NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Lets all drool over your stuff :)

Moderators: Slowy, Capt. Black

User avatar
TmcB
I may have a problem
Posts: 6747
meble-kuchenne.warszawa.pl
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:17 pm
Location: The Welling Town
Has liked: 535 times
Been liked: 394 times

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by TmcB »

Kev77 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 7:52 pm Maybe time to lock this thread
I’m not sure tbh - locking is like pretending someone didn’t get pretty damn well shafted in a forum that runs on trust. Worth airing to see if those values/etiquette still hold true.

I’d be embarrassed to be asking full price in that state, and in that condition knowing that it held huge sentimental value to the guy that commissioned it.
*UNIQUE* wrote:Tony, your taste is, as always, very refined. Or as HG would say, "bloody awful".

User avatar
Polar Bear
Burns BHM
Posts: 6087
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 12:53 am
Location: Wellington
Has liked: 359 times
Been liked: 365 times
Contact:

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by Polar Bear »

AiRdAd wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 7:06 pm Ben, the tone of your post indicates to the other forum members that you paid for the guitar, received it, weren’t happy with it, and then were unable to return it. The tone of the post implies that you had no way to assess the condition before purchase, had been asked to pay a high price for it, and had somehow been wronged and ripped off.

The reality of the situation from my perspective, is quite different to that. Without asking for any money from you, I dropped off the guitar to Auckland for you (to save you the cost of couriering it) - I gave you possession of the guitar for two weeks before you paid for it, so that you could have it in your hands before making a decision whether you wanted to purchase it - I made it clear that you were under no obligation to purchase it - and made it clear I’d pay the cost of the courier to have it returned back to me if you didn’t want to purchase it. If you didn’t want to buy the guitar, I even offered you unconditional use of the guitar for as long as you wanted, so you’d have something to use while you looked for another guitar, if you didn’t find this guitar suitable.

This is the most no risk buying situation for you that is possible. I offered it to you at what I thought was a fair price, you were able to accurately assess the guitar before you decided to purchase it, you were under no obligation to purchase it, and were offered unconditional use of the guitar if you didn’t want to purchase it, so I’m struggling to understand your motivation for the post that you made the day after you deposited the money into my account to pay for it.

Throughout our dealings with the guitar I felt like I was in a no win situation with you. Even after everything I’d done, I felt it wasn’t satisfactory for you, and I couldn’t come up with a solution to resolve the issue. I know you wanted to purchase the guitar for a cheaper price, but I felt the price I offered it to you for was fair. As our communication continued and I felt like you weren’t going to be happy with the guitar, I actually wanted to withdraw from the sale. To be honest, if it had of been anyone else, I would have; but I knew the guitar had sentimental value to you. I know the guitar wasn’t in the condition you were expecting before you received it in person, but unfortunately that’s the reality with the type of wood, and the guitar being owned by multiple owners over a period of 4-ish years since you last owned it. You were however, fully aware of the condition of the guitar before you made the decision to purchase it - having had it in your possession for over two weeks.

Here is more discussion on the points made:

Pickups not in the Guitar
You mentioned to me that money was tight, so I thought that since I was going to Auckland, I’d drop the guitar off for you, to save you the $40 courier cost. I had the guitar in storage at a place that I don’t always have access to. I was unable to get access to it until 9:30pm the night before I went to Auckland. I picked it up from storage, took it home and took the pickups out. When I went to put the other pickups in, I realised that they needed a different switch to work due to the unique wiring of the neck pickup. Unfortunately I didn’t have the required switch so popped the pickguard back on the guitar without installing them. I left for Auckland at 4:00am the next morning, and in the rush neglected to tell you that they wouldn’t be in the guitar. I apologised to you for that. I figured that it was better to get the guitar up to you without the pickups in it, to save you the courier cost, get it up to your quicker, and give you the chance to have it in your hands before you purchased it.

Price
I offered the guitar to you for a price that I though was fair. To be honest Ben, a local person who had played the guitar previously caught wind that I was selling it and offered me more than what I asked you for it, and that was without the pickups and the neck humbucker pickguard (which I could keep and use on another build). You mentioned money was tight and the guitar had sentimental value, so I offered it to you at a cheaper price.

