• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Interesting GC error...

Yeah, I'm not here to preach... <snip> ... all these discrepancies end up coming out of the consumer's pocket in the long run. It may seem like your winning, but everything we buy has a dishonesty tax.

Everything we buy has all kinds of tax. Corporate parachute tax, local sales tax, import tariffs, utility/overhead costs, and yes, shrinkage. I've experienced my share of bait-and-switch, and that's why I shop with vendors that offer the kinds of guarantees Mojo-Man was able to leverage. They get more of my business (on recurring expenses) because they stand behind their mistakes as well as their stated policies. I'm not an economist, but I bet it's more profitable in the long run to offer price-tag guarantees as well as price matching, even if the price match is a loss leader. But every corporation I've ever worked for calculated loss into their bottom line for just such an occurrence. (As well as real theft, which this wasn't.)

Just because you can does not mean you should….and we wonder why GC is in tough shape?

As noted, GC is in tough shape because of a number of market forces that have nothing to do with this or any other single instrument transaction they caused themselves to make.

Good for you, I guess. Which part are you more proud of?
Wow you sound like a real stand-up kind of guy. Bet you were real proud of yourself to see the minimum wage kid fired, huh? Terrible.

C'mon, guys!?

So what's your threshold for a good deal? I've seen bashing on the board for a member purchasing a Craigslist find without telling the owner that his bass was worth more. Is there a percentage point where something's no longer the seller's decision/choice/mis-labeling and the buyer is responsible for advising that there's a likely discrepancy? If I was in the market for a Fender '63 vintage reissue, and saw one on GC's site, what would be a fair price to pay? $2,500? $2,000? $1,600? $79? When will you tell me I got a good deal, and when will you accuse me of theft?

I don't work for the company. I'm not responsible for the training or lack thereof of the employees. I didn't make the policy. I didn't label the goods. I'm certainly not getting paid to review all of these things for them. They have processes, they have policies, and they have manager-level decisions to make; all their responsibility. (Maybe now we're getting to why they're in tough shape...?) Plus, we don't know what they gave for it, what might have been wrong with it that the buyer never caught, and many times, IME, they won't share either of those items with us.

I'm NOT an anarchist; I support an ethical community, however you want to inspire or enforce that, and will participate in the discussion.
I'm careful in ALL of my transactions to be as up front as possible, and have never been accused otherwise.
I totally believe in fairness and karma, really, I do.

But I think Mojo-Man is getting a bad rap here. And I'd have applauded mojomike if he'd have scored the bass pictured for $79.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wmhill
It wasn't too long ago that there was turmoil over an e-bay purchase between 2 talkbass members. The Buyer was mad that he seller claimed he put up the wrong price, and couldn't/wouldn't sell for that. As a seller it's your responsibility to double/triple check everything- not the buyers.
 
I too saw the bass the OP posted, on Sunday morning I believe, and thought about calling about it. One thing I do if there is a mismatched pic and description is search the rest of that stores' used inventory. Nine time out of 10, there is another listing that is either correct, or has the correct pic for the first listing (pics were switched). As others have said, it's best to call and get pics sent before committing to a "deal".