Negative Experience with Anothernewphone

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by Johny

Hi E.

I'm surprised that he hasn't done so already.

J.

It was only 4 days since he was here Johny.

He's at home preparing his post.

[Johny]

Originally Posted by MonBK

It was only 4 days since he was here Johny.

He's at home preparing his post.

Hi Mon

I thought that he would have been on by now. Very disappointing for the buyer bud.

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by Johny

Hi Mon

I thought that he would have been on by now. Very disappointing for the buyer bud.

He's obviously in no rush.

[Tmac478]

Originally Posted by schnipples24

If it isn't such a big deal, then why is the seller in hiding and yet to reach out to me? He logged on multiple times yesterday so it's obvious he's alive and active.

You are telling me the watch I showed pictures of is in "excellent condition with little noticeable wear"? You would be completely happy if you paid $4050.00 and received the watch that I did? If I didn't have nice members here reaching out to me, the cost of a professional polish would fall on me + the time it takes to send it out and receive it back from polish. I didn't drop 4k on that watch, so I could go through the headache of getting all that done. 4050 isn't even that good of a price, there's probably 5+ for sale on watchrecon right now for 4.2-4.3k, could probably be talked down to 4.1k.

I will be sending out my watch tomorrow to the wonderful William for polishing. If he has the time I believe he might be posting progress pics, so anyone doubting the validity of my claim can check in once those are uploaded.

I feel your pain.
I understand some members playing devil's advocate in a one sided debate but, like I posted earlier, I have no doubt that you were ripped off and the seller knows it. I don't care what kind of lighting or camera angles were used, THAT IS NOT THE SAME WATCH YOU THOUGHT YOU WERE BUYING (caveat: If it is, those are very old pictures he used for his sales thread).
I'm sure the polishing will make it look as good as new but, to me, it's still the principle of the matter.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

[freefly]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

You said it was misrepresented and said OP should fix it himself instead of creating a thread about it.

Sorry, you seem to have serious reading comprehension issues.

I was simply making the point that given the minor and seemingly exaggerated "damage" being reported here, it would have taken less time to actually refinish the watch than it did to post a thread about it
(including the 30+ replies/responses by the OP so far).
I did NOT tell the OP to refinished himself instead of creating this thread, and even acknowledged that the "heads-up" given was appreciated.

Originally Posted by tyler1980

Its a fair question to ask, if you would be Ok if it happened to you, as you seem fine with it when it is someone else's watch.

First, I have learned quite a bit from my own mistakes/inexperience long ago, so these days I tend to avoid situations like this in the first place.
I would think someone with "50+ watch deals" under his belt would have gained some knowledge/experience over those transactions as well. If this was the OP's very first watch deal, I may have been more sympathetic.

Second, I would've probably approached the situation a little differently. From the seller's pics (and not his description/verbiage), I can tell that it's in decent shape (but no safe queen) and can pretty accurately gauge the level of wear. Maybe that comes with the aforementioned experience and/or knowing what it is you are looking at, but it really isn't rocket science. If I was interested in that particular piece (armed with the knowledge above), I would have likely used the condition issues as leverage to get the price down a bit. If the seller had a hard "floor" on the price that was beyond my comfort level, I would simply pass, thank him for his time, and move on to the next.

To answer your question more directly: If somehow this exact scenario happed to me personally, I would not loose a wink of sleep over it. I would simply take the 5 minutes needed to address the issues, and it would be done.
I certainly wouldn't have been surprised, or shocked as to the condition and "damage" (or lack thereof) as has been described and evidenced here so far.
That's just me, and as I stated from the beginning: YMMV...

That being said, If I was on the other end of the deal as the seller, and a buyer wasn't happy with the watch, I would just offer a complete refund. Simple.

Originally Posted by tyler1980

Any time a watch is misrepresented the responsibility lies with the seller not the buyer to make it right, period. Fixing it yourself is not a reasonable expectation, and you agreed it was misrepresented. Degree of misrepresentation is irrelevant, it either is or it isn't misrepresented.

