上位 200 件のコメント表示する 500

[–]deg_deg 106ポイント107ポイント  (80子コメント)

On Friday a local store owner came in to buy cards she needed to fulfill TCGPlayer orders because Crystal Commerce's software allowed cards to be listed on TCGPlayer that currently had a negative inventory value.

Think about that for a second. Crystal Commerce's back end sold cards on TCGPlayer that it already knew it had oversold.

[–]BorosWreckingHer 56ポイント57ポイント  (17子コメント)

Then CC is not a good commercial tool.... not the customer's fault nor responsibility

[–]Athildur 24ポイント25ポイント  (9子コメント)

This is apparently extra tricky for (small) businesses because they have no alternatives. They can't manually keep up with everything (because in these cases it happens too quickly. And even if it wasn't, they can't afford to pay more staff to handle it), and they probably can't stop selling on those websites because their profits would plummet and they might not be able to keep the store open.

[–]Narynan 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

that for a second. Crystal Commerce's back end sold cards on TCGPlayer that it already knew it had oversold.

CC is a HUGE piece of shit, but they kind of have that market area locked down.

[–]sylverfyre 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Now, if some entrepreneur-programmer on this subreddit thinks they can tackle a production software problem... well, you might have a pretty good opportunity right here.

[–]Feverbrew 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

No shit. Obviously is not the sellers fault either.

[–]Aquafier 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

it's not like the consumer is being completely shafted, there is a technical issue an they are given a full refund

[–]Kamui1 1ポイント2ポイント  (61子コメント)

And you keep using that because?

[–]deg_deg 57ポイント58ポイント  (55子コメント)

People use Crystal Commerce because it's an all-in-one solution for small to medium sized businesses that can't afford a custom solution or possibly can't afford the time or aren't computer literate enough to manually inventory every SKU and CCG card they carry. It's also the only inventory management/POS software that has full integration with TCGPlayer's API because TCGPlayer won't make it available to anyone else.

[–]maxwellb 6ポイント7ポイント  (4子コメント)

It's also the only inventory management/POS software that has full integration with TCGPlayer's API

nope

[–]Tnarg_Helped_Us 7ポイント8ポイント  (2子コメント)

When I see a post like this with regard to a small business, I can say for near certain that you've never worked at a small company.

[–]kerkyjerky 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

Would love to see you start a lgs and change the world with your innovative ideas. Even as a customer I understand the plights of a small business owner, sometimes you need to use what you can to get by.

[–]Korlus 28ポイント29ポイント  (3子コメント)

According to UK Law, until money changes hands, any discussions/obligations beforehand are typically not acknowledged, and are simply an "Invitation to treat".

As soon as they accept payment, they are under contract to deliver the goods. Further, all offers are revocable until they are accepted (e.g. they can change the price on the way to the till).

After a company has been paid, you are now owed the product you paid for. If they can no longer supply you with the product, they are typically within their rights to give you your money back.

This is all fine.

The problem is when they took your money, refused to give you the product (despite having some in stock), and then immediately start selling the same product for a higher value. If they sell it for a higher value a significant (unsure on case law here) amount of time later (I would guess at least a day?), then that's typically just a case of bad timing.

As such, if they over-sell and have to cancel orders, you typically have no recourse (unless they went to some inconvenience to promise these items to you specifically, or you have been unduly harmed by their lack of performance in the contract - e.g. you had significant money invested and expected them to complete the contract of sale).


So, providing the same shop does not immediately begin selling the same item at a higher price, it's fine. If they do so, then they are breaking the law (if they took your money, and "had" to refund it).

I feel the law is largely in line with my feelings on the matter. Sometimes shops sell out. Sometimes they just want to earn more money and shouldn't have agreed to sell me the item.

[–]EggYolks 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

While this post is just talking about UK law, it should be at the top of this thread. This sums up the situation perfectly.

[–]GreasedWalnut 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Youre right that its scummy to pull your sales to sell at a higher price. However its very hard to see if thats the case. Its not uncommon for some players to offloaf their cards to stores to get the best possible buylist for their standard cards. Naturally the store is going to post thosse cards right away at the new price

[–]mr_indigo 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Giving money back isn't contractual measure of damages for breach. Damages for breach of contract needs to put the nonbreaching party in the position they would have been if the contract had been performed.

If we contract for you to supply me with 12 bushels of apples for $60, but you fail to perform your obligations, I am to be put in the position of having 12 bushels of apples, not 0. My remedy isn't $60, its the amount it would cost me to acquire 12 bushels of apples from elsewhere. If apples are now $7 a bushel, then I can sue you for $84.

The reason refunds work for most consumer goods is because the prices are static - so my cost to acquire the replacement is the same as what I paid.

[–]Shovan 26ポイント27ポイント  (14子コメント)

I remember during the last Pro Tour TCGplayer sent out an email letting sellers know that they should be aware of price spikes during the pro tour and that if they feel their inventory may have cards that could spike they should close the store for the duration.

I wish they'd send that email every pro tour.

[–]UncleMeat 20ポイント21ポイント  (11子コメント)

That's a terrible business strategy. Imagine there are no major spikes. The store just closes for an entire weekend when interest in cards is probably at its peak? No chance.

