Would you call this great condition?

Kickin' Chicken said:
Greg tried to resolve this according to ebay's rules.

best,
brian kc
Click to expand...


Bravo, he did the bare minimum according to Flea Bag's policy. Would not the world be a great place if everyone just did the bare minimum ;)

Though, you did leave out he did NOT accurately describe the cue, even the seller admitted to this mistake. And because of that, he should have made this right. Pretty simple, when I fug up, I'm gonna pay, it's really that simple.

If he described the cue accurately, there would be not any issue. But he didn't. That's a fact, straight from the seller. Probably why he auctioned off the cue instead of selling it at the going rate ?? I mean, since we are all speculating ;)
 
Last edited:
batalarms said:
The OP has done this kind of thing before.It is on his post on FB.
[Bh]e saw the words,'Great Condition' and he admits to seeing the blemishes.With these 2 things,he knew that he could trap the seller by saying,'Not As Described' [/B]
Then he tried to use neg feedback as a weapon,to get more money back.
This clown is every traders nightmare.That's why I am writing all this.The SAME thing has happened to me on eBay.It makes me VERY uncomfortable.
Fortunately when it happened to me,my buyer kept the item and went away after I offered a return.This guy is even more extreme.
#vindictive
#extortionist
Click to expand...


hmmm. You know, if OP has done this type of thing in the past, I think that gives a lot of credibility to the view he is a "scammer", and if that is true(cause you said some crazy other stuff in this thread), I would be inclined to believe you.

Bill, I believed said he noticed something odd in the pictures before hand but thought it was the lighting, sorry I am paraphrasing(maybe someone else?) But if he saw something odd before hand, but then still bid on it without asking, thinking he could get some extra cash, by trapping him so to speak/ that is shady.
Have no idea if that was the case.
When I am selling or doing a job I try and not leave myself wide open, which is what Greg did here.
 
The OP should drop this. Poke the bear too long and you might get mauled.

This entire thread and all others like it on various other websites is in violation of ebay policy.

If the seller, or anybody for that matter chose to bring this to ebay, the OP could be disciplined, up to having their ebay account closed.

Quit poking the bear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JC
bowiebill said:
He only knows Philippi and Scruggs cues. We are from Maryland. $600 is not a high amount for a birthday gift in our house, but I understand what you mean. I accept the fact that I was cheated and I no longer ask anything to make amends.
Click to expand...

In my opinion (which along with $4.00 will get you a small coffee at Starbucks, maybe...)
in my opinion, FWIW, you weren't cheated at all. I don't know Phillippi cues, but from
what's been posted here in this thread as well as other threads, you paid what most
would consider a fair price for the cue, though a bit on the high end of fair, but fair
non the less even in it's present condition.
If I recall correctly, your son wanted to keep it in spite of it's condition, maybe you should
ask him what it's worth. The fact that the gift came from his Dad would likely have the
value of that particular gift far exceed the $600 you paid. Maybe one day he'll take it in
and have it refinished, maybe when he's ready to pass it on to his son. The cue
belongs to your boy now, why not ask him what it's worth.
 
jimmyco said:
If the seller, or anybody for that matter chose to bring this to ebay, the OP could be disciplined, up to having their ebay account closed.
Click to expand...

I had my ebay/paypal account closed due to trying to pay for something while I was in the UK--flagged my IP address, wouldn't accept my proofs that I was who I said, they closed the account.

I didn't find it to be a punishment. They did me a favor.
 
ebay

jimmyco said:
The OP should drop this. Poke the bear too long and you might get mauled.

This entire thread and all others like it on various other websites is in violation of ebay policy.

If the seller, or anybody for that matter chose to bring this to ebay, the OP could be disciplined, up to having their ebay account closed.

Quit poking the bear.
Click to expand...

Thanks I did not know this maybe ill check this out.
 
jimmyco said:
The OP should drop this. Poke the bear too long and you might get mauled.

This entire thread and all others like it on various other websites is in violation of ebay policy.

If the seller, or anybody for that matter chose to bring this to ebay, the OP could be disciplined, up to having their ebay account closed.

Quit poking the bear.
Click to expand...

