OT good grief

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by j m shaw, Apr 26, 2003.

  1. Had to share this one with you, I work in a camera store and we
    deal new/used. Today I watched in dissbelief as one of my
    co-workers purchased from a silver haired lady her husbands
    M5, IIIg, 90ltm,135ltm and a 50ltm for the whopping amount of
    $125.00. I wanted to yell "HEY LADY" I will give you double but
    had to stand by biting my tounge as the transaction took place.
    Still I assume she was happy with the $ and the cameras will get
    serviced and go to new homes....just thought I would share. have
    a great night. mark
  2. That's really sad..........and disgusting. There is a world of difference between a person putting their own price on a camera, such as at a garage sale, newspaper ad, market stall etc and what happened here. When someone puts their own price on an item it's their responsibility and they should be happy with that price if they get it. Such a price is fair game if the buyer sees more value than the $ asked.

    This " silver haired lady " obvously did not know the worth of her husbands gear. If she did, she would have known to ask for more. She came to your camera store for a fair price. Your colleague was prepared to deal with her dishonestly. In my book this amounts to theft.

    Sure, bargains are to be hunted keenly, and sometimes found when luck is with you. But this is not a " bargain " situation......its just dishonest dealing. Your assumption that she was happy with the price is solely based on your belief that she thought she got a fair deal, which she didn't.

    Ripping off silver haired ladies has a price. The law of karma applies.
  3. This is the reason I don't mind ordering from B&H and others. I know there are a few salesmen on here who wax poetic about the benefits of starting a "relationship" with your local camera store, but to me this is moot.
  4. Gregory you are right it's sad, I DO think she was taken
    advantage of...granted the equipment was far from mint and the
    M5 had mold on the fungus, it was worth alot more than $125.
    this doesn't hapen too often in our shop, they tend to be fair but
    this was a sad deal indeed...
  5. I think its all relative. For example if you give a Leica to a tribal group that have yet been exposed to the civilised world, they wouldn't have a clue of any value for the camera. Likewise the old lady that sold the camera probably couldn't be happier for exchanging cash value for something she has no need for. In fact, in our society, we even go to great lengths to protect ourselves by having lawyers and advisors on matters that we have no knowledge in.....and yet I've heard of cases where the biggest crooks are lawyers.
  6. gib


    your coworker is a thief and a piece of human excrement
  7. Mark,
    What is the difference between what you did (or didn't do) today, and a camera shop that knowingly sells at full price a defective product to a customer as if it were working?

    In my opinion you and the shop you work at are as bad as any of the disgraceful NYC shops that readily and happily rip off customers!!!

    Please feel free to share the name of the store you work at so I may be sure to avoid it in the future. Maybe you would be better off keeping these things to yourself in the future.

  8. Henry, I disagree with you. The old lady was ripped off, financially and from a moral and ethical standpoint. The equipment was worth more than $3,000 and she got only $125. It's behavior such as this that accelerates the decline of society, and as good Christians we condone it because it constitutes a legal transaction. I couldn't live with myself if I was in the business of ripping off people. Granted, we all have to make a living, but this is daylight robbery. Give me the uncivilized tribe any day, at least they won't cheat me.
  9. Erik, it might be presumptuous of you to condemn Mark. This sort of moral dilemma presents itself to us in many ways, I'm sure we all have had our moments. It is difficult, and easy to second guess someone else's actions. The salesman who paid the $125 was a criminal, plain and simple, and a sorry example of a human being, but is it worth Mark to speak up and possibly lose his job in such a situation. Tough call. Maybe we could take up a collection and send a check to the old lady. I really feel disgusted at this incident.
  10. gib


    Mark said nothing. Mark made his moral choice. I would never trust Mark in any way, shape or form based on his little account of his character.

    That woman was defenseless.
  11. "In fact, in our society, we even go to great lengths to protect ourselves by having lawyers and advisors on matters that we have no knowledge in.....and yet I've heard of cases where the biggest crooks are lawyers."

    My apologies for making the above statement. It was not directed at our lawyer friends who frequent this forum, but rather at a minority of some bad apples in any professions. I was being sued once by an ambulance chaser in an accident injury case. Luckily my insurance company fought it out in court and won the case. The irony were, had they not went to court, at least there would have been some settlement costs, but it this case both the plaintiff and the lawyer didn't get a dime because the insurance company were able to prove the case fraudulent.
  12. William , you are entitled to your opinion, However I am no
    crook...I did talk with said salesman and told him the given
    amount was a joke he told me equip needed repair and didn't
    want to hear anymore. As for telling the lady, Sure I cold have
    said something and wanted too, however I probably would have
    been repremanded for doing so...or worse....I do value my $10
    per hour job as a recent college grad hoping for something
    bigger .... that $10 pays my rent....I felt bad and judging from this
    should have just forgoten about it, but I thought sharing would
    make me feel bet ter....obviously I was wrong, and now am
    getting slammed on this board...gee i feel great now. I will talk to
    my manager on monday and let him know that I feel the deal
    was unfair and how I feel sure it wont change things but I will
    have my say. Erick I will keep these things to myself in the
    future, and I am glad I never have to personally give quotes to
    customers...Sorry to start such a lousy thread. Mark
  13. Mark, don't feel too bad about this.
    Under the circumstance, you were not in a position to say anything without getting into trouble. The fact that you feel bad tells me that deep down you detest such unethical practice. If you are smart, wait a few years till you reach a status to be able to make a difference, both financially and morally, then you can stand for what you beleive in. As the saying goes, "Don't get into any fight that you cannot win".
  14. If Mark had said anything; the manager probably would have fired him for "ruining a deal". <BR><BR>Yes the lady could have made a lot money more; and should have had her stuff appraised by an unbiased professional. <BR><BR>Older people should have trusted younger friends to help in financial matters; to avoid being dumb with money matters. If she finds out she was really screwed; the store could be sued; for taking way too much an advantage of an older person. The contract/sale can be struck as void; if the seller was not of right mind. Some states have stronger laws than others in this matter; usually the retirement states.<BR><BR> My uncle threw out the mint LIONEL 275 Watt ZW Transformer and its original box; plus alot of other cool train stuff ; the transformer goes for hundreds on Ebay; without the mint box. Probably a grand of train stuff thrown out.<BR><BR>A friends Dad sold his old "obsolete" black body Nikon F with unmetered prism ; Nikkors 105mm F2.5; 50mm F1.4; 35mm F2 to a camera store for 50 bucks; and was happy he got "so much" for the old "obsolete" junk. He shows us the NEW AUTO FOCUS P & S goober brand camera; he got with his 50 dollar trade in CRAP/JUNK plus 50 dollars in cash. He didnt sell his Nikkormat movie camera; which he thinks is valuable.<BR><BR>I helped a girl fix up her 3 year old Ford Pinto; we redid alot of the mechanical stuuf; brakes, tires, etc. She traded it in on a VEGA; of the same year; and took a 3 year 90 dollar car note for the deal. She like the paint job on the Vega; over the Pinto. I really wanted to beat the salesguy up for taking advantage of her. The Vega died before the note was paid off; the typical Vega engine problem happened 6 months into the note. <BR><BR>A local camera store was always trying to by my dads mint Retina IIIc from him; "for a few bucks; since it isnt worth much". This comment made me not want to do business ever with them.
  15. gib