[–]s-holden -1ポイント0ポイント  (10子コメント)

Then their choice is to make sure their inventory numbers are correct and if a card spikes fulfill the orders of buyers who beat them to the punch of seeing the price change and making an order/updating the price.

[–]forte7 14ポイント15ポイント  (9子コメント)

See thats the thing people aren't getting. Their inventory #s are right. Its just not updating faster than ppl are purchasing. No one is required to fulfill an order and while I agree it sucks, you are not entitled to the item. They could just as easily not charge your account until the item is verified. You could still lose out on the item, but they wouldn't have your money first. Would that make people happy? I doubt it.

[–]s-holden -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

The issue actually is: why is a bad thing for buyers to complain and make a noise about such practices?

Surely it's useful information for buyers to have to know which stores seem to run into such problems more often than other stores so they can make a more informed choice about whom to purchase things from.

But the post is arguing that it is a terrible thing for the public to be informed about stores that run into supply issues.

Buyers would obviously rather buy from stores which manage to not have such issues, why is it a bad thing for the ones that do have them to be pointed out?

[–]forte7 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

The post isn't advocating just accepting it and moving on. This post is saying don't pretend like these small shops are ruining the world. You didn't seek these shops out, they just happened to have the lowest price so that they could move product. It literally could have happened to whatever shop had the lowest price on these items. When 100 people try and buy 4 cards all at the same time it jams up the system.

If it seems like they refund you and list it within 12 hrs again for the new price, sure screw that place. If they refund you and don't have the product again for days, well that is just how it rolls on PT weekend. Witch hunting someone for something that they literally had little control over and probably were not even at work when it happened helps no one.

[–]Kamui1 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Or simply write it in their rules. Everyone can read it then. All the time. It is nothing new.

[–]desymond 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

They do it with every ban list update. I don't think they've actually done it with a pro tour. Either way, they've reminded stores 2-3 times now, so there's no excuse to not know about that option.

[–]logonomicon 69ポイント70ポイント  (28子コメント)

ITT: people being really unsympathetic to the problems of the people who make their hobby possible.

[–]Format137_BossMode 19ポイント20ポイント  (21子コメント)

Also people who have no concept of how a business is run. Like, Amazon et al would do literally the same thing in the same situation.

[–]Athildur 10ポイント11ポイント  (2子コメント)

Unless dealing with extreme numbers, Amazon might not. They might honor the purchase and ship when available. Because unlike small businesses, Amazon is so large that it can manage to absorb some losses to retain the image of being reliable and honorable.

[–]ironwolf1 14ポイント15ポイント  (1子コメント)

It's like these people don't realize that they are trying to play the market and make money off these store owners and when they can't they get upset and throw a tantrum.

[–]Smoke_Stack707 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

and these same people are ordering stuff well past the point when they would be gaming the market for value. If you're ordering a Liliana on Saturday after it's seen a few feature matches guess what? it's already too late. Even ordering cards on Friday of PT is usually too late.

[–]WithinTheGiant 9ポイント10ポイント  (3子コメント)

But I'm always right and should be able to scam anyone I want because of that!

[–]lmburr 12ポイント13ポイント  (2子コメント)

Man, I think that is what bothers me the most about this conversation. The logic is essentially, "I want this card while I think it is underpriced, but I am unwilling to pay its new price."

I don't think there's anything wrong with buying cards you think are underpriced, or not wanting to leave money on the table, whatever. But the sense of entitlement, of like "Let me have this for less than I know it's worth," as opposed to walking away is pretty revolting.

[–]FinnRules 44ポイント45ポイント  (39子コメント)

There is a difference between this and buying a card pre unban and instead of a shipping notice, receiving a cancellation notice.

[–]fadingthought 10ポイント11ポイント  (4子コメント)

What is most amusing about the "I'll never shop at TCG merchant X again" posts is they are trying to imply they had any customer loyalty to begin with. They likely never would have shopped there again even if their order was fulfilled.

[–]CactusHitler 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Basically the only reason they shopped there in the first place was that that shop hadn't updated their prices to match the spike yet.

[–]Kaiser-Saucier 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

They likely never would have shopped there in the first place if they had any loyalty. They would have shopped at their LGS.

[–]r1mbaud 12ポイント13ポイント  (5子コメント)

To all these pseudo savvy buyers; No dude, you're trying to take advantage of a listing that is essentially dated exactly when there is a overbearing demand spike. You are not actually preemptively purchasing the card before the demand spike. So since you're just a lemming in line why do you think you're deserving of that dated listing? You didn't break the card. You didn't see its value before anyone else. You're just trying to rip off small businesses because you feel entitled to rip off great players. Such toxic comments in this thread, it's ridiculous.

[–]Sovee_ 14ポイント15ポイント  (2子コメント)

I have sympathy for anyone who bought something pre Pro Tour and got it cancelled, because it's more likely that something dodgy was going on, as inventories are more stable at that time, and even if the spike does happen on Friday, your order should be one of the first in which should make you one of the people to get cards shipped.

However, anyone ordering cards during the pro tour knows exactly what they're doing, knows exactly how it works (prices can spike faster than sellers update), and is trying to abuse the system. No-one should be buying their competitive decks during the pro tour, or on the day of the ban list announcement because this happens every time. Everyone knows stores have to adjust prices after large events. Sellers can't monitor their stores 24 hours a day, especially with the pro tour being in Australia, and you can't expect them to take losses because you just so happened to decide you wanted a playset of Emrakul that weekend and it totally had nothing to do with the pro tour.

