Someone please explain the DIBS system here in the Classifieds/m2m (5 Viewers)

[Josh Kifer]

^^ Exactly how it should work, unless the seller explicitly states to send him/her a PM (which is perfectly fine). And "stating in the thread that I will buy said item" can take many forms, including 'dibs', 'mine', 'sold', or more lengthy comments such as 'I'll take it', 'consider it sold', etc. If I've expressed that I will buy the item, the next step is for the seller to provide me payment information, upon which I supply him shipping information. Anything else -- and in any other order --is absolutely unnecessary. Offer-acceptance-payment-shipping, done.

Fwiw, I always require buyers post in the sales thread (and NOT send me a PM), for two reasons: First, I don't want my PM inbox blowing up (it's unmanageable already as-is), and posting in the sales thread puts the time-of-order tracking all in a single location. For people who don't want to be publicly identified as buyers? Change your mind, or don't plan to buy from me. I'm not altering my sales policies.


And as far as "dibs for @xxx" goes -- that's utter bullshit, means zero to me, and is not considered binding. You might as well have just posted "I have a large penis", in terms of relevance to the sale thread. Just do this instead:

You can have the seller ship the chips wherever you want.


Of course, the fairest way to hold sales is to just ban the current 'dibs' sale model altogether. Then all this dibs nonsense is moot, and everybody interested gets an equal chance to buy at the seller's asking price...... via the lottery-sale.

PM sent.

 

[BGinGA]

PM sent.

Troublemaker. I actually went to check my inbox....

 

[Josh Kifer]

Troublemaker. I actually went to check my inbox....

Hahahaha. My job is done here folks!

 

[FordPickup92]

Maybe I can add a one-click "I'll take it" button. I was not really sure what "dibs" meant the other day. I had to PM the person to ask if that meant they are buying it because a few others posted that they also would take it.

My bad

 

[LinkyBabe]

I had to go full Josh Kifer on the few times that happened

Given your avatar I'm guessing it would look something like this:

 

[Josh Kifer]

Given your avatar I'm guessing it would look something like this:

View attachment 604397

That's pretty dead on. In that same outfit.

 

[Natskule]

I'm not ignoring anything. Take this hypothetical situation:

Let's say a big usable tournament set of CDI98 came up for sale at a reasonable price. I happen to be first to see it. I don't need it, I have enough money to buy it, but I know several friends on the site that would love to have it as well. I want them to get it before the unwashed heathen get a chance at it. So, I call "dibs".

Oho, but this is not enough for me. I want to say specific dibs for someone else, say @Phish1321 . But what, I'm thinking, if he doesn't wake up for check PCF for the next four hours? Maybe I should be careful and specify that if he doesn't want it, then @Polochris should be next, so I dibs for him, too. But wait, there's also @horseshoez , who really helped me out a few times for the same chip series, so I 3rd dibs for him. And I can't forget @Steppenwolf , because he's always in like a dirty shirt for these sorts of things, so I 4th dibs for him. If all of them pass, then I'll pony up the cash myself.

Gets ridiculous, doesn't it? And in what world would this system be fair?

So, instead, I either buy everything myself and then make a deal privately, or I tag everybody who I think wants it and let fate decide.

Which really sucks for me when I see it 2 minutes later. I'm 5 deep, behind someone that didn't even want them for chips I was looking for and am ready to pay for. Don't like the dibs for others thing. Much prefer the tag 'em in the thread method.

 

[Hammer2171]

I don't care if the buyer pms or posts in the thread first. I'll just go by whatever timestamp is earliest.

If someone for some reason don't want to tell the world what they are buying, I'm fine with that.

I’ve had a few people privately pm me about buying chips as well, so I agree with going off the time stamp to see who responded first to the sale, that’s what I do when I have something listed. Also, it’s still completely up to the seller to choose who they want to sell the chips to. I just know you have to be really damn fast on here if you really want it, I’ve seen stuff get posted and sold in 1 min.

