Negative votes on grey imports because of warranty concerns

LFolly on 01/10/2013 - 15:34

Hello fellow OzBers,

Hoping to get some opinions on negative votes for parallel imports (usually phones) on the basis of warranty coverage. In each case the imported item is cheaper than what the same product can be purchased for in Australia (sometimes by a fairly large margin). Here are some recent examples:

http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/117551

http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/118208

http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/117700

In each case negative votes are given because the saving of $X amount is not enough to justify substituting a HK warranty for an Australian warranty. My problem with this is that it relies on a subjective judgment about the value and utility of a domestic warranty, when in reality a 1:1 price comparison can't be made because of these very differences.

I think in these instances a comment about the risks/costs associated with grey imports and international warranties would be more appropriate than a negative vote, but would be interested in hearing the community's opinion on this matter.

One of the contrary arguments may be that it is the neg-giving member's vote and it is their opinion on the bargain-worthiness of an item, and to an extent voting is always a subjective exercise.

PS - this isn't targeted at any specific member/s. I can really see the point being made by people who neg these deals, I just don't agree with the negative vote because it makes the whole process so arbitrary and subjective.

Poll Options

  • 18
    Negative vote is appropriate in the circumstances
  • 47
    Comment would be more appropriate in the circumstances
Site Discussion

Comments

  • ozhunter on 01/10/2013 - 15:53
    +1

    http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/118208

    For this deal the OP had pointed out that other stores were selling it about the same price which would make it not a bargain.(Though I realise it was not why the deal got negged)

    http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/118208#comment-1618055

  • randomthought on 01/10/2013 - 15:58
    +2

    I think many people misunderstand warranties (not helped by lots of FUD from manufacturers trying to prevent grey imports and get people worried about them). There is nothing wrong with a grey/parallel import as such, the important part is where you buy it from. As I said in the "iphone 5c thread" (paraphrased):

    For a grey import it depends if you bought it from an Australia retailer or from overseas.

    If I buy from an Australian business then I don't care what the manufacturer of the item reckons, or where the Australian business sources their stock from, as my warranty is provided by, and place of return if any faults is to, the Australian business. End of story.

    If I buy from an overseas shop over the internet then sure I have no warranty or rights other than what the shop decides to give me, which is why I will only buy low value items this way.

    • A3Australia on 01/10/2013 - 22:18

      If I buy from an Australian business then I don't care what the manufacturer of the item reckons, or where the Australian business sources their stock from, as my warranty is provided by, and place of return if any faults is to, the Australian business. End of story.

      If you buy an iPhone 5c from the Kogan.com.au website are you buying from an Australian business?

      If you buy an iPhone 5c from MobiCity.com.au or from their page on AmaySIM.com.au are you buying from an Australian business?

      What about from www.shoppingsquare.com.au ?

      Serious questions. Please reply. Thanks.

      • [Deactivated] on 01/10/2013 - 22:33

        You pay your money to them, so yes you are buying from Australian businesses.
        But the product may not necessarily be shipped to you from their warehouse (if they even have one), it can be dropshipped.

        • A3Australia on 01/10/2013 - 22:40
          +1

          You pay your money to them, so yes you are buying from Australian businesses.

          Unfortunately, no. You are wrong. In the above cases you are not buying from an Australian business.

          I believe you should be considered as buying from an Australian business, the ATO agrees with me, but not the ACCC nor Fair Trading. By the way, the ATO is not 'going after' these businesses for unpaid GST and/or income/company tax.

          Kogan does at least try to make it clear that one is buying from "Kogan HK Limited" and not Kogan (Australia).

      • randomthought on 02/10/2013 - 12:19

        yes they are all Australian businesses (according to shoppingsquare "about" webpage they say "Apus Corporation Pty Ltd is a 100% Australian Owned Business" so I don't actually know anything about them but am taking that at face value).

        • A3Australia on 02/10/2013 - 12:28

          yes they are all Australian businesses (according to shoppingsquare "about" webpage they say "Apus Corporation Pty Ltd is a 100% Australian Owned Business" so I don't actually know anything about them but am taking that at face value).

          Correct.

          However, when you purchase an item via their web sites (I am talking about all the .com.au sites that that orders for items/phones that are delivered directly to the buyers from Hong Kong/overseas) they allege that they are only an agent for the Hong Kong/overseas supplier. Therefor, they allege, they are not liable for collecting the GST on the sales, nor including the sales for their company tax.

          If you have a problem, and the .com.au site/business fails to remedy the situation, Fair Trading/Consumer Affairs etc. can not assist you because the .com.au business will say they were merely an agent, an you were dealing with an overseas person/entity.

          By the way. Have you ever attempted to talk to anyone from Apus Corporation and/or Shopping Square? They are trying very hard to make it impossible to call them.

        • A3Australia on 02/10/2013 - 12:48

          (according to shoppingsquare "about" webpage they say "Apus Corporation Pty Ltd is a 100% Australian Owned Business"

          Please check this section of their "Terms and Conditions".

          http://www.shoppingsquare.com.au/terms.php

          Direct Shipping Offers

          (a) For Digital Camera (and Lens), Video Camcorder or Mobile Phone orders - the items will be shipped directly from Oversea Supplier by Fedex, DHL or EMS. It take [sic] 3-7 working days to arrive anywhere in Australia. Shoppingsquare.com.au acts as [sic] agent in Australia provides [sic] Australian local Warranty Service for all the Direct Ship [sic] Offer items

          Important sentence is - "Shoppingsquare.com.au acts as [an?] agent in Australia [and?] provides Australian local Warranty Service for all the Direct Ship [ing?] Offer items"

        • randomthought on 02/10/2013 - 13:51

          Collecting GST and whether they pay tax or not is a separate issue.

          I haven't had to chase one of these companies to honour a warranty but given they are an Australian business then Australian law applies to them.

          No I know nothing about Apus/Shoppingsquare.

          And your last bit above quoting from their T&C's seems to state (albeit badly as you highlight) that they are aware of their warranty obligations.

        • A3Australia on 02/10/2013 - 15:09

          I haven't had to chase one of these companies to honour a warranty but given they are an Australian business then Australian law applies to them.

          And your last bit above quoting from their T&C's seems to state (albeit badly as you highlight) that they are aware of their warranty obligations.

          Which is why they (ShoppingSquare, MobiCity, Kogan, etc.) 'try' to make it clear (or try to hide) that one IS NOT buying from an Australian business, but from some unknown (in most cases other than MobiCity and Kogan) supplier.

          MobiCity for example is using a trademark loophole in order to have a .com.au domain. They have no ABN/ACN and are a HK company not an Australian one. There is no business/company in Australia to 'çhase'.

        • tonester on 03/10/2013 - 15:17

          @A3Australia

          they were merely an agent, an you were dealing with an overseas person/entity.

          if the agent is subject to australian law, then wouldn't it mean that the overseas principal is as well?
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_(law)

          http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/118436

        • A3Australia on 03/10/2013 - 17:02

          if the agent is subject to australian law, then wouldn't it mean that the overseas principal is as well?

          No.

        • tonester on 03/10/2013 - 17:58

          No.

          why not?

        • A3Australia on 04/10/2013 - 13:20

          why not?

          Because they are overseas = outside the jurisdiction of our Consumer Protection organisations.

        • tonester on 04/10/2013 - 13:36

          Because they are overseas = outside the jurisdiction of our Consumer Protection organisations.

          so you believe that even though the overseas principal is operating here via an australian agent, the principal is not subject to australian law?

        • A3Australia on 04/10/2013 - 13:55

          so you believe that even though the overseas principal is operating here via an australian agent, the principal is not subject to australian law?

          I just don't know how you as a customer of the Hong Kong company, are going to get any Australian Government body (or Australian State Government body) to do anything to help you. Nor do I know what they could do even if they wanted to do anything. Especially as you imported whatever you purchased yourself, as a private importer.

          If one is going to buy some 'grey import' item, AND wants/needs some consumer protection and/or warranty support - make sure you are buying from an Australian business/company that has already imported the item themselves.