    IMO you should have quit.
  16. gib


    In 1941, my grandmother gave away for next to nothing a family cottage on Lowber Lake north of Kingston, Ontario, because her husband died and four of her five sons were overseas or otherwise in the service. Guy gave her the money, all the contents were tossed. She did it becasue she was afraid she would get nothing at all if she waited.
  17. Sorry to start such a lousy thread. Mark

    I wish i had not read this thread. That lady could have anyones wife on this Forum, under sad circumstances.
  18. Mark, you were in a difficult situation. It won't be the last time.

    By accepting the gear and paying anything for it, the store
    assumes the risk of repairing the gear and then finding buyers
    among a fairly small group who would appreciate it. You, being
    a Leica knowledgable person could probably find those buyers
    even here on the forum. But I would hazard a guess that the
    store you work at isn't in the business of repairing, and then
    sitting on such exotic gear for God knows how long before it

    That said, it was still a rip-off if the collegue knew he was
    substantually shorting the lady, knew its potential value once
    repaired and /or CLAed, and had channels to sell such gear in a
    reasonable amount of time.

    The moral aspect raised here is an interesting one. What
    difference does it make morally that the woman was elderly?
    Would it be okay to rip off an unknowing 40 year old?

    In every case I've ever encountered, stepping forward to do the
    right thing involves consequences. I once was a witness to an
    injustice, and the consequence was a week long trial and a
    weeks' lost pay.

    However, you didn't rip off this lady, your collegue did. Bringing it
    up to your supervisor will either get you in trouble or your
    collegue depending on the moral slant of the supervisor. It will
    most likely involve a consequence as most moral dilemmas do.

    The thing to remember is that while small in the overall scheme
    of things, this is where a young individual begans forming their
    own Ethos that will manifest itself as life throws a person even
    bigger decisions to make later. Act as your conscience dictates.
    It is usually the best course to take.
  19. Buy back from your colleague and sell it back to the lady for not more than what she got. i.e $125.

    Lose your job or lose your dignity.
  20. OK all those 'Holier than thou' posters what about this scenario...

    You are browsing a charity shop's contents and come across a mint Leica IIIg and Elmar 3.5 in a leather case hanging up with all the other old cameras (box Brownies, plastic TLRs etc) and it is marked $10 because the old dears who take in all this gear from house clearances have'nt a clue. It probably came from some widowed friend who just donated anything remotely saleable to the shop and need the space because they are moving to a smaller house.

    Are you going to inform the old ladies running the shop that the camera is worth much more so that their charity can benefit from a proper price or are you going to pay the $10 and come and brag about it here?

    I know you would all pay $10 and come and brag. I know I would as well. Lets stop beating up on Mark and admit we are all morally 'selective' when a bargain is around.
  21. Beating up on Mark

    No one is 'beating up Mark',just expressing their views! Your scenrio is different, as you are aware.
  22. I was going to just watch this thread. Yet with some of the comments I could not just sit back. This post is more about the attitudes posted here, than the moral right or wrong of the situation that Mark wrote about.

    What happened to the lady is sad and wrong. What that salesman did is sad and wrong. What Mark did how was not sad or wrong given his particular situation. He did talk with the salesman in question. And he still might talk with the manager.

    Some one wrote that Mark should quit. And maybe he should. But given the economic realities of the job market, what kind of job if any could he find? Would those that find his situation unworkable, send him money to make up the difference if he ended up at McDonald's at $6 an hour?

    I wonder how many that are "casting stones" would stand up in their day to day life? I have heard more than one story here about garage sale finds. Lets say you find a good example of an M3 at a flea market or garage sale for $75 with a DR Summicron. Do you buy it for the $75, or do you offer the $1000 or so that it is truly worth? Or lets say that a camera store miss-priced that same gear, would you offer more? I know I would pay their price, and walk away. Does that make me a bad person?

    How many of you are working for companies that have questionable business practices? How many of you were less than charitable in your dealings with others?

    For those that blasted Mark, and even his store; if you don't fit ANY of the above scenarios - that you have never cheated ANYONE in your entire life- that you would rather quit your job than work for a company that you felt did people wrong; even if it meant not making your rent or mortgage - please give me your names so that I can send them to Rome. The world needs some more saints.

    What happened to this lady is what happens to us all, if we allow it. Sometimes we have control, and sometimes we don't We are judged and the services and rewards provided are then given by that judgment. A private hospital will turn away those in need, or give them just enough care to get them to the public hospital. Those that look like an easy mark pay more for their car purchase or car repair. Raises and stock options for the owners and senior management, and meager - if any more - money for the rank and file.
  23. Trevor,

    Looks like we were on the same thought train....
  24. Probably what Marc said. If you can live with your decision then go ahead. If you feel it's better to keep the job but work in a not-so-honest environment then go ahead.

    No body seems to be right here. We all make decisions day to day. Just stand by them once there're made.

    good luck Mark. ;)
  25. Since the cat is out of the bag and in order for us to be able to sleep better, I suggest we all help Mark and the lady out. Instead of talking to "right" a "wrong" I suggest we all chip in financially and have Mark reposses those equipment, then return it to the rightful owner.

    What's wrong with this picture ?
  26. Chip , if we follow your arguments to there logical conclusion, well anything is okay. Providing it's not against the law (maybe) it's alright. I suppose morals are for fools! or the Holier than I crowd.Seems to me a case of 'i,m all right Jack' who cares a damn about anyone else! And we wonder why the world is not such a nice place. Well, there is an old saying 'you reap what you sow'. Go figure.
  27. "No one is 'beating up Mark',just expressing their views! Your scenario is different, as you are aware."


    Is the situation really that different? Yes the woman went in looking to trade for what she thought would be a fair price. What she got was a fair price in her mind, otherwise she would have walked. Should the offer been higher? Probably should have been. Yet, without us looking at gear and seeing the overall condition; we can not truly pass judgment. The only thing that we know from Mark's description is that the M5 had fungus, and the rest was not mint. Given the fungus on the M5, we can only assume the rest of the gear may have issues too. We also do not know what the lenses were.

