An Ebay Listing That Tells A Flatsigned Story
jerry morris
unique way to let people know what happened when he bought a forgery
from an ebay seller:
http://cgi.ebay.aol.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1429940626
Rich Davis
"jerry morris" <jerrya...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:6457-3AF...@storefull-104.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
gin...@accumulata.com
spent at least $15,000 buying books. He went booth to booth buying mostly
signed modern firsts. Some dealers said they wouldn't sell to him but when
he piled up thousands of dollars of books, most caved and gave him a 20%
discount.
Jon Meyers
book experience as Flatsigned claims to have, an Asian forgery
should not be difficult to identify. Flatsigned may not have
*deliberately* misrepresented the book, but he wrote a description
that certainly gave the book the benefit of every doubt in his favor
without going out of his way to ascertain exactly what the book was.
The whining buyer, on the other hand, paid $3000 for an item with so
much suspicious about it that it should have set off alarms for
anyone. Yes, Flatsigned is an unethical cretin--but I have little
sympathy for this moronic buyer.
--
Jon Meyers
"The rule is perfect: in all matters of
opinion our adversaries are insane."
--Mark Twain
"jerry morris" wrote...
Scot Kamins
> Mr. Flatsigned attended a book fair I did this past weekend in Chicago and
> spent at least $15,000 buying books. He went booth to booth buying mostly
> signed modern firsts. Some dealers said they wouldn't sell to him
<snip>
So... this guy has a bad reputation even outside eBay?
--
Scot Kamins
Collecting The Modern Library 1917-1970
(because fanaticism is not limited to politics, religion, or economics)
Want list at http://www.dogeared.com/wtb.html
Denise Enck
very wary. Why didn't the buyer insist on escrow? (I know the transaction
occurred off of eBay but it could still be done.)
The seller, while he certainly could have described the book more clearly,
didn't actually claim that the book was a "PULITZER REVIEW COMITTEE,
PUBLISHERS OR AUTHORS PERSONAL COPY" - he said it could be. (There's a
question mark, and the seller says he's never before seen this copy.) There
is a picture of the bookplate in the original listing as well, and it
doesn't appear to be contemporary with the book. The lack of a photo credit
and lack of any blurb on the dustjacket also seem to point to a pirate
edition. Why, if one were spending three grand, one would not request a
number of quality scans & a lot of very detailed information, I don't know.
The seller did provide full-size scans (though low resolution) of the cover,
the dj flap, and the bookplate.
I certainly think that the seller should do the right thing and refund this
buyer's money. But the buyer should accept most of the responsibility - he
must've been smokin' something pretty good if he thought spending 3K on a
book he knew very little about was a terrific idea. The buyer admits that he
decided that he "enjoyed doing research, and would gamble that I could find
more information regarding it." I think I would do my research BEFORE
shelling out that amount of money. (And especially knowing that eBay
protections wouldn't apply to this purchase.)
There's one born every minute.
By the way, the link to the original auction is
http://cgi.ebay.aol.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?MfcISAPICommand=ViewItem&item=1
421665106
--
Denise Enck
den...@emptymirrorbooks.com
www.emptymirrorbooks.com
Empty Mirror Books, PO Box 972 Mukilteo, WA 98275
Specializing in Out-of-Print, Rare, & Signed Beat Literature, Small-Press
Poetry, and Literary Journals
"jerry morris" <jerrya...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:6457-3AF...@storefull-104.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
John Wilson
From the original auction:
"THIS PHOTO WAS ONLY USED ON THE ORIGINAL, 1960, TRUE FIRST PRINT RUN!"
- Now that just wasn't true, was it? It turns out it was also used on a
pirated Taiwanese edition, and that was what Flatsigned was in fact selling.
"We GUARANTEE YOUR SATISFACTION and WWW.FLATSIGNED.COM issues CERTIFICATES
OF AUTHENTICITY UPON REQUEST and GUARANTEE the validity of SIGNATURES FOR
LIFE!"
-That guarantee is made by the seller quite independently of any protection
that the buyer might have been entitled to had the auction gone ahead on
eBay. It guarantees the signature (which, as far as I can see, is still
considered to be authentic), but it also guarantees the purchaser's
satisfaction, and this purchaser is quite justifiably dissatisfied.
So Flatsigned made a guarantee that he wasn't prepared to honour. The
buyer's mistake was to have trusted a dishonourable person. But that
dishonourable person has well over a thousand satisfied customers (see his
feedback), and of the few who complained forgery (or, more accurately,
pirated editions) was not an issue.
I agree that the buyer should have been more cautious and more thorough in
researching the item fully before buying, but I wonder if perhaps the
greatest fools are to be found among those "satisfied customers" who did
*not* send their purchases off for a second opinion.
--
John R. Yamamoto-Wilson
http://rarebooksinjapan.com
Suds1130
handle this thru the AG's office in Flatsigned's state or the US Postal Service
as well as ebay SafeHarbor- after all, he was contacted "behind their back" and
that would probably get 'em as much as the misrepresentation.
"Too clever by half"- that may describe folks who feel that they are very
careful in their wording, but who misrepresent just as much by omission of
important information. And floating a guarantee out there.
What is clever about the new listing is that Flatsigned could sue, but then
he'd have to go to the buyer's home state and be subject to a counterclaim. I
like it!
I'm not inclined to totally blame the victim here.
SUE in TX
Denise Enck
him a refund, and I said do in my prior post. If I were that seller I
certainly wouldn't sleep at night. But then, I go to great lengths to
describe the books I sell in great detail, and if there's any doubt about
edition or other issues, I make that very clear. It's not about "blaming the
victim" - but as someone who has bought (and sold) a great number of books
over the internet, I can't imagine shelling out so much money for a book
about which I knew so little. I would imagine that the seller's guarantee of
satisfaction must have influenced him - and it's unconscionable that the
seller has reneged on that promise.
Certainly the buyer has acknowledged that he knew this was not "THE
ORIGINAL, 1960, TRUE FIRST PRINT RUN", he said that it had important
differences that he was going to research.
Denise Enck
den...@emptymirrorbooks.com
www.emptymirrorbooks.com
Empty Mirror Books, PO Box 972 Mukilteo, WA 98275
Specializing in Out-of-Print, Rare, & Signed Beat Literature, Small-Press
Poetry, and Literary Journals
"John Wilson" <j-ya...@hoffman.cc.sophia.ac.jp> wrote in message
news:9dde2h$2arv$1...@kanna.cc.sophia.ac.jp...
Medievalbk
>So Flatsigned made a guarantee that he wasn't prepared to honour. The
>buyer's mistake was to have trusted a dishonourable person. But that
>dishonourable person has well over a thousand satisfied customers (see his
>feedback), and of the few who complained forgery (or, more accurately,
>pirated editions) was not an issue.
>
I just did an ebay seller search and FLATSIGNED has zero feedback, zero lots,
and the sunglasses that say the ID's been changed in the last 30 days.
[...pushing back the potted palm leaves...]
"Verrrry Interesting."
William Taylor
paghat
<j-ya...@hoffman.cc.sophia.ac.jp> wrote:
> I have a bit more sympathy for the buyer than others seem to.
Me too. I can hardly believe there are people asserting that in any
buyer-beware environment which eBay is, if you get robbed of thousands of
dollars by a known swindler, then you're a big dope who deserved it. The
only tenable policy is full refund if dissatisfied for any reason, with no
blame even needing to be assigned.
-paghat
Trevian Bookshop
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1428181333
jerry morris wrote in message
<6457-3AF...@storefull-104.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
Dick Stephens
the ID timmiller.
I've looked at several of them over the past several months. The first
thing that I notice is that his prices are ASTRONOMICAL. As an example, he
repeatedly listed a copy of Robert Crais' Lullaby Town, the scarcest of
Crais' mysteries, originally with an opening of around $100 or so, with
reserve. No sales. I went to his web page and looked at his entire
inventory of books he was attempting to sell at auction. Lullaby Town had a
whopping price of, I believe, $800+. Copies in fine condition have gone on
eBay for $450-$500. I checked out a couple of his other auctions and
compared them to his web site prices to get an idea of what his reserve
might be, and it was the same story. Laughable.
Dick Stephens
"John Wilson" <j-ya...@hoffman.cc.sophia.ac.jp> wrote in message
news:9dde2h$2arv$1...@kanna.cc.sophia.ac.jp...
Bob Finnan
>>
>>So Flatsigned made a guarantee that he wasn't prepared to honour. The
>>buyer's mistake was to have trusted a dishonourable person. But that
>>dishonourable person has well over a thousand satisfied customers (see his
>>feedback), and of the few who complained forgery (or, more accurately,
>>pirated editions) was not an issue.
>>
>
>and the sunglasses that say the ID's been changed in the last 30 days.
>
>[...pushing back the potted palm leaves...]
>
>"Verrrry Interesting."
>
>William Taylor
When I looked up the auction in question today, the seller,
www.flatsigned.com, had an overall eBay rating of 1412.
This was comprised of 2186 positive comments, 8 neutral comments and 9
negative comments.
This, to me, would indicate that the seller was fairly reliable.
As to the buyer...
I'd would have to say he was extremely foolish to part with so large a sum
on
a book he didn't know that much about.
Of course, the seller seems pretty slimy to not give him a refund.
On the other hand - all we have is the sellers account of this transaction,
so
who knows what really transpired between these two individuals.
===================================
Bob Finnan
The Unofficial Hardy Boys Home Page
http://www.geocities.com/fwdixon
New Books For Sale
http://www.geocities.com/fwdixon/amazon.htm
paghat
<tre...@qed.net> wrote:
That's pretty cool actually. I hope the right fellow gets in trouble for
it, as that idiotic term "flatsigned" should be re-registered as "all
honesty flatlined."
-paghat
Wally Jenkins
gypsies is suspect.
However, judging from the number of unwanted calls we get daily from
telemarket people, I assume there are a lot of people out there who buy
cemetery plots,life insurance, aluminum siding and all kinds of high ticket
stuff over the phone!!!!!
Nevertheless, creeps like "Flatsigned" should be exposed and avoided!