 

[Numerobis]

1) does the seller need to abide by the dibs? regardless if said or no in the OP

2) same way as buyer sometimes negotiate post dibs, can the seller do this too? especially if his posting is too low

so for example a not so active seller posts a rack of PCA sec $5 for $400 he will get 5 dibs in the next minute. A lot of people are definitively willing to pay more. Isn't it the community role to protect the seller by explaining that prices of his product have gone up since he last visted?

 

[Steppenwolf]

There seem to be a lot of people who are against the idea of saying dibs for others.

I have a somewhat different view. For me personally, dibs simply means I will take the item, and I accept financial responsibility as buyer (if necessary). I don't care if you say dibs for me or for another person. It's all the same to me.

"Dibs for @allforcharity" is an efficient way of saying "I am helping a friend who I believe will pay today for this item, and if he doesn't, then I will". Why should that bear less meaning than any other dibs?

If someone says dibs for another person, and that other person is MIA, perhaps the dibber should pay up today and assume the position of reseller. But do they have to pay instantaneously for me to be okay? Hell no. They'd just better not back out. No different than backing out of dibs for yourself -- which is equally wrong IMHO.

I imagine people who are against dibs for others have been burned by those who back out. Is there a greater tendency for those deals to fall through? I don't have the data, but yes I imagine it probably is.

As a person who likes to look out for others - - whether those are my close friends or perhaps even strangers who I have decided to help - - I am not going to say "dibs for so and so" unless I mean it. Not allowing me to do that seems harsh and unnecessary, but if that is going to be a thing, I'd sure like to know in advance.

@ReallyGoodUsername has been explicit about prohibiting dibs for others, and while I don't necessarily like that or agree with the principle of it, I respect his way.

But if someone doesn't honor my dibs for another person, and he wasn't explicit about having that rule, then I would call B.S. I would not agree with that @BGinGA.

If PCF or a particular seller requires "dibs" to mean that I am the payor (i.e. no dibs for others), then it changes nothing for me other than my own choice of words.
In other words @Natskule, you would still be out of luck, when you see it 2 minutes later. If this dibber follows through (as they should in every transaction), you would still miss out. If he does not follow through (which is the real issue here), then your backup dibs should work out. Either way, you are no better or worse off.

I just don't see a world where people are prevented from buying stuff for friends. Too hard to enforce and way too harsh.

So, if I say dibs for another, and I am prepared to pay, then you'd better not turn down my purchase, unless you want to be lumped together with those who dibs for self or others and fail to follow through. This would be equally shameful to me.

Just be transparent about any rules you have in your sales thread. As an alternative to "no dibs for others allowed", I would suggest "all dibs are binding, including dibs for others". There is just no way you can expect to prevent people from placing dibs and/or executing transactions on behalf of others. A rule to prevent this would be rather superfluous.

 

[BonScot]

There seem to be a lot of people who are against the idea of saying dibs for others.

I have a somewhat different view. For me personally, dibs simply means I will take the item, and I accept financial responsibility as buyer (if necessary). I don't care if you say dibs for me or for another person. It's all the same to me.

"Dibs for @allforcharity" is an efficient way of saying "I am helping a friend who I believe will pay today for this item, and if he doesn't, then I will". Why should that bear less meaning than any other dibs?

If someone says dibs for another person, and that other person is MIA, perhaps the dibber should pay up today and assume the position of reseller. But do they have to pay instantaneously for me to be okay? Hell no. They'd just better not back out. No different than backing out of dibs for yourself -- which is equally wrong IMHO.

I imagine people who are against dibs for others have been burned by those who back out. Is there a greater tendency for those deals to fall through? I don't have the data, but yes I imagine it probably is.

As a person who likes to look out for others - - whether those are my close friends or perhaps even strangers who I have decided to help - - I am not going to say "dibs for so and so" unless I mean it. Not allowing me to do that seems harsh and unnecessary, but if that is going to be a thing, I'd sure like to know in advance.

@ReallyGoodUsername has been explicit about prohibiting dibs for others, and while I don't necessarily like that or agree with the principle of it, I respect his way.

But if someone doesn't honor my dibs for another person, and he wasn't explicit about having that rule, then I would call B.S. I would not agree with that @BGinGA.

