Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > grey market?

Reply
Thread Tools

grey market?

 
 
CNT
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2003
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...ADME:X:ON:US:2

I placed my first bid. Then I thought about it and felt I did the wrong
thing (especially the seller has zero ratings). Someone outbid me (whew!)
with still under $300 (and only $10 shipping). Can someone look at the link
and tell me if they notice anything wrong? It does say it has "warranty: 1
year", but it would have to mean the seller would provide a valid receipt
with store name on it and so on, right?

On top of that, the seller was using the pictures from a website. I then
called the online number (web address is in the picture), they said that
this seller has nothing related to this online store and he will bring it up
to the proper authorities. Question... if the store decide to take action,
would that mean the seller will be fined for each picture used (and he had
like 6 of those all lined up in the ebay within seconds each other).

Chuck


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
George Kerby
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2003
On 10/14/03 2:18 PM, in article 3f8c4c6c$(E-Mail Removed), "CNT"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...PageName=ADME:
> X:ON:US:2
>
> I placed my first bid. Then I thought about it and felt I did the wrong
> thing (especially the seller has zero ratings). Someone outbid me (whew!)
> with still under $300 (and only $10 shipping). Can someone look at the link
> and tell me if they notice anything wrong? It does say it has "warranty: 1
> year", but it would have to mean the seller would provide a valid receipt
> with store name on it and so on, right?
>
> On top of that, the seller was using the pictures from a website. I then
> called the online number (web address is in the picture), they said that
> this seller has nothing related to this online store and he will bring it up
> to the proper authorities. Question... if the store decide to take action,
> would that mean the seller will be fined for each picture used (and he had
> like 6 of those all lined up in the ebay within seconds each other).
>
> Chuck
>
>

Most likely those shots were supplied by Canon and the store used them swith
permission on their site. The seller just ripped them from the website, not
bothering to remove the tag at bottom right. The copy is probably stolen
from somewhere else, as well,
Personally, I would NEVER buy anything from a seller without any rating.
Common sense should suggest that.


__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
CNT
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2003
Quote "Common sense should suggest that." ????

If Canon supplied those pictures, it wouldn't have some other retailer name
on it. Yeah? And like I said, I called the number of that website address,
they said they didn't give them permission nor this seller wasn't afflicted
with them. I was aware of the zero rating, but they have to start somewhere.
On top of that, it closed with only $290, that is a steal (only if it was
legit)! I didn't mean to talk back at you, but since you mention "common
sense", so I just "corrected" back to you. Peace.

Chuck

> Most likely those shots were supplied by Canon and the store used them

swith
> permission on their site. The seller just ripped them from the website,

not
> bothering to remove the tag at bottom right. The copy is probably stolen
> from somewhere else, as well,
> Personally, I would NEVER buy anything from a seller without any rating.
> Common sense should suggest that.



 
Reply With Quote
 
PiZzazA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2003
Check out this web site
http://www.crutchfield.com/S-q4CJEOa...asp?i=280PSS45
and you will find the content is the same, word by word.

Although copying from other web sites is not unusual for legitimate sales,
but frauds almost always copy. This is just one piece of the puzzle to
determine a suspicious sale. There is no fool proof way to catch every
fraud, but you can always ask for a phone for direct dialogue before sending
the money. Most ebay fraudsters do not like to have verbal communications.

"CNT" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:3f8c4c6c$(E-Mail Removed)...
>

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...ADME:X:ON:US:2
>
> I placed my first bid. Then I thought about it and felt I did the wrong
> thing (especially the seller has zero ratings). Someone outbid me (whew!)
> with still under $300 (and only $10 shipping). Can someone look at the

link
> and tell me if they notice anything wrong? It does say it has "warranty: 1
> year", but it would have to mean the seller would provide a valid receipt
> with store name on it and so on, right?
>
> On top of that, the seller was using the pictures from a website. I then
> called the online number (web address is in the picture), they said that
> this seller has nothing related to this online store and he will bring it

up
> to the proper authorities. Question... if the store decide to take action,
> would that mean the seller will be fined for each picture used (and he had
> like 6 of those all lined up in the ebay within seconds each other).
>
> Chuck
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
PTRAVEL
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2003

"CNT" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:3f8c5948$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Quote "Common sense should suggest that." ????
>
> If Canon supplied those pictures, it wouldn't have some other retailer

name
> on it. Yeah? And like I said, I called the number of that website address,
> they said they didn't give them permission nor this seller wasn't

afflicted
> with them. I was aware of the zero rating, but they have to start

somewhere.
> On top of that, it closed with only $290, that is a steal (only if it was
> legit)! I didn't mean to talk back at you, but since you mention "common
> sense", so I just "corrected" back to you. Peace.
>
> Chuck
>
> > Most likely those shots were supplied by Canon and the store used them

> swith
> > permission on their site. The seller just ripped them from the website,

> not
> > bothering to remove the tag at bottom right. The copy is probably stolen
> > from somewhere else, as well,
> > Personally, I would NEVER buy anything from a seller without any rating.
> > Common sense should suggest that.


