Thread: Okay, this seller's listing are starting to rub me the wrong way...

Seeing how my career deals with sales and marketing, I totally understand highlighting the special qualities/unique characteristics of your product...

...but this eBay seller's listings are really starting to bother me.

This is at least the third occasion in the past two weeks or so that I've seen statements like 'Rare 1818 Wade & Butcher razor' in his title listings.

http://cgi.ebay.com/RARE-1818-WADE-B...item5d2746c2f6

Then, in the body of his post he states the mfgr's dates from some antique books by Lummus - for example: "Wade & Butcher 1818-1890 ("Old Sheffield Razors' by Lummus. Antiques, Dec. 1922)"

Now, I realize the shape of a blade and/or tang can give you a narrow date range for a razors age - however this seller claims not only a specific year, but also a year that's always right near the beginning of a manufacturer's lifespan (at least in the 2 or 3 listings I've seen so far anyway).

Perhaps I'm missing something... Maybe the antique books by Lummus, or other guides I don't have on hand actually give enough data for someone to actually narrow down a specific year...

But from what I've seen so far, I'm beginning to suspect this seller is stretching it a bit far in an attempt to paint a much more appealing historic picture/age on his wares than is reasonable.

Although a full wedge, the slight bow in the scales makes it a little later.

The specific dating seems pretty bad, but to see this;

Badly pitted blade
<snip>
Very Good CONDITION
Great Shape

in one razor's description amazes me. Especially from somebody that's sold nearly 2000 straight razors. :/

Faulty eBay listings bother me just as much as the next person, but I've actually bought from this guy in the past, and his descriptions and photos are generally pretty accurate.

Yes, the "1818" reference is a little . . . um . . . ambitious, but I think in the context of the entire listing, it's pretty clear what he's saying -- W&B started making blades in 1818, and this one looks pretty darn near what the earliest ones would look like. Certainly the photos are accurate, and it is a very early W&B, so what else would you expect by way of verification? A receipt from the store where it was purchased? Anyone buying this would know that this kind of documentation does not exist for razors from this era.

I'm not giving anyone a pass for lying, but I think in the greater scheme of things, this strikes me as more of an innocent error in phrasing than outright deception.

It's interesting about the "very good condition"

In some grading systems, "very good" is almost the worst condition an item can be rated

Originally Posted by JeffE

Faulty eBay listings bother me just as much as the next person, but I've actually bought from this guy in the past, and his descriptions and photos are generally pretty accurate.

I'm not giving anyone a pass for lying, but I think in the greater scheme of things, this strikes me as more of an innocent error in phrasing than outright deception.

Please don't misunderstand, I'm not saying you absolutely shouldn't by from this seller... or that you wouldn't get a razor that's exactly as pictured if you did. Heck, if he posted one that sparked my interest I'd probably still bid on it.

I'm just saying that, since I've now seen these specific, early year claims in titles for at least 3 or 4 of his listings versus just 1 or 2 (the 1818 W&B listing was just one example)..

... and when I read them it now makes me feel like I'm being lured into the listing with overinflated claims.

As you said JeffE, unless it's stamped right on the shank or there's some sort of original documentation with the razor, there is just no way to claim it came from a specific year...

Not a huge issue - and certainly not something I'm looking to make a big hubbub over. Just something that started to bug me a bit and I thought might be worth sharing with everyone as a sort of heads up to not rely on the listing titles quite so much and pay a deeper attention to the info provided in an ad's body.

Yes, I agree. Or as Matt Damon says in Rounders, "caveat emptor, pal!"

Actually I just filed a complaint about another seller who is breaking the rules in my view. If you check out the seller "leonandjanet", you will see that they are selling basically trashed, worn-out straight razors as being in "excellent condition" and with "minimal" or "light wear." Someone else from this site complained to them directly, and they just wrote back a smart-ass reply.

Anyway, this "paneraiguy" isn't in that league at all, and I did get a really nice Wostenholm from him at a great price, so I have to say something decent for the guy. I don't know how he does it, but he seems to have a huge supply of W&B, Wostenholm and Rodgers razors, and I would buy from him in the future.

Originally Posted by JeffE

Yes, I agree. Or as Matt Damon says in Rounders, "caveat emptor, pal!"

Good movie!

Actually I just filed a complaint about another seller who is breaking the rules in my view. If you check out the seller "leonandjanet", you will see that they are selling basically trashed, worn-out straight razors as being in "excellent condition" and with "minimal" or "light wear." Someone else from this site complained to them directly, and they just wrote back a smart-ass reply.

Anyway, this "paneraiguy" isn't in that league at all, and I did get a really nice Wostenholm from him at a great price, so I have to say something decent for the guy. I don't know how he does it, but he seems to have a huge supply of W&B, Wostenholm and Rodgers razors, and I would buy from him in the future.

You're right, he does seem to have a pretty good supply doesn't he. Which is why, even though he has a 99.6% eBay rating, it's still good to know someone here has had a good transaction experience with him...

...because, although those titles may ruffle my dander a bit, if he has a blade that really piques my interest (and with a supply like that he very well may) I'll probably bid on it - after doing a good review of the description/details and pics of course

Just to throw it out there, I have purchased from this seller as well. Like all of us, I rely on the pictures much more than the description. The razor('s ?) that I have bought from the seller all matched the pictures.

My comment was only about the discrepancies in that particular description. I personally do not think that "badly pitted" and "very good condition" belong in the same description. One or the other, but not both.

So while we're praising paneraiguy, I did take one quick look over at his listings, and damn if I didn't see another problem in another listing.

He's got a blade listed as "Joseph Rodgers & Sons" but the stamp on the shank says "Geo. Rodgers Sheffield". And there's no Joseph Rodgers 'double star' trademark on the shank either.

Now I have seen a few of the Joseph Rodgers blades, and they are excellent razors. But "George Rodgers" or whoever he is could be anyone.

Because I think the guy is basically honest, I left a message for him about the discrepancy, and I'll keep you posted about what he writes back.

So I guess the lesson is that the words really don't mean anything unless you can see it in the photos, right?!