Keep in mind it is a gret sounding and playing handmade instrument. The fact that Molly owned it for 2 years is a testament to how great it is. I think it’s the longest he’s held onto a guitar in recent times, by a long shot :-) On Slowy’s last visit to see me he played the guitar and without even plugging it in, offered (no begged) me to buy it. When I said I wasn’t interested in selling it, he jokingly told me he’d break my legs if I ever sold it to anyone else. We’ve all been talking about how prices have been increasing recently. Prices have increased in the 4-ish years since you originally sold it. I think the price I offered it to you for sits very well in today’s market. I know that you made me a counter offer on the guitar once receiving it, but I thought that was unrealistic, and for the above reasons declined.

Condition
I understand that you had a different expectation of the condition of the guitar when you owned it 4-ish years ago, and from the posts when it was last sold, and from our brief communication prior to me dropping the guitar off to you so that you could inspect it in person. I thought that if I sent the guitar up to you at no cost to you, and if you didn’t want it, you couriered it back to me at my cost, you would be able to get the guitar in your hands and make a decision if you wanted it. I thought this would be the best way for you to judge the guitar. Please also remember that you received the guitar without me asking you to pay anything for it, and had it in you possession for over two weeks before actually paying for it.

As a side note, I’m not sure what damage was made to the since it left your possession, but I have put two marks on the front of it, and probably contributed to other play wear on the body. Unfortunately, the wood used on the body is extremely soft. As an example, the round hole on the front of the guitar was caused from dropping a guitar cable from 1 metre above the guitar when it was lying on the ground. It is very susceptible to damage.

Communication
I offered to call you to discuss the guitar, as the written word can sometimes be misinterpreted, but you declined my offer to do that. I also made it clear in all of our written communication (multiple times) that you were under no obligation to purchase it, and that I was more than happy for you to return the guitar by courier at my cost.

Offer of use of the guitar
When I realised that the condition of the guitar was in after not being in your possession for 4-ish years was upsetting you. I offered you use of the guitar for however long it took you to find another guitar that was suitable for you. I said I was prepared to let you use it on a long term basis – if that’s what it took for you to find a guitar that was suitable for you. Even though it would of probably meant that I would probably miss out on the other sale I had lined up. I also offered to actively help you find that guitar.

Ben, I am truly sorry this hasn’t panned out like you’d wanted. And to be fair, it hasn’t for me either. I am left wondering, and don’t know what more I can do to make things so that you are satisfied. If you would like to discuss anything, I’m happy to call you, or you can flick me a PM.
In this situation, you held all the cards. Ben clearly wanted something back that had sentimental value, you agreed on a price that was significantly higher than what it had sold for on the forum previously.
Ethically, it’s acceptable, but morally, is it acceptable? There’s very much an unwritten rule around here about not dicking your mates. In this instance, you’ve not even spat on it first.

Once you’d agreed to the (high) asking price with Ben, did you not think it at all morally right to let him know that he was getting a heavily damaged carcass? Keeping in mind he’d agreed to buy the guitar off you at this point, not a pre purchase trial?

Regardless of what you’d been offered by others, the guitar as it stands is butchered. It’s not working. It’s parts, damaged parts. Who’s to say that your ‘local buyer’ wouldn’t have reneged once seeing the dismaying state of the guitar?

I’ve bought guitars that have needed a lot of work that wasn’t disclosed, and it puts a huge, bitter taste in one’s mouth. It will cost more money to remedy, and it will continue to irk for some time.

You’ve been paid the full amount, which I find staggering, but I understand the deep emotional attachment Ben has to this guitar. It does smell somewhat of someone taking advantage of that to make a quick buck though, and in a small community like this, that is definitely disappointing.
Zephyr - Wellington's Leading Covers Band

http://zephyrband.co.nz/
https://www.facebook.com/ZephyrBandNZ

User avatar
jeremyb
Chorus of Organs
Posts: 27894
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 9:03 am
Has liked: 4436 times
Been liked: 2391 times

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by jeremyb »

bender wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 7:48 pm Fwiw- I do appreciate you driving it up for me.
I hear that all the time.
#gayerformayer
Slowy wrote: But bullshit and guitars is what we do here. It's all we do here.