"jerry morris" <jerrya...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:6457-3AF...@storefull-104.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
jerry morris
with any questions. Ebay just pulled his ad.
A friend of mine queried Flatsigned and received a slightly different
side of the story in reply; however, the bottom line is that Flatsigned
did not honor his own "unconditional guarantee".
Jerry Morris
From: j...@trib.com (Jeb) Date: Thu, May 10, 2001, 2:36pm (EDT-3) To:
jerrya...@webtv.net (jerry morris) Subject: Re: rec.collecting.books
Jerry, my add was just canceled from eBay. I am not very computer
literate, and I don't know what threads are, but if you can make it so
that others can contact me, that would be great, thanks- Jeb
----- Original Message -----
From: "jerry morris" <jerrya...@webtv.net>
To: "Jeb" <j...@trib.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: rec.collecting.books
Jeb,
If you'd like, I can post a thread for people to email you with any
questions.
Personally, if Flatsigned were smart, he would bid on your book pronto.
Jerry
Welcome to the Library of Moi the Bibliomaniac:
http://community-2.webtv.net/MoiBibliomaniac/MOISBOOKSABOUTBOOKS/
Bob
the subject of this discussion? Could be good for some fireworks.
Bob
--
http://www.allroutes.to/thatbookstore
http://www.allroutes.to/stjohnsbury
"Bob Finnan" <fwd...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:3B09...@MailAndNews.com...
Bob
"jerry morris" <jerrya...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:6457-3AF...@storefull-104.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
Medievalbk
>>===== Original Message From medie...@aol.com (Medievalbk) =====
>>>
>>>So Flatsigned made a guarantee that he wasn't prepared to honour. The
>>>buyer's mistake was to have trusted a dishonourable person. But that
>>>dishonourable person has well over a thousand satisfied customers (see his
>>>feedback), and of the few who complained forgery (or, more accurately,
>>>pirated editions) was not an issue.
>>>
>>
>>I just did an ebay seller search and FLATSIGNED has zero feedback, zero
>lots,
>>and the sunglasses that say the ID's been changed in the last 30 days.
>>
>>[...pushing back the potted palm leaves...]
>>
>>"Verrrry Interesting."
>>
>>William Taylor
>
>When I looked up the auction in question today, the seller,
>www.flatsigned.com, had an overall eBay rating of 1412.
>This was comprised of 2186 positive comments, 8 neutral comments and 9
>negative comments.
Now we are starting to get into ebay stupidity. www.flatsigned.com does have an
overall eBay rating of 1412. But I looked up FLATSIGNED as the ebay
identification, Two different sellers?
Getting too strange...
Lawrence Person
jerrya...@webtv.net (jerry morris) wrote:
> Here's an email I just received from Jeb, inviting anyone to email him
> with any questions. Ebay just pulled his ad.
>
> A friend of mine queried Flatsigned and received a slightly different
> side of the story in reply; however, the bottom line is that Flatsigned
> did not honor his own "unconditional guarantee".
> Jerry Morris
>
>
How about asking him to post the original text of his auction (or forward
it to you if he can't figure it out).
You might also want to forward him the URL to the Postal Service Mail
Fraud Complaint Form at:
http://www.framed.usps.com/postalinspectors/fraud/MailFraudComplaint.htm
--
Lawrence Person
lawrenc...@jump.net
Lame Excuse Books Now Online at: http://www.abebooks.com
Nova Express Website: http://www0.delphi.com/sflit/novaexpress/
paghat
<t...@plainfield.bypass.com> wrote:
> Is anyone tempted to contact Flatsigned and taylorjeb and tell them they're
> the subject of this discussion? Could be good for some fireworks.
> Bob
I e-mailed taylorjeb & told him in essence "good show!" (for his
reasonable revenge tactic), but didn't mention the ng.
-paghat
jerry morris
from some fellow bookcollectors. I don't think he knows how to
subscribe to a newsgroup.
From: j...@trib.com (Jeb) Date: Thu, May 10, 2001, 6:05pm (EDT-3) To:
jerrya...@webtv.net (jerry morris) Subject: Re: Re:
Jerry,
I am exhausted, but before I call it a day, I would like to introduce
myself to you, and your group. If you would be so kind as to relay this
to them, I would certainly appreciate it.
First, my name is Jeb Taylor, and I am quite new to book collecting,
pretty new to eBay, and until 2 1/2 years ago never had power or running
water. I have always lived in very remote places, and what skills I have
gathered never prepared me for this day.
My occupation involves the sale of very rare high end projectile points
(arrowheads). It is an area that is filled with fakes, and believe it or
not, I am very respected nationally in this area. Actually when it comes
to points in the west, I am probably the "last word". I have always
loved books, and when I discovered eBay books about a month ago, I
started buying some books that I had read and loved through my life. It
was very refreshing, all of the book dealers I dealt with were very
honest and open. Only rarely did I receive a book that seemed less than
it was advertised as. This is something that is completely opposite to
the artifact world where there are far more fakes than real points, and
where one can NEVER let his guard down. Buying books (until this
experience) has been very good for me. It was an area where I did let my
guard down- and obviously paid the price.
To Kill a Mockingbird is one of my all time favorite novels. I had
checked prices and seen that they werte generally offered for $12,000
and up, which I could never afford. I came across Tim's add the day
before it ended, and thought that even if was an annomoly, as long as it
was Lippincot, 1960, had been signed by Harper Lee, and was offered with
a guarantee of satisfaction, How could I go wrong? I did e-mail Tim with
several questions, and his responses only added to my feeling that it
was a good buy. And I was very hopefull that with some perseverence, I
could track down just where this particular book fit into. It was sold
to me as a 1st, I bought it as a 1st- never was there any mention of it
being other than this- in fact Tim told me that it was "rarer".
I recognized Tim as someone who was pretty full of shit- however I
frequently have to deal with such people in my business, and shrugged it
off. Tim told me that if I could prove that this book was a early
printing blah, blah that it would be worth $50,000. I know he thinks
that is why I agreed to buy the book, but it had nothing to do with it,
I wanted a 1st signed by Harper Lee, period, and that is why I agreed to
buy it. Tim has also been saying that he agreed to sell it for less
BECAUSE I was willing to forego the warranty. This is simply not true-
it was never mentioned.
So, I read your comments, and agree that what I did was pretty stupid.
Some of what you talked about was however nothing I have any experience
with Safe Harbors, warrantys, etc. Hopefully, I will get the hang of
this, because I do really enjoy collecting books.
Anyway, it is my hope that you will judge my mistakes as stemming from
inexperience-
thanks, Jeb
Samuel Longhorn Clemmins
days) which left enough of a bad taste that I will not do so again...and he
has built up a significant reputation on both eBay and Amazon. He has billed
himself as 'honest Tim Miller Book Collector's Friend & Champion' and has
literally hornswoggled what must amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars
from a gullible public. While the buyer may have been somewhat foolish, he
has relied on a perceived 'reputation'. A quality that I think (possibly)
most of us make our living by....regards, Alex
Give a man the reputation as an early riser and he can sleep till noon.
Mark Twain
"jerry morris" <jerrya...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:6457-3AF...@storefull-104.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
Jon Meyers
> ... He has billed
> himself as 'honest Tim Miller Book Collector's Friend &
"There is one way to find out if a man is honest--ask him. If he
says 'Yes', you know he is crooked" --Groucho Marx
paghat
<alex...@gtonline.com> wrote:
> The thing is, I have done some business with this guy in my early (learning
> days) which left enough of a bad taste that I will not do so again...and he
> has built up a significant reputation on both eBay and Amazon. He has billed
> himself as 'honest Tim Miller Book Collector's Friend & Champion'
Yipes! A new generation that doesn't yet know the old "Honest John's Used
Cars & Brooklyn Bridges" always meant "Crook!" It's like never trust
anyone who's main theme is "Trust me!" No one honest has to make it their
title.
-paghat
Jon Meyers
> ... He has billed
> himself as 'honest Tim Miller Book Collector's Friend &
"There is one way to find out if a man is honest--ask him. If he
says 'Yes', you know he is crooked" --Groucho Marx
> Give a man the reputation as an early riser and he can sleep till
noon.
>
> Mark Twain
"We often do good that we may do evil with impunity." --La
Rochefoucauld
--
Jon Meyers (proprietor, House O' Quotes--our guarantee: "Love at
first cite!" Ask about our bulk discounts and our spring specials
on Mencken & Voltaire!)
HammanEarl
Jon Meyers
> Does anyone smell fish?
Three days old.
My favorite parts of the moronic, er, "innocent" victim's reply:
>>It was sold to me as a 1st, I bought it as a 1st- never >>was
there any mention of it being other than this- in fact >>Tim told me
that it was "rarer".
"[N]ever was there any mention of it being other than a first"??
Except the part where Flatsigned told him it was "rarer." How can a
book be both a first and something "rarer" than a first? It is
either one thing, or it's something else--it can't be both--and FS
was clearly blowing a ton of smoke about just what exactly that was.
>>I recognized Tim as someone who was pretty full of >>shit- however
I frequently have to deal with such >>people in my business, and
shrugged it off.
Translation: I knew he was a liar, but I chose to believe him
anyway, and to trust in his guarantee, because I was hoping to get a
steal.
Flatsigned is clearly an unethical creep, and I know it's not right
to blame the victim, but this guy was a greedy, careless dope and,
yes, he got what he deserved. There are real, innocent (and even
not-so-innocent) victims in this world who endure genuine loss &
suffering not of their own doing, and who deserve the sympathy and
support of all honest & compassionate people. But Hillbilly Jeb
ain't one of 'em.
--
Jon Meyers
Lawrence Person
<cath...@connectria.com> wrote:
> Flatsigned is clearly an unethical creep, and I know it's not right
> to blame the victim, but this guy was a greedy, careless dope and,
> yes, he got what he deserved.
To my mind, ignorance is far more forgiveable than dishonesty and malice.
If flatsigned proclaimed that the book was "GUARANTEED!", and then didn't
back it up, he's a liar and a con artists and it doesn't matter how
ignorant and foolish the buyer was.
paghat
<lawrenceperson-...@jump-v90-2120.customer.jump.net>,
lawrenc...@jump.net (Lawrence Person) wrote:
> In article <tfo4qfb...@corp.supernews.com>, "Jon Meyers"
> <cath...@connectria.com> wrote:
>
> > Flatsigned is clearly an unethical creep, and I know it's not right
> > to blame the victim, but this guy was a greedy, careless dope and,
> > yes, he got what he deserved.
>
> To my mind, ignorance is far more forgiveable than dishonesty and malice.
> If flatsigned proclaimed that the book was "GUARANTEED!", and then didn't
> back it up, he's a liar and a con artists and it doesn't matter how
> ignorant and foolish the buyer was.
Personally I've every sympathy for a conned fool. Think of the little old
lady just informed by Irish gypsies they can fix her leaking roof for
$1,000 -- she knows it is an emergency requirement, she knows from earlier
bonded contractors it would ordinarily cost $7,000, she knows that even
$1,000 will mean she'll be eating lettuce & weak tea three times a day as
her only meals the next few weeks, but it's clearly a bargain & she should
do it. They paint her roof white so it looks brand new, they take her
thousand dollars, & they're conning some old lady in the next state over
by the time the first rain falls & whitewash rinses through her ceiling.
You can say she was a moron to not see it coming, but con artists would
not exist if people tended to be too smart to fall for such things. It is
the blind, the maimed, the moronic that laws should protect. That Jon has
wanted the victim to share some of the blame reminds me of when I worked
in the crisis & rape crisis centers -- victims not only had to deal with a
crime against them, but they had to deal with a lot of people who thought
they should've been wearing sack dresses & locking themselves 24 hours a
day in a stone tower & shouldn't have any personal sex drive besides, as
in any other case, you gotta accept that your rapist is partially
justified.
My sense of the present catastrophe is that it should be regarded a
felony, not a civil court crime, & the guy should just be arrested &
charged as a felon who conned $3,000 out of a guy. Hell, I know a guy who
had a CRIMINAL arrest in Wisconsin for not returning library books because
some of the stuff was scarce enough it added up to grand larceny if
treated as stolen books, but the fool wouldn't've used his own library
card if he'd intended to steal the stuff. I would look into whether or not
criminal charges couldn't be made against this con artist. It wouldn't get
the $3,000 back but the bastard would spend a couple nights in jail at
least, & maybe have to get a second mortgage to pay an attorney to keep
him from a longer sentence. In my mind definitely, this Timmy Flatliner is
a criminal of the felon type, no less so than those wandering
pretend-house-repairers who scam little old ladies.
-paghat the ratgirl
Tom Martin
Tom
Subject:
RE: Question for seller -- Item #1429343896
Date:
Fri, 11 May 2001 14:11:47 -0500
From:
"Tim Miller" <timm...@flatsigned.com>
To:
<tma...@xtra.co.nz>
Tom,
All books come with a money back guarantee BUT, unless I made a mistake
in
description, you must pay the shipping costs. If I make a mistake, then
I
pay all shipping costs as well.
Best,
Tim
Tim Miller
2416 N. 77th Court #1
Elmwood Park, IL 60707
office/home 708 583 0845
fax 708 583 1560
Visit FLATSIGNED.COM <http://www.flatsigned.com/> for faster auction
viewing!
"FLATSIGNED" means signed by the author without being inscribed to some
stranger and signed directly on the page of book, not some bookplate
then
stuck onto the book!!
-----Original Message-----
From: tma...@xtra.co.nz [mailto:tma...@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 1:59 PM
To: timm...@ameritech.net
Subject: Question for seller -- Item #1429343896
Tim
Could you explain your guarantee to me? I live in
New Zealand, it's a long way to send a book from, so
if I bought this book or others what right of return do you offer if I'm
not
happy with any?
Thanks
Regards
Tom Martin
--------------------
Question from: isambad
Title of item: JOHN GRISHAM SIGNED 1ST 'TIME TO KILL' RARE
Seller: www.flatsigned.com
Starts: May-06-01 19:27:21 PDT
Ends: May-13-01 19:27:21 PDT
Price: Currently $202.50
To view the item, go to:
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1429343896
Visit eBay, the world's largest Personal Trading Community at
http://www.ebay.com
Nigel Burwood
> From: gin...@accumulata.com
> Newsgroups: rec.collecting.books
> Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 22:59:56 -0500
> Subject: Re: An Ebay Listing That Tells A Flatsigned Story
>
> Mr. Flatsigned attended a book fair I did this past weekend in Chicago and
> spent at least $15,000 buying books. He went booth to booth buying mostly
> signed modern firsts. Some dealers said they wouldn't sell to him but when
> he piled up thousands of dollars of books, most caved and gave him a 20%
> discount.
>
>
>
> Rich Davis wrote:
>
>> Maybe Ebay will give Mr. Flatsigned the boot now?
Suds1130
>felony,
There's simply no way to improve upon this posting, paghat - or lawrence
person's for that matter. Surely everyone who wants or gets a good deal is not
"greedy". SUE in TX
Jon Meyers
>....Think of the little old
> lady just informed by Irish gypsies they can fix her leaking roof
for
And...
> That Jon has
> wanted the victim to share some of the blame reminds me of when I
worked
Bringing starving senior citizens & rape victims into this
discussion is as irrelevant and rhetorically incendiary as shouting
"Nazi!" in any discussion other than one about actual Nazis.
Flatsinged is an unethical creep, no doubt, who should be taken to
task for his repugnant behavior. But this is not the same as saying
that Jeb is his "victim."
Let's try this for an example: A drunk driver is speeding down the
road, weaving back and forth. And let's say there's a big sign on
top of the car that reads "I promise not to hit you, but if I do
I'll stop and take you to the hospital." A man--sane and of normal
intelligence--standing by the side of the road sees the car coming,
notices the speed & the erratic behavior & the sign, and decides to
cross the road right in front of the car. He gets hit & injured,
and the drunk continues on his way. Is the drunk a despicable
criminal who should be taken off the road & thrown in jail, the
sooner the better? Absolutely, without question. But is the
street-crosser his "victim"? No, not in any useful, rational
definition of the word.
Jeb as much as admits he saw Flatsigned coming ("I recognized Tim as
someone who was pretty full of shit") but decided to step into the
road anyway ("I...shrugged it off."). I can't & won't defend any
part of what Flatsigned did, but I still fail to see why I should
have any sympathy for this buyer.
Jon Meyers
> There's simply no way to improve upon this posting, paghat - or
lawrence
> person's for that matter. Surely everyone who wants or gets a
good deal is not
> "greedy".
So, wanting a good deal relieves the buyer of the responsibility for
his own poor judgement & failure to protect his money?
Go back and read Jeb's reply again. He didn't get blindsided--he
chose to trust someone he recognized as a huckster, and he paid for
it. He sent off $3,000 without knowing exactly what he was getting,
and with no hard assurances from Flatsigned about exactly what was
being sold. I've done this myself at eBay, in hopes of getting a
bargain (though never with such a high-priced item), but each time I
knew darned well whose side the risk fell on: Mine.
paghat
<cath...@connectria.com> wrote:
> "paghat" wrote...
> >....Think of the little old
> > lady just informed by Irish gypsies they can fix her leaking roof
> for
> > $1,000...
> And...
> > That Jon has
> > wanted the victim to share some of the blame reminds me of when I
> worked
> > in the crisis & rape crisis centers...
>
> Bringing starving senior citizens & rape victims into this
> discussion is as irrelevant and rhetorically incendiary as shouting
> "Nazi!" in any discussion other than one about actual Nazis.
Protecting the hault, the blind, the stupid, without blaming them for a
well-studied con-artist's successes, is like shouting Nazi? You're not
thinking clearly, & you continue not to think clearly below.
> Flatsinged is an unethical creep, no doubt, who should be taken to
> task for his repugnant behavior. But this is not the same as saying
> that Jeb is his "victim."
>
> Let's try this for an example: A drunk driver is speeding down the
> road, weaving back and forth. And let's say there's a big sign on
> top of the car that reads "I promise not to hit you, but if I do
> I'll stop and take you to the hospital." A man--sane and of normal
> intelligence--standing by the side of the road sees the car coming,
> notices the speed & the erratic behavior & the sign, and decides to
> cross the road right in front of the car. He gets hit & injured,
> and the drunk continues on his way. Is the drunk a despicable
> criminal who should be taken off the road & thrown in jail, the
> sooner the better? Absolutely, without question. But is the
> street-crosser his "victim"? No, not in any useful, rational
> definition of the word.
>
> Jeb as much as admits he saw Flatsigned coming ("I recognized Tim as
> someone who was pretty full of shit") but decided to step into the
> road anyway ("I...shrugged it off."). I can't & won't defend any
> part of what Flatsigned did, but I still fail to see why I should
> have any sympathy for this buyer.
By your reasoning no one should buy on e-Bay from ANYone since the
percentage of honest people is probably down around 5 percent.
But since we're in to cartoon comparisons now. Suppose a rabid dog is in
your house. You decide to shoot the dog. You get bit & have rabies before
you can shoot him, PLUS you get dog-brains splattered on your signed
Escher print. So, is it your own fault you have rabies & wrecked the
print, when you could've just moved away & come back & reclaimed your
print after the dog starved to death? Are you some sort of dumbass for
leaving your door open so that any neighborhood rabid dog could wander in?
Are you not only stupid but cruel to have injured that sick animal? And
now that you think of it, didn't you almost kill that dog when it ran in
front of your car the other day but you stopped just in time -- and none
of this would've happened if only you'd been driving drunk & weren't quick
enough to evade running over the dog?
-paggers
Jon Meyers
> "Jon Meyers" wrote:
>
> > "paghat" wrote...
> > >....Think of the little old
> > > lady just informed by Irish gypsies they can fix her leaking
roof
> > for
> > > $1,000...
> > And...
> > > That Jon has
> > > wanted the victim to share some of the blame reminds me of
when I
> > worked
> > > in the crisis & rape crisis centers...
