• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Beware Fodera's "certified pre-owned" web page and consignment deals

#21
allexcosta said:
I disagree! He agreed to have 80% of the selling price, not $6200.
Click to expand...

What's your stake in this? Are you related to this person? Can you vouch for their honesty and integrity? I don't know if it's even cool for you to repost in entirety something from another board.
 
#22
I have had a dealer tell me an instrument was only worth X and then turn around and sell it for much more. That's a little different from this though.

On a different note, I wonder what Vic would think of all this?
He has had a long relationship with this company.

JKT
 
#24
The question is the terms in which it happened. "Mike" said he had a buyer for the bass. Which I guess is true, except it happened to be him or possibly another investor interested in flipping the bass for more money. The seller was expecting that it was a 80/20 split on a consignment sale. If the folks at Fodera considered it a straight sale, then I guess it's Kosher. But it seems like the seller thought it was a consignment deal, and in that case he's owed some money.

I wonder what the outcome would be if "Mike" told him straight up that he or someone he knows wants to buy the bass to sell for a profit. The seller then finds out it sold for $12,000 and he's kicking himself for selling it for $6200, but he agreed to it, so what can he do?

Then the issue is knowledge about the bass. Obviously, the fact that the bass was built side by side with Victor's bass increased it's value dramatically. "Mike" had that knowledge, and it looks like the seller didn't. Builders often field calls from potential sellers who would like to know what their bass is worth if they sold it. I know quite a few builders who would have no problem telling them information like a color being discontinued, or the rarity of a wood, or other things that might affect an instrument's worth. But that would require the seller or store where it is consigned to call and ask for this info. I don't know if that had been done in this case.
 
#26
jive1 said:
Then the issue is knowledge about the bass. Obviously, the fact that the bass was built side by side with Victor's bass increased it's value dramatically. "Mike" had that knowledge, and it looks like the seller didn't. Builders often field calls from potential sellers who would like to know what their bass is worth if they sold it. I know quite a few builders who would have no problem telling them information like a color being discontinued, or the rarity of a wood, or other things that might affect an instrument's worth. But that would require the seller or store where it is consigned to call and ask for this info. I don't know if that had been done in this case.
Click to expand...

This is the part that doesn't make much sense to me. When the bass was originally created and sold to the dealer and then to the anonymous individual that posted this on a message board the bass wasn't worth 12,000 or more even though the folks at Fodera knew full well then that the bass was built "side by side" with Victors bass.
 
#28
It doesn't look like anything illegal has happened, in my eyes. I mean, he was offered a price, consideration was there as he proffered the bass and took the cash. Just because the next owner found a way to make more cash from it doesn't mean he's entitled to a slice of the profits.

There could be some uncertainty if "Mike" knew the basses true value when he bought it, but even then...

yeah, it stinks, but it's worth knowing everything you can about what you're selling.
 
#29
Chris2112 said:
It doesn't look like anything illegal has happened, in my eyes. I mean, he was offered a price, consideration was there as he proffered the bass and took the cash. Just because the next owner found a way to make more cash from it doesn't mean he's entitled to a slice of the profits.

There could be some uncertainty if "Mike" knew the basses true value when he bought it, but even then...

yeah, it stinks, but it's worth knowing everything you can about what you're selling.
Click to expand...
Would your view change if it was an implied term of the agreement that Fodera would view the bass, assess the value, set it up and then advertise for sale?
 
#30
Mark Latimour said:
Would your view change if it was an implied term of the agreement that Fodera would view the bass, assess the value, set it up and then advertise for sale?
Click to expand...

Yeah, they did that during the original sale of the bass to the dealer. Are there any Yin Yangs selling for 12,000??? Anywhere????
 
#31
Mark Latimour said:
Would your view change if it was an implied term of the agreement that Fodera would view the bass, assess the value, set it up and then advertise for sale?
Click to expand...