      • xyned on 03/10/2013 - 16:46

        @Kogan- not Aussie business. Should be treated as Grey import. They do not provide tax invoices. Their invoices do not contain ABN and GST information. Which means the following

        1. Cannot claim TRS (tourist refund scheme)
        2. Cannot claim consumer guarantees act rights as stated on http://www.fairtrading.qld.gov.au/guarantees-warranties-refu…
        • A3Australia on 04/10/2013 - 13:21

          @Kogan- not Aussie business. Should be treated as Grey import. They do not provide tax invoices. Their invoices do not contain ABN and GST information. Which means the following

          Cannot claim TRS (tourist refund scheme)
          Cannot claim consumer guarantees act rights as stated on http://www.fairtrading.qld.gov.au/guarantees-warranties-refu…

          You meant Kogan HK Limited - not Kogan.

          There are two Kogan businesses running from the same .com.au website. Kogan (Australia) and Kogan HK Limited.

          In the case of MobiCity.com.au there is NO Australian business at all. Only a Hong Kong company - GloTech Services Limited.

  • Folly on 01/10/2013 - 16:00

    Hey OzHunter, I agree there are definitely other reasons a person might neg deals like this. I was just using them as an example of where someone has given/might give a neg on the basis of warranty coverage (or more specifically where a neg was/might be given because for "$X less than the Australian price it's not worth it").

    That's not to say that there aren't other reasons why these posts were/might be negged. I guess I'm just polling that one sub-issue: is a grey import not being 'enough' below the Australian price a valid neg?

    • ozhunter on 01/10/2013 - 16:03
      +1

      I just edited my comment above, but yes I agree that a comment is sufficient in those circumstances.

  • sane on 01/10/2013 - 17:38
    +2

    In general the value of a warranty is overplayed. You can tell what the value is by the cost of 'warranty extensions'. These are very lucrative for the company, so are the top end of any reasonable estimate of the value of a warranty.

    As such, you are only ever really talking about a few tens of dollars. If the difference in price is greater than that, then the warranty doesn't make up the difference.

    In reality electronics follows a bathtub failure curve. If it doesn't stop working very soon after it's first used, it tends to continue to work for a long time. Therefore provided you have a way of dealing with this initial risky period, you are good to go.

    Marking a deal down because it comes from overseas playing into the hands of overpriced local retailers - the marketplace is a global one and they need to be responsive to that. The myth of the highly valued warranty is one of the tricks they use to try to avoid facing reality.

    • macrocephalic on 03/10/2013 - 15:37

      Back in the 90's reasonable PC assemblers used to do 'burn in tests' where they would stress test the machine prior to sending it out. The basis was that most faults were found in the first few days of use, or not for many years - as you said.

      Fault rates are lower now though, so I don't know anywhere that does such testing.

  • p1 ama on 01/10/2013 - 20:16

    I don't think that a negative vote is fair in this scenario.

    A comment would be appropriate, to warn potential buyers of the risk. Just because there are warranty concerns doesn't mean that it's a bad deal. Out of all my purchases, I've never had to return anything because it broke, so generally if it's a good deal, then I buy it.

    If it ends up dead, then, I'm not sure what I'd do because that's never happened to me before.

  • Davo1111 on 01/10/2013 - 21:21
    +1

    The user A3Australia downvotes all phones that are not A-tick approved (or whatever the australian certification is). He seems to have an axe to grind or something, but i just ignore him.

    • A3Australia on 01/10/2013 - 22:20

      The user A3Australia downvotes all phones that are not A-tick approved (or whatever the australian certification is).

      Rubbish!

      He seems to have an axe to grind or something, but i just ignore him.

      If you ignored my comments, how do you know what they were?

      • Davo1111 on 02/10/2013 - 00:55
        +4

        Seriously?

        http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/117700

        http://www.ozbargain.com.au/user/16406/voted

        you only neg grey import phones. Out of your previous 10 negatives given, 9 were for grey import phones.

        • A3Australia on 02/10/2013 - 10:15

          you only neg grey import phones. Out of your previous 10 negatives given, 9 were for grey import phones.

          Because they were not 'bargains'.

          Also, do not confuse grey market phones with phones imported directly by the end user. To me, a grey market phone is one imported by a business to be sold (re-sold) to the public.