> >
> > Bringing starving senior citizens & rape victims into this
> > discussion is as irrelevant and rhetorically incendiary as
shouting
> > "Nazi!" in any discussion other than one about actual Nazis.
>
> Protecting the hault, the blind, the stupid, without blaming them
for a
> well-studied con-artist's successes, is like shouting Nazi? You're
not
> thinking clearly, & you continue not to think clearly below.
I said absolutely nothing dismissive of protecting those who need
protection. What I suggested was that dragging in emotionally
inflammatory comparisons where they have no relevance is
unproductive and, in this case at least, amounts to rhetorical
misdirection: "Pay no attention to the gentleman we're supposed to
be discussing. Look, instead, upon these poor widows & orphans. Do
they not make you weep for shame?" But our friend Jeb knew he was
dealing with a bullshitter and knew he was taking a gamble on the
book--and he lost. Tough. Don't gamble more than you can afford to
lose.
> > [snip]
> > Let's try this for an example: A drunk driver is speeding down
the
> > road, weaving back and forth....
>[snip]
> But since we're in to cartoon comparisons now. Suppose a rabid dog
is in
> your house. You decide to shoot the dog. You get bit & have rabies
before
> you can shoot him, PLUS you get dog-brains splattered on your
signed
> Escher print. So, is it your own fault you have rabies & wrecked
the
> print, when you could've just moved away & come back & reclaimed
your
> print after the dog starved to death? Are you some sort of dumbass
for
> leaving your door open so that any neighborhood rabid dog could
wander in?
> Are you not only stupid but cruel to have injured that sick
animal? And
> now that you think of it, didn't you almost kill that dog when it
ran in
> front of your car the other day but you stopped just in time --
and none
> of this would've happened if only you'd been driving drunk &
weren't quick
> enough to evade running over the dog?
Okay, so mine was a ridiculous example & only served to muddy the
waters--but, really, *I'm* the one who's not thinking clearly? I
think that dog must've bitten you, and it's too late for the shots.
(And, yes, you should've kept your door closed.)
--
Jon Meyers (who's already working on the first draft of his "neener,
neener, neener--yer one & so's yer mother!" reply)
fwdixon
Can we agree that, on the basis of the facts presented,
the seller was an unthical jerk and the buyer let his greed
overcome his common sense?
----
Posted via http://www.etin.com - the FREE public USENET portal on the Web
Complete SEARCHING, BROWSING, and POSTING of text and BINARY messages!
Lawrence Person
<fwd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> This entire thread is becoming ludicrous.
> Can we agree that, on the basis of the facts presented,
> the seller was an unthical jerk and the buyer let his greed
> overcome his common sense?
> ----
My God, for once I find myself agreeing with Bob. (Alert the media.)
However, I think "un[e}thical jerk" is too weak a condemnation. If he said
that he "GUARANTEED!" the book, and then didn't, he's not a jerk, he's a
lying scumbag con artist who should either cough up a refund or spend some
time in a cell.
fwdixon
>My God, for once I find myself agreeing with Bob. (Alert
the media.)
Strangely enough Lawrence, this isn't the first time we've
agreed upon something, it's just that I usually don't find it
neccesary to post anything when I'm in agreement with
someone - I feel my silence speaks for itself.
Bob FInnan
The Unofficial Hardy Boys Homepage
http://www.geocities.com/fwdixon
Suds1130
emptor". In a sales transaction, a party who has the superior knowledge and
expertise has the affirmative duty of disclosure- a significant omission of
information is a form of misrepresentation. SO, if you are the seller of the
house, or book, or car, and have knowledge that all is not as it should be,
you're not off the hook if you artfully describe the good stuff and carefully
write around the bad or iffy stuff. Contract terms are (generally) construed
against the party that drated them. SUE in TX
Samuel Longhorn Clemmins
and spoke of the rather suprising amount of support that he has received
from other eBayers...apparently Jeb has contacted both the FBI and the
Justice Department in pursuing the matter...
"paghat" <BADSPAMB...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:BADSPAMBADpaghat...@soggy72.drizzle.com...
Eljaysbks
done other than be pretty darn successful, and perhaps be annoying in the
process?
I'm not attempting to defend the man I just don't know anything about him.
Or why other dealers wouldn't want to sell books to him?
Frank Jason Oreto
Eljay's Used Books
Pittsburgh's South Side
Deals Galore
lefthanded? Stay tuned for upcoming legal action!
"Eljaysbks" <elja...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010525174425...@ng-cj1.aol.com...
jerry morris
------------------------------------------------------
Okay you autograph collectors, does Jerzy Kosinski have different
signatures?
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1432634113
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1432550148
Welcome to the Library of Moi the Bibliomaniac:
http://community-2.webtv.net/MoiBibliomaniac/MOISBOOKSABOUTBOOKS/
Jon Meyers
>>Okay you autograph collectors, does Jerzy Kosinski have different
>>signatures?
>>
>>
>>http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1432634113
>>
>>http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1432550148
Although I can't claim Rich Davis's level of expertise, these two sigs look to
me to be reasonably similar; there are several distinctive elements that match
quite well. It's an extremely rare person who creates nearly identical
signatures every time. Anyone's signature can vary, slightly or greatly,
depending upon the vintage of the signature, the writing instrument, the size &
position of the surface the signed object was resting on, the time taken, the
signer's mood--dozens of things.
All of which is not to say that one or the other (or both) of those Kosinski
sigs couldn't be a forgery--maybe, maybe not. But I don't think that the
relatively minor differences between the two are any evidence that one *must* be
a forgery.
Here are some other Kosinski sigs I found--perhaps useful for comparison:
http://www.abebooks.com/pictures/KELLERBKS/71621453.jpg
http://www.abebooks.com/pictures/BETWEENTHECOVERS/47765600.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Square/8639/jerzyk3.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Square/8639/jerzyk1.jpg
And a very interesting listing from Alibris (compare to Flatsigned's book in the
first eBay link above):
Title: Passion Play (Signed By Author)
Author: Kosinski, Jerzy
Alibris I.D.: 7289288930
Publisher: St. Martins New York
Year Published: 1979
Attributes: 1st Hardbound
Description: Very Good/near fine jacket SIGNED by Kosinski on ffep-sprawling
diagonal signature across entire page. Faded price mark upper rgt. corner behind
signatur
--
Jon Meyers
Rich Davis
and edition, but the signature seems to differ from the one depicted in the
scan.
"jerry morris" <jerrya...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:26036-3B1...@storefull-103.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
Gary Phillips
newsgroup about him, I went and checked the signatures of the books I've bought
from him against the signatures in other books by the same author. I did not
find any wild variations. Indeed, to my eye they are authentic signatures.
I don't know exactly what this bookseller has done to others, but with me he's
always been fair and honest.
Gary L. Phillips
Unknown
In reply to:
http://www.etin.com/article/Article.jsp?messageID=22197802&folder=rec.collecting.books
"Some individuals have been receiving their signed books of
the same title
and edition, but the signature seems to differ from the one
depicted in the
scan."
I recently went to a signing and bought a bunch of new
Robert B. Parker books of the same edition.
All were signed "Best Wishes, RBP" or "Wishing You The Best,
RBP". In shipping them out,
I did not necessarily match the book with the scan.
Peridote
Tim Miller
> >
> >So Flatsigned made a guarantee that he wasn't prepared to honour. The
> >buyer's mistake was to have trusted a dishonourable person. But that
> >dishonourable person has well over a thousand satisfied customers (see his
> >feedback), and of the few who complained forgery (or, more accurately,
> >pirated editions) was not an issue.
> >
>
> I just did an ebay seller search and FLATSIGNED has zero feedback, zero lots,
> and the sunglasses that say the ID's been changed in the last 30 days.
>
> [...pushing back the potted palm leaves...]
>
> "Verrrry Interesting."
>
> William Taylor
Convicting people without knowing all the facts is not right nor
professional. Anyone who has emailed me has received the facts. I
wish all would of done so but none the less. The FACTS are that the
buyer of this book negotiated with me to reduce the price IF he would
'TAKE THE RISK' that it might be valuable! He agreed to WAIVE THE
GUARANTEE and my listing clearly stated with question mark (?) that I
did not know the origin of the book. After finding out that it was
apparently not worth as much as he paid, he tried to extort (this is
illegal in all 50 states) money from me. At the time of sale he said
HE WOULD TAKE THE RISK, he agreed in subsequent phone coversations he
said this and further agreed that had he found this book was worth
$25,000 that he would not be complaining AND would not share the
proceeds with me in any way. FURTHER, I offered to COME TO HIS STATE
(WYOMING) AND HAVE AN ARBITRATOR DECIDE WHO WAS RIGHT with the looser
paying ALL costs. He has not agreed! Further, as some of you posting
here have pointed out, this buyer blatantly lied about SIGNATURE
versus BOOKPLATE since the very first line AND the scan clearly stated
and showed bookplate. Please find out the facts before you convict
people. Tragedies have resulted in far less than such unprofessional
conduct!
Best Wishes,
Tim Miller, Owner
www.FLATSIGNED.com
Tim Miller
> This is not an ebay listing of an item for sale. It is one individual's
> unique way to let people know what happened when he bought a forgery
> from an ebay seller:
>
>
> http://cgi.ebay.aol.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1429940626
Convicting people without knowing all the facts is not right nor
Tim Miller
> Mr. Flatsigned attended a book fair I did this past weekend in Chicago and
> spent at least $15,000 buying books. He went booth to booth buying mostly
> signed modern firsts. Some dealers said they wouldn't sell to him but when
> he piled up thousands of dollars of books, most caved and gave him a 20%
> discount.
>
TELL THE STORY. NO PERSON REFUSED TO SELL TO ME.....PERIOD! I did
spend about $15000 at the fair and most gave me the standard discount
of 20%. THIS PERSON IS A COWARD, A LIAR, UNPROFESSIONAL AND SHOULD
NOT BE TOLERATED OR BELIEVED. JUST ASK ANY OF THE DEALERS AT THE
CHICAGO BOOK FAIR I PURCHASED FROM. IF YOU WANT A LIST, EMAIL ME FOR
REFERENCES. AT LEAST 15 GLADLY SOLD ME BOOKS WITH NONE SAYING WHAT
THIS LIAR SAYS. HE IS A PITY AND A SHAME....A TRUE DISGRACE TO THE
BOOKSELLERS PROFESSION AS WELL AS TO ALL HONEST HUMAN BEINGS! IF I AM
LIEING, I HEREBY GRANT ALL MY ASSESTS TO THIS LIAR. TAKE ME TO COURT
YOU LIEING SOB!!