[–]Chewbacca_007 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

While I agree on a lot of this, I wouldn't generalize "anyone" that orders during the pro tour as that.

[–]Sovee_ 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's probably correct. I feel it's at least the majority of the buyers though, given the sets already been out for a while, so the casual playerbase has already likely done their buying. At least with the cards spiking heavily, most of the buying is probably being done by people aware that the cards are going up in value/should be selling for more at that moment.

[–]spiderlocmtgo 83ポイント84ポイント  (43子コメント)

I agree, but based on the pitchforks that roll around every time the majority of this sub does not. Players wait until the last minute after the price spikes, and then try to buy out from sellers who haven't had a chance to update their price to reflect the market price, resulting in 4 copies of Emrakul being sold 20 times. There's a sense of entitlement from these players that they deserve to take advantage of sellers because "the customer is always right" and it is dumb.

[–]4n1k8r 6ポイント7ポイント  (2子コメント)

I think everyone can get on board with the fact that any store denying a sale simply to re-list those cards at the new, higher price is absolutely wrong.

Likewise, I would hope that everyone would find a store refunding you your money because they ran out of stock perfectly acceptable.

[–]hamiltonincognito 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

I agree with you 100% and you'd think most people would, too. But reading this thread I'm led to believe that most people don't give a damn. They just want their precious cardboard.

[–]doomdg 19ポイント20ポイント  (1子コメント)

Players, especially ones who haven't been playing for long, think shops are out to rip them off. They have no idea the kinds of overhead a store might have when they buy/sell cards. They have no idea how much it costs to maintain an online inventory, especially if they go with something other than crystal commerce. And they have no idea how much it costs for a vendor to even be at a GP.

[–]PM_ME_AZN_BOOBS 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not to mention how much risk it takes to open a LGS in the first place. You need to put in tens of thousands of dollars UP FRONT before even opening. Many usually take out financing loans to even open up, and that itself can be a huge hurdle. Even then, there's a high risk of going under. I've seen so many go under in my local area, and the owners lose so much when that happens. In the end, they're just people like you and me who were really into the whole scene and wanted to take a huge life risk to pursue it in a more full time capacity.

Running an operation takes SO MUCH TIME, and that's just the store's day to day. Rent, utilities, salary, inventory, ecommerce, marketing, hosting tournaments/events, and you have to come out positive in profits EVERY SINGLE MONTH. There really isn't time to manually maintain an online inventory, which is a huge timesink. You try and go with what works best given your constraints. The real world is much less forgiving when your profits don't come in.

[–]Tebwolf359 9ポイント10ポイント  (1子コメント)

I don't believe that the majority of these stores are trying to cheat(1). But they continue to use software that has a major issue. One of the most basic rules of a business is don't over promise.

I have done in home service calls in my past. If I used software that continually double booked me, where I could not keep my commitments to my customers, I would stop using that software.

TCGPlayer lets you manually list cards. Do those ever get oversold?

If I had an employee that repeatedly, 3-4 times a year, couldn't handle the most basic part of my business, I would find a different employee.

I believe you when you say the fault lies with Crystal Commerce. That seems like something the vendors should address.

(1) The exception of course, are the stores that cancel all of their orders at $X, then within a couple hours, magically have more in stock at $X++. Those are the ones that deserve to be called out.

[–]psly4mne 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Whether it was their initial intention or not, these store absolutely use software bugs to cheat at selling cards. They oversell their inventory "through no fault of their own." Price goes up? Cancel the orders. Price goes down? Buy more and ship at a profit. That's certainly not going to provide them with an incentive to switch to better software, and so better software isn't going to get written. The only way this will change is if they are held responsible for cards they sell.

[–]TheAzureGrimm 7ポイント8ポイント  (2子コメント)

After reading the thread I see a couple common arguments.

  1. Consumers feel the retailer is responsible for using risky and/or faulty interfaces to list their cards.

  2. Retailers recognise the risk and are asking customers to be understanding of the binding situation between TCGPlayer and Crystal Commerce.

However the thread itself (thank you for the discussion it is a good one) is a band-aid solution on what is truly a festering wound. Therefore I would offer a solution to the issue at its core, the point of purchase.

I do feel the retailer assumes risk in these situations and is accountable when an undisclosed fault occurs. So let's communicate the issue to consumers where it really matters, the point of purchase. Explain there, in an open disclaimer, the possible risk of oversale due to back end design as well as the intended solution in the event this error occurs.

Be open with your consumer (reddit is great for discussion but is not the way to communicate to your whole consumer base) about your struggles, and also your intent.

If a consumer can see the risk of their purchase up front, then they assume the risk by purchasing from you with full knowledge that the sale may not be so final.

If retailers want consumers to recognize and accept the risk, fully disclose it to every consumer at point of purchase so that no one can claim they didn't know the risk up front.

I think this is the only real solution until the tech gap between TCGPlayer and crystal commerce can be bridged.

I leave it to the retailers to figure out how to work this. It's the only form of risk transference I would personally accept.