Well, the degree of misrepresentation is a factor in the real world. If you bought a Rolex and were shipped a Timex, then yeah, that's a real problem. However, say you receive the watch you wanted, but it had a couple water spots on the crystal that didn't show up in the seller's pics. That would still "technically" be a misrepresentation. Would you make a big deal and request a refund over a couple water spots that could be removed in 5 seconds with a polish cloth? Of course not. Point being; there is a wide range of "misrepresentation" and the actions (and reactions) should be congruent with the level of misrepresentation, IMO. In the OP's case, he was shipped the watch he wanted, but the factory-polished bezel had some swirl marks, and the bracelet/clasp had a few minor scuff/scratches (which were clearly visible in the seller's ad). So, the scales tilt a bit. As mentioned previously, "condition" is subjective and up for interpretation. The OP didn't confirm the condition, and apparently didn't perform any due-diligence whatsoever prior to buying a used watch, sight-unseen, from a private party (not a dealer), over the internet despite his "50+ previous watch purchases". So yeah, a bit of Caveat Emptor applies I'd say.

Regardless, if it's something that can be corrected with very little effort (as in this instance), I would be just fix the problem and move on.
In fact, that is the same sentiment shared earlier by the very member the OP is sending the watch to for (free) refinishing!

Also, you yourself wrote above: "Im sorry but my time is worth money."
Well, Ok, if your time is worth money, why wouldn't you spend 5 minutes to correct the minor finish issues, instead of devoting waaaaay more time to a thread on the internet trying to over-inflate the issue?

[Andad]

Dear 'credibility zero' Eric,

I expected much better from you.

[freefly]

Originally Posted by schnipples24

I'm sorry but I don't follow your logic. I didn't use flash or excessive lighting to try and exagerate the wear.

Sorry, I disagree. You can see the glare-inducing hot spot from the direct/harsh lighting in every one of your pics. That is not likely a coincidence.

Originally Posted by schnipples24

If it isn't such a big deal, then why is the seller in hiding and yet to reach out to me? He logged on multiple times yesterday so it's obvious he's alive and active.

I personally don't agree with the seller's lack of response here either (and have said so above). However, one doesn't beget the other. In other words, just because the seller has gone dark doesn't automatically mean that the issue at hand is a "big deal". You are setting up another straw-man argument, which seems to be prevalent in this thread.

Originally Posted by schnipples24

You are telling me the watch I showed pictures of is in "excellent condition with little noticeable wear"?

I don't know how many times it needs to be said, so I'll put it in bold this time: CONDITION IS SUBJECTIVE AND OPEN TO INTERPRETATION.
Yes, there are reasonable limitations regarding describing condition (i.e. calling something new/unworn when it's been put through a meat grinder, etc.). However, once a seller discloses that something is used/worn, condition becomes a matter of opinion and further due-diligence is key on the buyer's end to determine if the seller's version of "excellent condition" is in line with your version of "excellent condition". Make sense?

Originally Posted by schnipples24

If I didn't have nice members here reaching out to me, the cost of a professional polish would fall on me + the time it takes to send it out and receive it back from polish. I didn't drop 4k on that watch, so I could go through the headache of getting all that done.

1. It doesn't need a "professional polish".
2. You knew it was used, so the cost of such would only be relevant if the watch was being advertised as new (a pro polish would make the watch look like new, and go above and beyond "making you whole").
3. Yes, there are some generous members here (many kudos to them!). However, if the watch was in need of serious work (which seems to be what you are attempting to convey) and not a 5-minute polish job, then I am not sure they would have stepped up and offered their services pro-bono. The fact that a couple (gracious) members have offered to fix it for free sort of reinforces the fact that it's an easy fix, and very minor job.

Originally Posted by schnipples24

4050 isn't even that good of a price, there's probably 5+ for sale on watchrecon right now for 4.2-4.3k, could probably be talked down to 4.1k.

Now we are getting somewhere. Your buyer's remorse is showing. Sounds like you may have just realized after the fact that you could source one for cheaper in better condition, and simply wanted to back out of the deal.

[MonBK]

Why do you keep kicking a man that is down? ^

[freefly]

Originally Posted by directioneng

Dear 'credibility zero' Eric,

I expected much better from you.

Sorry if a bit of critical thinking offends you. No need for the (smug) feigned "disappointment" and/or personal attacks though (never thought I'd see that from you).
Of course, if you can prove me wrong on anything I've said so far, I'll happily concede.

[Uhtred59]

Wow Eric, you are like the last angry juror in 12 angry men. In my experience if everyone thinks you are wrong, you just mine be.

[schnipples24]

Dude I'm not even gonna bother responding to all this manic mess you've managed to put into words. You are calling me out for having 30+ responses in my own thread, when you've written out these fricking NOVELS in 2 days on an issue that has no relevance to you.

