I was waiting to receive my White cue back before I gave the true account about what occurred with respect to this transaction. That's right, Ron's version of the facts does not comport with reality. Surprise, surprise, he omitted material facts. The facts are as follows:
Ron wanted to trade a used White wrapless cue for an August 2007 White hoppe cue that was in MINT condition (one shaft test hit only). I spoke with him on the phone and he suggested that I look at the AZB thread from which he purchased the cue earlier this month, so I did. The thread gave all the specs on the cue, except for the length. It also said that there was a scratch in the butt end of the cue that could be polished out. It said nothing about multiple chips in the butt cap or a noticeable ding in the butt sleeve. After I looked at the thread, I called Ron and asked him point blank if he could see the scratch or any dings or dents in the cue. He said "no" and that the cue had been polished by the prior owner. So, I believed that I would be getting a used, but near mint condition cue if the deal proceeded. We agreed that he would ship me his White cue and $100.00 at his expense by USPS Express Mail, and if I accepted the cue, I would ship him my White by USPS Express Mail on the day I received his cue. Alternatively, if I rejected his White cue, I would ship it back at my expense by USPS Express Mail.
On 12/16, Ron was on the way to the Post Office, I called him and told him not to ship his White as one of the tips looked paper thin and I did not want to deal with getting it retipped. There are no cue makers anywhere near where I live and I do not retip cues. I asked for no additional consideration. Ron immediately offered me an extra $25 to get the shaft retipped, and I accepted, thinking I would have it done at the DCC in three weeks. Again, I asked for nothing.
I received the cue on 12/17. I immediately called Ron and told him that contrary to his representations, the cue had several chips in the butt cap, a noticeable ding in the butt sleeve between the rings, and a very noticeable scratch that went through one of the rings in the sleeve/handle section. I told him that I was rejecting the cue and was going to ship him his cue and case back that afternoon by USPS Express Mail at my expense, as agreed. I asked for no additional consideration. He immediately offered me an extra $125.00 to complete the deal. I told him that the condition of his cue was not the kind of cue that I deal in. I only sell brand new/unchalked or near mint condition cues (cues that are like new, but chalked with no dings, dents or scratches). After some discussion, we agreed that I would keep the 1x2 hard case he shipped the White to me in. At this time, I had no idea that the cue was 59" and nobody ever told me that it was. On 12/17, I shipped my White cue by USPS Express Mail and e-mailed Ron copies of the shipping documents (something that I almost always do).
That evening, after dinner I hit the White cue, and it hit just fine. After I played a match at my house with my Nitti cue, I speced out the White cue that Ron had delivered earlier in the day. To my dismay, the cue was 59". This was when I learned for the first time that the cue was 59" as opposed to 58". I called Ron on Saturday morning and told him that he had traded me a 59" cue that would be very difficult, if not impossible, to resell and that I wanted my cue back. I offered to pay for the return shipping on my cue and ship his cue back at my expense by USPS Express Mail, as we originally had agreed in the event that I rejected his cue. After he played with my cue in a tournament on Saturday, he e-mailed and told me that my cue would be returned upon receipt of his White, the case and $160.00. Today, I shipped Ron his White, case and a $160.00 USPS money order, and e-mail him copies of the receipts for the shipping and money order.
The way I read Ron's version of the "facts," he would have you all believe that I pressured him into giving me additional consideration to complete the deal. To the contrary, I never, repeat, never, asked Ron in any way, shape or form for additional consideration to complete the deal. In fact, in a PM just this evening, Ron admitted the same. I requested that he not ship me the cue on 12/16, and immediately rejected the cue on 12/17 after I inspected it, and telephoned him to let him know. He, and he alone, suggested that he infuse additional consideration into the deal to get me to ship him my White cue, which he just had to have. The only mistake I made was agreeing to take the case as additional consideration and not shipping his cue back on 12/17.
So, I'm the one that's out about $110.00 on shipping. Ron, on the other hand, is out nothing. I got the short end of the stick, but learned a valuable lesson. When someone has misrepresented the condition of a cue, as Ron did (as Ron informed in a PM late night, if a cue hits great like this White, he does not care about chips in the butt cap, a noticeable ding in the forearm and a scratch you would have to be blind not to see, and apparently does not see fit to accurately represent the cue to someone he knows is going to resell it), ship it back at once and have no discussion at all with the person who has made the misrepresentations. It's not worth it. I've done more successful and flawless cue deals than most people on this site, and have received very positive feedback. This deal went wrong as soon as Ron decided to misrepresent the condition of his White cue. He knew from the first time that we spoke that I only deal in Mint or Near Mint cues. Ron's cue was neither, not even close. So, these are the true facts.
I will not engage in debate about this transaction. None of you who were so quick to accept Ron's version of the "facts" and judge the situation were present to know the true state of affairs. I was and do, and my conscious is clear. I have now given a completely accurate account of how the deal transpired. Judging someone based upon one person's view of the "facts" is wrong, and displays ignorance in its most basic form. That's why I choose not to jump on the band wagon when someone is being beat up on a thread. Why anyone would believe Ron's version of the "facts" when he blatantly misrepresented the condition of a cue is beyond me. So, this is my first and last post to this nasty thread. I will continue selling only mint or near mint cues, and nothing in the thread will dissuade me from doing so. I have a list of customers a mile long, and have completed countless smooth transactions, many with repeat customers.
Best to all (even those who have bashed me on this thread -- I remain unblemished) in the New Year.
