Deal gone bad on superior cues site

Excuse my Ignorance.......But why would Martin be ignoring calls from Pookster?
Ignoring the first call leads me to suspect that Martin knew what is was going to be about?
He must of had prior knowledge.
If he didn't, why ignore the call, it could of been about anything.

JUST A THOUGHT
 
Last edited:
BryanMordt said:
So if you have a friend selling a cue and you mention it someone are you now responsible for that deal if it goes bad?

Just something for your consideration.

Bryan
Click to expand...

If you have integrity, yes. To some degree you are. It's a lesson all with even moderate moral integrity learn sooner or later. To think otherwise is telling.

JC
 
JC said:
If you have integrity, yes. To some degree you are. It's a lesson all with even moderate moral integrity learn sooner or later. To think otherwise is telling.

JC
Click to expand...

would not offering pookster the same deal martin offered don fall under moral integrity ? he offered pookster the courtesy of posting the cue on his website also.
 
New2Cue said:
Brian,

If you were Martin what would you do now? Would you at least call up Don and say WTF? Why did you lie to the buyer? Do you realize you are ruining MY reputation?

Or would you do exactly what Martin is doing now by ignoring the situation?
Click to expand...

Do we know that Martin didn't make a call to Don?
 
itsfroze said:
If he listed the cue so when Don sold it, he could buy a cue from Martin.
Then it might be that Don made a call to Martin ?

That would also explain why Martin, even though they had done business
on more than one occasion. wouldn't answer a call from Pookie, as Pookie
has stated.
Click to expand...

gee, which is worse, I wonder.

operating on hearsay

or

drawing your conclusions from guesswork and speculation :rolleyes:

had a feeling that wasn't gonna take long. :p

best,
brian kc
 
This case is really simple...I didn't get the cue that was listed on Martin site as described and the buyer hung up on me so I reach out to Martin for help so he can contact Don for me and he won't pick up my call either.

Like I said...I never blame Martin or ask for him to refund my money in the first.All I ask was for him to call me so he can hear my side of story.Instead he was ignoring me and that pissed me off Cause I was his customer also but he won't even pick my phone when I needed help.

And he also accused me of threaten him which I never did.

What would you do if you are me when You got a wrong cue and both parties are ignoring you?

I am done and cue will be up for sale or trade tomorrow
 
pookster said:
This case is really simple...I didn't get the cue that was listed on Martin site as described and the buyer hung up on me so I reach out to Martin for help so he can contact Don for me and he won't pick up my call either.

Like I said...I never blame Martin or ask for him to refund my money in the first.All I ask was for him to call me so he can hear my side of story.Instead he was ignoring me and that pissed me off Cause I was his customer also but he won't even pick my phone when I needed help.

And he also accused me of threaten him which I never did.

What would you do if you are me when You got a wrong cue and both parties are ignoring you?

I am done and cue will be up for sale or trade tomorrow
Click to expand...

Can you leave both of them negative feedback here or any feedback here on itrader if it was done outside of AZ? I will remember Martin but maybe not Don and I'd just as soon proceed with caution on both of them....
 
itsfroze said:
Originally posted by kickin' chicken:
If Pookster read the clear disclaimer[/COLOR] on Martin's website" -- Don't you mean if there was one ?
stating that Martin would not be a part of his customer Don's cue sale, then was it fair for Pookster to start this thread stating he got a bad deal on Superior Cues?

Then another post Kickin' chicken:
"if there were 3 phone calls and 4 texts from pookster to martin, all either accusatory or demanding[/COLOR], would you then blame martin for ignoring him?" Mean while Pookie has stated right in this thread for everyone to see, that he didn't do that.
********
Originally Posted by itsfroze View Post
If he listed the cue so when Don sold it, he could buy a cue from Martin. Then it might be that Don made a call to Martin ? That would also explain why Martin, even though they had done business on more than one occasion. wouldn't answer a call from Pookie, as Pookie has stated. Even though Pookie stated he was polite when he called.
********
You like to state anything that fits your side of the discussion as if it's fact, and put an if in front of it. So in my post I did the same thing, then you don't like it. So let me ask you how is it any different when I use the word if and you use the word if ?

You try to make Pookie look as if he was in the wrong, then in the same post no less, out of the other side of you're mouth you pretend to want people to keep an open mind.
That's the difference between you and me, I say what I think is right, and then stand by it, unless proven wrong. Where as you try to work both sides of the fence.
Have a great day !
Click to expand...

and here is what I feel the difference is.

I'm keeping an open mind while trying to let the facts lead wherever they do. I'm not, as you say you are, taking one side and defending it until proven wrong.

why not try to learn what the truth is before taking one side to defend.

as for our writing comparison, please not that in my sentences you showcased as examples that both strted with the word IF, you won't see any speculative maybes or might haves.

did yours have any? :wink:

I think pookster should get a refund since Don said the cue had no weight bolt and it did.

I also think this thread is a train wreck.

and fwiw, Martin said he did reach out to Don to try to assist Pookster.

best,
brian kc
 
Last edited:
itsfroze said:
That's what you claim you're doing ???

originally posted by kickin' chicken:
"why not try to learn what the truth is before taking one side to defend."

Like you didn't take one side, perhaps you should reread your posts, sir.

I did the same as you, but what I said didn't fit your side of the discussion,
so you didn't like it, end of story. :D



PS. "and fwiw, Martin said he did reach out to Don to try to assist Pookster."
NOT MUCH, for if he really wanted to help he would have answered his phone
or at least returned Pookies (a former customers) calls. His response/or lack of
it, was weak to say the least.
Click to expand...

better than you and I keep taking pot shots at each other, I'll yield and be off to new adventures, you may have the last word. :)

make it a real zinger. :eek:

and seriously, I do hope pookster gets a refund. Getting a cue that was not as described without any recourse is crappy. :frown:

best,
brian kc
 
Kickin' Chicken said:
I do hope pookster gets a refund. Getting a cue that was not as described without any recourse is crappy.
Click to expand...
Its good that you actually see this. I do see both sides of the story by why would an otherwise good person with a strong business reputation facilitate a deal through their good name and not expect...

1. The original seller to stand by their product, protect the customer(who is using their property as a go-between), etc

2. To roll out a weak disclaimer and expect that to be a shield against a bad transaction on his website.

When have 100% disclaimers ever been good for business? You can't be the facilitator, especially via a legitimate business and not have some expectation of responsibility. In a perfect world maybe(which is where you seem to live when you make an argument and take a stance) but not in reality. Where the rest of us do business.

Kind of reminds of the guys who claim innocence when they allow two parties to conduct illegal activity on their property. IE a drug deal. In no real world application is the middle man free and clear. Especially when they use their property as the facilitator.
 
Kickin' Chicken said:
and here is what I feel the difference is.

I'm keeping an open mind while trying to let the facts lead wherever they do. I'm not, as you say you are, taking one side and defending it until proven wrong.


and fwiw, Martin said he did reach out to Don to try to assist Pookster.

best,
brian kc
Click to expand...

Ok, if you're really trying to keep an open mind, why do you insist on putting words in Martin's mouth.

When exactly did Martin say he tried to contact Don? He posted here just once, and he certainly didn't mention getting involved, let alone ever calling Don.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top