On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 13:54:24 GMT, Tony Bryer
wrote:

In article , Mike Mitchell
wrote:
And it is this one significant feature that makes it grossly unfair,
in my opinion. It is a method for cheating buyers out of their
hard-earned wherewithal instead of playing fair with them. Question:
If this is such a wonderful system, why are new homes not sold in
this manner? Why are eggs, butter, bread, milk, cars, boats, trains,
or planes not sold in this manner? What other material good can you
name that keeps the price a secret that you have to guess?

I think you'll find that sales by sealed bid tender are not at all
uncommon where you are selling something that it is not easy to put an
exact value on. I certainly don't see any case for moral outrage: no
one makes you put in a higher bid than you wish and you're not tempted
to do so in the heat of the moment as with an auction.

Okay, then. Please explain why vendors in Scotland largely pursue this
unfair system, and, as you ponder, think carefully on the "unfair"
bit. If buyers are expected to get a valuation, what is wrong with the
concept whereby the vendor, i.e. the bloke with the goods to sell,
gets a valuation and prices the property accordingly? I'll tell you
why: It's so the vendor can quote some ridiculously low price, thereby
seducing buyers into his web, banking on the fact that buyers will put
in silly (i.e. exaggerated) offers so that the chance of getting *far
more* than the property is actually worth is greatly increased. This
to my mind exactly describes a scam, pure and simple. Basically, as I
see it, the vendor is using the system to *take advantage* of the
buyer. In other words he is not playing fair. Also, the system must be
crumbling at the edges because I am seeing secondhand properties
advertised at a fixed price, so obviously some people must agree with
how I see it. Vendors in Scotland must be incredibly greedy or
incredibly frit that they dare not state a fixed asking price, just in
case their pound of flesh isn't two pounds.

MM