Completely 100% agree with everything you said quite well here! I'm just super lazy and use the "not my problem" boiler plate to describe the same points you pointed out. Obviously I'd split the loss if something unworldly happened to the package but I'd rather under promise and over deliver.I see this now and then for US shipping too, wouldn't say it totally grinds my gears but I do typically avoid those ads and have passed on chips I would have otherwise picked up because of it. What I do when I'm selling is to ask the buyer how they would like things shipped (or provide my recommendation and ask them to confirm or provide an alternative method). IMHO there are risks that can be mitigated (reasonably) and other risks that really can't be that should shared by the buy and seller. Take for example a "typical" PCF transaction - say a rack of chips.
The transaction shipping risks include:
Folks can of course with whatever terms they like, but IMHO throwing in the "not my problem after I drop it off" for any of the USPS flat rate options is pretty lazy, and likely causing you to miss out on potential buyers.
- Damage to chips - this is typically mitigated by proper packing. I usually use a small flat rate box or a box in a padded envelope with the rack firmly wrapped/secured and padding. A medium or large box would obviously be better, but likely not worth the additional cost unless the rack is really valuable. Both the buyer and seller should agree with the shipping method prior to getting it mailed out. If I packed it like an idiot with the rack loose and rumbling around and something gets damaged, that's on me. However if the box is properly packed & taped, but falls off the truck and gets run over, that's a freak case beyond the control of either the buyer or seller, and I would offer that the loss should be split equally (minus the $50 you may get back from USPS) as it's a shared risk.
- Loss of the chips - this is one of my sticking points, especially with the dramatic rise online commerce and resulting porch pirates. For larger packages and more expensive transactions, I always require signature confirmation, and I pay the extra few bucks for it on my end as the seller. This guarantees that unless USPS loses it, the buyer will get the package in their hands. I let the buyer know beforehand, as I've found some hate having to sign for the package, and in those cases when the signature request is declined, I relinquish all responsibility for the package once I drop it off at the post office. So if a porch pirate grabs it, it's not on me as the seller/shipper. If USPS outright loses it in transit, it's similar to the freak case above and IMHO the loss should be split equally.
- For either of the cases above, numerous testimonies on PCF have proved that USPS insurance is next to useless. I personally don't consider this a reasonable mitigation to either damage or loss
I'd love to apply the same approach to international shipping, but that unfortunately is another beast....
Singles/button shipping gets a little trickier. Very few people want to spend $8 to ship a $2 chip in a flat rate box (and understandably so, I fall into this category). A fairly reliable alternative is to use a bubble mailer, which is cheaper but comes with increased risk. IMHO as long as the chip is packed in some cardboard and in a bubble mailer, any damage in this case is on the buyer, as there were more secure options available. But again, that should be at least mentioned up front during the transaction. I've bought a bunch of singles both here and on ebay, and have had pretty good luck with the chip secured to cardboard in a bubble mailer(even shipping from overseas!), I think I've only had one damaged.
I'd like to think this is the case for 90% of the people out there. For anyone who does really want the chips but is hesitant on the "not my problem" language I'd encourage them so ask the seller what they mean since again I think the high majority of sellers are just using oversimplified language and would definitely come to an agreement that's fair for both sides if something unexpected happened. The could explain in more detail using the language above but I think that'd dissuade even more buyers who, like myself, get skittish about long legally language on deals that are mainly based on a "virtual handshake".
