[78-L] E*AY Seller Complaint - Bait & Switch on a $300 Record

[Taylor Bowie]

Isn't the purple Harmony the label for the Pearl Bailey-Hot Lips Page "Baby, 
It's Cold Outside"?  That should qualify as a "CI" by most measures.

Taylor



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Lennick" <dlennick at sympatico.ca>
To: "78-L Mail List" <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 2:41 PM
Subject: Re: [78-L] E*AY Seller Complaint - Bait & Switch on a $300 Record


> Aw, now you're telling me that 1949 Harmonys aren't collector's items 
> either?
> Some days ya just can't make fifty cents.
>
> dl
>
> On 1/4/2013 4:43 PM, Cary Ginell wrote:
>>
>> Are there any Paramount 14000s that come from unissued material? If so, 
>> if it's a 20s artist, should those command higher prices? And what about 
>> Paramount/Steiner releases that might also be from ARC masters? I have a 
>> couple of Lead Bellys from the series (14006, 14017) that I think are 
>> from this period. Or should we treat these like 1949 Harmonys?
>> Cary Ginell
>>
>>
>>
>>> Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 13:02:28 -0800
>>> From: craigventresco at gmail.com
>>> To: 78-l at klickitat.78online.com
>>> Subject: Re: [78-L] E*AY Seller Complaint - Bait&  Switch on a $300 
>>> Record
>>>
>>> Still, before you bid a lot on a Paramount record you should study a
>>> discography long enough to figure out that there is no Paramount record
>>> from the 20's or early 30's in a 14000 series OR with black and silver
>>> labels....That seems like pretty common knowledge to me...
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Harold 
>>> Aherne<leotolstoy_75 at yahoo.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> IMO, a good Ebay seller should always note when a pressing is of a
>>>> significantly later vintage than the recording itself. Perhaps (say) a 
>>>> 1917
>>>> pressing of a 1914 Victor master isn't so significant (although it may 
>>>> be
>>>> if the collector cares about how far advanced the "stamper generation" 
>>>> is).
>>>> But for a sought-after recording like the one you describe, sellers 
>>>> need to
>>>> be as forthcoming as possible about all the features of the
>>>> record--defects, label damage, sound quality, and (in this case) the 
>>>> fact
>>>> that the disc is essentially a 1948 replica of the original 1920s
>>>> issue--and in this form, really not so sought-after.
>>>>
>>>> You can at least say that you own a 78 of the recording--you just
>>>> shouldn't have been expected to pay what you did.
>>>>
>>>> (love your YT channel, by the way)
>>>>
>>>> -HA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 3, 2013, at 7:47 PM, Clifford Bolling wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Anybody here familiar with 2ndfiddlerecords (aka George Casalle) of
>>>> Chicago?  I'm wondering if I should
>>>>> worry about dealing with this fellow.  I bought a Blind Lemon 
>>>>> Jefferson
>>>> record from him (auction #121039784517)
>>>>> described as Grades N-,  Never Played,  Excellent, and so on.  I found
>>>> out the photos in the auction are of a
>>>>> record that sold on ebay in Sep, 2011.  The record I got was not the
>>>> record in the pictures and had significant
>>>>> environmental damage to both sides in addition to significant label
>>>> damage on both sides.  I did not examine it
>>>>> close enough to tell if it had ever been played.  Could be unplayed.
>>>>>
>>>>> I paid an embarrassingly high price for this record, but the photos 
>>>>> and
>>>> description seemed a once in a lifetime
>>>>> opportunity, so I bid on it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, I sent him a note with these issues.  Haven't heard back from
>>>> him yet.  He has 100% positive feedback so
>>>>> he must be doing something right, just not this time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Has anyone here had issue with this seller?  Please, someone, say
>>>> something that will ease my anxiety.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!  CDB
>>>>
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>