closed sold out

[Alyona The Publicist]

closed - sold out

[Frank Ayres]

are you really only selling 5 copies of this as i have seen you advertise this a few times and i am surprised you haven't sold 5 by now?

[ODA Marketing]

Originally Posted by SpudDS

are you really only selling 5 copies of this as i have seen you advertise this a few times and i am surprised you haven't sold 5 by now?

Hi.

Same question here.

The time I purchased it, there where 3 or 4 people telling in the tread that they had purchased it, excluding me witch not posted in the tread itself but PM you that I had purchased it.

Strange .

[Alex Albert]

Hi,

I bough this package a few month ago!! and ther was only 5 copys to sell!!
and im sure that there are sold more then a 5 copys long time ago!

Alex

[Alyona The Publicist]

A big thank you to everyone who has purchased - this wso is closed now to avoid overselling.

[mrmcd]

This should not be happening in the Warrior forum, that's no way to success.

[Jeremy Kelsall]

I think this ebook was also sold in a package of 4 books a couple months ago and was advertised as only 10 copies being sold.

[lakshaybehl]

Sorry to interfere, but the decision of opening up an expired offer to a new set of prospects is in the hand of the copyright holder, the OP.

If Frank Kern does a coaching program/seminar for 36 people, and then after 8 months does the same again with another 64 people, the originial buyers should have nothing to complain about.

So the OP is free to sell as many copies as long as they want to. And at whatever price they want to. Higher. Lower. Whatever.

[Frank Ayres]

Originally Posted by lakshaybehl

Sorry to interfere, but the decision of opening up an expired offer to a new set of prospects is in the hand of the copyright holder, the OP.

If Frank Kern does a coaching program/seminar for 36 people, and then after 8 months does the same again with another 64 people, the originial buyers should have nothing to complain about.

So the OP is free to sell as many copies as long as they want to. And at whatever price they want to. Higher. Lower. Whatever.

I totally disagree with you.
If i buy something and it is limited to x amount of copies and then more are sold afterward, i believe this is going against the terms that people originally bought it for.
Also if it is ok why has the OP mysteriously closed this WSO with no comment to the allegations?

[Jeremy Kelsall]

I agree. Don't say limited copies if you don't mean it.

Originally Posted by SpudDS

I totally disagree with you.
If i buy something and it is limited to x amount of copies and then more are sold afterward, i believe this is going against the terms that people originally bought it for.
Also if it is ok why has the OP mysteriously closed this WSO with no comment to the allegations?

[Alexa Smith]

Originally Posted by SpudDS

If i buy something and it is limited to x amount of copies and then more are sold afterward, i believe this is going against the terms that people originally bought it for.

It depends whether the term about the number of copies to be sold is part of the contract of sale or not. Many people would perhaps take it as probably meaning "only 5 copies for sale right now". The only thing that's clear is that it's ambiguous (and people potentially wishing to depend on it in a subsequent dispute should therefore clarify it before buying)! In reality, though, I think one does this sort of thing at one's own risk to one's own reputation as a seller.

I think the "please delete", though obviously understandable, may be asking a lot.

[Jeremy Kelsall]

Well, I'll be sure to keep in mind in the future that I can tell the truth and deceive at the same time

[lakshaybehl]

Originally Posted by SpudDS

I totally disagree with you.
If i buy something and it is limited to x amount of copies and then more are sold afterward, i believe this is going against the terms that people originally bought it for.
Also if it is ok why has the OP mysteriously closed this WSO with no comment to the allegations?

Originally Posted by Jeremy Kelsall

I agree. Don't say limited copies if you don't mean it.

I totally agree with you when you say that the seller mustn't say limited copies if theyt don't mean it.

But when somebody sells a limited offer, they decide the number of copies that will be sold right NOW.

But then later on, if they want to sell the same product/service to another limited number of prospects, then its OK as long as they did not promise that the offer will never be available again.

I won't get deeper into it, because when I say 30, I mean 30. And it is upto the seller to think about reputation as well as business ethics, but I was speaking clearly from a technical point of view.

In the end, I would once again quote Frank Kern's example where he sold the Undercovber seminar to 36 people first and then months later opened it up to 64 people. He has the copyrights to it... And its upto him.

-Lakshay

Originally Posted by alexa_s

It depends whether the term about the number of copies to be sold is part of the contract of sale or not. Many people would perhaps take it as probably meaning "only 5 copies for sale right now". The only thing that's clear is that it's ambiguous (and people potentially wishing to depend on it in a subsequent dispute should therefore clarify it before buying)! In reality, though, I think one does this sort of thing at one's own risk to one's own reputation as a seller.

I think the "please delete", though obviously understandable, may be asking a lot.

[dliquete]

Well said Lakshay. That's pretty much my opinion.
I'll say that I've purchased WSOs from Alyofrendo before and I'm happy and have benefited.

Daniel

[ODA Marketing]

Come on folks.

This is not about the legal right to a product.

This is about the ethical side of it.

As long as you limited the amount of ex sold because you don't wont to flood the marked with people selling it and you do that to raise the value of the product, it is at least ethical wrong to start selling it again (with the same amount of right) only a few day later down the road.

We are not talking about the product itself witch you can compare with the "Frank Kern" case.

We are talking about the right to the product witch was sold here and witch was limited, not the product itself.

Right or wrong, I have at least noticed witch seller I can trust and witch I should stay clear of.

That last paragraph goes of course to those who support this way of doing business, as well.

Take care.

[lakshaybehl]

Originally Posted by omeyer

Come on folks.

This is not about the legal right to a product.

This is about the ethical side of it.

As long as you limited the amount of ex sold because you don't wont to flood the marked with people selling it and you do that to raise the value of the product, it is at least ethical wrong to start selling it again (with the same amount of right) only a few day later down the road.

We are not talking about the product itself witch you can compare with the "Frank Kern" case.

We are talking about the right to the product witch was sold here and witch was limited, not the product itself.

Right or wrong, I have at least noticed witch seller I can trust and witch I should stay clear of.

That last paragraph goes of course to those who support this way of doing business, as well.

Take care.

Was the reseller right included? If yes, I WAS UNAWARE OF THE FACT AND I APOLOGISE I STOOD THE WRONG GROUND.

If that was the case, then it would be totally unethical to resell the reseller rights because that would lower the value of the product in the marketplace. More resellers would mean more competetion and that would undoubtedly be hurting all the resellers' business.

I thought it was just the product... And I was wondering why so many people have problems with reselling the product.

-Lakshay