Ethical Query

"George" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

RJ said:

Quoted message said:

> Am I overreacting?
No. You are correct. He's a chiseler and he'll screw your
company one day.

--Blair

Disagree !!! he's an astute buyer.

Ever get a really good price on cereal ? canned goods ?
or any other grocery item ?
Did you buy "extra" ? take advantage of the price ?
Did you question the pricing ?

Given the state of the housing market,
a smart buyer might be shopping for a house
that has defaulted on the mortgage.
And if it's a really good bargain,
will you insist they take more money ?

<rj>

Different concepts. Houses have fallen in value and you would be buying it
at market value.
Scooping up a bunch of items that may have been incorrectly priced is a
totally different thing.

In some states, if a store posts an incorrect price, they have to honor it.
I see no reason for restaurants to be any different. It would be interesting
to know how long the wine list had been in existence without an employee
noticing the mistake.

On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 08:53:28 -0500, Omelet <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

RJ said:

Given the state of the housing market,
a smart buyer might be shopping for a house
that has defaulted on the mortgage.
And if it's a really good bargain,
will you insist they take more money ?

<rj>

That is how I got my HUD repo' for 35K.

Current market value is 79K. But, this was 20 years ago.

Not sure that repo' houses are in the same class as mis-marked wine
tho'. ;-)

I wouldn't ever want to buy a reposessed house or car... it would just
feel so WRONG to me that somebody else should suffer just so that I
could get a bargain... (I don't shop in pawn stores either!)

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Peter A said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Regarding the wine list, sometimes a wine stays at a low price
on a winelist even as its market price has gone up with time.
They could have bought it pre-arrival at a bargain, and never
marked it up to market. Probably they are not losing any money.

Quoted message said:

First of all, pre-arrival purchases never make that much of a difference
in price in wine.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

I remember buying 1984 Chateau Le Pin for $40 at wholesale
upon landing. It would have been less pre-arrival. A
few years later, we noticed it on the winelist at
Chez Panisse for $105 -- and immediately bought a bottle,
as it would be more than twice that retail.

I see where recent vintages of Le Pin are $800 to $1800/bottle.
http://www.wine-searcher.com/find/Chateau+Le+Pin+Pomerol/1999/-/USD/A/-/0

Steve

All of the prices you mention support my contention, which I will now
explain in detail.

A restaurant was selling for $7 a wine that retails for $200. Someone
suggested that the $7 might have been a legitimate price, and not a
typo, because the restaurant could have bought the wine pre-arrival at a
low price. My claim, supported by your prices, is that while pre-arrival
purchase can indeed save money, it never comes anywhere near covering
the spread between $7 and $200.

--
Peter Aitken

Omelet wrote:
thought.

Quoted message said:

Compared to many in third world countries, even many poor (minimum
wage level) here are wealthy with a house/apt. with electricity and
running water, a TV set, refrigerator and microwave.

And usually at least one car. Maybe not in good shape, but still...

as you may know, I work in Social History. A few years ago we had a set in
on of our museums showing a miner's cottage from the previous century. It
consisted of a fireplace, wooden table and two chairs. as well as some
cooking pots

One day some people from our local council brought some visitors. They were
from Africa and were with our council to learn how to run an area. I was
showing them around the exhibition and got to the miner's cottage. I was
explaining how poor these miners had been and how bereft of comfort.

I felt dreadful when they didn't understand what I was saying.. to them,
that cottage was luxury. I never made that mistake again

In article <[email hidden]>,

Karen AKA Kajikit said:

On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 08:53:28 -0500, Omelet <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

RJ said:

Given the state of the housing market,
a smart buyer might be shopping for a house
that has defaulted on the mortgage.
And if it's a really good bargain,
will you insist they take more money ?

<rj>

That is how I got my HUD repo' for 35K.

Current market value is 79K. But, this was 20 years ago.

Not sure that repo' houses are in the same class as mis-marked wine
tho'. ;-)

I wouldn't ever want to buy a reposessed house or car... it would just
feel so WRONG to me that somebody else should suffer just so that I
could get a bargain... (I don't shop in pawn stores either!)

Karen,

By far the vast majority of people that lose houses were short on
priorities, not money.