        • Davo1111 on 02/10/2013 - 11:04
          +5

          Because they were not 'bargains'.

          oh come-on! you didn't down-vote them for that, you didn't provide links to better models. Each time you downvoted one, you referred specifically to warranty.

          Just admit you have an axe to grind on grey imports. I remember when you wanted all non a-tick phones banned from ozb.

  • Geewhizz on 02/10/2013 - 05:57
    +1

    If the company's warranty service is questionable, then yes, a negative vote is appropriate.

    This serves as a warning to any who may not be aware of the issues around buying from a dodgy seller. A simple comment, without the negative vote, is most likely going to be overlooked in a thread that has several replies.

    • Geewhizz on 02/10/2013 - 06:08

      Though the wiki would suggest this is no longer technically the case.

      • andy19363 on 02/10/2013 - 07:10

        It only takes a couple of negs and the thread disappears for most users anyway….. Making any comments irrelevant

    • Folly on 02/10/2013 - 09:47

      I agree and wouldn't have an issue if a negative was given because of genuine concerns about a dodgy warranty or seller. That is clearly within the voting guidelines.

      In these cases however the neg is given merely because the product is a grey import. For instance, in the case of Apple products the warranty service is provided by Apple HK. There's no suggestion that the products are counterfeit, that the warranty is void, or that there is any deceit or fraud. There is a fair criticism that warranty service may require sending the phone back to the seller at the buyers cost though. But does that make it not a bargain?

      • Geewhizz on 02/10/2013 - 10:13
        +1

        In these cases however the neg is given merely because the product is a grey import.

        You're absolutely right - the negative votes in the examples you have provided are totally inappropriate. That is what the report button is for. One of the options in the drop-down box is 'invalid negative vote.'

  • Series4Episode10 on 02/10/2013 - 07:41
    +2

    One thing to consider with buying a phone this way is that some applications may be region specific and upgrading those applications to your regions releases may not be possible, I bought a Lumia 920 from an Aus seller, came from China, the "find my phone" feature does not work because of this, however, I saved $300 odd and am very happy with the phone.

  • riley94 on 02/10/2013 - 10:44

    I think a negative is okay, because seeing that there are negatives may result in someone who wouldn't usually read the comments actually reading them. Then they are aware of the issue and can make their own informed decision about whether or not to buy.

    • andy19363 on 02/10/2013 - 12:55
      +1

      Then they are aware of the issue and can make their own informed decision about whether or not to buy.

      Unless the post gets a couple of negs, then it disappears, and no one will be aware of the issue.

      • A3Australia on 02/10/2013 - 12:58

        Unless the post gets a couple of negs, then it disappears, and no one will be aware of the issue.

        I can see all posts - even with ten negative votes. Is it the case when one is not logged-in one can't see posts with several neg votes - or is it an option?

        • andy19363 on 02/10/2013 - 13:03

          the bulk of site visitors are not logged in and will therefore not see the post.

          Active users: 3000

          Members: 562
Guests: 2438

          currently

        • Moderatorneil on 02/10/2013 - 13:16

          Just because a post has negative votes doesn't mean it disappears. If however there are more negative votes then positive such as the 1st example given then it won't be shown in the new deals page.

          However, this doesn't come into effect for a certain amount of time (not sure exact time but a few hours maybe) due to throttling and caching.

          The deal is always visible if you go directly to the deal.

          The other 2 deals mentioned are not affected at all.

      • ozhunter on 02/10/2013 - 13:43

        Unless the post gets a couple of negs, then it disappears, and no one will be aware of the issue.

        Lol what made you think that? That would mean 2 members could easily hide any deals from nonmembers whenever they want.

        • andy19363 on 02/10/2013 - 18:15

          couple = some…. not necessarily 2….
          but, in essence, a small number of users who neg vote a deal can make it hidden from the bulk of people viewing the site…. as per Neil's comment above

          and as per site guidelines…

          Many people dont like a deal, and want others to know about some issues they have with the deal, as evidenced by the comments made about a deal when they negatively vote. The IRONY for you to consider is that if a deal gets a number of negative votes, it is removed from most visitors screens. So your considered comments go as well.

          http://www.ozbargain.com.au/wiki/help:voting_guidelines

          also….

