Okay, you are not trying now.
He bought the bass. A few weeks later, he bought the green bass. Since then, he says, the green bass was all he played. The first bass sat unused. Get that? He didn't say he never used the first bass. He said he didn't use the first bass after buying the second one. It remained "unused" from that point in time. This is reading comprehension.
In any event, you are minimizing the fact that you knew it had been stored in a closet for at least two years without a case.
I noticed that you mentioned more than once that you paid considerably more for this bass than you did your other one. Was there any buyer's remorse here because of that?
You do not seem willing to accept any responsibility for this situation, and anxious to brand the seller as a "liar". You're going to do whatever you are going to do, but don't pretend you are standing alone on the moral high ground.
Fair enough. You are right, when looking at ads in eBay (I am not being sarcastic here), I should have read more into the text of the ad. I should have been using the skills I learned in English class and really tried to understand what the author of the text was really trying to express or what he really actually meant. I should have been a verbal Sherlock Holmes. Like when the seller listed the condition as new, what he really meant was that it would be new to me. And when he said the bass was unused, I should have assumed he meant unused after he used it for a few weeks. I should have also understood that when he said that there was no damage or wear, that he meant no damage or wear except for the damage and wear caused by it being stored without a case, like all mexican fender in the warehouse before it gets shipped out. Also, I should have assumed that the pictures in the ad that didnt show the damage or staining were pictures of the bass when it was first bought, not when he was selling it.
I accept responsibility for assuming that the seller was trying his best to describe the item as well as he could. I guess I shouldn't have taken the guy's words or pictures at face value. So I do take responsibility for that. This did teach me a lesson that I should be more wary of when people sell stuff they call "new". I don't buy instruments on eBay often, but when I have and it was listed as new, it was new. So I was basing my experience on that. So this was the first time I got something that wasn't new when it was listed as new. I don't sell very often, but whenever I sold anything on ebay, I try to take close up pictures of anything that would be different from a completely new product. I take pictures of the smallest things even if you can only see them in a certain light or if you need a magnifying glass to see them. Even if it was like that when it came from the factory. Even if it was caused by the normal typical finishing issues in Mexican fenders. Or at least try to describe it. I have had lots of people tell me that they couldn't even see the imperfections when they got the product. I just assumed people did that, since eBay specifically tells you to do this in their seller guide.
I don't think I have the moral high ground above everyone, but maybe I do with this seller. I would not have sold this bass the way he did. I would have made sure that the buyer knew that before I bought the green one, I played this one. I would not have mentioned the Squier bass or the green bass to allow people to assume that I only used those two basses and not this one. I would not have used the word "unused". I would have taken close up pictures of the stains and ding near the neck. I would have presented the bass as it was and let the buyer decide if they can live with the staining or damage. I would not have used words or phrases that can be read different ways. I would definitely not have listed it as new (other).
It was not buyers remorse. $429 + shipping was a good price for a NEW jag bass, which is what I thought I was buying. $429 is not a good price for a USED jag bass, since I know that I can get them for less than that (at least around here). If I knew that I was getting a USED bass, the staining or damage would not have bothered me. But it was listed as NEW (other). And the condition of the item is not subjective. Ebay has specific definitions for the conditions of items. Again this was in the sellers guide, so I assumed the seller followed eBay's definitions.
Ebay lists new (other) as "A new,
unused item with
absolutely no signs of wear. The item may be missing the original packaging, or in the original packaging but not sealed. The item may be a factory second or a
new, unused item with defects. See the seller's listing for
full details and description of any imperfections." [emphasis mine]
So maybe my reading comprehension really isn't up to par, but I assume that when eBay says "unused", they don't mean that you used the item but then it was unused after you got another item to replace it with. Also, I assumed that "any imperfections" included the staining or ding near the neck and the seller would have needed to mention them. But I could be wrong. Maybe eBay's definitions are more subjective than I thought.
