The Collecting Cars Porsche thread…
Discussion
irish boy said:
I like that Shogun. What's the comments about - does it need a underside restoration or not and is it Silverstone selling it as private?irish boy said:
hmg said:
I’ve also noted the CC seem to have a raft of users( same names keep popping up) that regularly put the first few bids in to start the bidding but rarely bid when it gets down to the nitty gritty..
Quite often it seems to be the same traders who like to pass off stock there, funny that.That Shogun Evo carry on is the internet personified
Bothe sound like Pistonheaders 
bencollins4 said:
Sorry, also posted this on the GT market three but probably more appropriate here. 992GT3 bid up to £181,500 unsold tonight on CC. Looked nice enough to me, white, 3.5k miles. Ashgood gave up at £181k.
Saw that, I was also prompted to bid via email and I don't remember that happening before.Is that a new territory for 992 GT3?
RSVP911 said:
Taffy66 said:
av185 said:
Missed the car was that £181500 plus 6% buyers fee?
YesChanging landscape and owner profiles for these cars now.
ATM said:
993rsr said:
Seller paid £206k 3000 miles ago welcome to the reality of evaporating overs and evaporating cheap ‘tick’.
Changing landscape and owner profiles for these cars now.
Will take time for people to realise so prices won't just drop but everything heading down now.Changing landscape and owner profiles for these cars now.
Pflanzgarten said:
hmg said:
I’ve also noted the CC seem to have a raft of users( same names keep popping up) that regularly put the first few bids in to start the bidding but rarely bid when it gets down to the nitty gritty..
Quite often it seems to be the same traders who like to pass off stock there, funny that.That Shogun Evo carry on is the internet personified
Bothe sound like Pistonheaders I agree that there was bit of argy-bargy ... but the previously sold V6 Clio 255 with less than 2000 miles on the clock went for a very "reasonable" price compared to the one sold at the Silverstone auctions at the NEC. The argument in the Q&A's discounted the price ... but I think the similar Silverstone one sold with costs at around £20k more ??
cabbalisticar said:
I disagree. Just because it's there in the small print doesn't mean the entire artifice of the site isn't fundamentally disingenuous. Which I personally think it is.
The point is that just because a person or organisation flags up what they are doing, doesn't make it OK. Which is why offering loans at punitive rates to desperate people can be appallingly exploitative, even if those rates are flagged up front.
CC is obviously at the opposite end of the severity scale when it comes to exploitative practices - cry us all a river for wealthy people making impulsive purchases, etc.
Why is it "fundamentally disingenuous"? The print is quite normal size to read even at my advanced years. It's not preying on any vulnerable people so the comparison with punitive loans is just daft. So if they stick to the rules they've defined, all is ok. Might not be liked by many, but there's always choices. The buyer who bought from me came to view and it worked for him. The car I bought unseen worked for me. I took that punt, if the red wine fuelled purchase had gone wrong, I think that would have been my own fault. Noone forced me to buy unseen (well only the little diablo in the bottle!).The point is that just because a person or organisation flags up what they are doing, doesn't make it OK. Which is why offering loans at punitive rates to desperate people can be appallingly exploitative, even if those rates are flagged up front.
CC is obviously at the opposite end of the severity scale when it comes to exploitative practices - cry us all a river for wealthy people making impulsive purchases, etc.
Moderator edit: no naming & shaming
BertBert said:
Why is it "fundamentally disingenuous"? The print is quite normal size to read even at my advanced years. It's not preying on any vulnerable people so the comparison with punitive loans is just daft. So if they stick to the rules they've defined, all is ok. Might not be liked by many, but there's always choices. The buyer who bought from me came to view and it worked for him. The car I bought unseen worked for me. I took that punt, if the red wine fuelled purchase had gone wrong, I think that would have been my own fault. Noone forced me to buy unseen (well only the little diablo in the bottle!).