          IF a poster gets more than two negative votes the system, locks them out of posting again for 5 days.

          Only takes a couple of "I agree", or "not a bargain" negs and posts get hidden….

        • Moderatorneil on 02/10/2013 - 18:32

          IF a poster gets more than two negative votes the system, locks them out of posting again for 5 days.

          That's an old restriction that is not enabled. I've removed that from the guidelines.

  • MementoMori on 02/10/2013 - 14:25

    I've been looking at options re: a new iPhone.

    FWIW, yes, you are covered by the 'Kogan' warranty (post phone away, wait ages, get phone back with scratch marks etc), but this is a very different level of service than an Apple warranty (walk into store, swap over).

  • Moderatorneil on 02/10/2013 - 18:27

    Negative votes are the trickiest and stressing (for some) feature of OzBargain. The moderators discuss it quite often as well but to put it bluntly its a grey area where any moderator intervention involved can make people unhappy which is why we tend to be hands off (mostly) unless there is no reason given.

    It's very interesting to see who is posting here (feel free to change my typecasting :)) and for transparency I think it should be said:

    • Davo1111 is a former moderator who had to deal with hundreds if not thousands of these negative vote incidents.

    • Andy19363 has been against negative votes since the beginning. We have discussed the issue many times and he has publicly said he won't post deals anymore because of this. That's his right and opinion.

    • A3Australia is very passionate about overseas warranties, A-ticks, and other electrical certifications that usually requires the moderators to learn about various codes. :)

    I think we can say they are 3 different cross-sections of members. Somewhere in the middle there may be a compromise.

    The issue "Negative votes on grey imports because of warranty concerns" is tricky. The negative vote is a grey area when it comes to Major issues with a retailer.. If we start a topic about what is valid as a major issue and what isn't, our already long guidelines will be made even longer and more complicated. Not sure where you draw the line.

    Big picture is what is the purpose of the negative vote. It's mainly to warn people that the deal has a major issue. 9 out of 10 people won't need to ever use the warranty so grey imports are the cheaper option. However for the 1 out of 10 who do, the costs associated with an overseas warranty may outweigh buying local.

    As the guidelines and rules are created from community feedback, it seems the community has voted 18-3 (as of 2/10), that this issue should be noted as a comment rather than a vote. Let's continue the discussion and if people still think only a comment is needed then we will amend the voting to exclude negative voting for this issue.

    • andy19363 on 02/10/2013 - 18:38

      Andy19363 has been against negative votes since the beginning. We have discussed the issue many times and he has publicly said he won't post deals anymore because of this. That's his right and opinion.

      Hmmm… not quite….. I'm not against negative votes per se….. they do provide a useful function when they are used appropriately. My beef is with the fact that postings can be 'taken down' by the mob through the use of neg votes…. I don't like a mob choosing what other users can and can't see, particularly if it's based on unsound reasoning, as has happened many times.
      Lots of neg votes these days are purely there as 'punishment' for reps or posters

    • Folly on 02/10/2013 - 20:39

      Hi Neil, I've noticed that the community can revoke negative votes now by down voting a user's comment. Is there any way to down vote the vote without down voting the comment?

      • Moderatorneil on 02/10/2013 - 20:47

        That has been the case for a couple of years (can't recall exact date).

        There isn't a way to downvote a vote without downvoting the comment.

      • Davo1111 on 03/10/2013 - 17:30

        not without reporting it (and having a moderator withdraw the vote).

        Anyway, the comment should explain why the user has voted negatively.

  • ghostdom on 04/10/2013 - 10:08

    For warranty concern, Funny enough to question yourself,

    Were you glad to pay extra money to get apple care warranty extension for your last apple product purchase?

    and again question yourself, what about if you have the option to skip the factory warranty and save yourself certain amount of money when buying apple prouct from local apple store, would you consider?

    If Apple Australia was legal to give customer an option of choosing to have or not have the 1 year warranty when customer purchasing an iphone. Referring to my previous post, lets say if you choose product not come with factory warranty and could save $89 dollars from $739 when purchasing an iphone 5C from apple store, I believe there will be certain amount of people would take that risk and save those cash.