The auction was by a new user, with no other auctions, who would only accept
COD payment, and the price was well below market. That's four red flags,
right there.

The concern wouldn't have been that you'd have gotten a grey-market camera,
but that you would have received a box containing a brick.


>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Jim Waggener
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2003
Never buy from someone with Zero feedback.




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
 
Reply With Quote
 
George Kerby
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2003
On 10/14/03 3:13 PM, in article 3f8c5948$(E-Mail Removed), "CNT"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Quote "Common sense should suggest that." ????
>
> If Canon supplied those pictures, it wouldn't have some other retailer name
> on it.

You really don't have any concept of advertising, do you? Since this is a
photo group, I won't bore other readers about the details you're missing.
> Yeah? And like I said, I called the number of that website address,
> they said they didn't give them permission nor this seller wasn't afflicted
> with them.

The permission you mention was for the altered stock photo that Canon
supplied with the dealer's name superimposed over the image. NOT the co-op
image supplied by the manufacturer, Canon.
> I was aware of the zero rating, but they have to start somewhere.

True. But *I* would let someone else be the guinea pig and would look
elsewhere.
> On top of that, it closed with only $290, that is a steal (only if it was
> legit)!

Agreed. But why take the risk. The old saying about appearing to good to be
true applies here.
> I didn't mean to talk back at you, but since you mention "common
> sense", so I just "corrected" back to you. Peace.

I wasn't specifically referring to you. I meant in general. See above.
<BFG>
> Chuck


PS: As another poster recognized, red flags should have gone up when a guy
comes along selling a very expensive 'NEW' camera and has no generally
acceptable minimum starting bid, AND demands COD payment only. Let me
suggest that you bookmark this auction and see what kind of feedback, if any
this seller gets in the next few weeeks. I'd wager it ain't gonna be good!
Peace Out!
-Kerby
>> Most likely those shots were supplied by Canon and the store used them

> swith
>> permission on their site. The seller just ripped them from the website,

> not
>> bothering to remove the tag at bottom right. The copy is probably stolen
>> from somewhere else, as well,
>> Personally, I would NEVER buy anything from a seller without any rating.
>> Common sense should suggest that.

>
>



__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

 
Reply With Quote
 
CNT
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2003
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...category=30014

This above I see A LOT on ebay, over 16,600 feedbacks LOL But one thing is
the 64MB CF is $99 their selling price?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...category=30014

That one I have been watching closely. I did bid on a lot of his ebays, but
people always go over $400 easily with his auctions (I guess because of the
brand name stuff including).

My point is we all had zero ratings at one time LOL. So we start with buying
stuff, to gain counts, then start a business that way?

Finally, I called Canon and they told me that ALL ebay sales are not covered
by Canon warranty. Well, at ebay, they say they are covered but Canon says
no? I have seen Ritz or other companies at ebay, those would have warranty
for sure, right? While we are at it, HOW to make sure the ebay people are
selling warranty covered cameras?

Thank you.

Chuck

> Never buy from someone with Zero feedback.



 
Reply With Quote
 
gr
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2003
So, you're finally trying to buy that S45 which you decided on getting over
the S50 for entirely the wrong reasons. Okay... first mistake. Then, you bid
on a S45 from a bidder with no feedback and demands COD only???

Dude... you're a victim waiting to happen. Go to a real store and buy your
damn camera! At least that way, when you're unsatisfied, you can take it
back or exchange it. (And you WILL be unsatisfied.)


 
Reply With Quote
 
CNT
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2003
Nice of you. You are forgiven.

How can you judge that it's my mistake to buy the S45 in favor over the S50?
How about you review what I found in "Re: add-on lens for S45" dated Oct 12
@ 11:29pm. If you like, we can talk more about THIS issue over there.

Now BACK to the issue in here, all I was trying to do is get the best price
since over $400 is a little a lot (not that I won't pay for it). Let me say
it in other words... buying the S45 for $450 PLUS will need the Viking
256MB, which is another $70ish (final price is $55 w/rebate at amazon.com).
That's $520. Ok, if buying an S45 with 256MB off ebay for $400... do I need
to continue? If it all stays at ~$450~ for both, then I will better off buy
it from a store or Amazon or bhphotovideo (rather than whatchamacallit.com
on top of that, like the Beach thing dot com).

Chuck


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HOW IS GREY BOX VERIFICATION DONE AAA VHDL 0 12-21-2005 10:35 AM
Re: Ugly grey bar on the bottom of Firefox window FrankLion@gmail.com Firefox 0 11-04-2005 07:55 PM
ThunderBird Grey box a bottom of GUI Kneewax Firefox 6 07-21-2004 05:40 PM
Still trying to figure the grey level of an 18% grey card (was: If I shoot a grey card, should this end up as 127 grey?) Alan F Cross Digital Photography 40 03-02-2004 12:12 PM
If I shoot a grey card, should this end up as 127 grey? Alan F Cross Digital Photography 8 02-26-2004 09:57 AM



Advertisments