User avatar
Slowy
Vintage Post Junkie
Vintage Post Junkie
Posts: 15891
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:13 pm
Location: Orcland
Has liked: 620 times
Been liked: 1675 times

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by Slowy »

AiRdAd wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 7:06 pm On Slowy’s last visit to see me he played the guitar and without even plugging it in, offered (no begged) me to buy it. When I said I wasn’t interested in selling it, he jokingly told me he’d break my legs if I ever sold it to anyone else.
This is true.
And Danny, you and I need to have a wee chat.....

Though I also confess to telling you to sell it back to Ben.
So your legs will probably be good for a ride then. :rofl:
"I would stop worrying about it and ride."
Sizzilingbadger.

User avatar
olegmcnoleg
Vintage Post Junkie
Vintage Post Junkie
Posts: 3336
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2013 11:26 am
Location: Awkland
Has liked: 607 times
Been liked: 539 times

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by olegmcnoleg »

Polar Bear wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 7:57 pm
In this situation, you held all the cards. Ben clearly wanted something back that had sentimental value, you agreed on a price that was significantly higher than what it had sold for on the forum previously.
Ethically, it’s acceptable, but morally, is it acceptable? There’s very much an unwritten rule around here about not dicking your mates. In this instance, you’ve not even spat on it first.

...
To summarise, if somebody on here cuts you a break, pay it forward.

sunburster
Squier
Posts: 367
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 1:09 pm
Has liked: 107 times
Been liked: 98 times

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by sunburster »

Sounds like the buyer can either ship it back for a refund or keep it for the price paid. Sounds fair to me. If I were the buyer I'd ship it back and pocket the refund.

Though if I were the seller I'd just offer a partial refund so the price paid was near the original $750. That way the buyer would be happy, I wouldn't have to deal with having to put that mess of a guitar back together in order to sell it on later, and my reputation as a good seller would be restored.

vinylguy
Greg Bennet
Greg Bennet
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:24 pm
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 6 times

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by vinylguy »

Great to finally read both sides of the story, but whats the ending ? Can the original owner forgive the transgressions of the guitar and move on or wiil he be forever reminded of the bad vibes and harbour grudges evermore ? In which case he should just send it back and move on, having regretted ever having sold it in the first place. Just IMHO.

User avatar
GrantB
ADMIN
Posts: 12798
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:04 am
Location: Where I need to be
Has liked: 826 times
Been liked: 1519 times
Contact:

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by GrantB »

There is an offer from both sides to discuss via phone call. That’s a positive step. Let’s leave it at that for now please all. Thanks.
"Man is the most insane species. He worships an invisible god and destroys a visible nature. Unaware that this nature he's destroying is this god he's worshipping." - Hubert Reeves

User avatar
bender
Darth Fader
Posts: 10416
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:46 pm
Location: Dorkland
Has liked: 290 times
Been liked: 751 times
Contact:

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by bender »

vinylguy wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:20 am Great to finally read both sides of the story, but whats the ending ? Can the original owner forgive the transgressions of the guitar and move on or wiil he be forever reminded of the bad vibes and harbour grudges evermore ? In which case he should just send it back and move on, having regretted ever having sold it in the first place. Just IMHO.
A sincere apology would be a great start. That hasn’t actually happened yet.

I’ve got offers of help to make it whole- the fact that they are from other members and not the seller says an awful lot.

User avatar
crowbgood1
Vintage Post Junkie
Vintage Post Junkie
Posts: 2306
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:19 pm
Location: New Plymouth
Has liked: 68 times
Been liked: 32 times
Contact:

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by crowbgood1 »

This is not the place for this. It is turning into a kangaroo court with absolutely no evidence presented.

I don't think bender has presented his gripe in the right forum at all, and due to the lack of evidence, the onlooking "mob" can do nothing but surmise.

This is all very "uncool". May I suggest that admin delete the thread and ask bender to take his accusation elsewhere.
I was so much younger then, I'm younger than that now.

