while I could find it a nuisance and an excellent opportunity for rip-off, it was rather easy for me to adapt to the custom of bargaining about the price of anything one would like to buy.
I am getting to like this open-ended way of dealing with resources.
it means to me that the involved parties get to an agreement together: what does one want / need to have in exchange for the item, what is the other willing / able to give? one person may not be able to give as much as another, but then someone else who is wealthier can provide more for the same kind of item another time.
in this way I find this system more fair for everyone, as it is relative on all levels: everyone according to their abilities, and: the bargain is created as a result of the interaction of two or more parties, on the base of finding a consensus.
when looking at what software costs (basically either $299,- or for free) or how wages are bargained off in my own culture there is a slight similarity for me.
such a way of trading demands involvement and virtue, because someone who has more charisma, knowledge, power, theoretically could easily get to push the other into submission, if the other has no basic price that would protect her/him from an overbearing powerful party, except to maintain one's sense of pride and walk away from the bargain in total.
but i guess it is also this continuous involvement that could keep one party from straying too far away from the other party, unless character-neuroticism gets too much in the way.