[–]LeftZer0 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

The real problem is that people are confusing orders cancelled by legitimate and illegitimate reasons.
Cancelling orders because an item oversold is legit. They don't have the merchandise and they can't deliver. The consumer can't demand them to find new ones to complete the order. The consumer's last right here is to be refunded. The store should NOT be reported, named or blamed in any way.
Cancelling orders because an item spiked and they don't want to sell for the previous value is NOT legit. This is when a store should be reported to TCG (if used) and blamed in social media. But attention: this is ONLY valid when the store refuses to complete an order and proceeds to find their "lost" cards and readd them to stock at higher prices.

[–]TheAzureGrimm 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I agree. I think both case get better with an up front disclaimer.

Honest store owners get to be honest and up front without fear of 'witch hunting' and shady dealers become easier to spot if they choose to not disclose the risk of purchase and do shady deals.

Communication provides greater clarity on both ends.

[–]Reydien 25ポイント26ポイント  (19子コメント)

My understanding is that the issue here is that these companies are listing their stock on multiple aggregate sites at once (TCGPlayer, MagicCardMarket, Ebay, Amazon), and when a sale occurs on one platform relying upon their third-party software to update their inventory on the other platforms. The problem then occurs when the updates are not fast enough due to sudden demand.

Frankly, that is the risk they accept by effectively posting 8 or 12 listings across 2-3 platforms for four physical cards. They are betting that their system will be fast and reliable enough to prevent overselling, and when they lose that bet they should be held accountable to it. By being able to simply cancel the orders they are getting to have their cake and eat it too; all the reward from the bet, none of the risk. That is bullshit, and the players are completely justified in feeling screwed over because they're the ones who suffer the loss.

As an analogy, imagine instead the cancellation notice said "hey, sorry, but our new hire fat-fingered the numpad when they were manually entering the inventory, we only had 1 copy of this card not 12. Oh well, these things happen." Would you consider that an acceptable reason to cancel an order? How is that any different from "our automated system failed to update the inventory"? Either way, the store failed to accurately represent their inventory.

That being said, I understand being upset that every complaint thread makes it sound like the store is maliciously cancelling orders when it's more likely just an error on their part. The stores (probably) aren't the devil incarnate trying to squeeze out every cent of profit.

[–]deg_deg 16ポイント17ポイント  (16子コメント)

It will happen if you only list on TCGPlayer through Crystal Commerce. The issue isn't multiple sites being used. The issue is sheer volume of sales and the delay between TCGPlayer and Crystal Commerce communicating.

[–]Kamui1 9ポイント10ポイント  (5子コメント)

And they know it, but don't care. Why should they, If nothing happens to them?

[–]Cease2Resist 8ポイント9ポイント  (4子コメント)

Some of them probably care, but also know that using Crystal Commerce is the only way to put their cards on TCGPlayer. Either they use this shitty program that might screw over both them and their potential customers or shun arguably the best way (even with said shitty program) for an LGS to sell its stock beyond their immediate clientele.

[–]PM_ME_AZN_BOOBS 7ポイント8ポイント  (3子コメント)

It's pretty much required to list if you're a LGS owner worth his/her salt. Online opens up a huge market beyond the local community. These LGS are not Amazon, or Walmart with millions to sink into a perfect inventory management system people have come to expect. They have to go with what works best.

[–]Daeyel1 -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

If you think Walmart has a perfect inventory management system, I'll just sit back here and LMAO at you. I would know, being an employee.

Inventory Management is the single biggest nightmare retailers have. For MTG retailers, it's even worse, because you have stacks of 200 - 300 cards everywhere.

You know you have that Melira somewhere, but where?

[–]PM_ME_AZN_BOOBS 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Good to know. So if Walmart is unable to properly maintain one, what hope does a lgs have?

[–]Darklordofbunnies 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Their inventory management system is hilarious. That shit running out of boxes from the mid-90s still in some stores.

[–]Necrofamicom 0ポイント1ポイント  (9子コメント)

Wait wait wait, this is where I get lost.

If I have, say, 12 copies of X The Unspeakable and I have Crystal Commerce list those on TCGPlayer, how do I get into a situation where TCGPlayer allows more than 12 copies to be sold and in the event that happens, what does Crystal Commerce have to do with it at all? If TCGPlayers sells more than the 12 copies I have listed, how is it the fault of this third party software?

[–]Athildur 2ポイント3ポイント  (7子コメント)

Because presumably your inventory numbers aren't kept on TCGPlayer's site if you've got your account linked through CC. So instead, the number stays the same until CC tells TCGPlayer it has changed. Essentially, a person clicks on the site and tells TCG 'I want this'. TCG contacts CC, which says 'ok fine'. And you get a shiny confirmation to complete the sale. But CC is bad at handling large numbers of (near-)simultaneous transactions.

So now you have six people each ordering four copies in a very short amount of time. CC unfortunately doesn't keep up and sells each of these people their cards before it finishes updating the inventory numbers. (From what I gather, the program doesn't wait until it finishes a transaction before it starts a new one. So it's processing 1-6 at the same time. 6s transaction checks if there are enough cards in inventory, and because 1-5 haven't finished their transaction yet, it goes 'yeah we got that')

Essentially, CC is not good at what it's made for (management of inventory on multiple locations simultaneously, as well as being capable of handling a large number of transactions while still making sure there are no invalid transactions).