Morgage always gets Paid FIRST. #1 priority in my world. I can live
without power and water if I have to (altho' that is the #2 bill
priority).

I have PERSONALLY known more than one person that did not do that.
People that owned multiple cell phones, laptop computers, I-phones, Mp3
players, TIVO, annual passes to Schlitterbahn water park, $60.00
aquarium fish (I kid you not) and they ended up with foreclosures. I
don't do ANY of that [censored].

It's not all just "unfortunate" people.

There is no sin in purchasing repossessed property. Frankly, with my
finances when I got out of college, I would not have been able to afford
anything else. Closing fees were $1,200 on an HUD. I was able to save
that much. Initial morgage payments were $470.00 per month on a 30 year
loan at 12% interest. (I was making $8.25 per hour at that time).

I paid it off early then refinanced for debt consolidation and major
badly needed home repairs.

And again, Morgage is the FIRST bill paid.

One must keep one's priorities straight. I actually have it set up on a
debit so the money has to be there.

I owe 4 more years at $660.00 per month at 8.2%. I look forward to
paying it off. ;-)

It's not the same as taking advantage of an obviously mis-priced item.
Not at all.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a [censored]" -- Jack Nicholson

"Omelet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

By far the vast majority of people that lose houses were short on
priorities, not money.

Proof, please. Right now. Show me the stats.

RJ said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Am I overreacting?

No. You are correct. He's a chiseler and he'll screw your
company one day.

--Blair

Disagree !!! he's an astute buyer.

Quoted message said:

Given the state of the housing market,
a smart buyer might be shopping for a house
that has defaulted on the mortgage.
And if it's a really good bargain,
will you insist they take more money ?

<rj>

A smart buyer might buy a repossessed house.
A chiseler would offer sellers who are distressed
much less than the house's value and buy all the houses
on the block.

gloria p

"Ophelia" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Omelet wrote:
thought.

Quoted message said:

Compared to many in third world countries, even many poor (minimum
wage level) here are wealthy with a house/apt. with electricity and
running water, a TV set, refrigerator and microwave.

And usually at least one car. Maybe not in good shape, but still...

as you may know, I work in Social History. A few years ago we had a set
in on of our museums showing a miner's cottage from the previous century.
It consisted of a fireplace, wooden table and two chairs. as well as some
cooking pots

One day some people from our local council brought some visitors. They
were from Africa and were with our council to learn how to run an area.
I was showing them around the exhibition and got to the miner's cottage.
I was explaining how poor these miners had been and how bereft of comfort.

I felt dreadful when they didn't understand what I was saying.. to them,
that cottage was luxury. I never made that mistake again

Even my great-grandfather (killed in coal-mining accident in West Virginia,
USA, in 1911) was financially able to have a house physically moved because
he was unable to find adequate housing for himself and his nine chilren.

It is said that he was either Welch or Irish, depending on his maternal and
paternal heritage; but it could be that miners from other countries came
here because even though the life was hard and I understand the pay was next
to nothing here, they were better off financially-- but you will know more
about this than I. I recall as a child even 30 years later that he was
always well-remembered by his wife (who had remarried) and my
great-grandmother, his wife, who died in 1949.

The miners' lives are always of interest to me when I hear of the accidents,
such as the one now concluding in Utah, USA.
Dee Dee

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I wouldn't ever want to buy a reposessed house or car... it would just
feel so WRONG to me that somebody else should suffer just so that I
could get a bargain... (I don't shop in pawn stores either!)

I snipped Om's message to respond to this one.

You are being silly. I think your heart is in the right place, but your
actions help no one - except the person who got the cheaper because you
would not buy it.

Once a house or car is repossesed, the person has already lost it.
Buying or not buying has no effect on that person. Any suffering they
experience will happen regardless of what you do. Whether they lost the
item due to stupidity or unavoidable circumstances is no longer part of
the equation.

Items in pawn shops are there because someone made a decision to sell
the item. It's not only because of financial straights - they may just
have stuff they no longer want.

I will say that I don't shop at thrift stores, even though you can find
some great stuff there. Those places are intended for the poor, not for
people who can afford to shop elsewhere.

