Posts
So people, tell me what should i do if you sellers encountered the same situation as mine...
Buyer A interested in an item and it is available. So we exchange emails to answer her enquiries. The next day, coincidentally Buyer B also wanted the same item and make enquiries, too. At that time, Buyer A is just enquiring on the item, so that item is still consider available right? And so i told Buyer B the item is available and she wants to do COD. So i told her i can only COD at xxx area on xxx day.
The next day, Buyer A sms me telling that she will make the payment later on and i gave her my banking details. When i checked my email, i only c Buyer B reply saying that she cant make it for COD on xxx day and wanted to change date. So i politely tell her that the item is being reserved for another buyer.
And this Buyer B replied telling me that i'm sort of cheating her and is my fault i can't do COD with her. So i explained the whole story to her but get no reply from her. Maybe she is still pissed off. But do you think i'm wrong at this point? I've clearly mentioned that FIRST COME FIRST SERVE is for those who will make payment first and that enquiries emails is not considered as an order. So, how should i deal with this situation if it happened again. Thanks!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
'First come first serve' may be interpreted differently, but how I would see it is the person who first inquires will be the first one served, until either settled or if the person decides to let it go, then only the next interested buyer is served. I would've answered Buyer B's queries too but at the same time inform her that there's another buyer who inquired first so priority is given to the first buyer, and that if the first buyer decides that she's not interested anymore then I'll inform Buyer B that she's next in line for the item.
ReplyDeleteI think you're working on a first pay first serve basis, based on your explanation.
So in my opinion i think you were wrong in giving the impression to both the buyers that the item was available for both of them, when you should have settled everything with buyer A first and put buyer B on hold, unless and until buyer A decides that she doesn't want it anymore then only you move on to buyer B.
So the right buyer got the item, but how you handled it also wasn't fair to buyer B.
ahh agree with anonymous. :)
ReplyDeleteyea. totally agree with anonymous. as i was reading your post i already felt that you're being unfair to both parties. i mean what would you have done if B paid first? send it to B? then how bout A?
ReplyDeleteif i were B i would be pretty pissed out. after all you told B that the item was available. so yea, i think you handled the situation rather poorly that instant. but oh well from your point of view i guess you wanted a secure sell but sort of unfair towards your customers
a classic case of mis-communication. but from the looks of it, it seems that buyer b was treated a little unfairly due to timing problems (slow email) and priority should be given to only one of them since the beginning, but both buyers must be made clear that there is someone else eying the same item :)
ReplyDeleteAgree with the first Anonymous.
ReplyDeleteYou should have told buyer B that the item had been reserved for buyer A in the first email. Instead, you said it's available.
i think uguys are clearly missing the point, yes u may misinterpret FIRST COME FIRST SERVE all u want but seller did add that 'is for those who will make payment first and that enquiries emails is not considered as an order' <--hello how clear u wan her to state this?
ReplyDeleteso priority should be given to the buyer who have a million questions and takes 20 years to make up her mind to purchase or not isit? hell she'd be an old granny by then. i mean seriously, if the item is limited then buyer should not assume that she is the only person in the goddamn world to have set her eyes upon it yea..
bacalaa polisi blogshop tu..and anyway the world really doesn't revolve around each of u dear buyers
yes, most sellers misunderstand the 'first come first serve' term. its totally different with 'first pay first serve'. it's not fair to buyer B though. you should get your t&c straight, miss seller!
ReplyDeleteDear all, here's coming from a blogshop owner.
ReplyDeleteSituations like these are so typical. To me, its always first pay first serve, all my regulars understand and abide with it. I don't ever hold reservations and even if i do, i'll try to get their contact in case other interested buyers come along, they'd be inform via sms first.
So far, i never had a complain from any of my customers as i always state in my replies to enquiries or complete order form that there's already a potential buyer on hand (if there is).
So, if the buyer is really desperate for the item, they'll run to the bank even near midnite.
Rule of thumb, be clear, very clear to each interested buyer about the status of the item to avoid confusion and disappointment. I think they'd appreciate your truth than later hear,
" sorry, it's sold " when they are ready to pay.
So dear seller, in this case i think you're in the wrong. - SLAP -
first pay first serve method is very problematic, a lot of buyers have already complained because of this method of operating.
ReplyDeleteso if the buyer asks a million questions, then just say "there's another buyer interested in this item, please confirm your order within X days, otherwise the item will go to the next interested buyer"
I guess it'll be better if you 've told buyer B that there was actually a buyer A in the waiting list, so you'll sell the item to buyer A if buyer B can't manage to COD with you to complete the transaction before a certain date.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I don't understand is why some buyers can rant about not being able to buy a dress/top? Not all items you want in life can be reserved till you're comfortable enough to come and get it.