Greg’s false description and other things Greg sells violate some eBay policies too, so it’s not in anyone’s best interest to pursue further action through eBay.
 
Celophanewrap said:
In my opinion (which along with $4.00 will get you a small coffee at Starbucks, maybe...)
in my opinion, FWIW, you weren't cheated at all. I don't know Phillippi cues, but from
what's been posted here in this thread as well as other threads, you paid what most
would consider a fair price for the cue, though a bit on the high end of fair, but fair
non the less even in it's present condition.
If I recall correctly, your son wanted to keep it in spite of it's condition, maybe you should
ask him what it's worth. The fact that the gift came from his Dad would likely have the
value of that particular gift far exceed the $600 you paid. Maybe one day he'll take it in
and have it refinished, maybe when he's ready to pass it on to his son. The cue
belongs to your boy now, why not ask him what it's worth.
Click to expand...

This isn’t about the value of the cue. The debate is about what an honest description is.
 
bowiebill said:
Greg’s false description and other things Greg sells violate some eBay policies too, so it’s not in anyone’s best interest to pursue further action through eBay.
Click to expand...

EBAY already rendered a ruling in this matter


The cues condition was shown in the images attendant to the EBAY add, any issues over and above those disclosed occurred while the cue was in-transit or after it was delivered.

Do you have visual evidence of the un-packing process depicting the cue's condition at that time?
 
bowiebill said:
This isn’t about the value of the cue. The debate is about what an honest description is.
Click to expand...

If that's the case then you seem like a bright guy, you understand that ANY description
is subjective as is the value. For excellent or great condition apparently your bar is set a
little higher than the seller, as to the value, I think we'd all pretty much agree that the cue
is worth what you'd be willing to pay for it.
For example, some of the population here likes antiqueish, classic cues, like the Titlest
refinishes, the Rambows, stuff like that. To me those cues are mostly just old. Sure I might
like a Rambow, but to me it's mostly just old.
Descriptions are subjective. Apparently the sellers "Great" or "Excellent" is your, "Fair"
or "Average"
I would submit that your vetting of that cue was incomplete or poor.

You're calling him dishonest because he has a different opinion than you - he liked the
blonde instead of the brunette that you thought was hot.

If he's standing by his description then that's his opinion. Because it's different than yours it doesn't
make him a liar, it just means he doesn't agree with you
 
Last edited:
Celophanewrap said:
If that's the case then you seem like a bright guy, you understand that ANY description
is subjective as is the value. For excellent or great condition apparently your bar is set a
little higher than the seller, as to the value, I think we'd all pretty much agree that the cue
is worth what you'd be willing to pay for it.
For example, some of the population here likes antiqueish, classic cues, like the Titlest
refinishes, the Rambows, stuff like that. To me those cues are mostly just old. Sure I might
like a Rambow, but to me it's mostly just old.
Descriptions are subjective. Apparently the sellers "Great" or "Excellent" is your, "Fair"
or "Average"
I would submit that your vetting of that cue was incomplete or poor.

You're calling him dishonest because he has a different opinion than you - he liked the
blonde instead of the brunette that you thought was hot.

If he's standing by his description then that's his opinion. Because it's different than yours it doesn't
make him a liar, it just means he doesn't agree with you
Click to expand...

You are correct. I should have asked more questions. I trusted the seller because of his perfect feedback score. However subjective you want to say “great condition” is, I don’t believe any reasonable person calls a cue with damage to the butt, “great condition”.
 
bowiebill said:
You are correct. I should have asked more questions. I trusted the seller because of his perfect feedback score. However subjective you want to say “great condition” is, I don’t believe any reasonable person calls a cue with damage to the butt, “great condition”.
Click to expand...

I dunno man, you've only shown one photo of one portion of the cue that has been
greatly magnified, somehow I don't think that photo is conducive of the condition of the
entirety of the cue. How's the rest of the cue?
Would you have tossed Marilyn Monroe out of your bed if her mascara was smeared?
 
bowiebill said:
I feel the way I do, what you highlighted in blue, because of the responses I received from Greg. He came across like, I don’t care what you think, I want more money.
Click to expand...

Did he want more money from you, if not, who did he want it from? He'd have to sell it for a $160+- more than the first EBAY auction brought to break even.