Indeed, though could it be said this inspection by the dealer was part of the standard course of dealings when selling through a luthier in this manner? If not, then how is the term implied? If the seller could argue this, then he may have a foot to stand on given this term. I suppose it could be a standard term, it doesn't seem unlikely. In fact, I'm sure Alembic do something similar...
 
#32
Aside from a tad shady in disclosing the truth, I see nothing all that wrong with it. And its complete BS to think that dude desrves 80% of the top dollar that can be had, THAT is why you sell things yourself. You think a car dealership would do the same for you? Hell, I sell things on ebay, and sometimes people buy them so they get resold, and then I know I underpriced it. Should I bitch about the price I accepted?

If someone's going to bitch about it, shouldn't have accepted the amount of money. Sorry, but I don't buy into the integrity police that people appoint themselves to. Not that I promote crappy buisness (I have sold many used items, and made many happy connections), but this is buisness, and dude couldn't have gotten that coin for it in the first place. If he could, should have done it himself.

should have just kept it if it was that much of a stink. I say this having one of the most rare Fodera items at their shop right now, and considering doing the same thing. there are no deterents from anything I have read.
 
#34
lamarjones said:
Aside from a tad shady in disclosing the truth, I see nothing all that wrong with it. And its complete BS to think that dude desrves 80% of the top dollar that can be had, THAT is why you sell things yourself. You think a car dealership would do the same for you? Hell, I sell things on ebay, and sometimes people buy them so they get resold, and then I know I underpriced it. Should I bitch about the price I accepted?

If someone's going to bitch about it, shouldn't have accepted the amount of money. Sorry, but I don't buy into the integrity police that people appoint themselves to. Not that I promote crappy buisness (I have sold many used items, and made many happy connections), but this is buisness, and dude couldn't have gotten that coin for it in the first place. If he could, should have done it himself.

should have just kept it if it was that much of a stink. I say this having one of the most rare Fodera items at their shop right now, and considering doing the same thing. there are no deterents from anything I have read.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of this, but the added factor about "Mike" knowing some info about the bass that the seller didn't know is what makes the deal kinda shady. If the story as presented is true, then "Mike" had some insider knowledge that the bass was worth more than the seller thought, and then withheld that knowledge for the purpose of making a profit. It certainly isn't illegal, but it is immoral. I don't know how else the seller could research this, since they were giving it to the original manufacturer to sell he would think that they would tell him about anything unusual about the bass that would add value. Especially seeing that he was under the assumption that the bass would be sold with an 80/20 agreement, he would think that Fodera would do all in their power to sell it for the highest posible amount to give them the highest posible 20% profit.

On the other hand though, reading what happened, it sounds like "Mike" knew exactly what he was trying to do when he said "I have a buyer for the bass, the deal will give you $6200". He was careful with his words there. The seller should have asked "so that means you're selling it for xxxx, right?" Or he should have asked how much the bass appraised for. If I was the seller I certainly would have asked more questions or got certain things in writing when conducting a deal for this much $$. If he would have asked a couple questions, "Mike" would have either been caught in a lie (and the seller might actually have a case in court) or he would have had to give up the plan and tell the seller all the info.

This situation is like someone taking a beatup Fender jazz to a music store, without knowing the value (maybe it was a gift from a relative that passed away) and the store giving them $100 for it, while knowing that it is a vintage 1962 jazz that they can sell for $3000. Not illegal, but certainly immoral.
 
#35
Why wasn't a price determined or set by the seller? If he asked Joey and was told $7800, then found out that Joey sold it for $12,000, then that would be shady and he should get 80% of selling price. If he (the seller) set the $7800 selling price then shame on him for not asking what it was worth.
 
