"mike" BD ad on Kingsnake.com

Originally Posted by lucille

This is the LAST thing I would think of doing in this situation. I do not think there was anything fuzzy or uncertain about this transaction, colorful dragons were advertised, colorful dragons were pictured, money was sent to buy the aforementioned colorful dragon, and a plain normal was sent.

This seller should either give a total refund and allow the buyer to keep the dragon, or should send at his own expense, a colorful dragon which was advertised from the getgo and STILL allow this buyer to keep the normal. For the buyer to shell out any nore money for shipping would be a travesty of justice.

OK Lucille, I'll play along.

Check the terms on MANY peoples websites. A lot of them say if you are not satisfied with the animal and you let them know within the guarantee period (provided that there is one) a replacement animal will be sent. Only after the original animal has been returned at the BUYERS EXPENSE. I feel both sides here screwed up in diffrent ways. I think it would be a "travesty of justice" for either party to spend more money on this transaction than already spent.

I don't see either of them as "bad guys". I see a couple people who are probably learning a good lesson in internet business. Right now the seller has $75.00 and the buyer has a "normal" dragon. At least they both have something to show for this transaction. It's called cutting your losses, Lucille. Or they can keep fighting back and forth and ship this and ship that to the point that this $75.00 dragon ends up costing $300.00 and they are both out time, money and dragons. That's why I think they have to ask themselves if $75.00 is worth all this hassle...................


That's why I said they should both just walk away. I certainly don't agree with your "freebie" philosophy in your last paragraph. No one side deserves to be out "completely" in this transaction. Mistakes were made but it's possible that they were innocent and no great "scam" or "rip-off" was uncovered.

Originally Posted by Rebel Dragons

OK Lucille, I'll play along.

Check the terms on MANY peoples websites. A lot of them say if you are not satisfied with the animal and you let them know within the guarantee period (provided that there is one) a replacement animal will be sent. Only after the original animal has been returned at the BUYERS EXPENSE. I feel both sides here screwed up in diffrent ways. I think it would be a "travesty of justice" for either party to spend more money on this transaction than already spent.

I don't see either of them as "bad guys". I see a couple people who are probably learning a good lesson in internet business. Right now the seller has $75.00 and the buyer has a "normal" dragon. At least they both have something to show for this transaction. It's called cutting your losses, Lucille. Or they can keep fighting back and forth and ship this and ship that to the point that this $75.00 dragon ends up costing $300.00 and they are both out time, money and dragons. That's why I think they have to ask themselves if $75.00 is worth all this hassle...................


That's why I said they should both just walk away. I certainly don't agree with your "freebie" philosophy in your last paragraph. No one side deserves to be out "completely" in this transaction. Mistakes were made but it's possible that they were innocent and no great "scam" or "rip-off" was uncovered.

I have to agree with you on this one.....its called a learning curve

The second time I bought a dragon online I thought I found a great deal. The orange dragon was only $50.00 with shipping of $40.00. I sent the $90.00 and waited for the dragon to arrive. The next morning I received the package. It had a beautiful gray rock in it. I was pissed at first but after a while I wrote it off. I paid $90.00 for a lesson in finding and avoiding shady advertisements for dragons. I would rather pay extra to a known breeder and get what I want, than to look for and find the "great deals".

One dragon for $75.00 or 5 dragons for $100.00........... That would have sent up a red flag for me. It just don't add up and makes me wonder what the catch is. Well it turns out the catch is that your going to get a normal.

Lesson learned

Originally Posted by Rebel Dragons

The second time I bought a dragon online I thought I found a great deal. The orange dragon was only $50.00 with shipping of $40.00. I sent the $90.00 and waited for the dragon to arrive. The next morning I received the package. It had a beautiful gray rock in it. I was pissed at first but after a while I wrote it off.

Why are you on the BOI, Mike? The BOI is for people to get help righting their grievances, not for rock collectors.

There is no way I would EVER buy ANYTHING from this seller.

Originally Posted by Rebel Dragons

One dragon for $75.00 or 5 dragons for $100.00........... That would have sent up a red flag for me. It just don't add up and makes me wonder what the catch is. Well it turns out the catch is that your going to get a normal.

Ahh, the old days of 'caveat emptor', buyer beware: that even though there are specific descriptions and pictures, you should know to discount them because of the price, and of course you ought to know exactly to the dollar when the seller REALLY means what he says or when he is just joshing (lying) based on the precise dollar amount.

Those days are gone, because it is now unlawful to advertise one thing and sell another.

Lucille,
The days of "caveat emptor" are not gone. They will outlive the both of us. Take this case about "colorful" vs. "not colorful" into any attorney's office and watch him or her try not to be disrespectful in telling you to "learn from your mistakes". That includes if you are carrying a large-text copy of the entire UCC. If the claim is for $75, what person is going to spend hundreds if not more trying to recover it, where the court will scoff at awarding all except filing fees, etc?

