saucerfiend
Well-Known Member
Roughwear said:
Thanks Andrew and Allen. Much appreciated! I'll be glad to post pics.
Brian
-
When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Eastman Star or Original?
- Thread starter jschare
- Start date
Thanks Andrew and Allen. Much appreciated! I'll be glad to post pics.
Brian
saucerfiend
Well-Known Member
ButteMT61 said:
Scott,
I Pm'd you my phone number. Feel free to call.
Brian
Peter Graham
Well-Known Member
saucerfiend said:
OK, so it's definitely an original then, despite the feed that the seller was given from a forum member that it was a repro. Enjoy it. Hope you sleep well.
saucerfiend
Well-Known Member
Peter Graham said:
Thanks, brother.
Peter Graham said:
Whoa. Hold on.
Is it definite that the seller was told it was a repro? That remains speculation from all I've read on this thread.
And...if so... that somebody from this forum was the one to do so ? Again, I've not seen one word that this was the case from what has been posted in this thread.
Peter Graham
Well-Known Member
"Whoa. Hold on.
Is it definite that the seller was told it was a repro? That remains speculation from all I've read on this thread.
And...if so... that somebody from this forum was the one to do so ? Again, I've not seen one word that this was the case from what has been posted in this thread."
Is it definite that the seller was told it was a repro? That remains speculation from all I've read on this thread.
And...if so... that somebody from this forum was the one to do so ? Again, I've not seen one word that this was the case from what has been posted in this thread."
saucerfiend said:
Peter Graham said:
Peter, I have not seen where anybody 1) told the seller it was a repro or 2) if somebody did, it was a forum member.
If you have some information that you are not willing to share with the forum, I believe the forum would be better served either by saying nothing or PM'ing those folks behind the scenes you wish to share it with.
Damning with innuendo only adds to the atmosphere of a "nasty element" you were lamenting earlier this thread.
jschare
Active Member
SuinBruin said:
Again, if the seller is too stupid to know what he has then shame on him. I'm a cop. Been one for 21 years and a detective for 16 of those years and I see nothing illegal in that exchange. The person says he "doesn't believe" it to be an original. The seller had plenty of opportunity to do research even after that exchange to prove or disprove that it was an original and not a repro. Even if someone from this forum told the seller it was a repro and HE was the one who turned around and bought it, there is NOTHING illegal about it. Unethical? I don't believe so either. A seller should know what he or she is selling before putting that item up for sale.
wop54
Active Member
1) The seller probably thought the jacket was an original
2) Someone told or suggested that it was or could be a repro (was he a forum member? Was he trying to cheat the seller or was he in good faith? We don't know)
3) As a consequence, the seller dropped the price with a low BIN (but pricey for a repro)
4) Someone else bought the jacket quickly (could the buyer email the seller advising the seller that to him the price was too low, and probably let another buyer to buy it, in the meantime? Can we blame the buyer for not having done that?)
5) As a matter of fact, we are not 100% positive it's not an Eastman (could someone ask Gary Eastman?)
My point of view is that nobody here has to be blamed and we made "a storm in a glass of water" as we say downhere.
My two cents.
2) Someone told or suggested that it was or could be a repro (was he a forum member? Was he trying to cheat the seller or was he in good faith? We don't know)
3) As a consequence, the seller dropped the price with a low BIN (but pricey for a repro)
4) Someone else bought the jacket quickly (could the buyer email the seller advising the seller that to him the price was too low, and probably let another buyer to buy it, in the meantime? Can we blame the buyer for not having done that?)
5) As a matter of fact, we are not 100% positive it's not an Eastman (could someone ask Gary Eastman?)
My point of view is that nobody here has to be blamed and we made "a storm in a glass of water" as we say downhere.
My two cents.
269sqnhudson
Active Member
Maybe the buyer could confirm it wasn't him that told the seller it was an Eastman.
I imagine it wasn't, in which case no problem, but if it was, definitely not great!