Seller described the watch in excellent condition with little noticeable wear and pictures he provided seemed to confirm that (yes if you readjust in Photoshop with ten different filters and look at the pictures with a microscope you may be able to see some scratches)
Watch is NOT even close to being in this condition.
Seller has not responded to any of these issues and has since logged onto TRF so we know he is alive.

Those are my issues, period. Not buyers remorse, and not any of that other pseudo intellectual stuff you are talking about in your other comments.

I appreciate the perspective but now I feel you are just being obtuse for arguments sake.

Originally Posted by freefly

Sorry, you seem to have serious reading comprehension issues.

I was simply making the point that given the minor and seemingly exaggerated "damage" being reported here, it would have taken less time to actually refinish the watch than it did to post a thread about it
(including the 30+ replies/responses by the OP so far).
I did NOT tell the OP to refinished himself instead of creating this thread, and even acknowledged that the "heads-up" given was appreciated.

First, I have learned quite a bit from my own mistakes/inexperience long ago, so these days I tend to avoid situations like this in the first place.
I would think someone with "50+ watch deals" under his belt would have gained some knowledge/experience over those transactions as well. If this was the OP's very first watch deal, I may have been more sympathetic.

Second, I would've probably approached the situation a little differently. From the seller's pics (and not his description/verbiage), I can tell that it's in decent shape (but no safe queen) and can pretty accurately gauge the level of wear. Maybe that comes with the aforementioned experience and/or knowing what it is you are looking at, but it really isn't rocket science. If I was interested in that particular piece (armed with the knowledge above), I would have likely used the condition issues as leverage to get the price down a bit. If the seller had a hard "floor" on the price that was beyond my comfort level, I would simply pass, thank him for his time, and move on to the next.

To answer your question more directly: If somehow this exact scenario happed to me personally, I would not loose a wink of sleep over it. I would simply take the 5 minutes needed to address the issues, and it would be done.
I certainly wouldn't have been surprised, or shocked as to the condition and "damage" (or lack thereof) as has been described and evidenced here so far.
That's just me, and as I stated from the beginning: YMMV...

That being said, If I was on the other end of the deal as the seller, and a buyer wasn't happy with the watch, I would just offer a complete refund. Simple.

Well, the degree of misrepresentation is a factor in the real world. If you bought a Rolex and were shipped a Timex, then yeah, that's a real problem. However, say you receive the watch you wanted, but it had a couple water spots on the crystal that didn't show up in the seller's pics. That would still "technically" be a misrepresentation. Would you make a big deal and request a refund over a couple water spots that could be removed in 5 seconds with a polish cloth? Of course not. Point being; there is a wide range of "misrepresentation" and the actions (and reactions) should be congruent with the level of misrepresentation, IMO. In the OP's case, he was shipped the watch he wanted, but the factory-polished bezel had some swirl marks, and the bracelet/clasp had a few minor scuff/scratches (which were clearly visible in the seller's ad). So, the scales tilt a bit. As mentioned previously, "condition" is subjective and up for interpretation. The OP didn't confirm the condition, and apparently didn't perform any due-diligence whatsoever prior to buying a used watch, sight-unseen, from a private party (not a dealer), over the internet despite his "50+ previous watch purchases". So yeah, a bit of Caveat Emptor applies I'd say.

Regardless, if it's something that can be corrected with very little effort (as in this instance), I would be just fix the problem and move on.
In fact, that is the same sentiment shared earlier by the very member the OP is sending the watch to for (free) refinishing!

Also, you yourself wrote above: "Im sorry but my time is worth money."
Well, Ok, if your time is worth money, why wouldn't you spend 5 minutes to correct the minor finish issues, instead of devoting waaaaay more time to a thread on the internet trying to over-inflate the issue?

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by freefly

Ok, if your time is worth money, why wouldn't you spend 5 minutes to correct the minor finish issues, instead of devoting waaaaay more time to a thread on the internet trying to over-inflate the issue?

Maybe because the OP was trying to help/warn others from this unfortunate experience?

Prior to this, I would have thought that buying from a longstanding forum member with a substantial post history would have been a relatively safe judgement. "Misunderstandings" aside, a simple refund would have been expected (you said so yourself). I've learned to be more careful now; clearly this seller is not to be trusted and should be shunned, if not banned, from the forum.

Based on the totality of your comments, I think I can safely recommend that you be added to the "No Buy" list as well.

[schnipples24]

Originally Posted by Tony64

Maybe because the OP was trying to help/warn others from this unfortunate experience?

Prior to this, I would have thought that buying from a longstanding forum member with a substantial post history would have been a relatively safe judgement. "Misunderstandings" aside, a simple refund would have been expected (you said so yourself). I've learned to be more careful now; clearly this seller is not to be trusted and should be shunned, if not banned, from the forum.

Based on the totality of your comments, I think I can safely recommend that you be added to the "No Buy" list as well.

[Tmac478]

Originally Posted by MonBK

Why do you keep kicking a man that is down? ^

Exactly! The number of members finding fault with the OP and giving the seller the benefit of the doubt here is mind boggling. Let the seller come here and defend himself because, I'm quite confident, he's well aware of this thread.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by Tmac478

Exactly! The number of members finding fault with the OP and giving the seller the benefit of the doubt here is mind boggling. Let the seller come here and defend himself because, I'm quite confident, he's well aware of this thread.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

Actually those that have voiced support for the seller in this matter are fortunately rather few.

Threads like this often polarize the forum, for better or worse. IMHO that's where they become the most insightful. Through these postings we've seen the generosity of some as well as the indifference of others. The OP's dilemma has effectively "outed" many, not just the seller of this well-worn Explorer, and thus the forum has become a little less anonymous.

Edit: I'll add, in case anyone hasn't noticed, that this thread has already been viewed almost 16,000 times. I'd say everyone who's participated has gotten a good vetting.

[Gaijin]

If the seller was going to fix this he would have already. Not cool. But there it is.



This thread has run its course. Getting ugly now.

[Johny]

Is William Connor the sellers real name?

[Etschell]

Chad knows him and he isn't answering chad. He logged in. Guy may be a supporting member but that doesn't mean anything other than he paid 25 bucks.

[Ferdelious]

Can't the Mods just ban this guy for lack of response knowing he has signed on a few times now? It's clear he is in hiding and doesn't want to own up to misrepresenting the watches condition. We don't need his kind on here, just my

[Al1969]

Seems 'anothernewphone' now goes by 'freefly'.

[freefly]

Originally Posted by schnipples24

Dude I'm not even gonna bother responding to all this manic mess you've managed to put into words. You are calling me out for having 30+ responses in my own thread, when you've written out these fricking NOVELS in 2 days on an issue that has no relevance to you.

Well, "dude", I don’t believe you have exclusive rights to thread content, and I call them like I see them. If you read my very first post, I didn’t make any direct/harsh accusations at all. I also don’t think adding a bit of objectivity (and not spoon-feeding you what you want to hear) makes my posts any less “relevant” than others here…even if that may be counter to the narrative that you are seeking affirmation on. I just find it interesting the lengths some will go to when trying to make their case. To which point: The only thing I would be “calling you out on” here is (potentially) making a mountain out of a mole hill, and doing so with pics taken to purposely exaggerate the wear on the watch. I mean, I get it. Showing the watch in the worst possible light (literally) only goes to strengthen your case (and nobody wants to be perceived as a nitpicker).

The problem is your unwillingness to own up to it. I could be wrong, but the shock-value you generated with those pics seemed pretty intentional.
Judging by the reactions you got, I'd say it worked. Fortunately, some of us can “read” photographs better than others, and know better.

Again, that is in NO WAY any sort of endorsement or defense of the seller. Personally, I can’t comprehend why any seller would go radio-silent on what would've likely been a very easy resolution.

Originally Posted by schnipples24

Seller described the watch in excellent condition with little noticeable wear and pictures he provided seemed to confirm that (yes if you readjust in Photoshop with ten different filters and look at the pictures with a microscope you may be able to see some scratches)
Watch is NOT even close to being in this condition.

Well, regarding “noticeable wear” (a term that, again, is up for interpretation), I’d say the watch isn’t represented honestly by the seller’s pics OR yours, but likely somewhere in the middle. Just my opinion.



Here’s a little demonstration for you (and others) to put things in better perspective:

Below are pictures of the clasp on the Tudor I happen to be wearing today. All of these were taken today, within minutes or even seconds of each other, with NOTHING done to the clasp before, during, or after the pictures were taken.

Pic #1 & #2: Taken with harsh, direct light (no flash) at JUST the right angles to exaggerate the virtually-microscopic scratches on the clasp. As you can see, it makes it look pretty bad:





Pic #3, 4, 5, & 6: Taken with "normal" daylight from an adjacent window, at different angles:






The latter pictures are WAY more representative of the actual condiion and "noticeable wear". It is VERY difficult to find/see the microscopic scratches captured in the first 2 pics with the naked eye.
Further, if I wanted to remove those micro-scratches, it would take about 5 seconds.

Originally Posted by schnipples24

I appreciate the perspective but now I feel you are just being obtuse for arguments sake .

Look, I apologize if I got a little “sideways” here. A lot of it wasn’t directed at you, and I admit I got a bit caught up with rebutting others, which was clearly a waste of bandwidth. Being susceptible to troll-bait is my cross to bear I guess...

Anyway, I hope you get a satisfactory outcome, and it sounds like you will with the help of a generous member here (Kudos to William!).

[schnipples24]

Sorry freefly I understand your points, but if you think those tiny hairline barely qualifies as scratches on your clasp are similar to the two pictures shown below, then I guess this conversation is over. Because we have fundamental differences in thinking.

Look at the bracelet in the second picture. Those are more then just surface scuffs

[freefly]

Originally Posted by schnipples24

Sorry freefly I understand your points, but if you think those tiny hairline barely qualifies as scratches on your clasp are similar to the two pictures shown below, then I guess this conversation is over. Because we have fundamental differences in thinking.

Look at the bracelet in the second picture. Those are more then just surface scuffs

Fair enough. To me, the scratches in pics of the bracelet look similar in nature to the pics I posted above, where I intentionally exaggerating the (micro) surface scratches on the Tudor clasp (both being brushed stainless surfaces).
But, without having it in my hand I will concede that I can't say for certain. Agree to disagree on that point I guess.

Although, if I remember correctly the seller's ad didn't have any full-on bracelet pics at all, and the pic of the clasp was a bit indicative of wear, correct?
Again, not siding with the seller at all, just that Caveat Emptor always applies. I have no doubt you will be extremely thorough on your next purchase!

So, I suppose it's best just to move on and realize the silver linings here:

1. It isn't nearly as bad as it could have been. I still cringe at the thought of some of the horror stories that have been posted here in the past!
2. You will no-doubt end up with a great looking watch, thanks to the generosity of the member(s) here.

All things considered, I'd say this was a rather "cheap" learning experience. Wheras "paying for your education" in situations like these can sometimes be VERY expensive...

[Chewbacca]

This thread has more legs than than a GG crab dinner.

[Al1969]

Originally Posted by chewbacca

this thread has more legs than than a gg crab dinner.

x2. 11

[Kingface66]

Seems like someone could probably use a nice long leisurely walk. You know, log out for a while. Consider the amount of time they've spent trying to make a point ON A WATCH FORUM.

[lapince]

Originally Posted by michaelodonnell123

This is precisely why I do not buy used watches or from anybody online. Too risky. Hope you get this resolved quickly.

Yes I buy only from an AD or a grey dealer friend of mine in France, never take the risk of buying unseen from other than my friend

Originally Posted by GoingPlaces

"Excellent shape with little noticeable wear." This description is misleading. Seller owes you a call.

yeah basically it's like if I put a single's ad "25 year old model from Elite agency looking for love" seeing I am a 46 year old man...

Originally Posted by tommy91

I wouldn't dream of selling a watch using his words and pictures based on the piece he sent you, i would be ashamed.

Of course, anyone who says otherwise is out of his mind

Originally Posted by mercman

I don't think having two accounts is allowed but how would anyone know unless there is a system that checks I.P. addresses.

There is, I remember a mod banning someone because of some trouble and saying he was seeing the guy was reading from another account from the same IP adress. Some providers change your IP adress, it's a hassle for my playstation 4 as Sony blocks the internet options because of that, but that's in Odessa, not sure in the US...

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

I have my account set to be notified by email of a PM. I've never been sent an email by TRF. Not one.

He may not be aware. Until he logs in, it's just blind speculation.

Strange, I get an email as soon as I get a PM, maybe they go to your spam folder...

Originally Posted by Etschell

He's been offered two free polishes. I think the issue is he would rather send it back.

Yes, an unpolished watch with the description given which is light years away from the truth, and a polished one are 2 different things, I would not want to buy a polished watch...

Originally Posted by freefly

Sorry if a bit of critical thinking offends you. No need for the (smug) feigned "disappointment" and/or personal attacks though (never thought I'd see that from you).
Of course, if you can prove me wrong on anything I've said so far, I'll happily concede.

It's not critical thinking, IMHO, the buyer was clearly scammed with a product not matching pics or description, it is so obvious...

Originally Posted by Ferdelious

Can't the Mods just ban this guy for lack of response knowing he has signed on a few times now? It's clear he is in hiding and doesn't want to own up to misrepresenting the watches condition. We don't need his kind on here, just my

I agree, but I would putnthe story out on WUS and wherever he may be, this guy is clearly dishonest...

Originally Posted by Kingface66

Seems like someone could probably use a nice long leisurely walk. You know, log out for a while. Consider the amount of time they've spent trying to make a point ON A WATCH FORUM.

I agree...

[rootbeer7]

Originally Posted by freefly

Well, "dude", I don’t believe you have exclusive rights to thread content, and I call them like I see them. If you read my very first post, I didn’t make any direct/harsh accusations at all. I also don’t think adding a bit of objectivity (and not spoon-feeding you what you want to hear) makes my posts any less “relevant” than others here…even if that may be counter to the narrative that you are seeking affirmation on. I just find it interesting the lengths some will go to when trying to make their case. To which point: The only thing I would be “calling you out on” here is (potentially) making a mountain out of a mole hill, and doing so with pics taken to purposely exaggerate the wear on the watch. I mean, I get it. Showing the watch in the worst possible light (literally) only goes to strengthen your case (and nobody wants to be perceived as a nitpicker).

The problem is your unwillingness to own up to it. I could be wrong, but the shock-value you generated with those pics seemed pretty intentional.
Judging by the reactions you got, I'd say it worked. Fortunately, some of us can “read” photographs better than others, and know better.

Again, that is in NO WAY any sort of endorsement or defense of the seller. Personally, I can’t comprehend why any seller would go radio-silent on what would've likely been a very easy resolution.

Well, regarding “noticeable wear” (a term that, again, is up for interpretation), I’d say the watch isn’t represented honestly by the seller’s pics OR yours, but likely somewhere in the middle. Just my opinion.



Here’s a little demonstration for you (and others) to put things in better perspective:

Below are pictures of the clasp on the Tudor I happen to be wearing today. All of these were taken today, within minutes or even seconds of each other, with NOTHING done to the clasp before, during, or after the pictures were taken.

Pic #1 & #2: Taken with harsh, direct light (no flash) at JUST the right angles to exaggerate the virtually-microscopic scratches on the clasp. As you can see, it makes it look pretty bad:





Pic #3, 4, 5, & 6: Taken with "normal" daylight from an adjacent window, at different angles:






The latter pictures are WAY more representative of the actual condiion and "noticeable wear". It is VERY difficult to find/see the microscopic scratches captured in the first 2 pics with the naked eye.
Further, if I wanted to remove those micro-scratches, it would take about 5 seconds.

Look, I apologize if I got a little “sideways” here. A lot of it wasn’t directed at you, and I admit I got a bit caught up with rebutting others, which was clearly a waste of bandwidth. Being susceptible to troll-bait is my cross to bear I guess...

Anyway, I hope you get a satisfactory outcome, and it sounds like you will with the help of a generous member here (Kudos to William!).

This is the most interesting post of all. Simple misrepresentation. Did the seller know? Yes he must have. Did he photograph the watch in the 'best' light? Yes he must have. Should he take watch back and refund money? Absolutely.

[Dartmouthbrian]

I just want to point out that just because you've posted thousands of times doesn't make you any more trustworthy than a guy like me who has posted a little over 100 times.

I assure you if I had sold that watch it would have said "A worn, but loved watch with swirls and desk diving marks. It isn't perfect, but it is a Rolex" not "Excellent condition with little noticeable wear". I'd be pissed if I'd sent that much money expecting an Excellent condition watch only to receive a daily beater.

That watch was poorly misrepresented. Period.

Sorry OP. I hope the seller makes it right.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by rootbeer7

This is the most interesting post of all. Simple misrepresentation. Did the seller know? Yes he must have. Did he photograph the watch in the 'best' light? Yes he must have. Should he take watch back and refund money? Absolutely.

Yes, here is someone else who can take pix of a watch and hide the faults to prove the seller misrepresented?

Does this negate all his other ramblings?