@herman
The core of this imbalance is structural. Money is liquid, universally accepted, and instantly transferable. Goods, on the other hand, are variable—condition, authenticity, and even existence can be uncertain. That naturally creates a bias toward “cash first” as a form of protection.
But there’s also a behavioral layer. Sellers tend to view their risk, shipping an item and not getting paid as more immediate and tangible than the buyer’s risk of sending money and receiving nothing or something misrepresented. Even a buyer with a long, spotless track record often carries less weight than that perceived risk.
The result is a system where trust isn’t mutual; it’s front-loaded onto one party.
So maybe the better question isn’t “why won’t sellers ship first,” but rather: why aren’t we using mechanisms that balance risk on both sides? Escrow services and Goods & Services payments exist for exactly this reason. Yes, they come with fees, but they distribute trust instead of demanding it from one side. When both parties do their due diligence, there’s recourse for everyone.
For example, I won’t ship floor-standing speakers or sensitive electronics via standard ground services like FedEx or UPS. Those items need to be palletized and shipped freight because managing risk properly matters just as much as completing the sale. This not only inspire trust but also builds confidence in buyers.
At the end of the day, insisting on zero risk for yourself while asking the other party to assume all of it isn’t really trust—it’s leverage.
Buying and selling today can feel like the Wild West. As a seller, I pass on bargain hunters. As a buyer, I avoid those with unrealistic expectations.
What’s worked for me is simple: patience when selling and thorough due diligence when buying.