    But lets look at the "deal". A bargain M5 is about $900, the IIIg same condition about $800, and the lenses about $200 each. For a total of $2300. Based on Mark's description the M5 repair might be $400, about $300 for the IIIg, and about $100 each on the lenses - for about $1000 in repairs. Depending on the condition of the gear it may not even be repairable. Most repairs carry only a 90 or 180 warranty from the day it is received back at the store. And most dealers offer a 90 to 180 day warranty themselves. So if the gear lingers on a dealers shelf AFTER the repair warranty, then the dealer pays the new repair cost. That could be $200 to $300 for each body. Lets say for discussion that the dealer then factors a $200 for future repairs for each of the bodies. That leaves a profit of $900 on the total kit. That works out to about 39% profit if they get the full $2300 for everything. That may seem like a lot; but consider that camera dealers try to get 25% to 40% margins (depends on the dealer and the type of gear) on used gear.

    As to "beating up" Mark. I feel that some were too harsh on Mark and the situation (see my previous post). Some were down right personal IMO.
  28. Yep, i'll keep the same thoughts when i see a someone being mugged.Or maybe that's different,maybe. Where do you draw the line?
  29. I suppose, some people, can 'rational' anything.
  30. The thing I find extraordianry about this story is that no-one has said it is actually a criminal offense, or at least it would be in the UK.

    If a trader knowingly buys or sells at an 'outrageous' price in the UK, he is guilty of obtaining a pecuniary advantage under false pretenses and liable to a prison sentence of up to, I believe, five years. This law is applied, though seldom enough that it tends to make headlines. Does the U.S. not have a similar law?
  31. Allen,

    Sorry I write posts in spurts, so this is following up to your last comment. You have a point about the direction of life in general. Sounds like Mark and I share a common belief system. My previous post was more to illustrate how it might not have been reason for the offer. (A point that I forgot there is that depending on where a repair is sent, Leica repairs can take many weeks - if not months to get back. That too can be a factor in how much may be offered)

    In many shops it is customary to ask what they are looking to get for the gear. She herself may have offered the $150 or something close to it. Working for a dealer, I have seen people come in with gear that they want nearly what they paid for it. Others that have no idea as to what they have is worth, and they are so low ball. The question is asked so as to not to waste time. What we do with that information is what separates us morally. Fortunately for myself and my employer, we try to do what is right for all parties. So morally I ok with my employer. I guess that Mark may be relooking at his long term options with his.

    But the question still begs how many of us would have responded if we came across that woman wanted to sell us the gear for $150? What would we have offered her for the gear? It is easy for us to say now, that "oh, I would have given her $1000!". One can only say what is in their heart at that precise moment in time.
  32. Harvey,

    I wish we did for CEO's that are paid millions for managing a failing company.

    But more to your post, I wonder how this is enforced? Who decides what was a fair price? Closest thing that I can think of that is similar is "price gouging" laws. These come up more for a gas station that starts charging $3 for gallon of gas due to a shortage (while the wholesale price does not reflect that cost), or a merchant that might charge $10 for bottled water during a disaster.

    In Maryland gas dealers can not charge less than what they paid for the product. So I am sure that some states may have laws similar to what you speak of. Though for the free market system here in the states the phrase "let the buyer beware" rules for the most part.
  33. Well, all i know is this. I was brought up in South London, and if you ripped off someones old mum, you would do a lot of crying, for a long time! That's if you were lucky.
  34. Trevor, having different personal codes doesn't make one sinner
    or saint. You have your code, and others have theirs. It is a gray
    area at times except where a law defines the boundries.

    However, don't assume everyone has your mind set on the
    subject. I recently responded to the "flea market find" thread with
    a story about a young person that had stumbled across a mint
    Nikon Rangefinder collectable. I could have easily got it from him
    for under $1,000. and he would have been delighted. Instead I
    connected him with a knowledgable and fair dealer, from whom
    he received upwards of $20,000. It doesn't make me a saint,
    just a regular, vanilla flavored, honest person.
  35. How is this different from the "Garage Sale Finds" thread:


    People who got $x,000 of equipment for $y0. Should they speak up and pay more? Or should they rejoice in their "win"?

    I'm sure some of my own behavior is morally reprehensible, :) , but I recently bought a lens from a poster on this forum. It was a fairly new 90mm Summicron AA. He had originally advertized it for $1,450 and then two weeks later for $1,000. I bought it from him, but before that I told him that the price of $1,000 was too low for such a lens, and that he could get much more for it. He was glad about my honesty, and we settled on a price of $1,250. Some people would call me a fool, but I couldn't do it any other way. I have paid more for other equipment that I felt was not priced fairly. At the end of the day I have to live with myself. There are many instances of criminal ripoffs in society, but one has to clean one's own house before talking about another's. The ripple effect would change the world.

    There have been many cases of people on this forum who offer unfair and ridiculous prices to a seller in the off chance of securing a great deal from a not completely informed seller. Isn't that also criminal, according to the logic posted in this thread?
  36. Allan (Mad Frankie Fraser?) Herbert, fantastic. Loved that. LMAO

    "Dahn ere in Saarf London...etc" Millwall fan perchance?
  37. I agree with Gregory.

    Mark, did the lady come asking for $135 thereabouts or was it offered as a Fair Price by your collegue? There is a difference here, and it doesn't matter if she was "happy" with the offer or not.

    Obviously she didn't know the real worth.

    Mark, you'll see more things like these Im sure. When you make your daily decisions whether to interfere or not, you learn from these decisions.

    One day, when you are in a position to call the shots, make sure you act based on these lessons learned. Only you will know what's right , what's fair and what's wrong.

  38. Allan (Mad Frankie Fraser?) Herbert

    Love it. How about Trevor(kipper?)Hare. Chelsea fan? Prawn sannies all the way.
  39. Allen. Wotcha.

    Kipper? Nah. I changed me name after me bruvvas (Doug and Dinsdale Pirhana) nailed someones head to a floor.
  40. Actually ,i mean't 'wet kipper'old chap. Bunch of ill breed commoners.Not a drop of blue blood among the lot. It's all in the breeding, peasants, the lot (send them to the colonies). This is fun guv!
  41. Wrong=wrong. Situational ethics is a crutch for what Allen said "rational"izing.
  42. Well guv, us commen types...well, we know how to look after our old mum.Would'nt see her being done wrong. Or for that matter anyone elses old mum! Okay! we might nail the odd 'toe rag' to a garage door.Well ,that's how it works here. Not like you posh nobs with all the money, always waiting for you're family to croke. Running around the place grabbing the silver. You know what you toffs are like.Nuff said, i'm off to play jolly hockey sticks. Might pinch the Queens bum, can be a bit saucy that one.
  43. Mark,

    You have been presented with a discomforting dilemna and I can understand how you might be feeling about it. You were a witness, not a participant, to the transaction. You could not reasonably have intervened at the time without perhaps betraying your employer's trust. Anyway, the event has happened now and you can't turn the clock back even if you wanted to.

    Good on you for deciding to talk to the boss about it. This doesn't need to be any sort of confrontation, mind.......perhaps just an expression that you were uncomfortable with what you saw and asking if he thinks it was fair enough.