SINCERELY,
TIM MILLER, OWNER
WWW.FLATSIGNED.COM
>
>
> Rich Davis wrote:
>
> > Maybe Ebay will give Mr. Flatsigned the boot now?
> >
paghat
timm...@flatsigned.com (Tim Miller) wrote:
> Convicting people without knowing all the facts is not right nor
> professional.
Guaranteeing refunds that are not forthcoming is not right nor professional.
> Anyone who has emailed me has received the facts. I
> wish all would of done so but none the less. The FACTS are that the
> buyer of this book negotiated with me to reduce the price IF he would
> 'TAKE THE RISK' that it might be valuable! He agreed to WAIVE THE
> GUARANTEE and my listing clearly stated with question mark (?) that I
> did not know the origin of the book. After finding out that it was
> apparently not worth as much as he paid, he tried to extort (this is
> illegal in all 50 states) money from me. At the time of sale he said
> HE WOULD TAKE THE RISK, he agreed in subsequent phone coversations he
> said this and further agreed that had he found this book was worth
> $25,000 that he would not be complaining AND would not share the
> proceeds with me in any way. FURTHER, I offered to COME TO HIS STATE
> (WYOMING) AND HAVE AN ARBITRATOR DECIDE WHO WAS RIGHT with the looser
> paying ALL costs. He has not agreed! Further, as some of you posting
> here have pointed out, this buyer blatantly lied about SIGNATURE
> versus BOOKPLATE since the very first line AND the scan clearly stated
> and showed bookplate. Please find out the facts before you convict
> people. Tragedies have resulted in far less than such unprofessional
> conduct!
Since even the most retarded "professional" would never have sold this as
an autograph, I'm not buying your excuses. Give the man back his money you
wretch. Your only other option is to change your name so no one knows it's
you.
-paghat the ratgirl
Bob Riedel
>The FACTS are that the
>buyer of this book negotiated with me to reduce the price IF he would
>'TAKE THE RISK' that it might be valuable! He agreed to WAIVE THE
>GUARANTEE and my listing clearly stated with question mark (?) that I
>did not know the origin of the book.
Tim, would you agree that selling a next-to-worthless pirate edition as
something that "might be valuable," when a bit of research beforehand would
have revealed its true nature, is a questionable bookselling practice? Given
your original high reserve on this item, I'd be willing to believe you didn't
know thing one about what you had, but so far I've heard nothing from you
indicating that you realize you went off half-cocked when you put the book up
for sale in the first place. This in itself is enough to make anyone extremely
leery of any "unusual" items you might be attempting to sell in the future. You
present yourself as a professional bookseller, but such tawdry (rather,
nonexistent) research makes you look like a garage saler. If you don't know
what a book is, don't sell it until you do. And the practice of negotiating to
void a return policy speaks for itself.
>Tragedies have resulted in far less than such unprofessional
>conduct!
This would be easier to swallow (but not much) if you'd own up to your own
unprofessional conduct.
Bob
"You can't wake someone who is pretending to be asleep."
(Navajo proverb)
******remove last "a" to e-mail******
Lawrence Person
> > William Taylor
> Convicting people without knowing all the facts is not right nor
> professional. Anyone who has emailed me has received the facts. I
> wish all would of done so but none the less. The FACTS are that the
> buyer of this book negotiated with me to reduce the price IF he would
> 'TAKE THE RISK' that it might be valuable! He agreed to WAIVE THE
> GUARANTEE and my listing clearly stated with question mark (?) that I
> did not know the origin of the book. After finding out that it was
> apparently not worth as much as he paid, he tried to extort (this is
> illegal in all 50 states) money from me. At the time of sale he said
> HE WOULD TAKE THE RISK, he agreed in subsequent phone coversations he
> said this and further agreed that had he found this book was worth
> $25,000 that he would not be complaining AND would not share the
> proceeds with me in any way. FURTHER, I offered to COME TO HIS STATE
> (WYOMING) AND HAVE AN ARBITRATOR DECIDE WHO WAS RIGHT with the looser
> paying ALL costs. He has not agreed! Further, as some of you posting
> here have pointed out, this buyer blatantly lied about SIGNATURE
> versus BOOKPLATE since the very first line AND the scan clearly stated
> and showed bookplate. Please find out the facts before you convict
> people. Tragedies have resulted in far less than such unprofessional
> conduct!
1. You guaranteed the book in your eBay auction listing, the only thing
remotely resembling a binding document in this dispute.
2. In that listing you unconditionally guaranteed the book.
3. We have no way of verifying whether your version of the telephone
conversation in question is accurate, and no particular reason to believe
so.
4. A oral agreement, as they say, isn't worth the paper it's written on.
5. In the message above, you have just admitted to breaking eBay's rules
by selling an item that you had listed outside the eBay fee structure, as
listed at:
http://pages.ebay.com/help/community/investigates.html#selling
which specifically states the following as a Selling Offense: "Using
member contact information obtained from eBay or using any eBay feature to
offer to sell an item outside of eBay to any of your bidders in a Reserve
Not Met listing."
and thus your account is subject to termination under eBay rules.
6. Caveat emptor may be a good policy for a buyer to follow, but is an
unacceptable policy for any seller of sight-unseen merchandise.
7. Any honest bookdealer would offer a refund for any book which was not
as described, as in this situation, despite any side agreements which may
exist. That you have not done so, and continue to refuse to do so, tells
us all we need to know about your ethics.
8. Your use of SCREAMING CAPITAL LETTERS does not exactly leave us with an
impression of overwhelming intelligence, nor does such gaffes as using
"looser" when you mean "loser" (unless, perhaps, some sort of laxative was
involved).
9. Consider this as formal notice that I do not wish to receive any e-mail
from you at any time in the future, and that any further e-mails will be
reported as spam to both your ISP and eBay. If you want to discuss
something that appears in rec.collecting.books, keep it in
rec.collecting.books, in public, where everyone can see it and judge for
themselves.
fwd...@yahoo.com
> an autograph, I'm not buying your excuses. Give the man back his money you
> wretch. Your only other option is to change your name so no one knows it's
> you.
Paggy, you old rat girl you,
The seller notified the buyer BEFORE the sale of the risks involved
and the buyer agreed.Now the seller offered the buyer arbitration and
he refused.
So what's the problem?
The buyer was greedy and over-eager and he got burned and it's HIS
fault.
Now he wants to whine about it all over the 'net but it doesn't change
the fact that it was his own naked greed that was his downfall.
So boo fucking hoo for him, he got what he deserved.
__________________________________________________
Bob Finnan
The Unofficial Hardy Boys Home Page
http://www.geocities.com/fwdixon
New Books, Tapes, DVD's, CD-ROMs and More For Sale
http://www.geocities.com/fwdixon/amazon.htm
paghat
lawrenc...@jump.net (Lawrence Person) wrote:
Bravo Lawrence!
-paghat the ratgirl
jerry morris
Ask any professional bookseller if the facts of this case justify
arbitration. There is only one fact that matters; the bottom line is
that you, knowingly or unknowingly, sold someone a bill a goods, and
refuse to refund the buyer his money.
All the other facts are not relevant.
Jerry Morris
Jon Meyers
transaction deserve a poke with a pointed stick. The rest of you can continue to
flail away at Tim if you like--he surely deserves it--but let's hear no more, please,
about the poor, tragic vicitmized buyer and his righteous crusade against the evil,
rapacious seller.
--
Jon Meyers
"If you can't convince them,
confuse them." --Harry Truman
Tim Miller wrote...
> (Medievalbk) wrote...
> > >
> > >So Flatsigned made a guarantee that he wasn't prepared to honour. The
> > >buyer's mistake was to have trusted a dishonourable person. But that
> > >dishonourable person has well over a thousand satisfied customers (see his
> > >feedback), and of the few who complained forgery (or, more accurately,
> > >pirated editions) was not an issue.
[snip]
Jon Meyers
[snip]
> 3. We have no way of verifying whether your version of the telephone
> conversation in question is accurate, and no particular reason to believe
> so.
Ditto the buyer's version, to be fair.
> 4. A oral agreement, as they say, isn't worth the paper it's written on.
I don't know who "they" are (though Samuel Goldwyn usually gets the credit for that
sentiment), but they aren't lawyers. Oral contracts are, in fact, enforceable under
certain circumstances.
> 5. In the message above, you have just admitted to breaking eBay's rules
> by selling an item that you had listed outside the eBay fee structure, as
> listed at:
> http://pages.ebay.com/help/community/investigates.html#selling
> which specifically states the following as a Selling Offense: "Using
> member contact information obtained from eBay or using any eBay feature to
> offer to sell an item outside of eBay to any of your bidders in a Reserve
> Not Met listing."
> and thus your account is subject to termination under eBay rules.
Most of eBay's rules, including the one cited, are designed solely to protect their
own economic interests by asserting authority over things that are none of their
business, and such rules are not really relevant to a discussion of the legal & moral
implications of this particular sale.
I agree with all the rest of your points. Tim "Flatsigned" Miller's behavior was,
perhaps, barely borderline legal, but was certainly ignorant, unprofessional, and
morally questionable.
--
Jon Meyers (still shedding no tears for the buyer, however)
Medievalbk
>> > > William Taylor
>> > Convicting people without knowing all the facts is not right nor
>> > professional. Anyone who has emailed me has received the facts.
..yada yada....
Will someone take my name out of this clip? I've been an inquiring mind, not a
Nankiepoo. No list here.