Not sure what font size has to do with anything? The comparison with punitive loans isn't daft and I made it clear it's at the opposite end of the exploitation scale. As I very clearly said, cry us all a river for wealthy people making impulsive purchases. But just because you are wealthy, doesn't mean you can't be exploited. The presentation of the site is all about reassuring the buyer that the cars are all the most amazing thing ever with lots of glossy photos, loads of flowery prose, the Chris Harris tie in (these are the cars Chris Harris would have you buy, pretty much literally, here have another video of Harris bigging up a car for sale on the site) and so on. It's all about making the buyer feel good that the cars are top notch, not just your regular classifieds crap you have to manually filter, but something much higher quality and curated.
But in reality, CC goes to lengths in their T&C's to make sure it's nothing of the sort, they explicitly don't stand by any of the information posted about a car for sale. It's all on the buyer to do all due diligence, there are no guarantees or assurances that the descriptions and characterisations of the cars listed on CC's platform are accurate. Do CC inspect the cars? I don't think so [Edit: just checked, T&Cs say they do not inspect cars]
There's plenty CC could do to improve protection for buyers and ensure to some extent the quality and accuracy of the stock listed. But that's not the business model. The business model is glossy, glossy, everything is amazing, while any notion that some of the cars are extensively mis-described dross is carefully airbrushed from the picture.
Edited by cabbalisticar on Tuesday 6th December 10:59
Just to clarify before the name and shame bot goes postal, from the CC T&Cs:
"The accuracy of a listing is the sole responsibility of the Seller."
"We have no control over and do not guarantee the existence, quality, safety or nature of any items listed on the Site, the ability of any party to buy or sell any item listed on the Site, or that a party will complete a transaction for an item on the Site."
"Any dispute with respect to the sale of any Auction Lot shall be resolved between the Buyer and Seller and without the participation of Collecting Cars."
Etc
https://collectingcars.com/terms-conditions/
They explicitly don't even care is the car exists, let alone if it's accurately described and codify that in the T&Cs!
"The accuracy of a listing is the sole responsibility of the Seller."
"We have no control over and do not guarantee the existence, quality, safety or nature of any items listed on the Site, the ability of any party to buy or sell any item listed on the Site, or that a party will complete a transaction for an item on the Site."
"Any dispute with respect to the sale of any Auction Lot shall be resolved between the Buyer and Seller and without the participation of Collecting Cars."
Etc
https://collectingcars.com/terms-conditions/
They explicitly don't even care is the car exists, let alone if it's accurately described and codify that in the T&Cs!
jhowlett said:
It went back upto 225 before the auction,then down to 205 and now,they are still 30 k over list and thats for a new one.It looks a nice car though.cabbalisticar said:
Just to clarify before the name and shame bot goes postal, from the CC T&Cs:
"The accuracy of a listing is the sole responsibility of the Seller."
"We have no control over and do not guarantee the existence, quality, safety or nature of any items listed on the Site, the ability of any party to buy or sell any item listed on the Site, or that a party will complete a transaction for an item on the Site."
"Any dispute with respect to the sale of any Auction Lot shall be resolved between the Buyer and Seller and without the participation of Collecting Cars."
Etc
https://collectingcars.com/terms-conditions/
They explicitly don't even care is the car exists, let alone if it's accurately described and codify that in the T&Cs!
You said small print. It's not small as you've managed to quote it quite easily. Also you've substantiated my point by completely understanding how they work. It might not be what you'd like it to be, but it's what they say it is."The accuracy of a listing is the sole responsibility of the Seller."
"We have no control over and do not guarantee the existence, quality, safety or nature of any items listed on the Site, the ability of any party to buy or sell any item listed on the Site, or that a party will complete a transaction for an item on the Site."
"Any dispute with respect to the sale of any Auction Lot shall be resolved between the Buyer and Seller and without the participation of Collecting Cars."
Etc
https://collectingcars.com/terms-conditions/
They explicitly don't even care is the car exists, let alone if it's accurately described and codify that in the T&Cs!
And as for the exploitation you agreed in your previous post that it's not then you keep on complaining.
You don't like it, don't use it. Let others make up their own minds whether to or not rather than trying to be a super protector of what you think it should be. It's not. Really simple.
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff