used when promised new


I ordered .5m pair of Cardas Golden Reference interconnects from an Audiogoner We negotiated through email and came up with the price of $375 NEW. Well, I got the cables, timely, but they are not new. They are in absolutely fabulous condition, but they are definitely not new. They were also packaged poorly with no Cardas literature. No nothing. I emailed my disappointment, and have not gotton a response yet. This is going to be my first time giving a negative response on "feedback." Isn't this appropriate, even if amends are made. Am I being fair? Is there, really, any reason to hear an explanation? Even if he makes good $$wise, he still lied to me. I would appreciate feedback from you guys.
thanks in advance,
warren
128x128warrenh
It's probably not worth negative feedback. Of course, if it's as described, you should feel somewhat misled. It's best if we are totally honest in our dealings here.
If infact the cables are not new--he misrepresented the product. You need to give him negative feedback to keep everyone in check. Zero tolerance is the only way to keep up the integrity of this wonderful website that we all enjoy so much! Do the right thing.
I second neutral feedback and I'll add that I find the idea of zero tolerance intolerable.
Playing the devil's advocate (pun intended) he may have opened the Cardas package, tried them in his system for a very brief period, then schuffled them to the side with all of his other unused cables, and then months later when he decided to sell them, he remembered them as "new" because (in effect) he never used them. He then listed them quite honestly, sold them to you quite honestly, and then only when it was time to pack them did he discover that he had lost the Cardas literature. In the meantime, of course, he's been too busy (trying out all sorts of other cables) to send you a simple two line email to let you know that (line one) he searched the world over but could not find the original packaging and (line two) to offer profuse appologies for what you might objectively interpret as a misrepresentation. Otherwise he lied.