User avatar
TmcB
I may have a problem
Posts: 6747
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:17 pm
Location: The Welling Town
Has liked: 535 times
Been liked: 394 times

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by TmcB »

Couldn’t disagree more - if someone in a community is actually consistently not playing by the rules, there should be visibility of that, not hushed up and pretend it’s ok!

This is the exact place for it - it’s an in-house problem
*UNIQUE* wrote:Tony, your taste is, as always, very refined. Or as HG would say, "bloody awful".

User avatar
GrantB
ADMIN
Posts: 12798
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:04 am
Location: Where I need to be
Has liked: 826 times
Been liked: 1519 times
Contact:

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by GrantB »

TmcB wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 10:52 am if someone in a community is actually consistently not playing by the rules, there should be visibility of that, not hushed up and pretend it’s ok!
I'm going to send a warning out right now. Conjecture has no place here - this comment is case in point.

The two parties are going to have a discussion to try to move this forward. If you guys can't "leave it" like I asked before I have no problem in editing.
"Man is the most insane species. He worships an invisible god and destroys a visible nature. Unaware that this nature he's destroying is this god he's worshipping." - Hubert Reeves

User avatar
TmcB
I may have a problem
Posts: 6747
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:17 pm
Location: The Welling Town
Has liked: 535 times
Been liked: 394 times

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by TmcB »

GrantB wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 11:19 am
TmcB wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 10:52 am if someone in a community is actually consistently not playing by the rules, there should be visibility of that, not hushed up and pretend it’s ok!
I'm going to send a warning out right now. Conjecture has no place here - this comment is case in point.

The two parties are going to have a discussion to try to move this forward. If you guys can't "leave it" like I asked before I have no problem in editing.
Respectfully, there is zero conjecture in that comment quoted - it’s a statement that if schenanigans are going down, it helps no one to hush it up and pretend it’s not happening.
*UNIQUE* wrote:Tony, your taste is, as always, very refined. Or as HG would say, "bloody awful".

User avatar
robthemac
Vintage Post Junkie
Vintage Post Junkie
Posts: 1560
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 3:47 pm
Has liked: 557 times
Been liked: 348 times

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by robthemac »

TmcB wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 11:42 am
GrantB wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 11:19 am
TmcB wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 10:52 am if someone in a community is actually consistently not playing by the rules, there should be visibility of that, not hushed up and pretend it’s ok!
I'm going to send a warning out right now. Conjecture has no place here - this comment is case in point.

The two parties are going to have a discussion to try to move this forward. If you guys can't "leave it" like I asked before I have no problem in editing.
Respectfully, there is zero conjecture in that comment quoted - it’s a statement that if schenanigans are going down, it helps no one to hush it up and pretend it’s not happening.
I'm with Grant. There's an implied accusation given the surrounding context.
Last edited by robthemac on Sat Jan 09, 2021 11:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
GrantB
ADMIN
Posts: 12798
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:04 am
Location: Where I need to be
Has liked: 826 times
Been liked: 1519 times
Contact:

Re: NGD: Bittersweet reunion

Post by GrantB »

TmcB wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 11:42 am
GrantB wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 11:19 am
TmcB wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 10:52 am if someone in a community is actually consistently not playing by the rules, there should be visibility of that, not hushed up and pretend it’s ok!
I'm going to send a warning out right now. Conjecture has no place here - this comment is case in point.

The two parties are going to have a discussion to try to move this forward. If you guys can't "leave it" like I asked before I have no problem in editing.
Respectfully, there is zero conjecture in that comment quoted - it’s a statement that if schenanigans are going down, it helps no one to hush it up and pretend it’s not happening.
Right as the two parties try to work towards communication and progress? Unhelpful. Respectfully, suggesting you are merely making "a statement" doesn't cut it - thread locked until further notice.

No doubt the two parties will be in contact with mods later on. Happy to discuss with them directly.
"Man is the most insane species. He worships an invisible god and destroys a visible nature. Unaware that this nature he's destroying is this god he's worshipping." - Hubert Reeves

Post Reply