--
Peter Aitken

On Aug 25, 10:56 pm, Terry Pulliam Burd <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

As many of you know, I'm a paralegal in a law firm, which has little
to do with the following, but just setting the scene. My boss was
taken by a client to dinner the other night in LA after the execution
of a successful contract. Mind you, the client has a 7 figure plus
bank account, but tends to be a bit slow in paying his bills and a bit
over interested in the cost of things or what he has paid for things.
He also considers himself quite an oenophile.

While he perused the wine list, he found what he was certain was a
typo. Wine X, which is a favorite of his, was priced at $X7 and he was
sure it should have been priced $200 more than that (I checked - he
was right). He promptly ordered 4 bottles, 2 to take home. First of
all, I wasn't aware that you could order wine in a restaurant as if it
was a liquor store (this is southern California, so who knows). More
importantly, I can sort of see ordering 1 bottle while pointing out to
the staff that you think the price is a typo and you should at least
get the one bottle at that price, but I was offended that he ordered
several bottles and rather gleefully left thinking he had really put
one over on the restaurant.

My first reaction when my boss told me this story was that when we
finish the current lawsuit, we not take on any more work for him. If
he's willing to cheat a restaurant, he won't hesitate to cheat anyone
else. And a client like that we do not need or want. My boss
acknowledges my concerns, and says that he is more valuable to the
client than the client is to us, so if I want to cross him off our
client list, it's okay with him.

Am I overreacting?

I would have thought that the correct action would be to ask if it was
a typo. If the diner was told thatthe price was correct then I see no
reason not to take advantage of a good buy. Otherwise it's pretty
tacky behaviour and I'd serioiusly think about whether I wanted him as
a client.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

JoeSpareBedroom said:

"Becca" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Terry Pulliam Burd wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Am I overreacting? Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd

Quoted message said:

IMO, no. My mother always told me, if someone is gossiping *to* you, they
are also gossiping about you. Why would thieves be any different? If
somebody takes advantage of someone else's mistake, then they will take
advantage of you. I have made plenty of mistakes, but I would never cheat
anybody out of a nickel. I also would not want to do business with someone
who is that ethically bankrupt.

Quoted message said:

Becca

Please provide your source which proves that the restaurant made a mistake.

If the diner failed to ask if it was a mistake then his actions are
dubious to say the least.

(Victor Sack) said:

Terry Pulliam Burd said:

Am I overreacting?

If your law firm were doing criminal cases, representing thieves,
murderers and such, would you cross them all off your client list,
driving the firm into bancruptcy?

Quoted message said:

ObWine: So, what wine was it?! This is what is actually important here,
woman!

Victor

Hey this is RFC not RFW. We can only ask for the name of the wine if
Terry can provide the nutritional value of the wine.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

Edwin Pawlowski said:

"Terry Pulliam Burd" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

We do civil law (constitutional law, primarily First and Fifth
Amendment). As clean as hands get in law.

Fifth Amendment? As in "I'm not talking because I can say the wrong thing
(like the truth) and get my ass in trouble?" Yeah, that's clean.

Quoted message said:

And even if the price marked had been correct and the client mistook
it for the more expensive vintage (which I don't think is the case, as
I looked around with Google and an '89 vintage can be $200+), glomming
onto 4 bottles still shows a sleaze factor, IMHO.

Have you called the restaurant yet? What did they say? His intentions may
have been borderline sleazy, but he may have gotten what he paird for and
the seller may be quite happy to sell at that price. Supermarkets often
have loss leaders and I take advantage of them whenever I can.

Unless we can determine that an actual error took place, it is only your
speculation that the client did wrong. Let's get that clarified

No the actual price at which the restaurant was willing to sell is not
the issue. It is the somewhat dubuios willlingness of the diner to
take advantage of what might be a clerical error. A simple questions
like: "This seems like an awfully low price, is it correct" would be
all that was needed.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

"John Kane" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

JoeSpareBedroom said:

"Becca" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Terry Pulliam Burd wrote:

Quoted message said:

> Am I overreacting? Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd

Quoted message said:

IMO, no. My mother always told me, if someone is gossiping *to* you,
they
are also gossiping about you. Why would thieves be any different? If
somebody takes advantage of someone else's mistake, then they will take
advantage of you. I have made plenty of mistakes, but I would never
cheat
anybody out of a nickel. I also would not want to do business with
someone
who is that ethically bankrupt.

