RMC on GB

[Badger]

I'm responding to a finger pointed at me and being told I'm doing something wrong to sell at retail if I paid substantially less. On most forums when a moderator engages someone, that someone is allowed to respond. Is that not allowed?

Of course, fair and civil criticism is allowed, but only if it's factually correct ...

I assume if your hearsay anecdotal feedback proves to be incorrect, you'll post the appropriate public retraction and apology to Jim.

Thanks ..

Regards,
Doug

[JimF4M1s (Deceased)]

BTW, I own a Winchester stock purchased from Rex Guin that he said came from you for retail value. I don't know what he paid to whom, but I know what I was told when I paid over $300 3 yrs ago.

First, my comment "these buyers and re-sellers are only doing something morally illegal. Was referring to the re-sellers of the faked/repo'd carbines, not the casual person finding a deal on something. I feel sometimes people read more into a comment then what was intended. Or I expressed myself poorly.

Seeing that comment this morning has me dismayed. I don't understand why/where it came from, or the implication. I assume it is meant to impugn my character. So I feel a need to respond.

If someone has told you I sold them a carbine or stock recently, you were misinformed. I haven't sold a carbine or stock in at least 10-12 years. The last time I even shipped a stock was to painter777 to be refinished, four or five years ago.

I have traded some carbines to my cousin, but have only sold two carbines since I started collecting in 1976. Underwood T, and W coded with leaf sights many years ago. Neither for higher the $650. I have sold a few knives, oilers, mag pouches, tracer and grenade launcher ammo, and maybe a hand guard in the last five years, all to members here. The last few years I have just given parts to newer people to help them out, a Karma so to speak. Anything I have or will ever sell has had an open return policy for any reason. So back to the stock you mention. The only way it could have come from me was off of the two above mentioned Underwoods. And if so, and you bought it, you must have liked it. So I ask, what is your contention?

Let's keep in mind, our forum guidelines are to try and be fair and friendly towards each other while discussing our hobby and interests.

[INLAND44]

The Rock strikes me as a Korean refinish, possibly re-stocked here. If its in good mechanical condition, I don't see any problem with the price. In the not-too-distant future, one like that will go for twice that price. Very similar to 1911 rebuilds which in the last five years have carved out their own niche in the collectable arena, going for $1200 or so. Many of those are undocumented with no arsenal marks and possibly were rebuilt/refinished at other levels of maintenance than the arsenal rebuild programs and so were not marked. You just have to be knowledgeable about the carbines and pistols to hopefully avoid a 'home job', but the rebuilds do get blurry and next to impossible to read sometimes.

[tenOC]

First, my comment "these buyers and re-sellers are only doing something morally illegal. Was referring to the re-sellers of the faked/repo'd carbines, not the casual person finding a deal on something. I feel sometimes people read more into a comment then what was intended. Or I expressed myself poorly.

I've know forum guys who charge what is the max the market will bear. Even on items they found at substantially less.

That being said, these buyers and re-sellers are only doing something morally illegal. Distasteful to many or most of us, but not against the law.

Yes, I will strive to be fair and friendly, Jim. And I hate that we've had a disagreement. I hate that it comes over a topic we agree on too. I understand your explanation this morning. The original statement includes those selling at an increase by using the plural when the only subject would be a singular seller Sam-T-Bob, so I couldn't help but take addition of the phrase "that being said" with the entirety to implicate even forum members as mentioned.

I agree with what you are saying was your actual intent only towards fraudulent sales.

We know who most of the sellers are in the hobby. I have zero issue with them being here to buy and sell. It would be cheaper for me and other buyers if they weren't doing it, but I have no issue with them doing it. I still volunteer to buy from them if the item is something I want and they are an agreeable personality.

Getting a stored value by buying low for a higher value item is a lot of my goal in the hobby. I buy rare parts I will probably never use, much like you have. It's like a treasure hunt for me. So I personally can't understand why it would concern anyone that someone is making an increase in the hobby. So, if that's not your statement, I then understand you to just be talking about people like that GB seller.

Seeing that comment this morning has me dismayed. I don't understand why/where it came from, or the implication. I assume it is meant to impugn my character. So I feel a need to respond.

I'm positive you're reading more into it and I felt I explained myself with the example. I'm just relaying that I willingly purchased a stock said to have come from your possession at one time, and the seller sold it at high retail because of condition. I made no assertion that you are selling for profit. What I was implying is it's well known you have a grail of items as a collector and that they have a value or you would not have collected them. And since you're not in the habit of selling, I'm saying they still have that value to you (and to the rest of us). Most collectors do help out the new guys. I still get help and I help others in return. That help we give impacts our ability to get nice items, but we're supporting the hobby. Most collectors sell an occasional item and don't make a practice of hurting themselves to do it.

If someone has told you I sold them a carbine or stock recently, you were misinformed. I haven't sold a carbine or stock in at least 10-12 years. The last time I even shipped a stock was to painter777 to be refinished, four or five years ago.

This is only an example, but nowhere did I say you sold something recently. I didn't even say I bought it recently.

I have traded some carbines to my cousin, but have only sold two carbines since I started collecting in 1976. Underwood T, and W coded with leaf sights many years ago. Neither for higher the $650. I have sold a few knives, oilers, mag pouches, tracer and grenade launcher ammo, and maybe a hand guard in the last five years, all to members here. The last few years I have just given parts to newer people to help them out, a Karma so to speak. Anything I have or will ever sell has had an open return policy for any reason. So back to the stock you mention. The only way it could have come from me was off of the two above mentioned Underwoods. And if so, and you bought it, you must have liked it. So I ask, what is your contention?

Understood. I paid a fair price for the item and it was my choice to willingly buy the item several years ago. I have ZERO issue with a person selling an item for more than they paid because it is not morally illegal to do so. That's the contention in entirety.

The only real foul is that one seller everyone agrees on is misrepresenting items and the hobby. I feel you were unfairly impugning my character by yourself partaking in threads that hold derogatory (unfriendly) comments and then implying I'm doing something wrong by suggesting a method for collectors to get a good item while at the same time protecting the hobby would be to fairly out-bid him at the market place. I'm showing how it's a good business practice. If a reseller is willing to pay that same price, there's a reason for it and it can benefit the buyer and us (two fold). That is the reason for my response to you, just as you responded above.

I'm bent strongly toward fairness, maybe even to the extreme, like many who post about bogus items. I understand that you have a duty to protect the forum you're moderating on. I'm participating on this forum and won't misrepresent anything or anyone. I even hold my tongue on some of the bogus deals I've witnessed from 1 or 2 who post here.

[ChipS]

I don't have a dog in this fight. I really don't understand what you guys are arguing about. But, on a lighter side I don't think there is any such condition as "morally illegal". I believe it's either moral or immoral and legal or illegal. Wait, maybe it could be moral but still be illegal. I stand corrected - I think. LOL

[DaveHH]

Trying to explain the character of these people who buy a sow's ear and turn it into a silk purse is a waste of time. You can't shame someone who has no scruples. You could tar and feather this guy and he'd still laugh at you.