[–]Necrofamicom 0ポイント1ポイント  (6子コメント)

Yes, but when I look at TCGPlayer it tells me how many copies of a card a seller has available. How is that number not the inventory number? Will TCGPlayer oversell that number of copies? There's something that's not being explained here.

[–]AkaiChar 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

Because CC, lags. Tcgplayer will Lag because CC will. Especially when instead of only one guy trying to by the same cards, it's 10 or 100. And TCG or CC player doesn't lock the card necessarily until payment completes. Lots of factors, all happening way too fast for the system.

[–]Necrofamicom 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think it's the interplay between the two programs that's confusing me. If I have ten cards listed on TCGPlayer and they sell 20 copies, I don't see how that's the fault of CC and not TCGPlayer unless CC is for some reason telling TCGPlayer to increase the supply of cards available in response to being told to decrease its inventory.

[–]AkaiChar 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

That has more to do with how databases work and programming. The simple version is this: CC stores a number for X card. Let's say 5 of X. Tcgplayer is has 2 customers try to order at the same time, so it checks CC. CC still says 5 to both at the same time, because, it's true. So they both add at 5 to their respective carts, and CC can't check the number to say it doesn't have the card because it's too busy subtracting the card and may well not actually commit the change till completion of checkout, TCGplayer doesn't know to stop one of the orders. Couple this with that CC' s servers aren't necessarily fast enough to deal with the volume of queries, just like how game servers crash at launch because too many people try to log in at once, You end up with messed up results.

The solution is that CC should upgrade it's severs, but that's expensive and an increase in total cost for the service for a few times a year worth of mess ups that they frankly aren't held accountable for isn't in their interest. Especially since it would price LGSs out of their service also. Tcg, should maybe put a minute delay on checkouts during this time as a stop gap for CC to confirm inventory, but they probably wont.

[–]Athildur 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Because the program that connects the businesses with TCGPlayer and other sides is faulty. THAT is the issue. This program (crystal commerce) does not deal well with updating inventory numbers when a large number of orders come in for the same card within a narrow window of time.

When you link your business to TCGPlayer via Crystal Commerce, instead of TCGPlayer keeping track of your inventory, it relies on CC to provide that information. So when CC doesn't update fast enough to tell TCGPlayer that inventory has decreased, TCGPlayer simply doesn't know.

[–]Necrofamicom 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

When you link your business to TCGPlayer via Crystal Commerce, instead of TCGPlayer keeping track of your inventory, it relies on CC to provide that information.

Okay, this is what I was missing.

[–]Athildur 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

This has to happen because CC links the business with multiple sites, each offering from the same inventory. (Those 6 on TCGPlayer are the same 6 you'd see on a different card marketplace)

Edit: Considering how many stores need this kind of program to be good, it's kind of crazy how there isn't something better out there...

[–]AkaiChar 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

CC is a database software that manages inventory. My own LGS that I work at uses it, and it sucks for lots of reasons(I can't even begin) But the issue is, that hundreds of LGSs if not thousands, use them and CC can normally keep up but not during these spikes.

See, We update inventory to CC through a browser. After that it's out of our hands(aside from not messing with the physical cards). When TCG player and CC fail to communicate properly, which usually is during these spikes, then we LGSs get stuck holding the ball. And think about it, from another point of view, we are a customer of that service and we are failed by them, so we feel just as betrayed as the regular consumer. Except, we don't have a better alternative in our cost range but a consumer can just black-ball a LGS and order elsewhere. Sorta sucks all around.

[–]Korlus 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

"hey, sorry, but our new hire fat-fingered the numpad when they were manually entering the inventory, we only had 1 copy of this card not 12. Oh well, these things happen." Would you consider that an acceptable reason to cancel an order?

Yes. If they don't have the item in stock, they can't sell it to you. I would expect a full refund, or an offer of a comparable product from their stock.

Mistakes happen and they are:

a) Typically not punishable unless they have been done maliciously, or caused you significant loss.
b) Usually understandable.

The problem happens when that store promises to sell you an item, takes your money, then refuses to sell it to you, gives you the money back, and then re-lists the item at a different price.

If a store mis-labels a product and you take it to the till, they may or may not try and sell it to you at that price - if the price difference between label & actual is significant, they will often refuse to sell you the item. The "problem" occurs if they take your money and then try and back-out on the deal. That is when it is unacceptable.

If the online software is not up to the task then we need to find ways around it, because as soon as you take the customer's money, you owe them that product... but ultimately the refunding of the money given is typically the best you can ask for when they no longer have the product in stock.

[–]desymond 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I would like to know what percentage of sales come from each website (amazon/ebay/tcgplayer), and if the extra sales warrant the headaches of crystal commerce.

[–]nyconx 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

And yet the my store on TCG player has never had a problem. Don't blame laziness as having to rely on glitchy software.

[–]Tnarg_Helped_Us 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

The people that go after small shops online like that are clearly people that don't understand the real life, nitty gritty of working in a small business like a LGS. You can't just "get new software." The licences are expensive. People seem to think that their LGS owner is just sitting on millions from running their shop, and that any mistake made is basically white collared crime.