If PCF or a particular seller requires "dibs" to mean that I am the payor (i.e. no dibs for others), then it changes nothing for me other than my own choice of words.
In other words @Natskule, you would still be out of luck, when you see it 2 minutes later. If this dibber follows through (as they should in every transaction), you would still miss out. If he does not follow through (which is the real issue here), then your backup dibs should work out. Either way, you are no better or worse off.

I just don't see a world where people are prevented from buying stuff for friends. Too hard to enforce and way too harsh.

So, if I say dibs for another, and I am prepared to pay, then you'd better not turn down my purchase, unless you want to be lumped together with those who dibs for self or others and fail to follow through. This would be equally shameful to me.

Just be transparent about any rules you have in your sales thread. As an alternative to "no dibs for others allowed", I would suggest "all dibs are binding, including dibs for others". There is just no way you can expect to prevent people from placing dibs and/or executing transactions on behalf of others. A rule to prevent this would be rather superfluous.

I agree. If you say “dibs” you’ve stated your intention to buy (regardless of whether it’s for you or someone else).

If you later back out then you deserve all the flack that comes your way.

 

[Eriks]

There seem to be a lot of people who are against the idea of saying dibs for others.

I have a somewhat different view. For me personally, dibs simply means I will take the item, and I accept financial responsibility as buyer (if necessary). I don't care if you say dibs for me or for another person. It's all the same to me.

"Dibs for @allforcharity" is an efficient way of saying "I am helping a friend who I believe will pay today for this item, and if he doesn't, then I will". Why should that bear less meaning than any other dibs?

If someone says dibs for another person, and that other person is MIA, perhaps the dibber should pay up today and assume the position of reseller. But do they have to pay instantaneously for me to be okay? Hell no. They'd just better not back out. No different than backing out of dibs for yourself -- which is equally wrong IMHO.

I imagine people who are against dibs for others have been burned by those who back out. Is there a greater tendency for those deals to fall through? I don't have the data, but yes I imagine it probably is.

As a person who likes to look out for others - - whether those are my close friends or perhaps even strangers who I have decided to help - - I am not going to say "dibs for so and so" unless I mean it. Not allowing me to do that seems harsh and unnecessary, but if that is going to be a thing, I'd sure like to know in advance.

@ReallyGoodUsername has been explicit about prohibiting dibs for others, and while I don't necessarily like that or agree with the principle of it, I respect his way.

But if someone doesn't honor my dibs for another person, and he wasn't explicit about having that rule, then I would call B.S. I would not agree with that @BGinGA.

If PCF or a particular seller requires "dibs" to mean that I am the payor (i.e. no dibs for others), then it changes nothing for me other than my own choice of words.
In other words @Natskule, you would still be out of luck, when you see it 2 minutes later. If this dibber follows through (as they should in every transaction), you would still miss out. If he does not follow through (which is the real issue here), then your backup dibs should work out. Either way, you are no better or worse off.

I just don't see a world where people are prevented from buying stuff for friends. Too hard to enforce and way too harsh.

So, if I say dibs for another, and I am prepared to pay, then you'd better not turn down my purchase, unless you want to be lumped together with those who dibs for self or others and fail to follow through. This would be equally shameful to me.

Just be transparent about any rules you have in your sales thread. As an alternative to "no dibs for others allowed", I would suggest "all dibs are binding, including dibs for others". There is just no way you can expect to prevent people from placing dibs and/or executing transactions on behalf of others. A rule to prevent this would be rather superfluous.

I agree with this in theory but sometimes you’ll see dibs called for someone who shows up a little later going: ”thanks but I’m good on these, release dibs”. I prefer ”I’ll take them” followed up by a PM.

 

[BonScot]

I agree with this in theory but sometimes you’ll see dibs called for someone who shows up a little later going: ”thanks but I’m good on these, release dibs”. I prefer ”I’ll take them” followed up by a PM.

In that case my thoughts are the original dibser has to pay the seller and then worry about reselling the chips themselves. That would get rid of a lot unnecessary dibsing.

To me it’s really simple. If you write “dibs” on a sales thread you’ve committed to buying.

We all saw the recent hassle caused by a new member writing dibs on at least 3 different threads then backing out on all 3.