    The boss then has the option of saying whether or not he is happy about it. He may even explain to you how he sees the transaction fitting in with his business. It is just possible that his profit is not as large as it appears, as was suggested in a previous post. In any event, the Boss can run the business as he sees fit. That's life.

    You will then know if what happened is company policy, or the actions of an individual acting on his own under the company umbrella. This will simplify things.

    If the Boss says he is OK with what happened, then you can decide how much allegiance you feel you should give to this company. You can decide, privately, whether you stay or not, and if so for how long, depending how it sits with you.

    On the other hand, its just possible the Boss might figure that if you are not prepared to take advantage of customers....then you probably aren't looking to take advantage of him either. You might find that you now stand out from the other employees in his estimation.

    You are in an awkward position but it has been my experience that it never hurts ( sometimes in the short run, but always in the long run ) to stand on your principles. Everyone gets to decide for themselves the rules they will live their own lives by. And you don't have to decide anything this second, or even tomorrow. It is quite understandable that you might need this paypacket badly. Only you can decide...... I hope talking to the Boss will clarify things for you.

    I do hope you don't think my post presumptuous. It is not meant like that at all. I usually do not buy into such matters and am wary of offering unsolicited advice. But your post touched a nerve in me......and I must say, surprised me by doing so. I was in a similar situation once and it bothered me too at the time.

    I sincerely wish you succes in resolving this to your own satisfaction. Good Luck.
  44. Mark, i think what you did was enough given the situation at hand.

    in these times, you have priorities. you said that job you have right now pays for your rent, so by doing something (confronting co-worker) without being fired is i think the practical thing to do...

    and if i was at your shoes i probably would have just done the same thing.

    imho, you did nothing wrong. don't sweat it.
  45. in these times, you have priorities

    Mmm, the start of great injustices. I'm only doing my job, i had little choice. Unless folk are prepared to make a stand on small things(are they!)where will they be on big things. Correct, the same place! You do not have to think back far to hear the same words. I had little choice, i was only keeping my job. Sorry, to be so hard, but it's the little things what count.
  46. >>I wonder how this is enforced? Who decides what was a fair price? <<


    The last case to hit the papers was about a plumber who charged a pensioner £2,000 to do a job that other plumbers said was worth £50. They sent him down for two years. In the UK we have officials called Trading Standards Officers who are expected to know what's fair and what's not, which they often do by reference to trade associations and similar bodies.

    You can often tell Trading Standards Officers in South London, they're the ones trailing Alan and Trevor around the markets watching for them shifting dodgy Leicas stamped 'made in the USSR'. :)
  47. Maybe things like a roof over your head, food on the table, and small things like that? I haven't seen anyone yet offer Mark a subsidy while he looks for a more moral or ethical place to work.

    BTW, I wasn't trying to rationalize anything with my expnading on the possible realities of the situation. Just trying to show that costs to the dealer MAY be higher than we think just from Mark's brief description. They are the realities of dealing used cameras.

    I also noticed nobody tried to counter my speculation on getting these particular pieces resold.
  48. You can often tell Trading Standards Officers in South London

    Well, me and my mate Trevor, are going to have to check some of you lot out, get it. I've got the hammer, Trev the nails. But we are nice lads really, so we thought, we would let you choose the colour of the garage doors. Like white myself, goes well with red. Now Trev, being a bit posh, likes black. Me, cannot stand the screamers. I usually skin them alive. Cor Blimey, that makes them shut up.
  49. Mark didn't do anything wrong, I don't know why people are ragging on him. Im my work experience I have heard many derogatory jokes/statements made about gays, blacks, Jews, and so on. I spoke up when I could, but there were times when I couldn't, because I had a wife and her three daughters to feed. Am I part of the problem? I don't know. It depends if the discomfort outweighs the potential personal cost.

    I once walked away from a nice job because I couldn't deal with the dishonesty in their dealings. It was a tremendous financial sacrifice and I wouldn't recommend it unless one has reached the zone of pain, where life becomes intolerable, no matter how good the money.

    People tend to only focus on local situations. For example, we buy diamonds, yet ignore the murder and genocide that goes on in the diamond producing African countries. It is laughable that some diamonds are now certified as "blood free."
  50. Anyway, me and Trev, have dipped our sky rockets( pockets to you colonists) and have a got a one way ticket for that Russian bloke Chip Leik something. We'll take him to Milwall, and Chelsea, get him some posh grub. Yeah, then show him around South London AND STUFF. Then we'll see how well he can sing..if you get my meaning. All right!
  51. Im confused. Apparently many feel that Mark is not at fault. So why the dilemma?

    Move on.
  52. Allen, tell me straight: that last Crimewatch special?
  53. roof over your head, food on the table, and small things like that?

    Of course it has to be a big roof, and a very big table...just small things like that.
  54. Crimewatch special?

    Yep, got it wrong as usual. We used a mincer, flogged him to the local butchers. Bit sringy, still got a good price. Anyway, my mate Sweeney Todd wants to know if any of you would like a free shave. Genuine cutthroat used. Thoughr i'll mention it. E-mail if your interested.
  55. Time to move on, i've got a business plan.
  56. I wish I was rich, comfortable, and moral enough that could I tell someone else to quit a job that they need because their coworker made a shady deal. (Of course, I actually have quit a job because I was sick of the criminal behavior of my employers, so my morals may have be tainted by the realities of being broke and unemployed.)

    Still waiting to hear whether any of those insisting Mark quit are willing to provide him with a job or subsidy . . .
  57. I bought a 105mm F4 preset Nikkor-T from KEH for 35 bucks; and was expecting the bellows version; I got the telephoto; and they wouldnt give me my money back; since it was the "bargain" level rating 20 years ago. At that time the preset "mountain Nikkor" wasnt a collectors item; just a weird old obsolete preset lens from the original Nikon F camera. I thought the as is/bargain price for the bellows 105mm F4 was a steal; but was disappointed when it wasnt a macro bellows lens. It was advertised as a "105mm F4 preset lens for bellows???; as is"

    Later while visting a Bay Area (SF bay) camera store; the owner there said my lens was never made by Nikon; but he could give me a couple of dollars; for the "weird enlarging lens mounted on a Nikon F mount" When I mentioned it was in the Nikon F handbook; he got weirded out; and said "I will give only 20 bucks for that lens only". I thought it was strange that a shop owner was offering money for a lens I was using that day; and didnt really want to sell yet. It is good for portraits; I just stopped in the store for a few rolls of film.

    The low ball offer was because he knew that the Japanese were buying up the first Nikon F lenses; and I didnt at the time. Today the lens is worth a grand. [​IMG]
  58. I tell someone else to quit a job that they need because their coworker made a shady deal.

