drster- 3 of 5 stars

[toxicavenger]

Originally Posted by buffpilot

Another seller, ErikSzper's listing demonstrates what, I think, is an accurate representation of the goods he is selling: http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...ght=Transocean

Contrary to what the numerous comments indicate about me as a buyer, I'm under the impression that the main (only?) requirement as a buyer is to pay in full, promptly, which I did. Does the fact that I asked questions before I came to an agreement with the seller make me an undesirable buyer? Because after we came to an agreement, I paid the seller. I posted my review because I paid for a watch that I immediately had to send into Breitling in order to maintain the warranty that was advertised by the seller. Frankly, I'm surprised by the number of negative comments, as it seems that buyers on this forum are expected to not ask questions, pay promptly, and then not post anything other than glowing feedback. Sellers, however, are free to conduct due diligence prior to completing a transaction, and apparently are not responsible for any misinformation in their listings. Caveat emptor.

I guess you are a little thick so let's try this again. TO MAINTAIN the warranty you had to send it to manufacture. This is NOT something MARK did or has control over it. So WHY is a negative review against MARK warranted? Your negative review should be about the manufactures stipulations on why you have to do this to maintain the warranty.

The best thing you could do is to eat "crow" and back away.

[toxicavenger]

Originally Posted by buffpilot

Another seller, ErikSzper's listing demonstrates what, I think, is an accurate representation of the goods he is selling: http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...ght=Transocean

Contrary to what the numerous comments indicate about me as a buyer, I'm under the impression that the main (only?) requirement as a buyer is to pay in full, promptly, which I did. Does the fact that I asked questions before I came to an agreement with the seller make me an undesirable buyer? Because after we came to an agreement, I paid the seller. I posted my review because I paid for a watch that I immediately had to send into Breitling in order to maintain the warranty that was advertised by the seller. Frankly, I'm surprised by the number of negative comments, as it seems that buyers on this forum are expected to not ask questions, pay promptly, and then not post anything other than glowing feedback. Sellers, however, are free to conduct due diligence prior to completing a transaction, and apparently are not responsible for any misinformation in their listings. Caveat emptor.

You need to take your head out of your 5th point of contact and rethink things. This is a manufacture stipulation NOT something the seller did. So this doesn't warrant a negative review for the seller.

[toxicavenger]

Originally Posted by Sublover2166

Some of the members commenting on this thread with their amount of posts numbering at "1" is suspect and comical at best. So you all are becoming a forum member just to vouch for this seller? Hard to believe. This has been the perfect grab a bag of popcorn thread.

Check our history, there is a bunch of background Rolex guys here who don't interject much unless it is warranted.

[JP Chestnut]

Give it up dude, you're too buff for all these non-pilots. Clearly Breitling's shitty warranty is Mark's fault.

[FNFZ4]

Originally Posted by buffpilot

After over a month, I am still waiting for Breitling to repair my watch to the condition advertised by Drster. I know that you all thought that I was unreasonable in my rating, but this proves my point. I am still waiting to wear the watch I paid for in good faith.

In my opinion, If you were not satisfied with what you received, you should have asked to return the watch. You didnt have to send it to Breitling right away. You cant blame it on the seller. I am sure that when you received the watch and wanted to return it, Mark would take it back.

[Johny]

Originally Posted by buffpilot

After over a month, I am still waiting for Breitling to repair my watch to the condition advertised by Drster. I know that you all thought that I was unreasonable in my rating, but this proves my point. I am still waiting to wear the watch I paid for in good faith.

hi OP. what were all the damaged parts that needed repair? did you take any pics of the damage? can you post a pic of the damage repair estimate/report from the company? thank you.

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by buffpilot

Another seller, ErikSzper's listing demonstrates what, I think, is an accurate representation of the goods he is selling: http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...ght=Transocean

Contrary to what the numerous comments indicate about me as a buyer, I'm under the impression that the main (only?) requirement as a buyer is to pay in full, promptly, which I did. Does the fact that I asked questions before I came to an agreement with the seller make me an undesirable buyer? Because after we came to an agreement, I paid the seller. I posted my review because I paid for a watch that I immediately had to send into Breitling in order to maintain the warranty that was advertised by the seller. Frankly, I'm surprised by the number of negative comments, as it seems that buyers on this forum are expected to not ask questions, pay promptly, and then not post anything other than glowing feedback. Sellers, however, are free to conduct due diligence prior to completing a transaction, and apparently are not responsible for any misinformation in their listings. Caveat emptor.