    Buying grey import with lower price would be in this similar situation, it gives people the opportunity to take the risk and save some cash. But keep in mind, they do have warranty, For example, Kogan offer Australian warranty, even this is not apple factory warranty, but is still a huge bonous for consideration.

    In my opinion, certainly Grey import deal is not for all people, but simply offering more options for people like me do not mind to take the A BIT risk and save some cash for my next upgrade, At least I could convience myself that I am saving more than 10% comparing to purchasing locally and will get a same iphone that has same failure rate as australian stock and I am pretty sure that that failure rate within 2 years will be far lower than 10%, never the less, you still get warranty just not from factory.

    So it all come down to certain individual's decision of balancing yourself between save against risk. I still remember in my last Iphone 5C post, I got an neg from A3Australia becasue of the warranty concern, howver, in below comment section he/she mentioned he would be happy to buy one (iphone 5C 16gb selling 739 in AU) from grey import if the price is $500. So what if the price is 550 or lets say $600 delivered. I suggest at that price, they will be ozbargained in a few hours. But maybe the deal would still get Neg vote from certain people simply because the saving did not meet his own expectation. Is not that too subjective?

    In this case, if deal was not for you, and if you have some certain concern that would like to remind others, I think a comment (EVEN TYPE ALL IN UPPER CASE TO MAKE IT OBVIOUS) is enough, a Neg is not necessary or appropriate.

    • A3Australia on 04/10/2013 - 13:15

      So it all come down to certain individual's decision of balancing yourself between save against risk. I still remember in my last Iphone 5C post, I got an neg from A3Australia becasue (sic) of the warranty concern, howver (sic), in below comment section he/she mentioned he would be happy to buy one (iphone 5C 16gb selling 739 in AU) from grey import if the price is $500. So what if the price is 550 or lets say $600 delivered. I suggest at that price, they will be ozbargained in a few hours. But maybe the deal would still get Neg vote from certain people simply because the saving did not meet his own expectation. Is not that too subjective?

      So, your post was not a bargain for me, because the price was not nearly low enough to make it a bargain. Therefore I voted appropriately.

      In this case, if deal was not for you, and if you have some certain concern that would like to remind others, I think a comment (EVEN TYPE ALL IN UPPER CASE TO MAKE IT OBVIOUS) is enough, a Neg is not necessary or appropriate.

      Of course a NEG vote is correct if the supposed bargain is not a bargain.

      • Folly on 04/10/2013 - 13:56

        This goes to the heart of the controversy though A3A. The subjectivity of the calculation of bargain-worthiness ('What price domestic warranty?' if you will).

        And the fact that many of us believe that each post was not neg worthy because even if it wasn't a bargain (for you or otherwise) it was not not a bargain (if you get my meaning). And this was because of the fact that no matter how you look at each post, they were still lower in price than domestic alternatives. And the attributes that effected the calculation of its bargain-worthiness in your mind (and my mind and others) are uniquely subjective to the point of arbitrary.

        If you would buy a grey iPhone 5C for $500 (which is a saving of about $240 from Aus RRP) but not for $690 (a saving of $50) it would suggest that you value the domestic warranty at more than $50 but less than $240 (and less than $140 if your post of maybe picking it up at $600 was true). But this ">$50, <$240" is a personal calculation and valuation of risk.

        I suggest that in voting on a post an OzBargainer is making an objective judgment about its bargain worthiness: objectively this IS a bargain (+ve) or obejectively this IS NOT a bargain (-ve). Anywhere in between, no vote and a comment is more appropriate. And the only way to do this is comparing like-for-like on price.

        Hence the problem with neg votes on deals like these. They were not given because the post was objectively not a bargain. They were given because subjectively they were not a bargain.

        • A3Australia on 04/10/2013 - 14:09

          This goes to the heart of the controversy though A3A. The subjectivity of the calculation of bargain-worthiness ('What price domestic warranty?' if you will).

          Not only "What price domestic warranty?".