William Taylor
Max Johnson
----------
I must say, Paghat, that I, for one, am keenly disappointed in your tepid
response above. Usually you can be counted on to speak out (ad infinitum)
in flaming X rated prose for at least a couple of single-spaced typed pages
regarding ebay cheats and now you have this 'Flatsigned' corner-cutter dead
in your sights, floundering in a sea of ridiculous excuses, awaiting a
response already, and what do we get from 'Purple Prose Paghat'? ---- "You
wretch." -------- Really! ------ Flatsigned's inane defence is so flimsy
and lame that it can be easily picked apart, word by word, line by line and
stuffed back down his gullet and what we get from "Our" Paghat is "desist,
you wretch." Pathetic. All show and no go. Max
paghat
<mar...@qwest.net> wrote:
Some stuff is so easily done it isn't even worth the effort. But as
"wretch" did seem a bit tame, I will retell the story of the worm with its
head chopped off. Many people think if you cut a worm in half, you get two
worms. But in reality the half of the worm that is the "head" grows a new
rear end & recovers, but the rear end also grows a rear end and so looks
almost like a normal worm but slowly starves to death having a head at
neither end. This also explains how certain businessmen end up making
decisions that will eventually destroy their business. And that's why
instead of you wretch I should've said, "Give the guy back his money,
Worm's butt for brains."
-paghat the ratgirl
maiasaura
say : I just LOVE coming in on the middle of a good flame war! It's better than
reading part three of a trilogy and trying to guess who did what to whom, and when!
Quite invigorating!
Yoiks Away! Tally Ho, all!
Annie the Maiasaur
Bob Riedel wrote:
--
Visit:
"The Dog Collector" at http://www.maiasaura.com
Iron Chef USA! http://www.ironchef-usa.com
The Holocaust History Project web site! http://www.holocaust-history.org/
Peridote
auction are dead wrong. This deal was not closed in auction, so the auction
terms and ebay rules are moot. It was not closed in auction because neither
party wanted it closed in auction.
The contract here is probably an oral contract over the telephone, totally
legal and enforcible. This was preceded by the ebay ad book info, and
probably informational emails, and informational phone conversations. And
this oral contract was probably followed by affirming emails.
ww.flat's position SEEMS TO BE it was an isolated "As Is" deal with no
inferred warranties or guarantees of an item which has some unknown
qualities. Nothing wrong with that. And I would guess that he has emails to
back up the "As Is" aspect. He also seems to think that "As Is" deals are
unrevocable?
Jeb's strongest position SEEMS TO BE that it didn't matter whether it was a
true first or not, but that he was assured it was at least a 1963 Lippincott
with at least an apparent true signature. And on those assurances he
consented to an "As Is" deal. But it apparently was not published by
Lippincott, but by Taiwanese pirates instead.
In other words if you agree to buy a 1963 lippincott "As Is", and the book
is a 1963 Lippincott, you are stuck with it. But if you agree to buy a 1963
Lippincott "As Is", and it turns out to be non-Lippincott, then the seller's
assurances, which were the backbone of the deal, were faulty .
Peridote
John Wilson
newsgroup. Perhaps I'd better give the background first.
I saw Tim's postings shortly after he sent them. My first feeling was that
his outrage was genuine, my second feeling was that I was now less confident
that my previous comments in this thread were appropriate, and my third
feeling was that, because he had waded in angrily, his side of the story
would probably not come through as persuasively as it would have if he had
taken a calmer and more rational stand.
So I contacted him and told him so.
He responded asking what he could do about it, and I told him what (from
what I could see of the situation) I would probably do (which involved
maintaining that the buyer was still an idiot but nevertheless refunding his
money).
Here is his reply, which he has asked me to post to rec.collecting.books. I
have taken the liberty of editing sections of his reply which I interpret as
being greetings/comments intended for me personally, not for the newsgroup
as a whole :
___________________________________________________________
John,
[snip] Were I to think that others on the 'string' were as interested in the
truth, it would probably give rise to my again spending time attempting to
explain. Your reference to 'their highly developed sense of ethics' is not
well founded.
'Phagat Rat' or whatever his/her name is certainly just wants some
excitement, regardless the cost in time, human-spirit and integrity. Alex
from the UK (who goes by Samuel Longhorn Clemens) is an OLD enemy of mine
because I shipped his books via surface rather than air. The liar who made
the ridiculous statements about my being 'turned away' by booksellers at a
book fair in Chicago is so far gone that I don't want his support, esteem,
anything! There is another who knows the story of Tom Dorn, VP of the ABAA
(the reference in string was to buying a book at the NYC Bookfair - I was
not at the NYC Bookfair BTW) who had to retract his lies about me before.
Yet another chooses to ridicule my use of grammar or spelling. What would
cause me to want to earn the esteem of these people? [snip]
The truth is that I did not negotiate to reduce the price and remove my
guarantee. The buyer did and I accepted. That is something that I will not
do again. BUT, when he purchased this way, then had it examined, then
demanded his money back OR HE WOULD SMEAR MY NAME, it became extortion. To
bow to extortion means more extortion. The 'thread' of people have become
part and parcel of extortion. With all due respect due you, to bow to
extortion would not be good for anyone but for the extortionist.
Please post this on the thread...
___________________________________________________________
I am posting it because Tim asked me to, not because I agree with everything
he says. I accept his reasons for not wanting to give the buyer a refund,
but as I have already said I would probably have given him one myself. The
character references are his, not mine.
--
John R. Yamamoto-Wilson
http://rarebooksinjapan.com
Suds1130
It depends. One of the key "circumstances" would be a meeting of the minds.
The stories we've heard from both parties indicate there may not have been a
meeting of the minds. And, as I said before, contracts are generally not
enforceable, oral or written, where there is either a material
misrepresentation by omission or commission. A party with superior knowledge
or the capability of acquiring knowledge cannot always rely on a
"nyah-nyah-nyah/ they agreed" defense.
Whether it is "legally enforceable" or not, I vote with those who say that it
is more professional to refund the money. SUE in TX
William Klimon
news:i7XR6.19167$zl5.5...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
> All this yelling that ww.flat should abide by the terms set forth in the
> auction are dead wrong. This deal was not closed in auction, so the
auction
> terms and ebay rules are moot. It was not closed in auction because
neither
> party wanted it closed in auction.
>
> The contract here is probably an oral contract over the telephone, totally
> legal and enforcible. This was preceded by the ebay ad book info, and
> probably informational emails, and informational phone conversations. And
> this oral contract was probably followed by affirming emails.
>
> ww.flat's position SEEMS TO BE it was an isolated "As Is" deal with no
> inferred warranties or guarantees of an item which has some unknown
> qualities. Nothing wrong with that. And I would guess that he has emails
to
> back up the "As Is" aspect. He also seems to think that "As Is" deals are
> unrevocable?
It is NOT correct that such an oral contract would be enforceable.
Contracts for the sale of goods for the price of $500 or more must be
evidenced by a writing to be enforceable. Uniform Commercial Code (UCC)
section 2-201(1).
Therefore, an oral contract with a modification or waiver of the implied
warranty of merchantability (UCC section 2-314) would not be enforceable and
the buyer could sue for a breach of warranty.
William M. Klimon
http://www.gateofbliss.com
William Klimon
news:thdef8a...@corp.supernews.com...
> > 4. A oral agreement, as they say, isn't worth the paper it's written on.
>
> I don't know who "they" are (though Samuel Goldwyn usually gets the credit
for that
> sentiment), but they aren't lawyers. Oral contracts are, in fact,
enforceable under
> certain circumstances.
This situation (i.e., the sale of good for a price over $500), however, is
not one of them. See UCC section 2-201(1).
Cheers.
Suds1130
>Contracts for the sale of goods for the price of $500 or more must be
>evidenced by a writing to be enforceable. Uniform Commercial Code (UCC)
>section 2-201(1).
>
I'd lost track of the amount involved but, yes, this IS a rather important
point too. SUE in TX
William M. Klimon
news:20010602001011...@ng-cf1.aol.com...
As I recall, the amount was $3000.
Cheers.
Jon Meyers
> "Jon Meyers" wrote...
>
> > ...Oral contracts are, in fact, enforceable under
> > certain circumstances.
>
> This situation (i.e., the sale of good for a price over $500), however, is
> not one of them. See UCC section 2-201(1).
Yes, it does say "(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section a contract for the
sale of goods for the price of $500 or more is not enforceable by way of action or
defense unless there is some writing sufficient to indicate that a contract for sale
has been made between the parties..."
But read further, and see what is "otherwise provided" in Section 2-201(3)(c):
(3) A contract which does not satisfy the requirements of subsection (1) but which is
valid in other respects is enforceable
(c) with respect to goods for which payment has been made and accepted or which have
been received and accepted (Sec. 2-606).
Which means, I think, that the $500 limit only applies if nothing has yet changed
hands, or if the buyer has declined to accept the goods *and* the seller has declined
acceptance of payment. In the case of Flatsigned v. Jeb, although the buyer has not
legally accepted the goods (see § 2-606, as noted above), payment *has* been made &
accepted.
--
Jon Meyers
paghat
And just think about that for a while. Thousands of dollars shit down a
drain & the customer is supposed to grin & bear it & not get roaring mad
seeking a perfectly understandable revenge. Given that there's no way a
crook will ever return be induced to return ill-gotten gains of a
successful hornswoggle, threats is all there is. And remember, there have
been reports about this Wormbuttforbrains fellow for a good long time
before his inexpertise resulted in the BIG score.
Imagine you're a bookseller with a book you think or hope or imagine or
pretend is worth $3000. Without authenticating the signature you put it up
for auction for umpteen thousands of dollars but "settle" afterword for a
scant three thousand. Think you're honest & expert if you can pull such a
stunt? People have plotted murder for less money than that, it's not a
matter of you already chewed that gum ball you can't have your penny back.
Can you imagine ANYone with ANY sense will EVER trust such a bookseller it
being known he is perfectly willing to charge thousands of dollars for
signatures he never bothers to authenticate? When he got even that far he
showed he was in the wrong business by far. Can it be that any
excuse-making Wormbuttforbrains bookseller would EVER be capable of a
totally honest deal? Only by accident.
