Audiogon Grading Scale - the gold standard?


I recently got duped by an eBay seller's item representation, "...excellent cosmetically." Seller offers no equitable restitution, maintaining we merely have a difference of "opinion" as to the meaning of "excellent." My question is, how effective do you feel the "Audiogon Grading Scale" has been in eliminating misunderstandings/misrepresentations that would otherwise arise by way of subjective characterizations? I am pleased to say it's been working quite well thus far for me. Any suggestions as to how it might be further improved upon? BTW, for those interested, why not get a laugh out of this at my expense (literally). Check out http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1291871809
fam124
It appears that Fam124 has just learned the reason why I don't trade on the ebay site. Having said that however, I don't feel that the grading scale here is any better than the particular "selling individual". Most items that I've bought here do fit the described condition no problem, but some did not. You simply must try to know who you're dealing with. If a seller has enough feedback (here) that they appear to be of good integrity, then the description is likely valid. But in any other case, described condition may be suspect. Two of the "ebay type" individuals with whom I've dealt were clearly not of the typical caliber of an Audiogon member, thus I tend to view these characters with much greater caution. And having been somewhat taken in the past by those types, when I'm selling I tend to describe any existing flaws with accuracy to a fault. I'd much rather have my customer say "that wasn't so bad after all" than to say "what kind of junk are you trying to pass off as mint condition here?".
Gallaine: I appreciate your response. I may be able to recoup $200 (eBay's max coverage) if and when my claim is approved. Moreover, if such comes to pass it may (according to eBay) result in this seller getting the official boot, which is clearly my objective. I wish to ensure other unsuspecting victims do not fall prey. I've filed a fraud report with the NFIC in Washington. Beyond that, cost to litigate too prohibitive + this character's based in Canada.
Its not the grading scale, its the grader. No one could ever describe this as excellent on any kind of objective basis. Sorry you got taken. Your are right, artani is wrong. I've always found everything on this site to be as described, and have had some minor quibbles on ebay, but nothing that remotely approaches this. Bummer.
I feel for you. I can only begin to guess how far your jaw dropped and how heavy your heart was when you took them out of the packaging. Expecting to get something that is "mint" and ending up with something like that is truly a heartbreaking experience. Assholes like that ( pardon my French, but i think that word applies here ) should be made to eat ( literally ) the products that they misrepresent. After all, they taste "excellent". Sean
>
Fam, I too read the new "auction" you posted for these speakers, and I can't believe your seller described them as anything other than "sounds great, looks terrible." Yet I noticed that even w/all your disclosures, you still had a bid! Here on Audiogon, the grading scale is not a "gold standard." At various times on this site, I have found my eyes and grading abilities questioned. I have had two occasions, selling a tuner and later a SS amp, where I graded the items as excellent, meaning that with close inspection, and even a digital photo that I posted w/my ad, I could see no scratches, dings, or other marks on either of these units, yet both buyers saw what they considered "scratches" on the top plate once they got their items. The differences were amicably resolved, but I learned that even when you post a digital photo someone may see something in the flesh that you never did, and could not, see. Now, I have just described what I consider an honest difference in either opinion or visual acuity, I don't know which. But there are definitely cases where a seller misrepresents the condition of his/her item for sale even here. Don't trust a 10/10 rating unless the unit is literally still sealed new in its box. The most scrupulous sellers rate an item 9/10 if the box has been opened even just to inspect the unit to make sure it is what they think they have to sell. In the case of speakers, scratches, nicks and damage to the finish and/or grilles are very noticeable and must be disclosed! But marks on the black anodized finish of electronics are sometimes hard to see and are subject to very different characterizations and estimates of seriousness among honest people. Your seller was dishonest. I hope you get reimbursed. I would seriously consider returning the speakers to him even w/out reimbursement! just to make a point. With a copy of the text of your new auction, of course.