[meteorite-list] Dealer Refunds: IDENTITY and DOUBLE GAUL

From: Tom aka James Knudson <knudson911_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:22:44 2004
Message-ID: <003e01c33e64$2871bc60$bcd143d8_at_malcolm>

Hello Charlie and list, Steve started a post called "dealers refunds". I do
not think the buyer in Steve's post deserves a refund! Some how, some
where, the thread got off topic and on to the subject with Matteo and an
ebay deal of his. When I replied on this subject, I thought we were still on
Steve's original thread. So Charlie, I want you to know that I has not
talking about you in this thread at all. I am sorry if I offended you, I
thought if I was offending anyone it was the guy asking Steve for a refund!
: )
Thanks, Tom
The proudest member of the IMCA 6168
----- Original Message -----
From: Charlie Devine <moonrock25_at_webtv.net>
To: Michael L Blood <mlblood_at_cox.net>
Cc: Tom aka James Knudson <knudson911_at_frontiernet.net>; Ken O'Neill
<kenoneill_at_kenoneill.com>; Meteorite-List (E-mail)
<meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>; M come Meteorite Meteorites
<mcomemeteorite2000_at_yahoo.it>
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2003 3:44 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Dealer Refunds: IDENTITY and DOUBLE GAUL


> Hello everyone,
>
> On ebay I am shawomet, and I am the person whom Matteo is suggesting be
> blackballed on ebay because I left him negative feedback.
> I am very sorry that Matteo chose to air our differences on this list.
> When he continued to lie to me, I told Matteo he was very lucky I was
> keeping this between the 2 of us. Now he has decided to slam me in
> public, so, to set the record straight, here is why Matteo is so upset
> with me.
>
> It begins with the simple fact that Park Forest was a very special fall
> in my opinion. My emphasis in collecting has always been more on the
> history, and less on the science. So, Park Forest had it all in my
> eyes. I knew I was reading about, on this list, a fall that would rank
> as very historic. I resolved that I would try to acquire as many
> samples of the various hammers or "house smashers" as I could.
> It's 3 months later and I believe I did well in reaching my specific
> goals.
>
> Then one day I saw this ebay auction just a few hours after Matteo
> listed it:
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2178091504
>
> This listing gave the unmistakable impression that the seller was
> offering a slice of the stone that hit the roof of the PF Firestation!
> With a buy-now option of $55 for a 1g slice. I thought, "wow, what a
> way to round out my PF hammer collection!". But I also thought "I
> thought the PF town council had decided to sell this stone to a museum?"
> I then did what I've never done before. Bid first ( or in this case
> "buy-now" first ) and ask questions later. If this really were a piece
> of the PF Firestation stone, the auction might end with a buy-now before
> Matteo could answer my questions. So I ended the auction and
> immediately wrote to Matteo. I told him I would send payment if he
> could provide the evidence that this was indeed from the PF Firestation
> hammer. His reply did not really address my question. He told me that
> he got the slice from Michael Blood, who got it from the Hupes. He told
> me he had a slice from this stone on his collection page. He did, and
> it was captioned "Firestation stone".
>
> I decided to contact Michael Blood, but he was not around. I decided to
> sleep on it. Lo and behold, when I awake I remember that Michael did
> offer pieces of a stone that had fallen across the street from the
> firestation. Matteo was mistaken. It must be a piece of this stone
> that I had purchased. So I wrote to Matteo and told him he must be in
> error, but being an honorable man, I would pay his ebay fees since I had
> bid first and asked questions later. A small loss for me, no loss for
> Matteo.
>
> Matteo's reply to my suggestion was that I could believe one of 2
> things. I could believe that Michael Blood was a liar, or I could
> believe the slice came from the stone that penetrated the roof of the
> firestation. Whatever Matteo's reason for putting it that way, I "fell
> for it" and sent my payment. A perfect example of being told what I
> really wanted to hear and believing it I guess.
>
> Several days went bye when I noticed a post from Michael to the list.
> Seeing that he was around I contacted him and discovered my memory had
> been correct. Michael never offered this hammer on his pre-post list
> and Michael never told Matteo that the pieces Matteo bought from him
> came from the Firestation impactor. Michael also fwd me a copy of his
> old PF pre-post. I fwd this pre-post to Matteo and presented it as
> evidence that the specimen I purchased, and which was now enroute to me,
> was not what Matteo claimed it was. Matteo's reply was that perhaps the
> description "fell across the steet" from the firestation had been lost
> in his emails with Michael. Matteo did not offer, as I expected he
> would, and as I would have immediately done myself, a refund or other
> form of adjustment that would make up for his misrepresentation of this
> auction listing.
>
> When the item arrived, I left negative feedback.
> That feedback simply stated the truth of the matter. I did not demand a
> refund that I felt the seller should have offered me of his own free
> will. I wrote it off as a gamble on my part, a gamble I had lost.
>
> After I had posted the feedback, Matteo contacted me and reminded me
> that he had told me if I did not believe the piece was from the stone
> that hit the firestation, I did not have to send payment. He has
> repeated this claim on this list. Matteo, as I told you yesterday, I do
> not like being lied to. I told you that I have saved all your emails.
> And I state catagorically:
> at no time did you tell me not to send payment.
> Rather, you told me that if it were not from the stone that hit the
> station, then Blood was a liar.
> Since I don't believe that Michael is a liar, and it didn't dawn on me
> that you might be misleading me, you got paid and I own a pretty
> expensive slice of "ordinary" PF.
>
> In closing, I want to state, that I left Matteo negative feedback
> because I felt I was lied to.
> While the feedback was strongly worded, I'm not all bent out of shape
> about what happened.
> I accept responsibility for my "bid now, ask questions later" approach.
> If Matteo had simply agreed to my offer to pay his ebay fees for the
> item I purchased, there would be no negative feedback and I would'nt be
> offering a long-winded expaination of a matter that Matteo should have
> kept between the 2 of us. Again, I am sorry that this business is being
> aired in public. I do hope this is the last word that anyone expects
> from me on this matter.
>
> Best wishes,
> Charlie
>
>
Received on Sun 29 Jun 2003 01:30:35 PM PDT