    Shady deal! ripping off some old lady. Well that's people who work in politics for you...anything goes. If they have not got money or power; well they are nothing. Yes. it's that simple!

    Well, me and my mates like a few lagers. We usually have a curry...take the piss out of the indian waiter,great fun. Well ,we get a bit short of dosh sometimes. We all know where the old foggies live! they are no use to anyone. Bit of a thumping, they cought up. The old man tries to defend his wife. She screams a lot when we thump him. We soon shut him up. Fantasy, look at crime figures in any country against the old. Tell me then i'm speaking fantasy.
  59. Still waiting to hear whether any of those insisting Mark quit are willing to provide him with a job or subsidy . . .

    Grown man, there are a lot of jobs in the USA. Do you really have to offer your rear to get a job in the USA? I suppose in Politics that maybe the case.Time to call on your lurking friends Mike;)
  60. Why weren't the people who are so outraged in this thread speaking up in the "garage sale" thread? I find "it's okay to pay an unfairly low price if they ask, but it's not okay to offer an unfairly low price" to be a very convenient distinction, but I question whether it makes any sense. In both cases, you're taking advantage of someone's ignorance to get a good deal. And it's very curious that someone might see that as a valid distinction, but they don't recognize the difference between clubbing someone on the head and taking their money and witnessing a coworker offering an unfairly low price.
  61. gib


    okay here we go.....

    let us turn this upside down shall we..... Mark is such a great guy.

    If his coworker had been a purse snatcher on the street and took her purse and Mark ran and tackled him he would be a hero.

    Instead Mark put this thread up becuz his conscience bothered him.

    So, we now know that Mark is willing to protect his $10 an hour job despite him moral sense that the guy he works with his a thief.

    Thus Mark is a good guy.

    What could Mark do in his sales moment of truth?

    I can only say, what I would do, I would say Lady, you should get a second opinion on the value of your merchandise....or... lady, this guy is worse than a purse snatcher and he needs to work on his cardio rate and get new sneakers....or maybe the two of them should have just hit over the head and taken the stuff and given her nothing.

    If you guys on this thread have no sense of right and wrong and havent got the guts to act on that judgement....well, I pity you.

    I aint rich and comfortable....but I sleep fine at night.
  62. Sitting behind a computer and telling someone else to quit his job (after all, it's nothing to find another one) displays smugness, not ethical superiority. Requiring other people to make sacrifices so you can simply pat yourself on the back is bullshit. Would Mark quitting his job make customers less likely to get ripped off? Would it punish the person who made the shady deal? No, it deosn't do a damn thing that's productive.
  63. I for one wasn't begrudging the witness to this transaction. The fact he spoke about it on here shows that he didn't like it. There's lots of ways people make money off others- whether it be selling your services to your employer or whatever. Happens day in day out, just depends on what your tolerance is of how much skin off you can handle.
  64. gib


    want to step outside Mike?
  65. I gotta agree Mark...you should have spoken up. If a $10 an hour job is worth compromising your morals than you can be bought pretty cheaply. You should have spoken up. Mike makes note of the 'garage sale' thread, but this is entirely diffenent IMO. Someone who is putting on a garage sale should go out of their way to some degree to make themselves aware of what they are selling. You'd think, after all the garage sale 'stories' out there (and they are legion), that people would make themselves aware. Someone walking into a 'supposedly' reputable camera shop is doing exactly that...trying to be educated as to the value of what they are selling. Your company ripped her off Mark. Even my own IIIg story...I informed the university dept what the stuff was worth...but it had all been officially depreciated and they could not legally make a bundle of money on it(just for those who'll say I've done the same thing as Mark).
  66. Allen, how old are you? i assume a young lad, because you seem to have this idea in your mind that the world is black and white.

    well, i've got news flash for you: it is not. plenty of shades of gray, my friend.

    if you're catching my drift, good for you; if not, pity...
  67. You should have spoken up.

    didn't he say he confronted his co-worker regarding this matter?
  68. gib


    on a lighter less gasoline ignite note......in our lives we have moments present themselves where we get the chance to make a bad thing better....one thought that penetrated my rocklike brain is this that Mark is not that old....and reflecting back on my "perfect" life I can think of a few moments where I knew what was wrong and what was right and I didnt always speak up.....of course, the only problem with that, is that those moments resonate for the rest of your life....finding another job and letting this current one go, that might make things better, speaking to his manager about the transaction might improve things.....silence though, that is the wrong kind of eloquence.
  69. If you guys on this thread have no sense of right and wrong and havent got the guts to act on that judgement....well, I pity you.
    Instead of pitying me, educate me: explain how taking advantage of someone by offering them an unfair price is wrong, but taking advantage of someone by paying an unfair price is right.
    And I never said Mark did the right and admirable thing, but I'm willing to cut him a little slack because there are lots of times that people are in a tight position and have to make a quick choice, and that choice isn't always the best one. Sitting at the computer after the fact and offering what you consider the right solution is a lot different than being in the situation in real time. If you can comfortably condemn Mark, and enjoy the satisfaction of knowing you would have done the "right" thing, you live in a world that's a hell of a lot simpler than the one I'm living in . . .
  70. If a $10 an hour job is worth compromising your morals than you can be bought pretty cheaply.

    Well, that says it all. Sorry folks, but i'm not about ripping off someones mum. Joke or not, try doing it in South London. Try doing it with my mum. Emotive,yes! Rip my mum off, cry!lots.Yes i do really mean it...in a hard way!
  71. gib


    as far as the garage sale lowball price what do you do question:

    I think you tell them that they have something possibly worth much more than they know. I think you will probably kick yourself briefly but in the long haul, it is the right thing to do.

    I may be crazy, but it is just a thing, your soul on the other hand is a super thing.
  72. dexter legasp, you are a Phil brain, just some sad little Troll. Get a life, and take some decent photos. Plonker!
  73. you live in a world that's a hell of a lot simpler than the one I'm living in

    The world is called Morals...very simple really. You don't need a great brain to figure.
  74. Bob, I see your point about responsibility for assigning value, but I'm not sure I buy it. The person who's making the purchase for an unfair price still presumably knows what they're doing. In a sense, it's like saying that camera salesman was wrong because the lady trusted him (which I'd agree with), but the person having a garage sale should know that he can't trust anyone there so it's his reponsibility to make sure the price is fair. That's a bit tricky, since one could also argue that it's the responsibility of the person having the garage sale to insure that no one steals anything (since they can't be trusted), and any theft isn't really the responsibility of the thief . . .
  75. situation in real time.

