Texting replies to car ads

riverrock1

Hello,a lot of car ads I have looked at say 'no texts'.Can someone tell me
what is wrong with responding to texts.

I am currently selling my car and have someone interested,although they have texted me from 2 different mobiles.I googled one and it had a car for sale a few weeks ago,the other one shows up as a nail painting business.
Should I be suspicious?

rovoagho

Who cares once he pays?

Clubsport

riverrock1 wrote: »

Hello,a lot of car ads I have looked at say 'no texts'.Can someone tell me
what is wrong with responding to texts.

I am currently selling my car and have someone interested,although they have texted me from 2 different mobiles.I googled one and it had a car for sale a few weeks ago,the other one shows up as a nail painting business.
Should I be suspicious?

Texts are annoying, Fair enough if it's early/late asking is it okay to ring or if there wondering is the car still there and they'll ring you then.

It's annoying when people text and you reply and then they keep asking questions and it goes back and forth for ages, Instead of them just phoning you.


Wouldn't worry about it, If they turn up and pay cash and sign the logbook.

discodavie

The reason I always put up no txts is to fed rid of timewaster to be honest.

corktina

texts are often from time wasters..and there's a cost involved, you get a bit pished off having answered umpteen texts and never hearing from the person again.

NIMAN

Why is a texter more likely to be a time waster than someone who calls you?

George Dalton

I don't get the whole anti-text thing to be honest. We have often sold cars via text.

riverrock1

Thanks for the replies.Meeting them this evening so will see how it goes

Henry Ford III

NIMAN wrote: »

Why is a texter more likely to be a time waster than someone who calls you?

There's no guarantee of that, but someone who calls is showing more of an interest in the car I'd have thought.

If I were selling a car I'd be inclined to call back any enquiries, with the firm intention of getting the potential buyer to see the car.

If they're no keen on that chances are that they are a tyre kicker/time waster.

Henry Ford III

George Dalton wrote: »

I don't get the whole anti-text thing to be honest. We have often sold cars via text.

I'm amazed by that George. I feel like a bit of a dinosaur.

fletch

I wouldn't be put off by texting, either as a buyer or a seller. As a buyer at least I have a trail of all their answers for reference. As a seller, I can reply at my leisure rather than having to constantly take calls.

djimi

I probably wouldnt want to deal with someone via text, but thats mostly because I really couldnt be bothered having a conversation by text that would take two minutes over the phone. Not sure how much it would put me off a seller though; probably if some halfwit started texting me in illegible text speak then they wouldnt be too likely to get a response!

NIMAN

Henry Ford III wrote: »

There's no guarantee of that, but someone who calls is showing more of an interest in the car I'd have thought.

If I were selling a car I'd be inclined to call back any enquiries, with the firm intention of getting the potential buyer to see the car.

If they're no keen on that chances are that they are a tyre kicker/time waster.

I have texted a few people recently about cars simply because I am at work and cannot chat.

Ignoring texts could just be ignoring that one person who could end up buying your car. No-one is that busy that they can't take a minute to reply to a text query.

biko

As long as text isn't "Hw much 4 car, bst price?" I'd be ok with it, then again I always only use mail until it gets time to get serious.

NIMAN

I use full words. Must be old.

Toyotafanboi

at least my last 3 cars have sold to texters.

just like a call, you can tell a genuine texter from a timewaster.

George Dalton

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

just like a call, you can tell a genuine texter from a timewaster.

Just what I was going to say. There are plenty of timewasters who phone up for a chat, which is even more annoying than a timewaster who texts IMO.

Henry Ford III

NIMAN wrote: »

I have texted a few people recently about cars simply because I am at work and cannot chat.

Ignoring texts could just be ignoring that one person who could end up buying your car. No-one is that busy that they can't take a minute to reply to a text query.

As I said I'd be more inclined to call text enquirers back.

GarIT

I think it has a lot to do with older people finding texts more effort than a call, where younger people find texting easier.

As one poster said why spend 5 mins texting what can be done in 2 min on the phone. Where I would say why spend 2 mins on the phone when I can text twice as fast as I can talk. I could text 2-3 words per second, where someone else might get 5 words per min. Talking is a medium where everyone is familiar with. Also some people like to waffle and give very vague answers, you cant do that in a text.

Anan1

GarIT wrote: »

As one poster said why spend 5 mins texting what can be done in 2 min on the phone. Where I would say why spend 2 mins on the phone when I can text twice as fast as I can talk. I could text 2-3 words per second, where someone else might get 5 words per min. Talking is a medium where everyone is familiar with. Also some people like to waffle and give very vague answers, you cant do that in a text.

Because you get far more information about the person on the other end from a call than from texting.

Henry Ford III

GarIT wrote: »

I think it has a lot to do with older people finding texts more effort than a call, where younger people find texting easier.