For crying out loud, why don't you quit while you're behind.
Really, asking a respected seller if his merchandise is stolen?

It's like me asking if you're an idiot!!


PS. don't bother to reply as I'm pretty sure I know the answer.

[jefftb]

I have a low post count but got here via another thread and buffpilot pointed to this one from there. I'm watching with popcorn but the OP has dug himself a hole and needs to remember the old adage... Or get a bigger shovel and dig faster.

[mfnj]

not that Mark needs any more additional support, but put me down in the "Mark is outstanding" category!

In fact, I am going to wire him some money now for a future purchase I haven't even identified yet because he is that good!

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by MonBK

For crying out loud, why don't you quit while you're behind.
Really, asking a respected seller if his merchandise is stolen?

It's like me asking if you're an idiot!!


PS. don't bother to reply as I'm pretty sure I know the answer.

[Axelay2003]

Originally Posted by CoachH

I have been a member of TRF for quite a while, but I have never been moved to post. I am a member of numerous watch forums, but seldom do I post.

Mark (drster) is a class act. I question the OP motives, as any dealings I have had with Mark have always been great. Why was this not handled over the phone or through PM?

My thoughts exactly. Good luck to OP. Mark knows where he stands.

[WatchinMD]

Having never had the pleasure of a transaction with Mark, my only contribution to this thread is to wonder if BUFFpilot as a user name indicates that he splits his time between the cockpit and the gym or perhaps he is a pilot of the vernrable B52 loving referred to as the BUFF?

[waQstar]

even the minions are clueless on this one....
Mark is 5 stars all the way...

[123Blueface]

Originally Posted by buffpilot

Another seller, ErikSzper's listing demonstrates what, I think, is an accurate representation of the goods he is selling: http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...ght=Transocean

Contrary to what the numerous comments indicate about me as a buyer, I'm under the impression that the main (only?) requirement as a buyer is to pay in full, promptly, which I did. Does the fact that I asked questions before I came to an agreement with the seller make me an undesirable buyer? Because after we came to an agreement, I paid the seller. I posted my review because I paid for a watch that I immediately had to send into Breitling in order to maintain the warranty that was advertised by the seller. Frankly, I'm surprised by the number of negative comments, as it seems that buyers on this forum are expected to not ask questions, pay promptly, and then not post anything other than glowing feedback. Sellers, however, are free to conduct due diligence prior to completing a transaction, and apparently are not responsible for any misinformation in their listings. Caveat emptor.

It's been pointed out well so far.......boy are you way off.

I will just refer to a comment you made to start this thread:
I contacted Mark about the warranty issue and he professed (truthfully, I think) lack of knowledge about this restriction. I think that it is his duty as the seller, to know of all of the limitations of his product. In my case, his advertisement should have indicted the need for warranty maintenance or Mark should have rectified the discrepancy prior to listing the watch.

This is exemplary of the absurdity of your logic that has been criticized and frankly ridiculed in this thread.

Rather than the questions you posed to him, do you not think it was YOU that had due diligence to ask about the warranty?
If one follows your logic further, you expect a car salesman to be able to mechanically tear down a car and put it back together. After all, he is selling it. He should know all the limitations of his product.
As ridiculous as that analogy sounds, so does yours. I believe you expect the unexpected and it has been evidenced not by suppositions, but rather by your own written words.

At this juncture, I would just sail away, quietly, and let this die once and for all. Think about it, has one single person posted in your favor in over five pages? Clueless!

[improviz]

Originally Posted by Johny

hi OP. what were all the damaged parts that needed repair? did you take any pics of the damage? can you post a pic of the damage repair estimate/report from the company? thank you.

Yes, buffpilot, I agree with Johny: I too would like to see any documentation and/or pics the watch was (supposedly) "not in the condition advertised", given that there were a slew of close-up pics in the ad that showed its condition perfectly.

[1watchaholic]

Originally Posted by FNFZ4

In my opinion, If you were not satisfied with what you received, you should have asked to return the watch. You didnt have to send it to Breitling right away. You cant blame it on the seller. I am sure that when you received the watch and wanted to return it, Mark would take it back.

