Ray did you have to go there...
Yeah really, as I was scrolling through the thread I was just waiting for it. It belongs in a museum Ray.
Ray did you have to go there...
Yeah really, as I was scrolling through the thread I was just waiting for it. It belongs in a museum Ray.
The real test is to compare the box of razors against BurmaShaver's photos. That said, I suspect he'd be hard pressed to replicate a "white balance error" as perfectly as was done with the sample he was bidding on...
"What is being said" is:I'm not sure what is being said here, but let me just say:
1. This is the same picture set I sent to the seller to explain the situation.
2. I said the seller NEVER claimed it was gold; that was MY assumption.
3. This is the same razor, right out of the box, positioned the same way--with no cleaning, alterations, etc.
4. I only posted it to show that digital lighting/pics are not 100% accurate and that it is the bidder's responsibility to confirm the details about an item.
5. These mistakes happen--and continue to happen--so use my mistake as an example.
'Nuff said!
Best of luck and do update this thread to let us know of the outcome.
All of these issues speak to me about the reality that the photos you all are bidding on are not accidental. So while the general tone of the thread seems to be one can't trust cameras, I am pointing out that it's more likely that one can't trust ebay sellers.
Now you can yell at me about how it was your fault or whatever, but the fact is that your assumptions were reasonable assumptions and the reason why we have consumer and advertisement laws in the US. The fact that ebay is very much a commercial venue rather than its original garage sale days means that consumers need to be aware that all the snake oil saleperson tactics of old are back in full throttle without the legal framework protecting against them.
Ontario,
Are you referring to the first picture?
My post was referring to Burmashaver's item:
and was predicated upon him comparing the blade packaging against one that he either owns or is certain has been correctly photographed.
My point of him testing it out himself was merely to satisfy his own possible curiosity of how simple (or not) it would be to reproduce the image the seller was using.
The underlying point, however, regardless of how one believes the seller came to obtain the selling image, is that the seller had to have known the image he was using was not representative of the item he was listing...which seems to me to support my conclusion that it was not simple error.
Well said.
The seller owes a refund and an apology with respect to Burmashaver's razor. If the OP's razor turns out to be nickel, he too is owed his money back and an apology.
Neither of these razors were listed as being gold razors. And in the case of the OP, the razor doesn't even look like a gold razor. Wishful thinking on the part of the winning bidder doesn't constitute a breach of contract.
Actually, I was referring to both the OP picture and this one.
I wouldn't go quite as far as to say that it's difficult to create a picture like this by mistake (I think it's really rather easy and too easy in fact, but that's a discussion for the Darkroom I suppose) but I agree completely and wholeheartedly with your last point:
regardless of how one believes the seller came to obtain the selling image, is that the seller had to have known the image he was using was not representative of the item he was listing
Well said.
The seller owes a refund and an apology with respect to Burmashaver's razor. If the OP's razor turns out to be nickel, he too is owed his money back and an apology.
guys... Get over it. This thread is so boring now.
You want to know how this story ends? After realizing it could a lighting issue but before paying I asked the seller. They told me it was silver. I told them their post was misleading and I wasn't going to pay, sorry. That was that. As for brief of contract, eBay can't do jack. They just give you all these hokey warnings to scare people to make the system work... like brainless sheep. And for what? An $8 SS... That's a goods price and it probably would have cleaned up like new. But you know what - I don't want another nickle SS and it is a matter of principle to me that I taught that incompitant seller to either have true color pictures or disclose the true color since their pictures were ambiguous.