Nick, I certainly agree with you that Caveat Emptor *always* applies, even more so in the crazy parallel universe known as eBay.
However, if someone makes a claim like "this was Coppi's personal bike used in the TdF" or "this was John Howard's personal bike," they need to be prepared to substantiate that claim (because until proven, that's all it is - a claim). How could you prove, as a potential buyer, eBay sellers' claims such as those?
Richard, I disagree that we've been "trashing" either of the auctions in question. I thought the discussion on the Bianchi in particular was quite civil. Can't we even do that in this forum? I realize that bike was sold (BTW, does the new owner want to "out" himself?), so it's moot, but these are the kind of minutiae we classic bike nerds agonize over! Don't take all of the fun out of the process!
Cheers,
Greg Parker In way too PC A2 MI USA
In a message dated 10/9/02 3:12:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org writes:
> Message: 12
> Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2002 14:59:27 -0400
> From: <nickzz@mindspring.com>
> To: OROBOYZ@aol.com
> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Reply-To: nickzz@mindspring.com
> Subject: Re: [CR]Coppi 1952 TdF (?) Bianchi on eBay
>
> In many ways I agree with what you say about sellers being up front &
> divulging any & all information they have regarding an item for sale.
>
> However there is also a responsibility that goes with the buyer to
> substantiate all of the facts prior to purchase.A savvy buyer should never
> believe all that is included in the description without validating it
> personally or at least to his own satisfaction.A wise buyer makes wise
> purchases based on his knowledge of the items he buys.Not on what the seller
> says they are.
>
> My motto has always been BUYER BEWARE.Then I only have me to blame for a bad
> purchase decision.
>
> Nick Zatezalo
> Atlanta,Ga.
>
>
> On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 13:53:02 EDT OROBOYZ@aol.com wrote:
>
> > In a message dated 10/4/2002 1:05:38 PM Eastern
> > Daylight Time,
> > richardsachs@juno.com writes:
> >
> > >
> >
> > Coming into this a bit late (I have been off at
> > the Bike Show) ....
> >
> > Well, this is rather a crucial point about a
> > persons responsibility in
> > selling a valuable thing, be it a bicycle or
> > anything else. True ignorance of
> > the facts or feigned ignorance, the result is
> > the same.
> >
> > I think I read in between the lines that Richie
> > has affection and empathy for
> > the older gentleman, which I can understand,
> > but this seller still must be
> > held responsible when selling something as
> > special as this bike. HE should
> > have asked you to help him properly describe
> > that bike before placing it for
> > auction.
> >
> > You cannot simply say a bike belonged to Coppi
> > if you are really not sure or
> > able to substantiate it. Imagine selling an
> > item "Used by John Kennedy" or
> > selling your home by saying it had some
> > enhancing attribute that you really
> > didn't know for sure and unable to substantiate
> > it. It would be seen as
> > outrageous. Kind of like these religious
> > relics, i.e., "Saint Sebastian's
> > toe bone" Yuk.
> >
> > That bike was valuable in it's own right as a
> > mechanical piece but the Coppi
> > provenance would boost it's value immensely to
> > some buyers. If we are "CR
> > Police", in a position to call someone to task
> > on a slip up (or, in some
> > other cases, intentional misrepresentation)
> > like this, I think it's a good
> > thing.
> >
> > Dale Brown
> > Greensboro, North Carolina