 

[Steppenwolf]

I agree with this in theory but sometimes you’ll see dibs called for someone who shows up a little later going: ”thanks but I’m good on these, release dibs”. I prefer ”I’ll take them” followed up by a PM.

To me, dibs = I'll take them... and should of course be followed by a PM (because how else can the deal be consummated? ).

If the concern is making sellers wait too long for absentee buyers, then perhaps what people need to do is put time limits to consummate deals before dibs expire.

People who called dibs should step up and buy the item IMO. We also see people do this when calling dibs for self. It just shouldn't happen. But if there is a list of backup buyers, there should be no harm, if done in a timely manner. When backup buyers move on, real harm is done and the dibber should be held responsible. Just as @BonScot said.

 

[Kid_Eastwood]

Personnally I use the unambigous "I'll take it" statement instead of "dibs" and I directly send a PM to request payement info.

My own interpretation and analogy with the financial derivatives :
- Dibs = call (option to but)
- I'll take it = future (obligation/commitment to buy)

 

[raynmanas]

the use of the specific word "dibs" really only ever makes sense to me in the event of a set that has not yet been split. e g. "dibs on a rack of the $500s if split", especially if split pricing has not been established yet. this case also makes it acceptable (to me) to release dibs if the split takes too long or the split price is not agreeable. this is why dibs probably shouldn't be a phrase used to state your intent to buy - though informal, it really means a claim of first right.

that said, since it seems to have permeated into any sale now, if someone says it instead of something less ambiguous like "I'll take them", I now still expect they are 100% committed to completing the purchase, even though I disagree with this use in our parlance.

and as others have mentioned, dibs for someone else is kinda BS. either tag them and let the cards fall as they may, or just commit to buying them yourself without mentioning who they are for, and work out the details via PM.

 

[rowlin]

For anyone with the interest, patience, or appetite for it, here are a couple historical threads concerning the subject.

Link to thread: "Dibs"??? (from Sept. 2015)

Link to thread: What are "dibs"?! (From Nov. 2019)

 

[Marius L]

There seem to be a lot of people who are against the idea of saying dibs for others.

I have a somewhat different view. For me personally, dibs simply means I will take the item, and I accept financial responsibility as buyer (if necessary). I don't care if you say dibs for me or for another person. It's all the same to me.

"Dibs for @allforcharity" is an efficient way of saying "I am helping a friend who I believe will pay today for this item, and if he doesn't, then I will". Why should that bear less meaning than any other dibs?

If someone says dibs for another person, and that other person is MIA, perhaps the dibber should pay up today and assume the position of reseller. But do they have to pay instantaneously for me to be okay? Hell no. They'd just better not back out. No different than backing out of dibs for yourself -- which is equally wrong IMHO.

I imagine people who are against dibs for others have been burned by those who back out. Is there a greater tendency for those deals to fall through? I don't have the data, but yes I imagine it probably is.

As a person who likes to look out for others - - whether those are my close friends or perhaps even strangers who I have decided to help - - I am not going to say "dibs for so and so" unless I mean it. Not allowing me to do that seems harsh and unnecessary, but if that is going to be a thing, I'd sure like to know in advance.

@ReallyGoodUsername has been explicit about prohibiting dibs for others, and while I don't necessarily like that or agree with the principle of it, I respect his way.

But if someone doesn't honor my dibs for another person, and he wasn't explicit about having that rule, then I would call B.S. I would not agree with that @BGinGA.

If PCF or a particular seller requires "dibs" to mean that I am the payor (i.e. no dibs for others), then it changes nothing for me other than my own choice of words.
In other words @Natskule, you would still be out of luck, when you see it 2 minutes later. If this dibber follows through (as they should in every transaction), you would still miss out. If he does not follow through (which is the real issue here), then your backup dibs should work out. Either way, you are no better or worse off.

I just don't see a world where people are prevented from buying stuff for friends. Too hard to enforce and way too harsh.

So, if I say dibs for another, and I am prepared to pay, then you'd better not turn down my purchase, unless you want to be lumped together with those who dibs for self or others and fail to follow through. This would be equally shameful to me.