    Some folk do not need to answer that question. Of course, the trainee politic person is always seeking for votes, goes with the job. What do they want to hear.Sort of sad really, not what you believe, but what gets the votes. Morals..what's that got to do with anything. Votes, that's what it's all about. Tricky Dicky or what...he got the votes!
  76. The person who's making the purchase for an unfair price still presumably knows

    A little old lady...get real. Are you trying for votes. You really do not need to bend! Okay, sorry ,in your job,maybe! Find another job..be you! one life.
  77. Followup to my last post: What if the person having the garage sale is a little old lady??
  78. Allen,

    The job market may be better here in the states, but it isn't that good. I think Mark's comments indicated his situation well. I think that if he could get a job that he enjoyed for $10 an hour tomorrow he probably would. He is genuinely disturbed by the actions that day IMO. Whether it rises to the level of quiting without another job, that is for Mark to decide. Being a working stiff myself, I am among those that go from paycheck to paycheck at times. For me this does not rise to that level, unless facts are missing.

    To others:

    It is now being raised that it was a old widow lady that got cheated. Would it matter that it was a man? From the comments its seems for some that it would.
  79. Huh? Am I the only one that sees the two RATIONAL sides of the

    Mark didn't witness a murder. It was a deal HE identified as
    being unfair. But there IS a possibility the unfairness wasn't as
    great as he imagined. He spoke up and said something to the
    collegue. He wasn't fired for doing so, so the collegue ISN"T the
    boss. Now, he is thinking about bringing it up to the boss. The
    way I would do it would not to make it confrontational.

    Mark, simply state the facts and the collegues' response to your
    feeling it was unfair. Ask for the business reason so you can
    better understand the stores' POV on aquiring such gear. Bet it is
    similar to my rationale and the other person who did the math on
    this thread. If not, then you can quietly look for another job and
    when you quit tell them exactly why.
  80. What if the person having the garage sale is a little old lady??

    Morals my friend, go figure. Forget the smart answers. Chip, just stop it, you know what i mean!
  81. Marc, I also noticed that several dirty, beat-up cameras and lenses probably have a market value that's only a small fraction of the $3000 that someone mentioned. But I thought the ethical argument was more interesting . . . ; )
  82. I am surprised that no one is refuting my math on the final costs, guess the Morals Squad would rather flog Mark...
  83. another job and when you quit tell them exactly why.

    Well, we all have to survive, so perhaps you are right. Me, i would have gone loopy...could not handle ripping off some ones Mom. Right is right...no compromise, i would rather not suvive, if that is the deal. Call me a Dodo.
  84. Morals, not maths!
  85. Come on guys. It is obvious that Mark is upset with the transaction but to make personal statements on his ethics in this difficult situation is,in my opinon, not fair.

    I admire him for posting this workplace situation that caused him discomfort and one that left him very few options. He had to measure the risk to reward to his job and paying his bills. I assume he isn't a manager at the photo store which would have put the responsibity for that transaction on him. If, after speaking to his manager about this transaction he can then decide if he should look for a more ethical workplace. Good luck Mark.
  86. What if, what what. Scum is Scum...really, it is that simple. Why try to justify it. Only Scum do that. They love the old and weak, and young and helpless. If you ignore it, you are part of it...no justification. Really..your choice. Politics, about power and money. What do they care. Saying the right words to the lemmings, that what matters.Votes!
  87. What's the saying, Liars always figure, but figures never lie? *shrug* (not pointed at anyone)
  88. This reminds me of what happened to my ex-girlfriend: she goes into the Saturn dealership to get her oil changed. Leaking drain plug since the tech didn't tighten it down. Blocks later at an intersection her idiot light lights up- oil pressure! Engine screwed. Goes back to the dealership- we gotta used engine with only 5000 miles on the clock from a wreck. Pop in the "new" engine, everything's fine. If it were me, I'd demand a new engine, since I don't know the history of the used engine. Don't know how it was broken in, whether the oil was ever run low, overheated, etc. Guess it depends on the actor and actee. I thought she got screwed myself. Told the manager I wasn't going to buy a Saturn from them ever.
  89. By the way I wasn't around when it happened. I'd have given the managers an ear full.
  90. I appreciate all the positive feedback and respect the negative also. Looking back I should have spoken up, and if the opportunity arose told her to get a second opinion. Lesson learned. I did talk to my co. worker he felt given condition of equip. it was fair or close too????? I am still thinking about talking to my boss?? thanks again. Mark
  91. want to step outside Mike

    I'm off to the fight. My money is on Will, seems bigger and more wholesome. The other bloke seems a bit weird.
  92. am still thinking about talking to my boss?? thanks again. Mark

    Be a man,have some bottle, stand up. Have pride in yourself. Money matters, you matter more. Pride in yourself is beyond money. You won't starve. Be a man, not just in name.Don't be a bender. Respect yourself, the world will respect you. Nobody,including yourself, respects a bender...who loves Jude? Only Politicisations .
  93. Sorry aboot the spelling and grammer...well, not really! so what!
  94. I assumed William G. was joking with the "step outside" remark. If not, then offering to demonstrate your ethical superiority by threatening to beat up people who disagree with you is the real joke.

    And you shouldn't assume he'd win. After all, I'd fight dirty. ; )
  95. After all, I'd fight dirty. ; )

    Hey, talk is cheap! lets get it on. My money is still on Will.
  96. Mike Dixon, alias, Tricky Dicky. Time to call on those lurking friends.
  97. gib


    your moral challenge Mike would be when I fell over with a heart attack and you had to decide if you would give me CPR, unless I fell over on you and pinned you.
  98. dexter legasp, you are a Phil brain, just some sad little Troll. Get a life, and take some decent photos. Plonker!

    now that's uncalled for. why do you keep calling names to people who disagree with you? since you typed in pretty sick insults, you should have at least given me the consolation of spelling my name right.
  99. If anyone watched 60 Minutes tonight, they would know about the legal ripoff the Halliburton has perpetrated on the US taxpayers with their contract to rebuild Iraq, to the tune of $7 Billion, that's $7,000,000,000, in a no-bid contract. No other bidders were allowed. That's $70 per US family. The contract is secret and cannot be seen by anyone. There are many other contract such as this that go on routinely in DC, yet nobody speaks out about them. As a taxpayer I'm outraged, yet I cannot do anything.
  100. Mark, Is there a way to speak to your boss and appeal to his sense of morality and fair play? If your boss backs up your colleague then perhaps you can track down the old lady and call your local newspaper with the story. I guarantee years from now your $150,000 a year job will rest on another moral decision. The fact that you posted this story means it is really bothering you which means you are a decent person so don't let some $10/hr. job compromise your integrity. Life is full of such decisions so start making them now.
  102. At what percentage of worth offering for the equipment would the "moral issue" be gone?

    It is unhealthy for a business to NOT buy items at low prices.

    Our business requires a minimum 50% markup on selling price on used items; because of the repair risk; serial number searches; and cleaning required to resale the items over a year.

    This profit pays for the huge overhead a small business has. The huge medical; liability; and auto insurance; plus a zillion taxes; yellow page adverts; rent; direct labeor costs; etc must be paid with hard cash. We have no government pipeline/nipple keeping us afloat. When a machine dies; we fix; mend it; instead of buying new.

