annum, or around £2.3 billion each week.

also see:
http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_debt_chart.html

I wouldn't spend too mcuh time researching - it's depressing stuff.

mrmonkfinger

The economy + failing at maths.

Sounds like numerous chancellors.

The Rookie

We have tax laws that allow certain ways of avoiding tax (like cycle to work for example!).

In most cases tax avoidance is totally legal, where it is not legal is where company's pay parent companies (situated in a tax haven of course) an excessive (as in unreasonable and unjustifiable) amount for certain 'services' they get, so for example Starbucks UK manage to pay Starbucks offshore almost exactly their taxable profit in various royaltys (for use of the name), legals 'services' etc etc so they pay no tax in the UK, this is avoidance but is NOT legal if the payments are found (aka can be proven) to be excessive.

junglist_matty

I sold a 3yr old £900 bike for £200 last month.... Was chuffed!

That bike owed me nothing, I bought it, rode it and had fun over many thousands of miles so anything I got for it was a bonus....

Trouble is, many people buy a bike thinking they'll ride it, don't ride it more than a few hundred miles, then a year or two down the line need some cash, so sell the bike they've not touched for the last year selling it as mint "nearly new" and get about 80% of what they paid! ....Thing they don't realise is that the bike (metal parts) will still perish sat in the garage untouched!!!!

allthegearnoidea

querhoch wrote:

but why would you consider it an upgrade? it does the same job as the last one you had. unless its significantly stronger or lighter, if youre a weight weenie, then I wouldnt consider it an upgrade at all. only label whores get excited when they see a bike specced with Hope, Thompson, Spank etc without checking to see if what theyre paying for is the name.

if yo look in a motoring sense, a 'Modfication' is somethig that is NON stndard, (especiall from an insurance ompanies point of view!!) so a Hope seat clamp i rightly classed as an upgrade, most choosethem for the colour, but also the hope qr's have Brass collars onthem unlike most that have plastic, so in that int it is an uprade,

yes thompson seat posts cost 2 or 3 times as much as a standard post, But! thye have a machined 'ridgrd' shaft that helps against the post slipping whilst clamped, and is alsoof an ovalised constrction inside the post to create more stiffness, - more noticeable on thinner posts like 27.2's, its one of those things that untill you ride with a thompson or Higher end Easton etc you dont see the reason for them!

the listing of al the parts and rrp is much the same with the chav' and teir barclaycard cars, listig all the things theve done to them and sayin the cars worth in exces of 20k for a saxo but listing it as need to sell (most likely toay barclaycard back for it!!) for the bargain price of £5000 etc. people get sucked into the £600 whels = £600 more alue to the car, realistically, makes maybe£50-100 difference!!!

rrsodl

sloppycowpat wrote:

most people 'HOPE' they can get as much as possible for stuff they don't want any more or often haven't used it much so think it is worth nearly new price, and people will pay for it. Simples!

I'd say that if I don't want something then I take it to the tip but on the other hand if there is something I haven't used much but I think it has some value then I don't want to give it away just because somebody doesn't want to pay the real value.

For example I mentioned that I had some handlebars that I didn't have any use for and somebody PMed me to offer £2 for it plus postage - I know those bars go for as much as £20. Probably he saw an opportunity to make a quick tenner and I'd be a fool if I played ball knowingly I can make the tenner myself.

I dislike in a big way people that try to take advantage of others

bails87

I once worked with a guy who'd put a £2k stereo/speaker system into a VW Polo. He didn't understand that if a 'normal' Polo was worth £5k, his wouldn't necessarily be worth £7k. "But it cost me £5k and I've spent £2k on it, so it's worth £7k" :roll:

I was amazed when I sold my £1100 C2W road bike for £800 after over a year of all weather use. I'd looked after it, but I don't think I'd replaced anything apart from the tyres. The buyer was still chuffed with a 'bargain' and i was happy with the cash that he offered to avoid paypal's fees.

lawman

Another prime example of a bike thats waaaayyy over priced!! :shock:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Santa-Cruz-Bl ... cfc&_uhb=1

I'm sorry but nice as it is, and I do love the colour, nearly £4k for a second hand bike is insane, he needs his head checking!

bennett_346

"The bike cost over £5k altogether"

njee20

Probably did. Only XT/X9 though. £3000 maybe if its mint, but pushing it.

bennett_346

He'd have to be mental to of spend 5k on that. People do this funny thing where the higher the value the more likely they are to round up the price.

It was probably more like 4600.

allthegearnoidea

Haha! A year old frame and 2 year old componants and a price drop of £1300 from its alleged £5k tag for a biKe that's been Well used!
Bargain!

rrsodl

allthegearnoidea wrote:

Haha! A year old frame and 2 year old componants and a price drop of £1300 from its alleged £5k tag for a biKe that's been Well used!
Bargain!

Well, if the frame was made of steel or titanium then the fact that is one year old would not matter at all, unless of course it's bent or damaged.

The Rookie

Because aluminium or carbon would be knackered after a year or two?????

rolf_f

bails87 wrote:

I once worked with a guy who'd put a £2k stereo/speaker system into a VW Polo. He didn't understand that if a 'normal' Polo was worth £5k, his wouldn't necessarily be worth £7k. "But it cost me £5k and I've spent £2k on it, so it's worth £7k" :roll:

Many years ago a mate and I went to look at an Alfasud Sprint at a dodgy out of town Arfur Daley type dealers near Lincoln. The car was white and filler and priced about £500 which was optimistic. I was hoping he wouldn't drop to the £350 my mate might have gone for.

Anyway, we spoke to the dealer and commented on a particularly crusty looking bit of bodywork - the dealer said he needed to get something done about it so the price would go up to about £750...... This would have been pudding and rattle can repairs on a 70s Alfa and he thought that would increase the value......

querhoch

Oddly, Ive just had this very arguement with a riding buddy.

He's taken off his 2011 Boxxer WC and Put on a 2012 Fox 40. His reckoning is that as the Fox cost around £1400 he has added that to the overall value of the bike. I countered that with this:

The bike was worth, 2nd hand value, £2,500. By changing the fork youve added around £300 in value over the Boxxer WC, but now that Fox is 2nd hand so you have to take that into account and deduct accordingly. The bike is now worth £2,700.

He isnt talking to me now.

mac_man

querhoch wrote:

Oddly, Ive just had this very arguement with a riding buddy.

He's taken off his 2011 Boxxer WC and Put on a 2012 Fox 40. His reckoning is that as the Fox cost around £1400 he has added that to the overall value of the bike. I countered that with this:

The bike was worth, 2nd hand value, £2,500. By changing the fork youve added around £300 in value over the Boxxer WC, but now that Fox is 2nd hand so you have to take that into account and deduct accordingly. The bike is now worth £2,700.

He isnt talking to me now.

Yup... this kind of nonsense always makes me laugh. Somebody buys a bike for £3K, takes of forks, wheels, mechs etc. Spends another £3K 'upgrading' everything and advertise the bike for £6K. :roll:

So what happened to all the perfectly good wheels, forks, brakes etc? Throw them away did you? Sell them on Ebay?As with the optional extras on a car, no way would I pay over the odds for an upgraded or custom bike.