h a l f b a k e r yNumber one on the no-fly list
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Pretty much like eBay except that the
winning bidder
pays the charity direct for an advertised
item
and the seller gets nothing. The charity gets
all the money.
Everything else is details.
[link]
|
| |
very public spirited of you [st3f] + |
|
| |
I participated in one of these recently, except it was services donated. |
|
| |
Hmm, this sounds good but it makes me wonder: Would there be a lucrative market for scammers? Everything else is details, as you say, but that is one of the more important details. Aside from that, bun. |
|
| |
"Would there be a lucrative market for
scammers?"
Since the winning bidder pays the charity
directly (and the seller gets nothing) there
is no profit motive for selling fake items.
There is still a potential for scammers to
lie saying that they haven't received items,
though. |
|
| |
Nice, although I can imagine a resistance on the part of sellers to pay shipping costs for their item so there might have to be a portion of the buyers money which is used for this. |
|
| |
I skipped on some of the details in the
idea because I wanted to keep it simple
and save the details for the annotations. |
|
| |
There are a few alternatives that spring
to mind.
1. The buyer pays for shipping --
possibly asking the seller (who gets
nothing after all) to be a little too
charitable. Easy to administrate and
hard to scam, though.
2. The charity pays -- Either a rebate
into the sellers auction account or by
providing the seller with pre-pay labels.
Either way has some overhead for the
charity.
3. The charity ships -- I can't figure out
why I like this so much (I do, though),
particularly as you end up taking the
item to the charity shop anyway. |
|
| |