Yay another ebay thread.

MattRocks wrote on Yesterday, 09:38:

I came across a graphics card seller who states in the listed the case is as-seen, and will be tested after purchase completes. Huh?

After purchase completes, that graphics card is owned by the buyer. At that moment it belongs to someone else, so he would be testing someone else's kit. Why?

Of all the negative things one can say on eBay, this claim is pretty weak.

Unless the item is sold as "New", I don't see any problem with it. A seller has a stock of used parts, all of which are on sale all the time, and one cannot predict who will want to buy what and when.

It makes sense to test after sale to make sure you are shipping a working part. Even if you tested it 5 years ago, it doesn't mean it still works. If you find it's not working, it costs you less as a seller to cancel the sale at that point, than have the buyer test it a month later, find out it's not working, because then you're out both the item and the shipping cost.

MattRocks wrote on Yesterday, 09:38:

But, right now, eBay still better than Facebook or any other marketplace.

That is absolutely true. At least for buyers. For sellers it can be a nightmare.

DosFreak wrote on Yesterday, 10:13:

Yay another ebay thread.

Yay!

MattRocks wrote on Yesterday, 09:38:

... seller who states in the listed the case is as-seen, and will be tested after purchase completes. Huh?

I guess sellers are getting used to the fact that "untested" really means "tested but didn't work" to most buyers.

And this genius thinks "I'll test if after you buy it" somehow gives buyers more confidence!

dr_st wrote on Yesterday, 11:32:

... It makes sense to test after sale to make sure you are shipping a working part. ...

Agreed, but why not say something like "working, will reconfirm before shipment"

A working part is worth so much more than an "unknown" one, you have to wonder why if it was indeed "known working", that wasn't stated.

To echo dr_st's point, it sounds like they want to confirm a working part before shipping it out, especially if it's something that has been sitting on the shelf for awhile.

I've had sellers occasionally do this (verify working before shipping). It's good practice from a seller perspective because if they can document it's working, it helps protect them from sketchy buyers who might try to claim a faulty item to get a discount or refund after the fact.

Doesn't sound like a scam at all.

I only really use ebay now as a kind of online traders portal, its not that far from amazon or various other services for buying various new things

i still see lots of interesting used stuff - but i save searches with strict price filters, so i wont see anything outside of some pretty low prices

eBay is the same it has always been, but the hobby has changed because of supply and demand.

I have to admit most of what I get on eBay these days is much more modern then when I started because prices are much higher for Nubus/AGP/VLB/EISA/MCA/ISA cards I liked to collect. Whole machines have to be special for me to even bid just because of the shipping costs.

When I started on eBay it was like a garage sale for people selling items just for the novelty and so something they paid decent money for and was now obsolete didn't end up in the trash. Shipping was also super cheap back then and eBay didn't get a cut. Now with prices through the roof and buyers expecting 100% running equipment for their money sellers are either forced to sell an item they can't fully test as non-functional or deal with returns they have to pay shipping for at a significant loss of money.

I am convinced that many sellers say the item is working when they really have no idea. For some things the time taken to properly test it is worth more than the cost of shipping. So just let the buyer test it and refund them after return if it doesn't work.

But then there are some jokers that list something as "for parts or not working" and are charging the same price as a working one (or more). This for example:

https://ebay.us/m/sOTG47

Oh, I know people are marking stuff as tested when it hasn't been.

How exactly do you test a piece of hardware that requires a driver that doesn't exist anywhere.

For that matter, how did you test a piece of hardware that requires a system to put that hardware in and you don't even have the hardware to test it with?

I've actually sent questions asking exactly how a seller tested something. I've never received a response.

Unless a seller goes out of their way to show something is working (e.g. screenshots from a PC showing it in use), I just assume a 50/50 chance of it working.

I've bought stuff labelled as not working that has worked and vise-versa. It's a crap shoot.

Shponglefan wrote on Yesterday, 19:35:

I've bought stuff labelled as not working that has worked and vise-versa. It's a crap shoot.

^^THIS^^

I rarely buy retro parts from ebay anymore for exactly this reason and my filters\searches tend toward the low end with inexpensive shipping.

Cases are the exception.
If I can find a good retro case in the price range I'm looking for, anything working inside of it is a bonus....

One time I ordered a rack mount case. Listing did not show the inside of the case and it said it was only the case and the price reflected that. On e it arrived, it had a S478 industrial board with AGP, PCI, and fully working ISA.

Some people are just not technically inclined to properly test stuff.

I purchased 2 evga power supplies for dirt cheap as they were sold as non-working. When the supplies arrived, I used my digital PS tester to test them, and both were beeping for no 12V2 which is fine since it has only one 12v power rail on those anyway. So, two working supplies for cheap.

Modern GPUs might boot to video just fine but crash hard when loading a driver or doing anything in 3D. Tested doesn't mean much these days.

"Tested" means either "It doesn't smell bad" or "I plugged it in and it didn't explode"

I generally check not just feedback but what other things the seller has listed.

Naturally it doesn't always work out this way but in my experience:

-sellers who don't normally sell computer stuff and list something computer related as "untested" or "powers on but nothing else tested"...usually a good deal and likely works
-sellers who normally sell computer stuff with it listed as "untested"...usually a good deal but likely doesn't work
-sellers who normally sell computer stuff with it listed as "tested" but with barely any photos or evidence of it tested...usually overpriced and likely doesn't work
-sellers who normally seller computer stuff with it listed as "tested" and provides tons of photos and a detailed description...usually overpriced but does work

sunkindly wrote on Today, 01:52:

I generally check not just feedback but what other things the seller has listed. […]
Show full quote

I generally check not just feedback but what other things the seller has listed.

Naturally it doesn't always work out this way but in my experience:

-sellers who don't normally sell computer stuff and list something computer related as "untested" or "powers on but nothing else tested"...usually a good deal and likely works
-sellers who normally sell computer stuff with it listed as "untested"...usually a good deal but likely doesn't work
-sellers who normally sell computer stuff with it listed as "tested" but with barely any photos or evidence of it tested...usually overpriced and likely doesn't work
-sellers who normally seller computer stuff with it listed as "tested" and provides tons of photos and a detailed description...usually overpriced but does work

That's my approach also.

If the seller knows how to test, then they are aware: they know whether or not it works, they know what it's fair value is, and they don't want to put any effort in.

So when that seller lists as currently untested, and will test after you have paid.. that's signalling they will put effort in, are not maximising profit, and will not show you what their test is.

The big inconsistency is in their effort.

The last piece of the puzzle is their pricing strategy: Did they price it strategically, or did they list at $1 no reserve?