You all know more about this particular cue than I do and I'll try to say nothing about it. However, I am confused and have been confused in the past, about the use of "mint" or "near mint" to refer to a cue that has been refinished, or that matter, played, not to mention had the work that this cue apparently has had (whoops that does mention this cue).
I generally deal in collectibles of other types and I don't think I've ever used the term "mint" as a description, not even one time. I don't sell coins but isn't mint a grading used by coin people to describe an item that was made, and then immediately sealed and is now in the exact same condition as it was on the day it was made?
How can a cue that has hit one ball ever again be mint? Isn't that bell rung the minute an item is used in any way (and like all bells, now can't be unrung)? And again, to refer to a refinished item as mint, regardless of who did the refinish, seems a mockery the term, pr maybe I just don't understand what mint means.
Perhaps what we need her at AZ is a grading system. For me, I sell on the internet, sight unseen to my buyers, I just call things excellent (I don't buy them unless they fit that description) and if my buyer doesn't agree with my description (all terms like this being subjective after all) I just take the item in return and give them their money back. I think coin dealers developed a rating system to take the subjectivity out of it and maybe it works or maybe they are forever discussing what "very fine" means, but it does seem that there can be no mistaking what mint means. Perhaps the real question in this case is just how near mint this near mint stick is/was.
Kevin