    Most people that abhor a decent profit have never run a business; and have a low risk government job shielded from the reality of being in a recession. A decent Profit is like having good health. This profit pays the monthly wage of those on the dole; soldiers in Iraq; the postal worker; city mayor; fireman; policeman; old pensioners from past wars; etc. The current USA business climate is hostile; businesses are moving abroard to escape the "anti profit" noose of insurance and taxes; and high labor costs. It is strange that some government workers abhor businesses profits; that inturn pay their secure wages.

    Without a profit; the business will pay no income taxes. Thus the states here dig into the tobacco trust funds; and use the "help the old folks who smoked" money; to pay for roads; travel; school football programs etc; With small businesses profits being a bust; the states are eyeing the internet; to tax all sales. The recent US government economic census form of 2003 is targeted to give the states more fuel to tax all mailorder and internet sales.

    Here all the state and local governments focus on "tax holidays" to bring in new business; this tends to screw existing business; who have to still pay high income and property taxes. The politicians are heros; for bringing in new businesses; this helps them get reelected. The business closings; due to lack of profits; is not studied much here. Threatening to move ones entire labor force overseas seems to get their attention; sometimes they even give a slight "tax holliday"; to not pull the labor plug.
  103. Kelly...so let me get this right. 'at least 50% markup on used equipment' is what your stores policy is? So you'd have offered the lady $125.00 and sold it for $187.50 (hell you wanted to make some cash so you put it out at $250.00). I highly doubt it. I agree with some of the stuff that's been said...hopefully Mark uses this as a learning experience. I've been in the same position and it isn't that hard to quietly pull a co-worker aside and politely let them know that they're being unfair (I'm going to assume the co-worker didn't really know by how much he was ripping this person off). This works pretty well every time because most people (the co-worker) aren't downright dishonest.
  104. Think of it this way, the lady practically sold only one of the LTM lenses and gave the M5, IIIG and the other 2 lenses for free.

    but i digress.
  105. I've known some little old silver haired ladies who were crooks. Maybe the stuff was hot.
  106. Bob,

    Let me repost this from above in case you missed it:

    "But lets look at the "deal". A bargain M5 is about $900, the IIIg same condition about $800, and the lenses about $200 each. For a total of $2300. Based on Mark's description the M5 repair might be $400, about $300 for the IIIg, and about $100 each on the lenses - for about $1000 in repairs. Depending on the condition of the gear it may not even be repairable. Most repairs carry only a 90 or 180 warranty from the day it is received back at the store. And most dealers offer a 90 to 180 day warranty themselves. So if the gear lingers on a dealers shelf AFTER the repair warranty, then the dealer pays the new repair cost. That could be $200 to $300 for each body. Lets say for discussion that the dealer then factors a $200 for future repairs for each of the bodies. That leaves a profit of $900 on the total kit. That works out to about 39% profit if they get the full $2300 for everything. That may seem like a lot; but consider that camera dealers try to get 25% to 40% margins (depends on the dealer and the type of gear) on used gear."
  107. Hey Chip you're assuming a helluva lot here. I'm also going to assume that Mark would never have posted (or 'watched in disbelief' for that matter) if the stuff was in poor shape and the lady was getting fair value. Ya know...every once in a while you actually can stand up and call a spade a spade.
  108. I think some people are being much too harsh on Mark. He was obviously disturbed by the incident, so his heart's in the right place. He ought to feel out his boss and see what the company thinks about this kind of behavior. If the boss is a stand up guy he'll make right with the other salesman, if not, Mark will have to decide if he can work for such a company, or not. Very few people can react instantaneously in a situation like this the first it happens. the problem is conflicting loyalties (to the store, coworkers, old lady, self). If you're upset enough about it, and Mark was, he'll know what to do next time. A very important life lesson.
  109. Bob,

    I would hope your comment, "so let me get this right. 'at least 50% markup on used equipment' is what your stores policy is? So you'd have offered the lady $125.00 and sold it for $187.50", was a joke. If not you really have no idea of the cost of doing business in the retail sector - in particular when it comes to the risks of dealing used gear.

    Mark wrote, " I DO think she was taken advantage of...granted the equipment was far from mint and the M5 had mold on the fungus, it was worth alot more than $125"

    The key "assumptions" are "far from mint" AND "the M5 had mold". Also fogging is an issue (as well as cleaning scratches) for the lenses.

    This is not assuming a lot. It is the reality of a camera shop that deals in used gear. Unless a seller is willing to wait for a estimate of value AFTER a repair technician looks at it, that is another story all together. Many shops do not have techs that can take apart a camera to get a detailed look inside at the time of an appraisal.

    It may be a shame that the M5 may have lowered the overall value of the kit. You are right Mark did not comment on all of the kits condition. He might not have looked at it all closely. But the reality is that the M5's condition indicated that the rest of the kit was suspect.

    Just as with a car; if you have a car that needs work and you go to trade it in - then the value you get back on is less. If you spend the money to have the car presented in its best possible condition - then you will get more for it. Same with cameras.

    The key in this discussion is that the M5 had mold and fungus. That indicates poor storage and lack of use. I would think that even you would agree that it would be fair to assume that the IIIg and lenses were stored the same way.

    The only assumptions that I feel that I may be way off on is in the cost of repairs. I did not have a repair guide handy when doing the reply. I was working off of my memory as to what repairs cost, and also based on the very brief description by Mark.

    Everyone is focused on the $125 that the customer got. May question for you Bob (and for anyone else)is, what (given what you know of the general condition) would you have given her for the trade? [I think everyones answer should be entertaining]
  110. Okay Chip...here goes...and I am the industrial manager for a large retail outlet that deals in used every single day. We would expect to retail the units @ M5-$1500, IIIg - $1000 and $200 each for the lenses. A total of $3100.00. This is for cameras that could be put on the shelf at good , but not excellent shape. For this we would give the customer $2325.00, LESS the cost of CLA's, our cost of which for these pieces would total $725.00...leaving the customer a total of 1600.00. Bear in mind I'm talking Canadian funds here, conversion to U.S. dollars leaves $1106.00, a far, far cry from the $125.00 given. As I've said this would be for good, not great gear, with each piece given a CLA. Whether the fungus was too far gone is, under the circumstance something I can't comment on, the fellow who sold the gear (unless a repair expert who took the camera apart on the spot) wouldn't be able to ascertain, no can you. Why do you find it so hard to realize that often 'the deal of the century' means someone got ripped off. If you can live with that thought, someone please remind me never to buy anything from you.
  111. Chip you're a wanker/fondler.
  112. Too others, sorry for the long post….


