Sellers adding for PayPal use is plainly BS

I guess I'm not impatient because I always pass on the 3% extra charge on something I buy, not because I find it morally objectionable or am worried about the legalities, but because keeping the cost down is a good thing. Even if you are getting a $5K amp for $2K, saving $60 is worth saving. If I'm really looking to streamline the process, I can even send the seller a personal check and tell them to wait until it clears - no time, no extra $$$ sending the payment.

I've always viewed the use of PayPal as being something that's extremely beneficial to the seller. It's also indisputable that the number of times (in 2002) that you pull out a cc and get charged more for using it is near zero - standard practice is that whatever the price is, you can pay however you like. Now it's true that on a large purchase you can try to negotiate a better cash price, but outside of PayPal, I can't remember the last time I was told there would be a surcharge for paying with plastic. So, again, not because it's unethical, immoral or illegal, but just because protocol exists that says payment form shouldn't alter the price, I have never absorbed the PayPal charges.

Now, if somebody posts a Wadia 861 CD player that I've been searching for and lists a price of $2K and says the only way they'll sell is if Payment is by PayPal with buyer absorbing the cost, I'll pay it in a heartbeat because it's still a great deal. In essence, though, all that's saying is that the negotiating is pre-made - there's no sense in trying to negotiate down because the price is already so good, completely on the seller's terms, that you either hit the offer or move on.

I always find it interesting which threads grow to be the longest - I don't think I could predict which ones will catch fire with any accuracy. -Kirk