Keep in mind that items, as a rule, sell for more the first time listed than subsequent auctions so the likely hood of it selling for at least $160+- (includes "new" selling fees) more are slim, especially now that the condition of the butt sleeve may have degraded to a greater extent than displayed when first listed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JC
Celophanewrap said:
I dunno man, you've only shown one photo of one portion of the cue that has been
greatly magnified, somehow I don't think that photo is conducive of the condition of the
entirety of the cue. How's the rest of the cue?
Would you have tossed Marilyn Monroe out of your bed if her mascara was smeared?
Click to expand...

It was not magnified, and look through this thread, I added additional pics.
 
ribdoner said:
Did he want more money from you, if not, who did he want it from? He'd have to sell it for a $160+- more than the first EBAY auction brought to break even.

Keep in mind that items, as a rule, sell for more the first time listed than subsequent auctions so the likely hood of it selling for at least $160+- (includes "new" selling fees) more are slim, especially now that the condition of the butt sleeve may have degraded to a greater extent than displayed when first listed.
Click to expand...

If the cue was returned the seller is credited the seller fee's. And it appears from most everyone here that this cue plays lights out and is worth a TON more money. So, why would it not sell for more. The OP practically "stole" this cue according to most of the posters.
 
Celophanewrap said:
...
Would you have tossed Marilyn Monroe out of your bed if her mascara was smeared?
Click to expand...

Ginger or Maryann?
Genie or Samantha?

Seriously though - wow! What a thread eh?
While ChicagoRJ does make some really great points in his posts - I'm still going to fall in favor of the seller here. Primarily because the seller offered /FULL/ refund including shipping costs, which means the buyer was offered a complete "do over" - which doesn't happen often in life.
Secondly - with as much positive feedback as the seller has earned, it tells me that he's worked very hard to always do the right thing - and I think it's a pretty crappy deal to try to smear a good name. Words like "cheat", and "lie" carry negative connotations, and even after being made aware of all so much in 20 some pages - we're still seeing those kind of words being tossed around.

With that said - I'd think the value of this cue has increased in value now. I mean so many folks and so many electrons passing through the internet HAS to be worth something. :-)

One other point though. As the end consumer (the son) has accepted the cue "as is", it's really the middle man (father) that's unhappy at this point. I do understand that you'd want to provide a loved one with something "perfect" - but then again - you were buying something USED - not a NEW cue. You could have ordered a new cue from the maker - but you wouldn't have "saved those pennies". So again - I'm going to side with the seller.

<-- *passes the 'talking stick' to the right*
 
Ched said:
Ginger or Maryann?
Genie or Samantha?

Seriously though - wow! What a thread eh?
While ChicagoRJ does make some really great points in his posts - I'm still going to fall in favor of the seller here. Primarily because the seller offered /FULL/ refund including shipping costs, which means the buyer was offered a complete "do over" - which doesn't happen often in life.
Secondly - with as much positive feedback as the seller has earned, it tells me that he's worked very hard to always do the right thing - and I think it's a pretty crappy deal to try to smear a good name. Words like "cheat", and "lie" carry negative connotations, and even after being made aware of all so much in 20 some pages - we're still seeing those kind of words being tossed around.

With that said - I'd think the value of this cue has increased in value now. I mean so many folks and so many electrons passing through the internet HAS to be worth something. :-)

One other point though. As the end consumer (the son) has accepted the cue "as is", it's really the middle man (father) that's unhappy at this point. I do understand that you'd want to provide a loved one with something "perfect" - but then again - you were buying something USED - not a NEW cue. You could have ordered a new cue from the maker - but you wouldn't have "saved those pennies". So again - I'm going to side with the seller.

<-- *passes the 'talking stick' to the right*
Click to expand...

Oh, Genie and Ginger of course, they absolutely looked sluttier
 
Ched said:
Ginger or Maryann?
Genie or Samantha?
Click to expand...

Oh, def Maryanne over Ginger, but Genie wins hands down over all shows in that era, with the possible exception of the lovely Mrs. Laura Petrie from Dick Van Dyke. Now, if Genie has a scar on her left thigh, I'm not returning her, I will admit that ;)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top