Rextex writes:
<< Without access to electrical power or phone service for over two
weeks now - 'inquiries / questions' (things in general) have just been
hard if not impossible to respond to. >>
He was able to post auctions on Dec. 20 and 31 and was able to write me
on Dec. 24 and Brian on Jan 8. Others may have intermediate dates which
further debunk this broad time period claim.
<< There is a third auction in which I described a lens as MINT / NEW in
which a 200mm f/4 lens was shipped in error and was less than MINT or
NEW. I sent the correct lens (MINT - no blemish, mark etc. and still
with the original 'Passed' sticker on it) and this Buyer (a DR. in
California)
subsequently refused this lens after three weeks of usage - and returned
a different lens, even 'dented', and most certainly not the one that I
shipped
to him (which was a perfect MINT/NEW 200mm f/4 Lens) and is simply
trying to get to me - I am returning "HIS" 'DOG' lens this morning. >>
And now it is clear why I publically recommend matching serial numbers.
I have .jpg's of the "MINT/NEW" lens, which I rate as 9 (KEH=Ex) due to
aperture ring brassing and a lens hood ding.
<< It will eventually sell, and the people that you are talking with
'somewhere' - wherever that is - will still talk as they really don't
have very much else to do. >>
I KNOW that is obliquely directed towards me. And I DON'T have anymore
time for him or his issues, of which I've been involved in so far as
giving invited third party assessment.
Gary Reese
Las Vegas, NV
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|