#36
vision said:
I agree with all of this, but the added factor about "Mike" knowing some info about the bass that the seller didn't know is what makes the deal kinda shady. If the story as presented is true, then "Mike" had some insider knowledge that the bass was worth more than the seller thought, and then withheld that knowledge for the purpose of making a profit. It certainly isn't illegal, but it is immoral. I don't know how else the seller could research this, since they were giving it to the original manufacturer to sell he would think that they would tell him about anything unusual about the bass that would add value. Especially seeing that he was under the assumption that the bass would be sold with an 80/20 agreement, he would think that Fodera would do all in their power to sell it for the highest posible amount to give them the highest posible 20% profit.

On the other hand though, reading what happened, it sounds like "Mike" knew exactly what he was trying to do when he said "I have a buyer for the bass, the deal will give you $6200". He was careful with his words there. The seller should have asked "so that means you're selling it for xxxx, right?" Or he should have asked how much the bass appraised for. If I was the seller I certainly would have asked more questions or got certain things in writing when conducting a deal for this much $$. If he would have asked a couple questions, "Mike" would have either been caught in a lie (and the seller might actually have a case in court) or he would have had to give up the plan and tell the seller all the info.

This situation is like someone taking a beatup Fender jazz to a music store, without knowing the value (maybe it was a gift from a relative that passed away) and the store giving them $100 for it, while knowing that it is a vintage 1962 jazz that they can sell for $3000. Not illegal, but certainly immoral.
Click to expand...

Go look anywhere for these basses, the retail price is 9000, that is bass central saying 'usually t its 9000, call us for a price of a new one', the price the seller got is great for a used bass on consignment. The fact that its one like Vics and they are trying to get some ******** price for it is just like saying the ox signed it or something, and that is all value that has nothing to do with the bass itself and no it is not vintage by any means.
 
#37
vision said:
I agree with all of this, but the added factor about "Mike" knowing some info about the bass that the seller didn't know is what makes the deal kinda shady. If the story as presented is true, then "Mike" had some insider knowledge that the bass was worth more than the seller thought, and then withheld that knowledge for the purpose of making a profit.
Click to expand...

I have called Fodera and asked about basses that I owned, basses that I was thinking about buying and ones that I was thinking about selling, everytime they pulled the file on the bass and read it to me on the phone. They told me what it would cost new today and what it was worth used. They told me if it was rare, how many were made in that batch, what was custom about that particular bass. It's not insider knowledge, it's common sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jsxtal
#38
CelinderMotoMan said:
Why wasn't a price determined or set by the seller? If he asked Joey and was told $7800, then found out that Joey sold it for $12,000, then that would be shady and he should get 80% of selling price. If he (the seller) set the $7800 selling price then shame on him for not asking what it was worth.
Click to expand...

+1...Like I mentioned, the seller was way too nonchalant about a deal this big. I would have had some extra questions and got things in writing, then there wouldn't be an issue.
 
#39
lamarjones said:
Go look anywhere for these basses, the retail price is 9000, that is bass central saying 'usually t its 9000, call us for a price of a new one', the price the seller got is great for a used bass on consignment. The fact that its one like Vics and they are trying to get some ******** price for it is just like saying the ox signed it or something, and that is all value that has nothing to do with the bass itself and no it is not vintage by any means.
Click to expand...

If the story is true and "Mike" put it up for $12,000 and it sold that quickly, then it must have been worth more than an average Yin Yang, and he knew it because of his connection with Fodera. It's not vintage, but there was extra value attached to that bass that he knew about, and obviously that value was real if it sold for that amount.
 
#40
CelinderMotoMan said:
I have called Fodera and asked about basses that I owned, basses that I was thinking about buying and ones that I was thinking about selling, everytime they pulled the file on the bass and read it to me on the phone. They told me what it would cost new today and what it was worth used. They told me if it was rare, how many were made in that batch, what was custom about that particular bass. It's not insider knowledge, it's common sense.
Click to expand...

True, and I would have done the same thing. I can kinda understand though why the seller would think that by having Fodera sell it, they would tell him about all this stuff when he sent the instrument to them.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back