As one poster said why spend 5 mins texting what can be done in 2 min on the phone. Where I would say why spend 2 mins on the phone when I can text twice as fast as I can talk. I could text 2-3 words per second, where someone else might get 5 words per min. Talking is a medium where everyone is familiar with. Also some people like to waffle and give very vague answers, you cant do that in a text.

Nobody I know can text faster than they talk.

In addition it's pretty easy to establish a potential buyers bona fides by listening to what and how they say things.

Whilst text selling is clearly possible it has to be a poorer way of doing business.

GarIT

Anan1 wrote: »

Because you get far more information about the person on the other end from a call than from texting.

That would be stereotyping.

Henry Ford III

GarIT wrote: »

That would be stereotyping.

I'd disagree totally. If anything it's actually the opposite.

GarIT

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Nobody I know can text faster than they talk.

In addition it's pretty easy to establish a potential buyers bona fides by listening to what and how they say things.

Whilst text selling is clearly possible it has to be a poorer way of doing business.

If I tried to I could talk faster than I text, but vs a regular conversation I would probably text faster and be more direct. I've sent 500 texts in a day before and probably send 200 to 300 a day like most teens so I've plenty of practice.

Texting is in writing so I would consider it preferable. I also don't just people based on how they sound.

Anan1

GarIT wrote: »

That would be stereotyping.

You'll have to explain that one.

GarIT

Henry Ford III wrote: »

I'd disagree totally. If anything it's actually the opposite.

Assuming someone is serious or not by how they sound is stereotyping. I'm not knocking calling. I'd probably say they are both equal. I just think the reason people say no texting is because they aren't good at it or used to it.

GarIT

Anan1 wrote: »

You'll have to explain that one.

Possibly used the wrong wording there, just checking a dictionary, prejudice is probably better there.

Anan1

GarIT wrote: »

Possibly used the wrong wording there, just checking a dictionary, prejudice is probably better there.

How is it prejudiced?

GarIT

Anan1 wrote: »

How is it stereotyping?

It's basically saying that person sounds, rough, dodgy, etc. I don't want to deal with them.

GarIT

Anan1 wrote: »

How is it prejudiced?

Because you are judging them before you have even met them just based on how they talk.

"An unfavourable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason."

Anan1

GarIT wrote: »

It's basically saying that person sounds, rough, dodgy, etc. I don't want to deal with them.

Where did I say anything like that?

GarIT wrote: »

"An unfavourable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason."

Let's try again. The advantage of the call is that you gather knowledge not beforehand, but during the call.

GarIT

Anan1 wrote: »

Where did I say anything like that?

I didn't say you said it, but saying you know if someone is serious or not from a phone call is.

Anan1

GarIT wrote: »

I didn't say you said it, but saying you know if someone is serious or not from a phone call is.

I didn't say that you know if someone is serious or not from a phone call.

Irishcrx

I've no problem with texting buying or selling, Text is always a good back up referance for numbers/questions etc. But if I was buying or selling and it was going back and fort, ie if I was becoming very keen on a car I'd ring them then to show my intertest is genuine and just have a chat about it.

But as always and as we learn the only way to truely know the answers is go and look at the car, never take anyones word for anything they say. I like to talk very little when actually viewing a car and just focus on the car and what I'm spending my money on, a few minutes alone with it if possible is always good, can really check everything on your list. Always bring one for that make and model.

Henry Ford III

GarIT wrote: »

Assuming someone is serious or not by how they sound is stereotyping. I'm not knocking calling. I'd probably say they are both equal. I just think the reason people say no texting is because they aren't good at it or used to it.

It's nothing to do with accent, nationality, or sex.

What I did say was you could very quickly discern someone's intent over the phone. it's unsaid but resonably obvious by the way they respond and react to what's being said.

That's not stereotyping at all.

p.s. It works both ways too.

GarIT

Henry Ford III wrote: »

It's nothing to do with accent, nationality, or sex.

What I did say was you could very quickly discern someone's intent over the phone. it's unsaid but resonably obvious by the way they respond and react to what's being said.

That's not stereotyping at all.

p.s. It works both ways too.

I would generally say that other than accent, there's nothing extra you cant find out in a text.

Anan1

GarIT wrote: »

I would generally say that other than accent, there's nothing extra you cant find out in a text.

Have you ever wondered why employers don't conduct job interviews by text?

Henry Ford III

GarIT wrote: »

I would generally say that other than accent, there's nothing extra you cant find out in a text.

I must be a bit of an oddball in so far as I actually like talking to real people, and actually find it usefull too.

fletch

Anan1 wrote: »

Have you ever wondered why employers don't conduct job interviews by text?

They do filter out candidates using their CV/cover letters

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

Ardennes1944

Ive bought all my cars and sold all my cars from people who texted me/texted people back and forth. You know pretty quickly if they're gonna waste your time by the questions they ask.

riverrock1

Just as an update I met the people I mentioned at the start of this thread
and they were fine.It seems i was suspicious for nothing..