Just be transparent about any rules you have in your sales thread. As an alternative to "no dibs for others allowed", I would suggest "all dibs are binding, including dibs for others". There is just no way you can expect to prevent people from placing dibs and/or executing transactions on behalf of others. A rule to prevent this would be rather superfluous.

The whole dibs for others is pointless if you are buying the chips regardless. Just buy them and send a message to your friend that they can buy them from you.

The problem with dibsing for others is obviously when you are not buying them yourself and the seller is supposed to wait for the person who is being called dibs for on behalf of someone else, and others who want to buy the item is expected to be next in line (without the actual person who's been called dibs for has claimed to buy or not). Dibs for others makes zero sense, and means nothing to me. If you want to buy my chips for your friend just buy them regularly instead of start some confusion around it.

 

[ovo]

What I don't think is appropriate is when someone else calls dibs for another person. That shit should be outlawed

 

[ReallyGoodUsername]

I agree with this in theory but sometimes you’ll see dibs called for someone who shows up a little later going: ”thanks but I’m good on these, release dibs”. I prefer ”I’ll take them” followed up by a PM.

The whole dibs for others is pointless if you are buying the chips regardless. Just buy them and send a message to your friend that they can buy them from you.

The problem with dibsing for others is obviously when you are not buying them yourself and the seller is supposed to wait for the person who is being called dibs for on behalf of someone else, and others who want to buy the item is expected to be next in line (without the actual person who's been called dibs for has claimed to buy or not). Dibs for others makes zero sense, and means nothing to me. If you want to buy my chips for your friend just buy them regularly instead of start some confusion around it.

I agree with everything you said @Steppenwolf but have seen what @Eriks & @Marius L explained happen more often than not. If someone is buying a chip in my listing for someone else that’s acceptable. I just don’t allow the term “dibs for XXXXX” to be used as it seems to take on an even shakier level of commitment than calling dibs for oneself.

 

[CrazyEddie]

1) does the seller need to abide by the dibs? regardless if said or no in the OP

In my opinion, no. A seller is free to sell or not sell to anyone for any reason. However, if a seller says they'll use one policy (like "first come first serve") and then doesn't abide by it then I'd certainly think less of that seller in the future.

2) same way as buyer sometimes negotiate post dibs, can the seller do this too? especially if his posting is too low

"buyer sometimes negotiate post dibs" - If I put up a sales post with a listed price, and someone replied in the thread that they'd buy them, and then afterwards tried to negotiate on price, I would ignore their offer and probably refuse to sell to them in the future. Posting "dibs" in a thread discourages other potential buyers who might be perfectly willing to accept the listed price from even considering trying to buy them; posting "dibs" and then trying to negotiate is directly and actively hurting the seller. No one should ever do this, and those who do should be outed.

"can the seller do this too" - The rule (both in law and as a matter of ethics) is that an offer followed by an acceptance is binding on both parties. As a practical matter, people back out of sales for all kinds of reasons. Depending on the circumstances, I personally may or may not consider it a transgression worth getting upset about.

For example, as per my answer to your first question, I assume that every posting has an implicit clause stating "I reserve the right to decline to sell to anyone for any reason" (equivalent to @Windwalker's now infamous Asshat Clause) even if they don't say so explicitly, and so while technically refusing to honor "first come first serve" because you don't like who came first might be a violation of the offer-and-acceptance principle, I don't consider it a problem.

A seller backing out of a sale because they realize they can get a better price is a different matter. In general, no, this is a bad thing and should not be done. But once again in certain circumstances I personally wouldn't be particularly upset over it, even if it happened to me - specifically, the circumstance in which the seller was hugely ignorant of the true value of what they were selling and hugely underpriced it (as per your hypothetical example). By law, the seller is obligated to honor their ruinously-low offering price; ethically, however, I'm not going to cry for the buyer who lost the opportunity to make an enormous profit by preying on the seller's ignorance.