And when someone lacks the time, expertise, or desire to authenticate a
book he's selling for $3000 on a mark-down, will he be MORE motivated to
authenticate "signed" book he thinks are worth a mere fifty, or a hundred,
or three hundred? Of course not. I will forever assume that every signed
book he offers needs independent authentication because if it were fake,
he wouldn't know the difference, would care to know the difference.
"Probably signed -- $3000" is a discription (just like the term
"flatsigned") that is never going to be adopted by legitimate booksellers.
Put Probably Signed and Flatsigned down in your lexicon as synonyms for
crooked amateurism bound to defraud.
Doesn't matter really what his feeble excuses are for keeping THOUSANDS of
another man's dollars obtained for a fake signature. The fact remains he
was not qualified to know the difference, & when he makes all the mistakes
an amateur pretending to be an expert inevitably makes, he thinks a
customer should not be peevish about that, should not with helpless anger
demand a refund or pay the consequences, does not think a refund should be
forthcoming because the book MIGHT have been a deal if it had been the
real thing. No one honest sells books that expensive that have not been
authenticated -- so the fact that no refund was forthcoming turns out to
have been the SECOND crooked act, not the first, in that sour deal.
Even if a buyer was as big a dope as the flatworm would make of him, or as
greedily ignorant as Hardly a Boyo found him to be, the fact remains that
flatworm put on auction for a very high price a COMPLETELY FAKE autograph
& DOES NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE or willingness to find the expertise to EVER
be trusted with a dime.
If the flatworm knew a signature from his second sphincter this terrible
theft could never have happened. And he wouldn't be left making excuses
for himself, plus admitting to having more enemies in this world than I've
made in decades of being a pretty persistently rude bitch. This flatworm
has a lot of people who hate his guts by his own admission in the letter
he had John post for him; all pretty much under the impression they or
their friendds were hoodwinked by him at one time or another. Making
excuses for selling fake autographs, making himself out the good guy in a
handful of other encounters with people he believes to be his enemies. If
he has so many enemies in such a short time, there is not chance in hell
it's not his own fault, & not on the basis of personality conflict -- the
basis would be his own behavior, pretence of expertise he lacks, &
willingness to put high prices on books any honest bookseller would would
not have sold without first finding out if the signature was real.
Just imagine yourselves paying out $3,000 for a fake & finding out you
have neither the right book nor your money. This is not just buyer beware,
this is buyers don't go anywhere near this guy. So I don't care if the
buyer is a greedy dope who should've known better than to deal with a
transparent fraud. No matter how stupid the victim, my empathy always
falls on the side of the robbed, not the robber.
-paghat the ratgirl
William M. Klimon
> Yes, it does say "(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section a
contract for the
> sale of goods for the price of $500 or more is not enforceable by way of
action or
> defense unless there is some writing sufficient to indicate that a
contract for sale
> has been made between the parties..."
>
> But read further, and see what is "otherwise provided" in Section
2-201(3)(c):
>
> (3) A contract which does not satisfy the requirements of subsection (1)
but which is
> valid in other respects is enforceable
>
> (c) with respect to goods for which payment has been made and accepted or
which have
> been received and accepted (Sec. 2-606).
>
> Which means, I think, that the $500 limit only applies if nothing has yet
changed
> hands, or if the buyer has declined to accept the goods *and* the seller
has declined
> acceptance of payment. In the case of Flatsigned v. Jeb, although the
buyer has not
> legally accepted the goods (see § 2-606, as noted above), payment *has*
been made &
> accepted.
Yes, indeed, *if* payment has been made and accepted (it could have been a
conditional payment--by check, e.g.--this is a question of fact), then the
exception applies and we are back to the question of whether the contract
was otherwise enforceable. An argument could be made, e.g., that there was
a breach of the duty of good faith, if not outright fraud.
And, of course, if there was an implied warranty of fitness for a particular
purpose (another question of fact, which very well might be answered in the
affirmative in this case) then that too can only be waived in a writing.
UCC section 2-316(2). Thus, a breach of warranty claim could be made as
well.
William M. Klimon
news:BADSPAMBADpaghat...@soggy72.drizzle.com...
> "Probably signed -- $3000" is a discription (just like the term
> "flatsigned") that is never going to be adopted by legitimate booksellers.
> Put Probably Signed and Flatsigned down in your lexicon as synonyms for
> crooked amateurism bound to defraud.
I don't have the same visceral reaction against the term "flatsigned" that
you seem to. As a descriptive term simply meaning a book signed and signed
only by the author, it strikes me as a harmless neologism.
As for what is implied by the term, however, I see a big problem.
Flatsigned's whole marketing effort implies that "flatsigned" is a
preferrable state for a book, as opposed to any more personal annotations by
an author. But that is an inclination that is counter to the historical
preference of the greatest book collectors and dealers.
I wonder which item in the following pairs Flatsigned would prefer:
(1) (a) a copy of THE WASTE LAND signed by T.S. Eliot
(b) the same as above but signed to Ezra Pound
(2) (a) a copy of MOBY-DICK signed by Melville
(b) the same as above but signed to Hawthorne
It seems to me that Flatsigned would--according to his principle--prefer
(a), but of course he would be turning his nose up at two unique and
fantastically valuable dedication copies. He would be rejecting history and
literature and art for the sake of a specious value that he has wed himself
to--and in the process he would lose out financially as well.
(Other examples would be works that are corrected or annotated in autograph
by the author. I have, by way of a not terribly valuable example, a
biography of St. Francis of Assisi by Eloi Leclerc entitled EXILE AND
TENDERNESS, translated from the French by the great Thomas More scholar
Germain Marc'hadour. In this copy Marc'hadour has made innumerable
corrections to the text by hand, as well as inscribing and signing the book.
I assume Flatsigned would reject this copy--although I would and do
certainly prefer it.)
So he reveals himself or at least his business as vulgar--apart from his
questionable business practices.
John Wilson
"Even if a buyer was as big a dope as the flatworm would make of him, or as
greedily ignorant as Hardly a Boyo found him to be, the fact remains that
flatworm put on auction for a very high price a COMPLETELY FAKE autograph"
I'm getting a bit confused now. I thought the problem was that the book
itself turned out to be a pirated edition, not a true first. I don't agree
with Tim's refusal to reimburse the buyer, but I can at least follow his
reasoning that if the buyer (misguidedly, greedily, naively, whatever)
waived the guarantee over whether the book was indeed a first he has no
right to claim reimbursement. Am I right, however, in thinking that this is
the first time the autograph itself has been claimed to be fake? And is that
now a given in the discussion?
*If* the autograph is fake then I would agree that Tim Miller has no
defence, that the buyer should be reimbursed and that anyone who has bought
a Flatsigned item should assume the worst until they have had their item
independently verified.
On the other hand, that doesn't square with the $15,000 he spent at the
Chicago Book Fair, which suggests to me that he pays good prices for genuine
articles (I don't suppose all those dealers at the Chicago fair were selling
fakes).
Peridote
1.)If payment has been tendered and payment accepted this proves the 2
parties both believed there was an agreement, and the deal would be exempted
from that rule.
2.)Most business case law in the first half of this century was based on one
main form of written evidence---the telegram. Is not an email just a modern
form of a telegram?
Peridote
John F. Kuenzig
When I started as a dealer, I set a goal to make a profit on everything I
sold. I found that with mistakes (and I've made plenty) to resell them at a
profit to some dummy didn't work very well - the "dummy" sooner or later
got smart, and then I was the dummy since I'd lost a potential repeat
customer. This is even more of an issue with higher end items.
Today's mistakes are repriced, loss taken, and I move on with
another repeat customer in the fold.
I think Tim knew what he sold, or knows now. I can't agree his approach
if he wants to maintain and grow a business. This customer will never again
buy from him, and by extension many of us who could be very real customers
won't buy or will be very leery of him. The question is what he does now.
To Tim if he's reading - suck it up, take the hit, earn my and everyone elses
respect here for doing it, even if very late in the process. Take a shot at
some
future earnings from this group - I'd be very surprised if this group doesn't
represent collectively 100s of thousands of dollars spent annually on books.
And I'll bet there are _lots_ of lurkers here who spend serious money on
ebay too (even if they wouldn't admit it to the world at large) :)
John Kuenzig
Bookseller
Pillar of Truth
example, then goes out and buys unsigned editions of the same book. Gets
out his trusty pen and signs the rest. "I picked up a whole batch of these
signed books wholesale. Bid with confidence!"
You're not even a good forger!
"Tim Miller" <timm...@flatsigned.com> wrote in message
news:77dbc1a7.01053...@posting.google.com...
> gin...@accumulata.com wrote in message
news:<3AFA123C...@accumulata.com>...
> > Mr. Flatsigned attended a book fair I did this past weekend in Chicago
and
> > spent at least $15,000 buying books. He went booth to booth buying
mostly
> > signed modern firsts. Some dealers said they wouldn't sell to him but
when
> > he piled up thousands of dollars of books, most caved and gave him a 20%
> > discount.
> >
> THIS PERSON IS A LIAR AND I CHALLENGE HIM TO HAVE A NEUTRAL PERSON
> TELL THE STORY. NO PERSON REFUSED TO SELL TO ME.....PERIOD! I did
> spend about $15000 at the fair and most gave me the standard discount
> of 20%. THIS PERSON IS A COWARD, A LIAR, UNPROFESSIONAL AND SHOULD
> NOT BE TOLERATED OR BELIEVED. JUST ASK ANY OF THE DEALERS AT THE
> CHICAGO BOOK FAIR I PURCHASED FROM. IF YOU WANT A LIST, EMAIL ME FOR
> REFERENCES. AT LEAST 15 GLADLY SOLD ME BOOKS WITH NONE SAYING WHAT
> THIS LIAR SAYS. HE IS A PITY AND A SHAME....A TRUE DISGRACE TO THE
> BOOKSELLERS PROFESSION AS WELL AS TO ALL HONEST HUMAN BEINGS! IF I AM
> LIEING, I HEREBY GRANT ALL MY ASSESTS TO THIS LIAR. TAKE ME TO COURT
> YOU LIEING SOB!!