Quoted message said:

Becca

Please provide your source which proves that the restaurant made a
mistake.

If the diner failed to ask if it was a mistake then his actions are
dubious to say the least.

Proofreading is an important skill, often neglected.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Karen AKA Kajikit said:

I wouldn't ever want to buy a reposessed house or car... it would just
feel so WRONG to me that somebody else should suffer just so that I
could get a bargain... (I don't shop in pawn stores either!)

They've already suffered. Whether you buy it or not. They've already
lost possession. I won't buy them because they often aren't in good
shape. My BIL bought a repo tv, a big fancy one. The previous owner
took a screwdriver and gouged scratches in the wood case. Then he took
the back off and [censored] in it.

"Dan Abel" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Karen AKA Kajikit said:

I wouldn't ever want to buy a reposessed house or car... it would just
feel so WRONG to me that somebody else should suffer just so that I
could get a bargain... (I don't shop in pawn stores either!)

They've already suffered. Whether you buy it or not. They've already
lost possession. I won't buy them because they often aren't in good
shape. My BIL bought a repo tv, a big fancy one. The previous owner
took a screwdriver and gouged scratches in the wood case. Then he took
the back off and [censored] in it.

Probably a football fan.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Edwin Pawlowski said:

"Terry Pulliam Burd" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

We do civil law (constitutional law, primarily First and Fifth
Amendment). As clean as hands get in law.

Fifth Amendment? As in "I'm not talking because I can say the wrong thing
(like the truth) and get my ass in trouble?" Yeah, that's clean.

"Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous
crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in
cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in
actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be
subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or
limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness
against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without
due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use,
without just compensation."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#am
endmentv

That covers a lot more ground.

Quoted message said:

Unless we can determine that an actual error took place, it is only your
speculation that the client did wrong. Let's get that clarified

I agree, but I certainly don't know the details. If I buy something on
sale at the advertised price, I certainly feel no guilt. If I get a
good deal on something, I shouldn't feel guilty. If the guy gloated a
lot over how he put something over on the restaurant, I might be
reluctant to do further business with him.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ophelia said:

Omelet wrote:
thought.

Quoted message said:

Compared to many in third world countries, even many poor (minimum
wage level) here are wealthy with a house/apt. with electricity and
running water, a TV set, refrigerator and microwave.

And usually at least one car. Maybe not in good shape, but still...

as you may know, I work in Social History. A few years ago we had a set in
on of our museums showing a miner's cottage from the previous century. It
consisted of a fireplace, wooden table and two chairs. as well as some
cooking pots

One day some people from our local council brought some visitors. They were
from Africa and were with our council to learn how to run an area. I was
showing them around the exhibition and got to the miner's cottage. I was
explaining how poor these miners had been and how bereft of comfort.

I felt dreadful when they didn't understand what I was saying.. to them,
that cottage was luxury. I never made that mistake again

True perspective can be a serious slap in the face sometimes huh?

I sometimes like to throw that example at whiners.

And I use it to remind myself how good I really have it sometimes. ;-)
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a [censored]" -- Jack Nicholson

In article <[email hidden]>,

JoeSpareBedroom said:

"Omelet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

By far the vast majority of people that lose houses were short on
priorities, not money.

Proof, please. Right now. Show me the stats.

<shakes head>

Like I said, personal experience.

I've only recently owned a Tracfone. Costs me about $20.00 per month to
maintain but I don't walk around with a borg implant (bluetooth) in my
ear.

I also don't own a laptop computer.

There are co-workers that earn 1/2 of what I do that have $100.00 per
month cellphone contracts and throw away 1/2 of the chinese fast food
that they order for lunch everyday. One of them that earns $9.00 per
hour and has three kids, unmarried, owns an $800.00 laptop.

And they [censored] about how they have trouble making their bills.

Look up your own stats if that's what it takes to convince you.

I use my eyes and ears.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a [censored]" -- Jack Nicholson

Quoted message said:

My BIL bought a repo tv...

Umm, what is a BIL? I saw this in another post and thought it was a
typo.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
941-925-8650
4883 Fallcrest Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34233
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================>