 

[MrWitti]

So happy that this discussion came up. I thought I was the only person that struggles with the dibs (or better with the release dibs). Seen so often that someone called dibs, then started to negotiate or back out, using it as a free option (free Long Call Option, all rights, no obligations)

 

[Nanook]

So happy that this discussion came up. I thought I was the only person that struggles with the dibs (or better with the release dibs). Seen so often that someone called dibs, then started to negotiate or back out, using it as a free option (free Long Call Option, all rights, no obligations)

I like owning free Calls or Puts for that matter. I'll take as many as I can get please....

It seems like I started a thread with lots of opinions - not all the same.....
Obviously this topic is not understood the same way by everyone and that is why I started the thread in the first place. >100 posts in < 24 hrs = I hit a nerve

 

[Irish]

Calling dibs, and then trying to negotiate a better price, and then backing out is crap. Like saying that you want to ride shotgun and then realizing that the driver has terrible halitosis ... you can't back out

So happy that this discussion came up. I thought I was the only person that struggles with the dibs (or better with the release dibs). Seen so often that someone called dibs, then started to negotiate or back out, using it as a free option (free Long Call Option, all rights, no obligations)

Wtf people actually do that? A PM trying to haggle after a commitment wouldn't even get a response from me, I'd go right onto the next interested person with a note in the thread "shitbag XXX reneged" for all to see, and they'd be added to my blacklist.

This is why I don't sell much, other than to help folks out with their WTB ads. I guess I'm just getting old and crusty.

 

[upNdown]

Wtf people actually do that? A PM trying to haggle after a commitment wouldn't even get a response from me, I'd go right onto the next interested person with a note in the thread "shitbag XXX reneged" for all to see, and they'd be added to my blacklist.

This is why I don't sell much, other than to help folks out with their WTB ads. I guess I'm just getting old and crusty.

You know, that’s one nice part about the market going crazy - you don’t get all the negotiations. Used to be, when you posted some chips for sake, just about every reply would include an attempt at negotiating down the price, and/or asking for free shipping.
But now, people just buy.

 

[BearMetal]

Wtf people actually do that? A PM trying to haggle after a commitment wouldn't even get a response from me, I'd go right onto the next interested person with a note in the thread "shitbag XXX reneged" for all to see, and they'd be added to my blacklist.

This is why I don't sell much, other than to help folks out with their WTB ads. I guess I'm just getting old and crusty.

I think it's fine to call dibs on 1 rack, then in a PM ask about getting a deal on buying more. As long as you always make good on the original dibs if the combined deal falls through.

 

[CdnBeerLover]

Wtf people actually do that? A PM trying to haggle after a commitment wouldn't even get a response from me, I'd go right onto the next interested person with a note in the thread "shitbag XXX reneged" for all to see, and they'd be added to my blacklist.

This is why I don't sell much, other than to help folks out with their WTB ads. I guess I'm just getting old and crusty.

Based on the comments in the thread, there may be an expectation that a seller honour "dibs" from anyone on the forum. That is not compatible with a blacklist. I have one as well (any user that completely ignored my PM's to purchase items for sale at full asking price is on it), and is another reason why I don't believe in dibs. If a user is on the list, I will not sell to them, dibs or not.

 

[Irish]

I think it's fine to call dibs on 1 rack, then in a PM ask about getting a deal on buying more. As long as you always make good on the original dibs if the combined deal falls through.

Yes, there are tons of different situations that can arise from M2M sales transactions. Hell I'll even forgive an "oh shit I completely misread your post these aren't what I thought they were!" if it seems sincere, I'm not looking to have someone drawn and quartered just because. But for someone to call "dibs" and then withdraw or try to haggle for no good reason or because they feel entitled is going to fall on deaf ears in casa de Irish.

 

[Irish]

Based on the comments in the thread, there may be an expectation that a seller honour "dibs" from anyone on the forum. That is not compatible with a blacklist. I have one as well (any user that completely ignored my PM's to purchase items for sale at full asking price is on it), and is another reason why I don't believe in dibs. If a user is on the list, I will not sell to them, dibs or not.

They can feel free to submit a hurt feelings report to management.

 

[BNM]

There is no “dibs system”. It’s an unofficial method by which some people attempt to claim something which is for sale in the classifieds. No idea why they don’t just say “I’ll take them. PM incoming.” I suspect it has something to do with the rather final nature of the later statement. Harder to back out.