          There is also the value, or lack of value, of any warranty being offered by the seller, and the 'quality' of this warranty service.

          And the fact that many of us believe that each post was not neg worthy because even if it wasn't a bargain (for you or otherwise) it was not not a bargain (if you get my meaning). And this was because of the fact that no matter how you look at each post, they were still lower in price than domestic alternatives. And the attributes that effected the calculation of its bargain-worthiness in your mind (and my mind and others) are uniquely subjective to the point of arbitrary.

          In some cases, in fact in many/most cases, they were not "lower in price than domestic alternatives". They were the same as many other grey market imports - some of which had already been imported by the sellers (therefore allowing the buyer(s) to claim their rights under local Australian consumer guarantees and Acts). And in one case Harvey Norman was a better price (or close enough) because of a trade-in deal.

          If you would buy a grey iPhone 5C for $500 (which is a saving of about $240 from Aus RRP) but not for $690 (a saving of $50) it would suggest that you value the domestic warranty at more than $50 but less than $240 (and less than $140 if your post of maybe picking it up at $600 was true). But this ">$50, <$240" is a personal calculation and valuation of risk.

          Any vote (Pos or Neg) is a "personal calculation" of whether the post is a true bargain or not.

          I suggest that in voting on a post an OzBargainer is making an objective judgment about its bargain worthiness: objectively this IS a bargain (+ve) or obejectively (sic) this IS NOT a bargain (-ve). Anywhere in between, no vote and a comment is more appropriate. And the only way to do this is comparing like-for-like on price.

          I agree.

          Hence the problem with neg votes on deals like these. They were not given because the post was objectively not a bargain. They were given because subjectively they were not a bargain.

          They were given a -neg because they were not considered a bargain. They were given a +pos because they were considered a bargain.

        • Folly on 04/10/2013 - 14:23

          It should be a personal calculation based on objective aspects A3A. Like price. Factoring in the "price" of the warranty is too variable to support a negative vote. That's my only point.

          Regarding cheaper alternatives: that's an entirely good reason to give a negative vote. Although it's not why the votes were given in many of these cases.

          It's also not the issue raised by this thread. This isn't a thread in defence of posts 117700 or 117551. The issue is whether a subjective calculation of the value of an international warranty is a proper basis for a negative vote on Ozbargain. So far the Community says (at over 3 to 1), no.

        • A3Australia on 04/10/2013 - 14:37

          Regarding cheaper alternatives: that's an entirely good reason to give a negative vote. Although it's not why the votes were given in many of these cases.

          1) Some were cheaper, and some that were cheaper were even Australian models.

          2) As for other 'grey' devices. No, not just "cheaper" - most were the same (or within a few dollars on a multi-hundred dollar device). This meant that the post was not a bargain in itself, but was just the same price as others. Some of these others were from Australian businesses, which had stock in Australia, and afforded buyers AU consumer protection etc.

        • andy19363 on 05/10/2013 - 12:33

          The issue is whether a subjective calculation of the value of an international warranty is a proper basis for a negative vote on Ozbargain.

          Lots of discussion about the usefulness of neg votes….
          http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/105988
          http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/70230
          http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/92128
          http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/89277
          http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/89118
          http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/77307

          None of which convinces me that the neg vote is useful anymore….

          another one here….. http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/118585
          negged because of shipping costs, yet not one neg provides a cheaper alternative….
          The negs provide no useful info at all and the post has probably disappeared for most users

        • Moderatorneil on 05/10/2013 - 13:48

          And we trialed removing the negative vote in late 2010. The results of the trial from community feedback was that users wanted the negative votes.

          There are still issues with negative votes so hopefully we can improve on the current system to make everyone happy.

        • Folly on 05/10/2013 - 18:44

          I'm not anti negative votes altogether: but I do think they're only appropriate in certain situations.

          1) the same item is available cheaper elsewhere;

          2) their are serious and substantiated claims against the seller or concerns about the product (fraud, safety, etc);

          3) Illegal/spam/breach of ozbargain rules.

          If it doesn't fit in there: don't positive vote, or don't positive and comment.

        • Moderatorneil on 05/10/2013 - 18:58

          3 should be report button not negative vote.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join