Craigslist, EBay and Other Online Finds
#2446
I don't think this is the 'discussion'. While I agree that the bad photos wouldn't discourage me, I do agree that the photos leave A LOT to be desired. BUT... if I'm in the market, and it's a hot market, then of course I would look further into it. The pictures show nothing negative about the car except the owner has no photography skills with his/her potato phone camera.
If this were for a newer 100k+ car, then that may be a different story, but for this 'relative' price-range, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt that the car is still a prime example and the owner just sucks at photography...
In addition, at least he didn't take screenshots from pictures on his phone, then upload them in the vertical plane with the huge black bars on each side... seen it too many times as well
If this were for a newer 100k+ car, then that may be a different story, but for this 'relative' price-range, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt that the car is still a prime example and the owner just sucks at photography...
In addition, at least he didn't take screenshots from pictures on his phone, then upload them in the vertical plane with the huge black bars on each side... seen it too many times as well
It's just an overall ideal of selling a car it's best to try and appeal to the most people possible. The majority of cars purchased every day are by casual buyers looking around. Talk to any professional car salesman, they'll tell you they work on the fact that most people who are going to purchase, do so within 48 hours of seeing the vehicle. That's why they always ask for a number & will call you within 24 hours (unless they are lazy or a bad salesperson).
Is this always a guarantee, slam dunk rule? Of course not
But, and I think more to your point......at the end of the day it only takes one person to buy the car. A savvy shopper will look into the crappy ads knowing less people are eyes on and that could help score a great deal since the seller has less people calling.
For a seller, there is absolutely nothing to lose by taking a ton of high resolution photos, unless the car is a turd and you don't want to show the bad spots.
#2447
Des,
I spoke with that guy and he is just a hillbilly car flipper. The interior was horrible, cayman wheels on a turbo, some weird rear center console, and some hillbilly hack job exhaust. It looked like a set of pea shooters coming out the back. Someone hacked the exhaust off at the cats and welded in some galvanized steel. I believe the cats were hollowed out as well. That car was worth 29k at best. Especially bc he had no records on a car that showed having a horrible owner. He would never show me a picture of under the car at the engine.
I spoke with that guy and he is just a hillbilly car flipper. The interior was horrible, cayman wheels on a turbo, some weird rear center console, and some hillbilly hack job exhaust. It looked like a set of pea shooters coming out the back. Someone hacked the exhaust off at the cats and welded in some galvanized steel. I believe the cats were hollowed out as well. That car was worth 29k at best. Especially bc he had no records on a car that showed having a horrible owner. He would never show me a picture of under the car at the engine.
#2448
https://orlando.craigslist.org/cto/d...573851126.html
nice deal if you aren't concerned with the salvage title. Nice 04 cab 6spd w/64k miles.
nice deal if you aren't concerned with the salvage title. Nice 04 cab 6spd w/64k miles.
#2449
I don't think this is the 'discussion'. While I agree that the bad photos wouldn't discourage me, I do agree that the photos leave A LOT to be desired. BUT... if I'm in the market, and it's a hot market, then of course I would look further into it. The pictures show nothing negative about the car except the owner has no photography skills with his/her potato phone camera.
#2452
I think that the out of focus picture of the Boxster displayed in post 2451 above is a poor photo.
#2457
I was referring to the post of the 996 Turbo pictures.
Post #2432 stated "Those poor photos [referring to the pictures in post #2425] might not discourage you but they will discourage some". I replied: "And they [the referenced photos] may encourage some".
I have never opined that poor photos were a good idea. I did opine that the 996 Turbo pictures in question are IMO not poor photos.
Post #2432 stated "Those poor photos [referring to the pictures in post #2425] might not discourage you but they will discourage some". I replied: "And they [the referenced photos] may encourage some".
I have never opined that poor photos were a good idea. I did opine that the 996 Turbo pictures in question are IMO not poor photos.
#2458
I was referring to the post of the 996 Turbo pictures.
Post #2432 stated "Those poor photos [referring to the pictures in post #2425] might not discourage you but they will discourage some". I replied: "And they [the referenced photos] may encourage some".
I have never opined that poor photos were a good idea. I did opine that the 996 Turbo pictures in question are IMO not poor photos.
Post #2432 stated "Those poor photos [referring to the pictures in post #2425] might not discourage you but they will discourage some". I replied: "And they [the referenced photos] may encourage some".
I have never opined that poor photos were a good idea. I did opine that the 996 Turbo pictures in question are IMO not poor photos.
#2460