They are two entirely different situations surely. Emailing the seller with bad info in order to buy the jacket cheaper is pretty poor behaviour but if it was someone else who messaged the seller and the buyer just snapped it up, not really an issue.
I don't think anyone is suggesting criminality either, just ungentlemanly behaviour.
T
I imagine it wasn't, in which case no problem, but if it was, definitely not great!
They are two entirely different situations surely. Emailing the seller with bad info in order to buy the jacket cheaper is pretty poor behaviour but if it was someone else who messaged the seller and the buyer just snapped it up, not really an issue.
I don't think anyone is suggesting criminality either, just ungentlemanly behaviour.
T
269sqnhudson
Active Member
jschare said:
I'm glad you're a cop on the other side of the pond!
Cobblers161
Well-Known Member
What amazes me is how anyone could even vaguely consider it being an ELC. Like Andrew mentioned the collar shape has yet to be matched by ELC but more tellingly, at least in my humble opinion, is the character of the leather. If you look at the close up of the knits and epaulettes you can clearly see a character poles apart from that offered by Eastman.
From reading the above posts I've reached the conclusion that the seller has been duped. His knowledge on A-2's is limited and someone took advantage of that and to the sellers credit he changed the price to reflect the fact his description was believed to be incorrect.
Quite shameful really.
From reading the above posts I've reached the conclusion that the seller has been duped. His knowledge on A-2's is limited and someone took advantage of that and to the sellers credit he changed the price to reflect the fact his description was believed to be incorrect.
Quite shameful really.
Rutger
Well-Known Member
"This, I don't believe is an original. It is a reproduction made by Eastman Leather in England."
So if the opportunity arises I guess I'll be sending a message to the jacket seller that his item isn't what he claims.
"hm, that Buzz you're selling, it's not a Buzz but a re-tagged cheap repro."
Me telling lies isn't criminal or unethical, the seller is to blame for accepting my bluffing, as he was given the opportunity to check.
Well I don't know who the messenger is. Was he knowingly telling a lie? Was he thinking to be right with his claim? These are both possible.
I usually ask first for further specific details (zip?tags?construction details?) and then make a statement.
In this case the seller was given ample opportunity to check, so he's partly responsible. But that doesn't make the messenger right.
The buyer got himself a very nice jacket.
If he's the messenger and knowingly lied about it then it sucks.
If he's the messenger and really thought he was rightfully claiming it to be an Eastman he got lucky, and maybe he learnt a bit.
If he's not the messenger then don't bother about what's being said, you got a very nice jacket and I hope you will enjoy looking at it and occasionally wear it.
Oh, well, gonna make myself a sandwich and check the newspapers if anything else happened.
Like a banned member once said: "this is just the internet, don't take everything too seriously".
So if the opportunity arises I guess I'll be sending a message to the jacket seller that his item isn't what he claims.
"hm, that Buzz you're selling, it's not a Buzz but a re-tagged cheap repro."
Me telling lies isn't criminal or unethical, the seller is to blame for accepting my bluffing, as he was given the opportunity to check.
Well I don't know who the messenger is. Was he knowingly telling a lie? Was he thinking to be right with his claim? These are both possible.
I usually ask first for further specific details (zip?tags?construction details?) and then make a statement.
In this case the seller was given ample opportunity to check, so he's partly responsible. But that doesn't make the messenger right.
The buyer got himself a very nice jacket.
If he's the messenger and knowingly lied about it then it sucks.
If he's the messenger and really thought he was rightfully claiming it to be an Eastman he got lucky, and maybe he learnt a bit.
If he's not the messenger then don't bother about what's being said, you got a very nice jacket and I hope you will enjoy looking at it and occasionally wear it.
Oh, well, gonna make myself a sandwich and check the newspapers if anything else happened.
Like a banned member once said: "this is just the internet, don't take everything too seriously".
bfrench
Administrator
Quote from eBay:
Q: This, I don't believe is an original. It is a reproduction made by Eastman Leather in England.
A: Well I'm not now 100% sure myself. I will have to leave that to the bidders. However the Eastman jackets seem to bring a similar dollar amount. I am going to drop the starting bid and let it go.