    It seems that (once conversions are done for US$ vs. CN$) that the anticipated resale value is about the same - $2300 (mine) vs. $2135 (yours). And if we were looking at just a standard CLA, you probably are right there also. The final profit margin if there were no further repairs were needed beyond the CLA's would be 25% for your firm. Within the 25% to 40% that I stated in the previous post. In the dealers I know of in the US the margin is probably higher in the 30% to 50% range.

    It appears to me that your firm is willing to take a greater risk - such as the repairs costing more, and the equipment requiring potential repairs AFTER the expiration of the CLA warranty if the gear does not sell right away. These are business decisions that each firm makes on its own. Such factors as - how quickly will repairs be done, how quickly will such product be sold, will there be future warranty repairs that might not be covered by the CLA warranty play a factor in the offer made to a customer as you well know.

    You are also right that neither you nor I have seen the actual equipment. The key in my valuations was the term "fungus". I took the worse case scenario, you took the best case. The point of my posts was not to defend a low ball figure to an "old lady". It was to provide some thought as to why the money that was offered, was offered; to provide a business model that would give some thought to responses here.

    You did lose me with your comment, "Why do you find it so hard to realize that often 'the deal of the century' means someone got ripped off. If you can live with that thought, someone please remind me never to buy anything from you". Maybe it's been a long day for me. But the comment "that often 'the deal of the century' someone got ripped off" means either the customer or the merchant gets "ripped off" (though I never had used that phrase to my knowledge) means to me that either the customer or the merchants gets ripped off. In a pure business sense it is up to the company to determine acceptable risk. Your comapny has determined yours. My company probably falls somewhere in the middle. I will say that based on the limited information that I personally (NOT representing my company) under such circumstances offered somewhere between $500 and the $1100 you spoke of. All of it dependent on the inspection of the gear and what my reasonable expectations of repairs; and expected turn rate of the gear.

    If we are talking of our companies we have a responsibility to protect that company’s interests. If we are talking about dealing as individuals; then it up to our morals. In the sense of the company that may not jive with our personal morals. Given our respective companies, I don't think that we are far apart.

    In fact I resent the comment "someone please remind me never to buy anything from you". Just because I gave a "rationalization" of what was offered in this case does not mean that I condone what was done. Not knowing the individual that made the offer, I cannot say that he was trying to "rip" anyone off. Nor can I say that he was looking out for the customer’s best interests, though it appears not. You and I do not have all the information available. But for you to make a comment like that when I was trying to show a PONTENTIAL other side of the coin is misguided. Never did I say that my company or I subscribed to such methods or overall math. I took the time to look at the possible "rational" behind it, trying to justify the price that was paid, so the lynching would stop; trying to look at a business model that might support such an offer.

    My previous posts were meant to provide another view of the "bashing" (my term) that Mark and his associate were being subjected to without looking at a business model to support the money offered. Many of the respondents here probably don't have the experience that you or I have (though the overall risk willing to be assumed are different between you and I). And that was the vein that I approached my previous posts. It was only after a challenge that you decided to respond. Then with a personal attack was unwarranted. Maybe I did not make myself clear on my intentions of the post. But your misrepresentation of Kelly’s post and your follow-up to mine does question your motives.

    Keep in mind we are talking about our experiences in valuing gear. You took one road, I took a more conservative one for illustration purposes only. NEVER did I say that my company or I use such business models. I took Mark’s comments further. It is heartening that your company does work on smaller margins, and thereby assuming greater risks. But remember that not all shops are able to do so. But to attack an individual for making broad comments not associated to his current employer, but rather his experience and conversations in the industry ranks up there with the “bashing” that Mark and his fellow associate have received.
  113. I wish you would gain a better vocabulary there James, need to broaden your horizons there mate.....

    Guess it takes one to know one....
  114. gib


    I guess we will never know whether the silver haired lady was a crook as someone suggested in this thread, doing a little Spring cleaning, or was selling some old possessions of her husband because she was hard up for money.

    I guess those three possibilities would suggest 3 different business models that she might have been employing.

    Discussing this with someone off line, another angle came up, one that I am not familiar with. Namely, do camera stores offer an estimation of value service for a fee. Along the line of walking in and saying here is $50, tell me what I have, how bad is its condition, how much to repair, how much roughly would that net me.
  115. William,

    You have a good point there (though I am sure it will start a war again). I personally took it as an woman that wanted to trade her deceased husbands gear. As such we did not have all the info to make an informed opinion.

    Discussing this with someone off line, another angle came up, one that I am not familiar with. Namely, do camera stores offer an estimation of value service for a fee. Along the line of walking in and saying here is $50, tell me what I have, how bad is its condition, how much to repair, how much roughly would that net me.

    You raise another good question. I know from my experience that when a customer comes in with gear like this we give a free estimate of what we would give them with the information at hand. That our estimate is based on the current condition, and that the value is based on that condition. If the condition is questionable (like in this case in this post) we would indicate that there may be more to the repairs than normal. And that as such it reflects what it is worth for us. Leaving to the customer whether they want to sell or not. I personally indicate that if one is not happy with the value that they can sometimes get more selling on their own (and have done battle with my managers when I thought the value low).

    One point not discussed here is that a dealer "generally" will not under value gear on the chance that it may come back to haunt them (as in this case). Cameras stores today have to build a relationship with each customer, regardless of the situation. If not they risk not being there tomorrow.

    On the other hand shops will not without a fee is indicate what the item will sell for in the open market. At least in the US, trying to give such a value could open one to litigation for not meeting expected value. With the ability for people to see what value gear has to purchasers on *bay, there is no reason for camera stores to get in to that. Everyone seems to have the feeling (off a few bad apples) that dealers are "out" against the customers. Not the case with the shops I have worked with.

    Even the situation that Mark relayed, none of us (even dare say Mark) have the true indication of what the gear is worth. Unless Mark comes back and says that his manger reviewed the transaction and feels that the value is higher; we have to assume that there may be other factors as to condition that warrants the money received.
  116. Chip, A lot of words to justify taking an old lady to the cleaners. I hope you are
    only playing devil's advocate.
  117. Yes I am Ray, only since so many are wanting to lynch both Mark and his associate without looking at all the possible details.

    Funny some here are will to get into details about this and that about specific gear. Yet when the human element is involved thy want to rely on pure emotion.

    I am beginning to feel that Mark's only sin was sharing his feelings. So many were wanting to cast stones without really looking at the situation. I truly wonder how people would have responded if Mark had left out "old lady".

    In particular the lack of indignation in teh garage sale therad indicates that peoples feelings were driven by the "old lady" reference.

    I guess just one example of we hear what we want to hear. If you need further examples jsut look at any US newspaper.
  118. Chip...poor Chip I hope you find a way to distill situations down to their essences better in the future. It will save you a lot of time and effort.
  119. Maybe like you James? I guess we are the same then... like your first post to me...
  120. You know I'm not an adversary, what's wrong with a little debate? I'm not being mean about it. I just throw some things out there from time to time.

Share This Page