If someone asks for a honest evaluation, adding a candy coating is being dishonest. Sometimes there's a slight upside to a bad deal, but in this instance of the OP's post ... I see none. Also, as a Licensed Auction House I have a fiduciary responsibility to appraise accurately. In addition, I have a moral and ethical duty and responsibility to my fellow man (and myself) to be forthright, even if the news is not pretty.
I advised him (the OP) to contact the seller to ask to get out of the purchase as eloquently as possible by paying the sellers fees, etc ... and by suggesting this, I got ripped a new one in emails and notes from subscribers to this forum.
It infuriates me when people are targeted as "pigeons" but in this instance I cannot say whether this was the case or not other than it seems the OP got lured into a bidding war in waters that were above his head.
Honoring your bids, even if you were suckered into a bidding war is one thing, a thing any gent has to abide by. However, being sold a false bill of goods is something different. In this instance I have no proof one way or the other.
The only irrefutable fact is ... that NM3 is a junker, NRA poor-fair at best.
I advised him (the OP) to contact the seller to ask to get out of the purchase as eloquently as possible by paying the sellers fees, etc ... and by suggesting this, I got ripped a new one in emails and notes from subscribers to this forum.
It infuriates me when people are targeted as "pigeons" but in this instance I cannot say whether this was the case or not other than it seems the OP got lured into a bidding war in waters that were above his head.
Honoring your bids, even if you were suckered into a bidding war is one thing, a thing any gent has to abide by. However, being sold a false bill of goods is something different. In this instance I have no proof one way or the other.
The only irrefutable fact is ... that NM3 is a junker, NRA poor-fair at best.
Last edited: