NGD - Not as described by seller (Fretboard member)

hotpickups

I’ve just checked my ad in the amps classifieds that it didn’t say ‘as new’ just in case. Immaculate but not ‘as new’ phew  

Blaendulais

Sorry but expecting a used guitar to look exactly like a new guitar whether or not the advert says ' as new' is incredibly naive. 

It reminds me of buyers when you advertise a 20 year old well played strat who message you and ask are there any scratches.

You get what you pay for and that looks like a bloody good value guitar for 1400.

Dan_Halen

Blaendulais said:

Sorry but expecting a used guitar to look exactly like a new guitar whether or not the advert says ' as new' is incredibly naive. 

It reminds me of buyers when you advertise a 20 year old well played strat who message you and ask are there any scratches.

You get what you pay for and that looks like a bloody good value guitar for 1400.

Not sure what the words ‘as new’ do actually mean then. Any ideas?

Legionreturns

Blaendulais said:

Sorry but expecting a used guitar to look exactly like a new guitar whether or not the advert says ' as new' is incredibly naive. 

It reminds me of buyers when you advertise a 20 year old well played strat who message you and ask are there any scratches.

You get what you pay for and that looks like a bloody good value guitar for 1400.

"As new" doesn't mean "In the same condition it would be if it was new"? 

Well what the hell does it mean then? 

Adey

skunkwerx said:

Adey said:

Can we get Judge Judy on the case?

I dunno man, if she sat on the case then there would be damages... 

Ooo. Not so sure... Has the OP suffered a financial loss? I don't think so. He has got a guitar that is worth more than he paid for it, it would appear. So, in my mind, that's a "no" with regard to damages.

Did he get what he was expecting? No, but he should have looked at the photos closer.

What is the resolution? Either keep the guitar and be pleased you have got it cheap. If he wants, he can sell the guitar himself and then buy an immaculate one if he can find such a thing.

Should he get compensated for pain and suffering? Probably not.

Life can be hard sometimes. :-(

Dan_Halen

Legionreturns said:

Blaendulais said:

Sorry but expecting a used guitar to look exactly like a new guitar whether or not the advert says ' as new' is incredibly naive. 

It reminds me of buyers when you advertise a 20 year old well played strat who message you and ask are there any scratches.

You get what you pay for and that looks like a bloody good value guitar for 1400.

"As new" doesn't mean "In the same condition it would be if it was new"? 

Well what the hell does it mean then? 

Oh, you’re so naive reading what was said and thinking that was what was actually meant!

You silly goose! 

Blaendulais

Legionreturns said:

Blaendulais said:

Sorry but expecting a used guitar to look exactly like a new guitar whether or not the advert says ' as new' is incredibly naive. 

It reminds me of buyers when you advertise a 20 year old well played strat who message you and ask are there any scratches.

You get what you pay for and that looks like a bloody good value guitar for 1400.

"As new" doesn't mean "In the same condition it would be if it was new"? 

Well what the hell does it mean then? 

I dont care what it means but  Its NOT new! 

Iamnobody

Adey said:

skunkwerx said:

Adey said:

Can we get Judge Judy on the case?

I dunno man, if she sat on the case then there would be damages... 

Ooo. Not so sure... Has the OP suffered a financial loss? I don't think so. He has got a guitar that is worth more than he paid for it, it would appear. So, in my mind, that's a "no" with regard to damages.

Did he get what he was expecting? No, but he should have looked at the photos closer.

What is the resolution? Either keep the guitar and be pleased you have got it cheap. If he wants, he can sell the guitar himself and then buy an immaculate one if he can find such a thing.

Should he get compensated for pain and suffering? Probably not.

Life can be hard sometimes. :-(

You might want to read the post again 

lukedlb

As new is as subjective as telling the wife that I’ve cleaned the kitchen. 
What’s more, the guitar could have had some of these issues when first bought as new. 
In any case, I think we can all feel for the two private parties involved and hopefully everyone has learnt something from this thread, whether it’s amending descriptions in terms of the wife’s idea of clean, or resisting items that are so subjective however great an offer they are. 

Please don’t forget that the forum is made up of members who have utterly different taste to you in music, guitars, and tone. Being a member does not mean you have found likeminded people.

and ripping apart the seller or buyer is just poor form on you all. Now go and clean the kitchen. 

(My good lady has literally just asked me to clean the kitchen). 

AlexHunter

Ben_McCarthy said:

AlexHunter said:

If you can’t resolve it then I’m happy to buy the guitar.

But only if it’s in as new condition? 

I wasn’t baiting. Just offering a potential solution whereby if the OP isn’t happy with the guitar and the seller doesn’t want to refund, I’ll buy it.  No politicking...

JAYJO

As new imo means as good as new. If you bought a CD and removed the cellophane and did not play it. Then I would say good as new. The shop may have a policy that you cannot return something once packaging has been removed. You want to sell so list good as new only been unwrapped and sell reduced. Played once is not as new and should be listed as used. Imo
I think guitars may be one of the few items you could buy ex display without a reduction. A lot of stuff  is reduced because it's x display. Guitars are test driven so used or not used?  If I tried one and I loved it. Would I want a newer one from the back. 

Blueingreen

The mods posted a thread on PPG advising members not to use it unless they know and trust the seller.  Had that advice been taken this situation would almost certainly have been avoided.

LPManic

I can’t decide who of the two involved parties has behaved like the bigger asshole.

I’m going to go for the buyer:

1. clear flipper’s remorse (not once did buyer mention playability of guitar with regards to price or transaction)
2. Public shaming on forum both parties frequent
3. In the first pages thanking everyone who backed him

Good popcorn entertainment all the same.

Philtre

LPManic said:

I can’t decide who of the two involved parties has behaved like the bigger asshole.

I’m going to go for the buyer:

1. clear flipper’s remorse (not once did buyer mention playability of guitar with regards to price or transaction)
2. Public shaming on forum both parties frequent
3. In the first pages thanking everyone who backed him

Good popcorn entertainment all the same.

Fuck off, that's complete fucking bullshit.

Schnozz

I think the cracks around the neck pocket should have been mentioned, but the rest is fine IMO.

Dan_Halen

LPManic said:

I can’t decide who of the two involved parties has behaved like the bigger asshole.

I’m going to go for the buyer:

1. clear flipper’s remorse (not once did buyer mention playability of guitar with regards to price or transaction)
2. Public shaming on forum both parties frequent
3. In the first pages thanking everyone who backed him

Good popcorn entertainment all the same.

Clear flippers remorse? That’s quite a statement based on absolutely sod all.

Calling someone an asshole when they’re upset because they’ve dropped nearly a grand and a half on a guitar and it’s not like described? OP has every reason to not be happy.

Also, you have no idea beyond this thread if there may be more to the sellers side than appears or if there are extenuating circumstances.

I’d suggest it’s you coming across like an asshole here. Maybe drop the insults and, if nothing useful to add, keep schtum?

Philtre

God, there are some ignorant fuckwits in this thread.

So sorry @chenzman that you've been fucked over by the seller and have to endure the utter cluelessness and trolling of these fuckwits.

Nikc

Legionreturns said:

Nikc said:

The price paid would be very relevant in a court of law - just saying

A sales "contract" has two parts. The goods, and the price. Either one is central to the contract and cannot be changed after the contract has been fulfilled. So no, a court of law would not say "ah that's fair enough as it was a good price" 

Don't be so silly!

sorry mate due consdideration is very much part of any decision (consideration in this case being the price paid) it helps having worked in the law and banking and having a friend who is a judge - but hell I'll just be silly (and right) 

ten77guitar

Philtre said:

God, there are some ignorant fuckwits in this thread.

So sorry @chenzman that you've been fucked over by the seller and have to endure the utter cluelessness and trolling of these fuckwits.

Why not just accept that some people have a different opinion from you rather than getting prissy and hurling insults? Just a suggestion.

Philtre

ten77guitar said:

Philtre said:

God, there are some ignorant fuckwits in this thread.

So sorry @chenzman that you've been fucked over by the seller and have to endure the utter cluelessness and trolling of these fuckwits.

Why not just accept that some people have a different opinion from you rather than getting prissy and hurling insults? Just a suggestion.

An opinion is one thing. Misinformed bullshit is another. Example - "clear flipper’s remorse "