> SINCERELY,
> TIM MILLER, OWNER
> WWW.FLATSIGNED.COM
> >
> >
> > Rich Davis wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe Ebay will give Mr. Flatsigned the boot now?
> > >
> > > "jerry morris" <jerrya...@webtv.net> wrote in message
> > > news:6457-3AF...@storefull-104.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
William M. Klimon
> This is a wrong interpretation on 2 counts.
I think I stated the rule correctly. There may be applicable exceptions
depending on the facts of this particular case.
> 1.)If payment has been tendered and payment accepted this proves the 2
> parties both believed there was an agreement, and the deal would be
exempted
> from that rule.
Yes, *if* payment had been made and accepted, then there is an applicable
exception to the general rule. It is possible, however, that payment was
conditional, if it had been made by check, e.g. Again, it would depend on
the facts of the case.
> 2.)Most business case law in the first half of this century was based on
one
> main form of written evidence---the telegram. Is not an email just a
modern
> form of a telegram?
(a) Insofar as the modern statute diverges from the older case law, the
modern statute (the UCC) would govern.
(b) And under the UCC if there is some kind of writing that meets the formal
requirements, then we are not really talking about an oral contract anymore.
Cheers.
my-wings
consistently, but seldom feel that I have the knowledge base that would
allow me to contribute. But this particular thread has caught my
interest....
"John Wilson" <jo...@rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in message
news:9f9hek$2vi4$1...@kanna.cc.sophia.ac.jp...,
from correspondence which Tim Miller wrote and asked him to post....
>
> The truth is that I did not negotiate to reduce the price and remove my
> guarantee. The buyer did and I accepted. That is something that I will
not
> do again. BUT, when he purchased this way, then had it examined, then
> demanded his money back OR HE WOULD SMEAR MY NAME, it became extortion.
To
> bow to extortion means more extortion. The 'thread' of people have become
> part and parcel of extortion. With all due respect due you, to bow to
> extortion would not be good for anyone but for the extortionist.
>
If Mr. Miller's account of the offer and acceptance is correct, then it
appears that his customer hoped to pick up a $25,000 (or whatever it was
thought to be valued at) book for $3,000 and expected that if the book were
not genuine, Mr. Miller would give him back his money. If Mr. Miller had
been a more "professional" seller, it would have worked. The buyer would
have experienced the chance of a large gain at virtually no risk
In raising the possibility that the buyer was attempting to "perpetrate a
scam," I am not condoning any portion of this transaction by either party.
Frankly, it's hard for me to believe that any purported professional could
have a book with such potential value and not authenticate it before
offering it for sale. The only reason I can think of for not authenticating
the book himself is that Mr. Miller didn't *want* to know the truth, so that
he could, in somewhat good conscience, offer it on its potential.
What I see here is something I've noticed on the Antiques Road Show time
after time: It's possible to pick up a $5,000-value treasure for $0.25, but
you can seldom do it for $500. When the price is high, but low relative to
the true value of the thing, suspect that the seller is making his fortune
on the buyer's greed.
I think that's pretty much what happened here, with the exception that
possibly Mr. Miller didn't *know* he had a fake.
Just my two cents, and thanks to everyone for making such an interesting
newsgroup for a lurker to read.
Alice
fwd...@yahoo.com
>... Even if a buyer was as big a dope as the flatworm would make of
him, or as
> greedily ignorant as Hardly a Boyo found him to be, the fact remains that
> flatworm put on auction for a very high price a COMPLETELY FAKE autograph
> & DOES NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE or willingness to find the expertise to EVER
> be trusted with a dime.
Paggy, you saggy baggy old rat girl,
What relevance does the auction have to do with the private sale?
Let’s say I take a penny out of my pocket, make highly detailed
scans of it, put it up for auction on eBay with the aforementioned
scans, a minutely detailed description in which I speculate that it
MAY be a rare variation and a starting bid of $5000.00.
Now let’s say some dope bids on it and wins.
Now, who’s to blame?
Certainly not I, since the item was more than adequately described.
Why NOT blame the buyer? Nobody put a gun to his head and forced him
to buy.
It’s nice to be able to blame others for our own shortcomings,
to dive deeper into the victimization pool where one’s self is
NEVER at fault - it’s always the other guy.
Let’s put the blame where the blame belongs and let’s not
mix apples and oranges.
The book auction on eBay has absolutely no bearing on the ensuing
private sale.
The buyer knowingly took a risk and was warned BEFOREHAND of that
risk.
The seller has no obligation to refund the money since the sale was
“As Is”.
That being said, it’s my opinion that, for the sake of his
business and reputation, the seller should have refunded the money.
It’s also my opinion that the buyer was a greedy dope who whines
too much.
__________________________________________________
Bob Finnan
The Unofficial Hardy Boys Home Page
http://www.geocities.com/fwdixon
New Books, Tapes, DVD's, CD-ROMs and More For Sale
http://www.geocities.com/fwdixon/amazon.htm
fwdixon
>If Mr. Miller's account of the offer and acceptance is correct, then it
appears that his customer hoped to pick up a $25,000 (or whatever it
was thought to be valued at) book for $3,000 and expected that if the
book were not genuine, Mr. Miller would give him back his money. If Mr.
Miller had been a more "professional" seller, it would have worked.
The buyer would have experienced the chance of a large gain at
Now why would a buyer assume that a seller would allow him to
experience "chance of a large gain at virtually no risk"?
It doesn't make any sense.
__________________________________________________
Bob Finnan
The Unofficial Hardy Boys Home Page
http://www.geocities.com/fwdixon
New Books, Tapes, DVD's, CD-ROMs and More For Sale
http://www.geocities.com/fwdixon/amazon.htm
----
Posted via http://www.etin.com - the FREE public USENET portal on the Web
Complete SEARCHING, BROWSING, and POSTING of text and BINARY messages!
my-wings
"fwdixon" <fwd...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3089.990...@iw0.mailusenet.com...
> my-wings <night_...@worldnet.att.net> sez:
> >If Mr. Miller's account of the offer and acceptance is correct, then it
> appears that his customer hoped to pick up a $25,000 (or whatever it
> was thought to be valued at) book for $3,000 and expected that if the
> book were not genuine, Mr. Miller would give him back his money. If Mr.
> Miller had been a more "professional" seller, it would have worked.
> The buyer would have experienced the chance of a large gain at
> virtually no risk...<
> Now why would a buyer assume that a seller would allow him to
> experience "chance of a large gain at virtually no risk"?
> It doesn't make any sense.
Well, he might of assumed it because virtually every seller who's expressed
an opinion on this thread, including you, indicates that they would refund
the money and states that that's what Mr. Miller should do. As I said....it
would have worked if Mr. Miller had been more "professional."
Regards,
Alice
Max Johnson
Ockham's) Razor'? If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc. etc.
applies here. We have a deceitful merchant trolling for a dupe and he found
one. Possibly some of flatsigned's legions of satisfied customers should be
scrutinizing and authenticating their purchases (esp signatures) very
carefully. Max
----------
In article <BADSPAMBADpaghat...@soggy72.drizzle.com>,
Brs36
>Frankly, it's hard for me to believe that any purported professional could
>have a book with such potential value and not authenticate it before
>offering it for sale.
I thought this as well. For someone who deals regularly in authors'
signatures, it seems strange that he couldn't figure out the true value of this
book / signature and back up the sale. The whole incident has something
schmierig about it.
B.
Remove the Nojunk from the email address to reply to the email address.
gin...@accumulata.com
John Wilson wrote
>
> On the other hand, that doesn't square with the $15,000 he spent at the
> Chicago Book Fair, which suggests to me that he pays good prices for genuine
> articles (I don't suppose all those dealers at the Chicago fair were selling
> fakes).
>
Two items about his big purchases at the Chicago Bookfair.
1) He bought 8 books from me that were not signed and worth less than $10 each
but would be worth much more if they were signed.
2) He bought 28 or so signed books from a friend. We checked the progress of 14
of them which were put on eBay in the next few days. I believe all of them
either did not meet the reserve or sold at a price lower than he paid. He
bought them from a very knowledgeable bookseller who did not underprice them.
Flatworm is not a knowledgeable bookseller. None of the better booksellers in
the Chicago area know anything about him. I'm sure he'll be gone in a year or
so .
Charles Kroon
Ginkgo Leaf Books
earl4140
> timm...@flatsigned.com (Tim Miller) wrote:(snip)
Since even the most retarded "professional" would never have sold this as
> an autograph, I'm not buying your excuses. Give the man back his money you
> wretch. Your only other option is to change your name so no one knows it's
> you.
discussion. I've visited his site which begs the question where can I find
a listing of the "BookPerson" sites of this newsgroup, especially Ms.
Paghat. Earl
Jon Meyers
> ...which begs the question where can I find
> a listing of the "BookPerson" sites of this newsgroup, especially Ms.
> Paghat
Does *no one* know how to use a search engine? Put "paghat the ratgirl" into any
decent SE, and you'll be at the site of Violet Books more quickly & with less efffort
than it took to post the question in the newsgroup.
As for the others here who are dealers, or who have informational sites, most of them
include links to their pages in the sig files at the bottom of all their posts. All
you have to do is pay enough attention to actually notice them--not an unreasonable
expectation, seeing as you've been posting here for several months--but I suppose
that's too much trouble.
James D. Keeline
>
> "earl4140" <earlh...@home.com> wrote...
> > ...which begs the question where can I find
> > a listing of the "BookPerson" sites of this newsgroup, especially Ms.
> > Paghat
>
> Does *no one* know how to use a search engine? Put "paghat the ratgirl" into any
> decent SE, and you'll be at the site of Violet Books more quickly & with less efffort
> than it took to post the question in the newsgroup.
For example, if one visits http://www.google.com and enters the phrase
"paghat the ratgirl" and then clicks the "I'm feeling lucky" button,
you will be taken to the top listed result -- Violet books in this case.
James
fwd...@yahoo.com
another person is going to let them make a huge profit at no risk to
themselves.
It's idiocy to assume otherwise.
Furthermore, the buyer bought the books "As Is", a condition that any
court in the land would recognize as a final sale.