Apparently Mark gave you a great deal or you would have avoided the so called problem and returned the watch vs. sending it to B'ling for service. I've completed numerous transactions with Mark and every one of them was solid...except for the one I did 30 days in the hole for receiving stolen goods!

[425ranger]

Buttpilot,

Buy only new watches if this is how you are, and I'm not even being mean about it. Find a new hobby. When you look back at this thread many watches from now you'll realize your folly.

All the best

[Noblegeorge]

Originally Posted by Mosco

You spelled 'caveat venditor' wrong.
And no, it is not that you merely asked questions, it's WHAT SORT of questions you asked. And then the 'review'. You, sir, are a grade A douche. Stubborn and unwilling to understand why you got such a reaction. But hey, keep it up - there are still a few more sellers that can blacklist you. Better yet - go buy from an AD and save yourself sleepless nights, not to mention embarrassment on a public forum.

Grade A Douche? When did name calling become acceptable here? Disappointing.

[Abdullah71601]

Folks are outright rude to the OP here. Yes, he's amateurish compared to you all, but he's in line with the "trip advisor" concept that is so pervasive in retail services these days. Some wisdom on how to query an online watch dealer would have been much more productive to both the OP and the community in general than the rabid piling on in this thread.

My customer sends packs of auditors every month to scrutinize everything we do, regardless of how highly we perform against their standards. I would love if all they did was phone in a couple no-brainer questions and threw money at me.

[watchdawg]

Originally Posted by Johny

hi OP. what were all the damaged parts that needed repair? did you take any pics of the damage? can you post a pic of the damage repair estimate/report from the company? thank you.

I too would like to see photos of the alleged damage.

I may have a low post count but I have been around for awhile and I can't remember anyone having a bad thing to say about Mark

[h999r]

Some of the OP questions are good only on Craigslist not TRF.

[Maxfli]

Originally Posted by MickCollins1916

Not sure that res ipsa works in this situation though. Your response seems a little tone deaf in the sense that you may have missed or intentionally disregarded the points some (most? all?) of us were trying to make. Many of them are worth considering.

This. Thread was a learning opportunity for the OP. It would appear he didn't.

P.S. Mark is 5-star all the way. If one can't have a first rate transaction with him, one shouldn't be buying on a forum.

[jcd]

I just stumbled across this thread. It pisses me off. Obviously, Mark doesn't need anymore people to vouch for him, but I'm going to anyway.

He's as stand up as they come. I've dealt with Mark on several occasions and all the transactions went flawlessly. I got the Breitling that I'm wearing as I type this through a trade with Mark.

Mark contacted me not long ago to alert me that someone was using my name to try and scam people, and I did what I could do to stop that. I appreciate that he took the time to do that. I haven't noticed him listing much stuff lately. I hope this kind of thread has nothing to do with that. He deserves better.

[MitchSteel]

I've dealt with Mark, bought a pretty expensive watch from him......he's A1 seller, that I would not hesitate to deal with again.

Buff......what's the matter with you man? Learn some etiquette, be an adult.

And since we're awarding scores out of 5 here, I award you 2 out of 5 for your post......masterfully composed piece of literature

[Sublover2166]

Originally Posted by MitchSteel

I've dealt with Mark, bought a pretty expensive watch from him......he's A1 seller, that I would not hesitate to deal with again.

Buff......what's the matter with you man? Learn some etiquette, be an adult.

And since we're awarding scores out of 5 here, I award you 2 out of 5 for your post......masterfully composed piece of literature

This thread was started June4 and your just chiming in now? You get 0 out of 5 stars.

[Johny]

Originally Posted by Sublover2166

This thread was started June4 and your just chiming in now? You get 0 out of 5 stars.

[123Blueface]

Originally Posted by Johny

Same here.

I guess there must be an unwritten rule as to "by what date you must respond to a thread".

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by 123Blueface

Same here.

I guess there must be an unwritten rule as to "by what date you must respond to a thread".

There isn't.

[MitchSteel]

Oh my.....John( Sublover.......very creative btw), my appologies, I did not realize I was on time constraints to jump on a thread....I do have a life you know, sheeesh!



You get a 5 out of 5 for policing this thread, good work.

[mannyv11]

Originally Posted by MitchSteel

Oh my.....John( Sublover.......very creative btw), my appologies, I did not realize I was on time constraints to jump on a thread....I do have a life you know, sheeesh!



You get a 5 out of 5 for policing this thread, good work.