It's ridiculous, and the amount of impact you have on a shop by getting them in trouble with TCG player can probably cut many players off from the game entirely by getting their shop closed. And for what? All so you can save 20 bucks on your copies of a card that you didn't have the sense to buy 2 weeks earlier? How petty.

[–]lutefisks 6ポイント7ポイント  (3子コメント)

TCGplayer should be able to know if the shop honor some of the orders and cancel the others.

[–]veritas723 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

yup. when you play the spike game during pro tour or ban season.

you take your chances with getting your order cxl. you get a refund. tough shit.

people that call out stores. as if they were legitimately engaging with a store to do business. and not just button mashing the quickest/cheapest item for sale.

please. cry me a river.

[–]The_Robot_Cow 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Don't people realize that there are a TON of other people also trying to buy the same cards?

[–]Electricbarker 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

A lot of the comments in this thread about how stores eat losses also sound like they come from the kind of people that scratch their head and wonder why business shut down despite "doing well".

A store is under no obligation to fulfill a transaction for an item that never existed in the first place. If you tried this at any other business besides a LGS you'd be laughed out of the store. Seriously, try demanding Walmart fulfill an order they oversold on. Notice how they gave you a refund and then told you to have a nice day? Why should it be different for LGSs when a software error causes them to oversell. You can't eat losses forever, and while it's nice now, in the long run it could mean you'll never see that store again.

[–]oxero 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thank you for this thread. A lot of issues arrive because of these threads and people need to learn that these small stores also can't just say "Sorry, we ran out, but we will still honor the order." What are they supposed to do? Buy the new emmy at 20 dollars and sell it at 15 for a couple hundred people? Give me a break. Thats not how markets and businesses work. Big store retailers like walmart do this because the value customers to return, but they are also financially stable enough that honoring even up to hundreds of dollars wont hurt them.

Also witch hunting is a dangerous thing to be doing.

[–]jtank777 9ポイント10ポイント  (136子コメント)

None of this would happen if the stores, instead of refunding, sent an email to the customer stating that they were out of stock and the cards would be shipped as soon as they were back in stock.

[–]WithinTheGiant 9ポイント10ポイント  (2子コメント)

Retailers are not obligated to provide items at a loss that should not have been sold due to not existing at that time. They are obligated to provide a refund in this scenario. Why do you think it should be literally the opposite of common sense?

[–]Korlus 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Usually the anger comes when they immediately re-list them at a different price. If they took your money then they owe you what you paid for.

If they don't have any in stock then yes, a refund is fine. They are not required to go and purchase items and make a loss, but they are expected to go through with any contracts they have entered into when already able.

[–]stravant 18ポイント19ポイント  (0子コメント)

That still involves them eating a big loss, which doesn't seem very fair either.

The can't just magically appear more copies of the card... they have to buy them from people, at a price likely higher than what the oversold copies sold for.

[–]deg_deg 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

But that assumes that Crystal Commerce overselling is the retailer's fault and it's not. It's either TCGPlayer or Crystal Commerce's fault.

[–]bobfiveHS[S] 30ポイント31ポイント  (35子コメント)

Like I said in the other thread, there are real practicality issues involved in your next 12 Emrakuls being promised out to people around the country.

But more importantly than that, here's the fact: Most people are not willing to wait an indefinite amount of time to relieve a card, ESPECIALLY one which stands to decrease in value over the coming weeks.

The other thing people have to realize is this: At my store, it is entirely possible due to the meta game shift that we will not see another Emrakul come across the counter for a month. We aren't going to events, we aren't running some 1st class online card buying ring, we're just a hole in the wall lgs trying to make some extra money selling online to keep the lights on.

I'll stress again, if a card gets ordered, as long as we have it it gets shipped. If it.jumped.in price overnight we still made money on it even if it sales at the old, lower price. But you're asking stores to ship cards that don't exist. Cards generated our of thin air by a glitch in the software.

[–]Shirtless_Brezhnev 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

The problem with waiting to have more in stock is that for a lot of LGS when a card comes in stock is totally random.

[–]McWerp 34ポイント35ポイント  (93子コメント)

So you expect a store to pay 30$ each to restock their emrakuls just so they can send them to you for 12$ a piece?

The real world doesn't work that way.

[–]SBGawain 7ポイント8ポイント  (11子コメント)

Yeah. The amount of whining by speculators trying to make a quick and easy buck is ridiculous. "THESE LGSs AND PEOPLE SHOULD BURN THEIR MONEY BECAUSE OTHERWISE I DON'T MAKE SOME EXTRA MONEY."

Scum of the earth. Guess what? Other retailers oversell all the time. It just happens. It doesn't mean they have to eat dirt and destroy their business so that you can make some money. You got refunded. You lost nothing.

[–]TheScrublord00 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think one aspect of these situations that people forget occurs during spikes is that not only is there a large influx of people trying to buy these particular, but those who had these cards already are also selling them at higher buylist prices. Stores can genuinely oversell cards, and have to cancel orders. But we don't stop working just because we sold out of one card. Our doors still open every day, and people come in to sell their cards every day. Maybe your order did, legitimately get cancelled because of CC/TCGPlayer/Ebay/whatever sold more copies than we had. That doesn't mean that when we relist the card at a later date that we're selling the exact particular copy that you expected.

