KirkS518 wrote in post #16523132
Sounds like a perfect candidate for an "Item not as described" case to be opened. eBay does not like sellers representing 14 year old items as new. You would certainly be able to get a chunk of money back. What's the average sales price for a used lens?
FlyFishingTN wrote in post #16523235
Yea it's a 300 2.8 and it is in new condition. I'm not really upset about it since it is in great condition. However, I was trying to get a newer lens because it does affect resale value. The add was very misleading. When I asked about the age (after the sale) he told me he thought it was a 2007.
Anybody that owns a lens of that caliber likely knows about the date code. I don't feel screwed, just a little mislead. I paid more thinking it was a newer model lens.
Jerobean wrote in post #16523881
the OP clearly states it's in new condition, just 14 years old.
What I gather from what you said, he bought the lens news as a retailer buyer. He is now selling a USED lens. Unless he is a retailer that had this sitting around in inventory since 1999, it is a USED lens. You bought a USED lens, not a new lens.
If I buy a new car from a dealer, have a flat bed bring it to my house, stick it in my garage and don't drive it for 15 years, can I sell it as new? No.
The seller described it as new, but it is used. Either ask for a discount down to the average selling price of a used lens, or open an Item Not as Described case.
This is an example of why people have problems on ebay. The item is represented as new, and it is not, but the seller gets away with it, and the buyer gets shafted (yes, I'm saying he got shafted), but does nothing about it. The seller (and others) just repeat the pattern, and one day someone gets seriously burnt.
Misrepresentation is misrepresentation. New is New, and Used is Used. In New Condition is Used in like new condition.