End Quote
Hi, Guys,
The above quote makes it quite clear that whoever contacted the seller said he believed it wasn't an original - that kind of puts the onus on the seller to either refute the question or do as he did and lower the price.
If any of you were selling an original, I would suspect that you'd have adequate proof of its authenticity or it would be let the buyer beware.
So, how about cutting both sides a little slack and let the buyer enjoy his jacket whether an original or not.
Thanks
Q: This, I don't believe is an original. It is a reproduction made by Eastman Leather in England.
A: Well I'm not now 100% sure myself. I will have to leave that to the bidders. However the Eastman jackets seem to bring a similar dollar amount. I am going to drop the starting bid and let it go.
End Quote
Hi, Guys,
The above quote makes it quite clear that whoever contacted the seller said he believed it wasn't an original - that kind of puts the onus on the seller to either refute the question or do as he did and lower the price.
If any of you were selling an original, I would suspect that you'd have adequate proof of its authenticity or it would be let the buyer beware.
So, how about cutting both sides a little slack and let the buyer enjoy his jacket whether an original or not.
Thanks
Persimmon
Well-Known Member
Looking at the history of the posts and the original Ebay listing I have a few thoughts.
Often when a jacket is listed on Ebay and it states an original etc etc several members of this Forum have emailed him quite rightly to tell him its a Repro etc (hopefully to protect folks out there who share our hobby)
Now not everyone is an expert so mistakes can be made.
Equally I don't buy the "police view" that if he does not know correctly then tough luck - Forrest Gump etc !!!!!!!!
Now if that person ignores such comments the subsequent purchaser ends up buying a "wrong un" although they almost certaintly don't know it. (Shame on him )
Now is the Ebayer changes the listing to "I now know/ understand its a repro " etc we are all much happier in our world and justice is seen to be done.
So in the contents of this story -
He lists it as an original
He is told its a Repro (Eastman) and acts "correctly"
Then this Forum quickly deconstruct and pretty much agree its an original -
Should we not have then told (by email) the Ebayer that it is an original ?
WE are quick to shout at them when they list them wrong.
Should we not have been equally quick to tell when its listed as a Repro and not as it should be an Original ?
Or are we so selfish we always want the bargain ..
The question is who told the Ebayer it was an Eastman repro ?
If its a Forum member and they were originally mistaken then he should have corrected his error.
If it was not then we cannot change that but perhaps we should all feel a touch quilty that (having agreed its an original) that not one of us had the decency to email him.
I know I do.
What is done is done and there is no way back but it does openly reveal that Forum members are all different in their views.
Often when a jacket is listed on Ebay and it states an original etc etc several members of this Forum have emailed him quite rightly to tell him its a Repro etc (hopefully to protect folks out there who share our hobby)
Now not everyone is an expert so mistakes can be made.
Equally I don't buy the "police view" that if he does not know correctly then tough luck - Forrest Gump etc !!!!!!!!
Now if that person ignores such comments the subsequent purchaser ends up buying a "wrong un" although they almost certaintly don't know it. (Shame on him )
Now is the Ebayer changes the listing to "I now know/ understand its a repro " etc we are all much happier in our world and justice is seen to be done.
So in the contents of this story -
He lists it as an original
He is told its a Repro (Eastman) and acts "correctly"
Then this Forum quickly deconstruct and pretty much agree its an original -
Should we not have then told (by email) the Ebayer that it is an original ?
WE are quick to shout at them when they list them wrong.
Should we not have been equally quick to tell when its listed as a Repro and not as it should be an Original ?
Or are we so selfish we always want the bargain ..
The question is who told the Ebayer it was an Eastman repro ?
If its a Forum member and they were originally mistaken then he should have corrected his error.
If it was not then we cannot change that but perhaps we should all feel a touch quilty that (having agreed its an original) that not one of us had the decency to email him.
I know I do.
What is done is done and there is no way back but it does openly reveal that Forum members are all different in their views.