I've worked in other industries before where I sold highly sought after collectables, things that would garnish a 500+% profit when resold on the secondary market, and these things used to get oversold very often. Not once have I ever had a customer believe that we were cancelling their orders in order to create scarcity in the market place, or to try to screw them out of a quick buck, or because we wanted to relist the item later at a higher price. That kind of shit doesn't actually happen as often as MTG players would like to believe.

Most stores aren't in business by making money off of price spikes. In fact, these price spikes are marginal compared to the rest of the the transactions we do on a day to day basis. If you honestly believe that every store that cancels an order due to oversell during the Pro Tour is out to make a quick buck by relisting cards $15 higher today than last week, then you either have no idea how stores actually stay in business, or are so entitled and full of your own shit that you've been blinded into believing that the world owes you something that it, in fact, doesn't.

[–]mohoots -4ポイント-3ポイント  (16子コメント)

They should stop using Crystal Commerce or plan ahead.... Set all your stock to 2/3 what you have for 1 day. These stores know what they are doing and they do it intentionally.

[–]ZuiyoMaru 15ポイント16ポイント  (15子コメント)

No, they don't. Crystal Commerce is the only widely available option for TCG inventory management. No shop wants to issue ten refunds in a weekend because their stock got bought out; that's a successful sale ruined AND bad word of mouth. Now imagine it happening every Pro Tour, every time a card spikes.

If there was a better affordable system to use, shops would be using it.

[–]extralyfe -5ポイント-4ポイント  (8子コメント)

now imagine stores just disabling the ability to make online orders over PT weekend and saving themselves hassle for the rest of eternity.

I mean, really, if all shops know they get fucked on PT weekend, why aren't they just shutting down for the weekend? isn't that just refusal to learn from past experience? isn't expecting the same approach to work better next time - when the game has become more popular - a little fucking insane?

[–]MarkhovCheney 26ポイント27ポイント  (6子コメント)

Those sales just go elsewhere then.

People in here live on another planet and i have never seen such entitlement and venom over something so minor

[–]Bartikowski 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's a pretty unreasonable expectation that a store should miss out on a whole weekend of sales for fear of a couple of cards spiking and having to issue some refunds.

[–]HarryIsAJerk 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

What is frustrating is that this happens more frequently for cards that have price spikes and rarely for cards that don't.

I've seen stores do this and then restock at the marked up price. Not saying every time it happens someone is doing the dodgey, but there are very clear cases where people are.

Perhaps what really needs to stop is people using a program that causes these problems?

[–]thememans 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

The reason for this is rather simple. Everybody and their mother is buying cards during or directly before a spike. Which means it's vastly more likely that an actual inventory error occurs as the system can't keep up with several purchases at once.

It is incredibly unlikely, however, that a lot of people will be clamoring for a card when the price drops, meaning that such a problem just won't happen.

[–]Medarco 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

Perhaps what really needs to stop is people using a program that causes these problems?

There isn't a better option. Code one and you will make sick bank off of it and be a hero to shops and buyers everywhere.

[–]elconquistador1985 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

What is frustrating is that this happens more frequently for cards that have price spikes and rarely for cards that don't.

Perhaps there's a reason for that? Perhaps the sale volume increases dramatically during a spike? The software can't handle it. The problem is that there isn't better software.

[–]Raka_ 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

"They did not list more than they had, a glitch in the system caused 10 more to be generated out of thin air." I agree with What you're saying, this is just a poor choice of words. Its not creating inventory, its failing to process orders fast enough, thus selling cards that are already sold. This is why some stores turn off their inventory during major events. I also think you post is way way way way too hyperbolic. A store shutting down because a reddit thread post? Lets be more realistic.

[–]Kanin_usagi 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

This seems like a controversial position.

[–]captaincat444 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I wonder if they can legally cancel orders outside of the USA. Where I live if an invitation to treat is accepted (by paying for your order) then both parties have a legally binding contract at that point it has to be fullfilled (only the consumer has the right to cancel the contract in some cases) unless a massive error has been made (like a $10,000 car being advertised for $1,000 for example) or that the selling party does not have the legal right to sell that good (it was a stolen product, illegal product).

[–]puntmasterofthefells 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Guilty until proven innocent. That's become the norm in social media. Watch me get a hundred downvotes for it too.

[–]Magicplayinggeek 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

Why do magic players have to be responsible for wizards of the coast and local game store bottom lines?

Just because I play magic I have to do everything in my power that my lgs gets a great allotment from wotc and the best possible pricing due to large orders from their distribution outlets?

Bow you're asking me to worry about crystal commerce service pitfalls.

What's next the lgs doesn't have time to do their own taxes so if I want to pay $10 to play fnm I have to do their taxes before hand?

If you can't run a business then don't open a card shop

"I lIEK MaGIK" is not a business plan. If you bitch about your job and can't do it.....then close up shop

[–]Kintanon 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

you're asking me to worry about crystal commerce service pitfalls.

I think the actual request is for your to be a reasonable human being and accept that not everything in the world functions perfectly smoothly and some mom and pop LGS isn't actively trying to screw you out of your 8$.

[–]gamingmath -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

some mom and pop LGS isn't actively trying to screw you out of your 8$.

But they are. They're intentional trading away accurate inventory management for wider exposure of their wares. That's a scummy practice no matter how much of a sob-story you want to use to justify it.

[–]Kintanon 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

They are using a product that works perfectly fine 99.99% of the time. Even when there are these spikes + order cancellations it affects a very very tiny percentage of the people buying cards.

[–]SarcasticSadist 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'll pitch in a ringing "amen!" I find a great deal of witch-hunt posts to be highly suspect. We just don't have controls in place to make sure that the poster has a legitimate beef and is not just salty towards the shop over some slight. It's really easy to take down a business with bad publicity on the Internet, and brick-and-mortar card shops are hard enough to find as it is.

[–]Chewbacca_007 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The thing is, the businesses haven't "done nothing wrong". They've chosen to use an inventory system that is known to be flawed and gets negative press every pro tour and potentially every banned and restricted announcement. The choice to continue using that means they shoulder the responsibility, even if that means negative press.

Note that I'm not saying the stores must honor every oversold card. I don't believe that right now (even if I may have argued for that in the past). But that doesn't absolve them off negative reviews for bad interactions stemming from risky business practices.

[–]CaptainJank 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Do you think it would be possible for a free, open source, Crystal Commerce alternative to be made by the community? We have to have enough developers willing to help out somewhere in here.

[–]Bleachi 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

3) While the reddit rules may only say no Witch-Hunts against PEOPLE, Local Gaming Stores are ran by people. When you post names of stores who refund your order due to overselling because you believe that they are lying in order to cheat you, consider this: if you are wrong, you are pointing the hive mind Internet crusade machine against a small locally owned card shops. You are not valiantly fighting against some major banking Giant, or Proctor Gamble like mega conglomerate, or even a Wal-Mart.

YOU ARE TURNING WHAT IS ARGUABLY ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL TOOLS AVAILABLE AGAINST A SMALL LOCAL BUSINESS.

The point of the witch hunt rule is to protect individuals from harassment. It is not intended to protect businesses from criticism, no matter how small that business is.

I'm not fond of people who bend privacy rules to hide shady business practices. It's convenient that you completely overlooked the fact that some stores don't actually run out of stock when they claim to. They cancel orders so they can sell their cards at a higher price. Cards that they still own, in actuality.

You would rather disallow customers from calling attention to this fraudulent practice? Yes, many store owners legitimately oversell their stock, and honor as many purchases as they can. But if we enacted your draconian rule against "witch hunts," we'd have no way of catching the few fraudsters out there.

[–]DelusionalProphecies -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

1) My first thought was what store does this guy own that recently got bashed?

2) On black friday and cyber monday online stores never seem to have an "oops we oversold stuff because our software is crappy" problem so why do magic retailers have that issue? Amazon retailers dont use Crystal Commerce?

3) We have every right to create a list of stores who have cancelled orders and use it to only shop at stores that dont do that.

OP wants us to just keep getting screwed and do nothing about it. We have to do something even if that means blacklisting. How do you avoid blacklisting as a busines? Make it right with customers and honor the orders your software accepted. Regardless of whose fault it is because it wasnt the customers but he is the one suffering. It is up to the company to EARN our business it isnt something that we just give.

[–]Nkyaxs 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Except Amazon retailers, and other businesses, do have the experience of "oversold stuff because our software messed up". In those cases, then they just cancel your orders and refund your money. And if you are part of the percentage that cares enough to call customer service, then Amazon is big enough to order more inventory and return you the product at a loss to themselves in order to maintain an image of goodwill. Your local LGS, not named SCG or CFB likely does not have this reserve of money to do so.

It just so happens that Amazon is so damn big that the few times this happens are drowned out whereas reddit provides a perfect platform for every single occurrence this happens amongst every single seller to have its own sob story and witch hunt against them.

And finally, you're not being "screwed" out of anything. You get your money back. The only sense that you suffer is that you couldn't buy something listed at an incorrectly lower than market price when it was out of stock because a faulty system couldn't update its stock in time.

You're free to blacklist whoever you want, but at least understand the other side's perspective. Many of them are not looking to screw you, and would probably love to fulfill your order in order to maintain goodwill and faith, but simply do not have the capabilities to do so without endangering their companies.

*Obviously I am only referring to cases in which stores refund items out of stock, and not the stores that refund items with the intention of reselling the same item at a higher price.

Edit: Grammer and spelling.

[–]gtnover -5ポイント-4ポイント  (6子コメント)

I just think the answer is simple. If being out of stock is the true reason you aren't shopping it, then request a rain check. You've purchased the item at a price that was agreed upon by both parties, when they get it in stock they just ship it to you then.

[–]forte7 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

Rainchecks are possible if you have a regular supply that will often be sent at the same rate. A $12 Emrakul today will not be found again until the price drops back down to $12. If this scenario holds then sure you can have a $12 Emrakul when the price drops back down to $12.

[–]Ilytian 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

How is that simple or fair? You would have never even gotten to order the card if the program didn't glitch. Now they're obligated to sell you a card they have to buy for more than what you're going to pay them? Seems real simple and fair for the guy benefiting from the glitch.

[–]Smoke_Stack707 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

that makes no sense. Say you and 100 people place an order for an Emrakul at X dollars but CC oversells the LGS inventory. Emrakul's price rises to twice the value of X because suddenly Emrakul's price trends upwards. an IOU would mean that the store would have to find you your Emrakul and ship it for no financial gain.