And this:

Originally Posted by dragonman22:

3rd and most important. Whose opinion do I value more. Sara, some 20 year old girl from Pennsylvania or Mr Schmitt the well known and respected owner of Suncoast Herps.

... is not this:

Originally posted by Lucille:

Cheap shot. This is known as an 'ad hominem' attack: instead of addressing the issues themselves you go after some personal quality of whoever posted.

One of these days you'll get to the law school class about "expert witnesses", and the fundamental basis of civil opinions, that being that some are worth more than others. One entity voluntarily rendered an opinion here contrary to another. They do not carry the same weight for exactly the reason stated. It was anything but "ad-hominem". He did not say she was ugly. He did not say she was stupid. He did not say she was fat.

IMO, John S. has taken time in this thread to present sound opinions and hopefully mediate a solution. Mike S. was on the money too. The seller has been willing to do something. What this thread has done is establish a basis upon which people can evaluate both buyer and seller. I would extend the theory that that is the main accomplishment of the BOI, regardless of what folks wish it to be.

Originally Posted by Chameleon Company

Lucille,
The days of "caveat emptor" are not gone. They will outlive the both of us. Take this case about "colorful" vs. "not colorful" into any attorney's office and watch him or her try not to be disrespectful in telling you to "learn from your mistakes". That includes if you are carrying a large-text copy of the entire UCC. If the claim is for $75, what person is going to spend hundreds if not more trying to recover it, where the court will scoff at awarding all except filing fees, etc?

And this:


... is not this:


One of these days you'll get to the law school class about "expert witnesses", and the fundamental basis of civil opinions, that being that some are worth more than others. One entity voluntarily rendered an opinion here contrary to another. They do not carry the same weight for exactly the reason stated. It was anything but "ad-hominem". He did not say she was ugly. He did not say she was stupid. He did not say she was fat.

IMO, John S. has taken time in this thread to present sound opinions and hopefully mediate a solution. Mike S. was on the money too. The seller has been willing to do something. What this thread has done is establish a basis upon which people can evaluate both buyer and seller. I would extend the theory that that is the main accomplishment of the BOI, regardless of what folks wish it to be.

Well put, Jim
Excellent post!

Originally Posted by Chameleon Company

Lucille,
The days of "caveat emptor" are not gone. They will outlive the both of us. Take this case about "colorful" vs. "not colorful" into any attorney's office and watch him or her try not to be disrespectful in telling you to "learn from your mistakes". That includes if you are carrying a large-text copy of the entire UCC. If the claim is for $75, what person is going to spend hundreds if not more trying to recover it, where the court will scoff at awarding all except filing fees, etc?

And this:


... is not this:


One of these days you'll get to the law school class about "expert witnesses", and the fundamental basis of civil opinions, that being that some are worth more than others. One entity voluntarily rendered an opinion here contrary to another. They do not carry the same weight for exactly the reason stated. It was anything but "ad-hominem". He did not say she was ugly. He did not say she was stupid. He did not say she was fat.

IMO, John S. has taken time in this thread to present sound opinions and hopefully mediate a solution. Mike S. was on the money too. The seller has been willing to do something. What this thread has done is establish a basis upon which people can evaluate both buyer and seller. I would extend the theory that that is the main accomplishment of the BOI, regardless of what folks wish it to be.

Damn...I hate it when we agree Jim.

Couldn't have said it any better

Yeah Mike. I slapped myself. Doesn't always work though, as sometimes I just get dumber. Thanks.

Why are you on the BOI, Mike? The BOI is for people to get help righting their grievances, not for rock collectors.

Talk about cheap shots Lucille. A jab at someone who has actually been scammed is very constructive.

There is no way I would EVER buy ANYTHING from this seller.

I think that you are in the minority here. After asking the proper questions I would have no problem taking a chance on this seller

Ahh, the old days of 'caveat emptor', buyer beware: that even though there are specific descriptions and pictures, you should know to discount them because of the price, and of course you ought to know exactly to the dollar when the seller REALLY means what he says or when he is just joshing (lying) based on the precise dollar amount.

I would love to go with you to buy a used car. With that attitude, it would be a hoot.

Those days are gone, because it is now unlawful to advertise one thing and sell another

Happily that did not happen here Lucille. At worst this is a "shades of gray" situation

Keep us posted on the weather in Utopia Lucille. It sounds like a neat place to live.

My whole reasoning for starting this thread was not to get into a money war! Of coarse I would like my money back, I got ripped off, who wouldn't want the satisfaction of a reward and the chance to further seek out what I was originally looking for. A Yellow Dragon. I just wanted everyone interested in buying a bearded dragon to be aware of this scam artist lurking on kingsnake and who knows where else, waiting for you to send your hard earned money into an empty pit. I don't know about the rest of everyone else but I work hard for my money(firefighter/EMT=low pay) and 75 dollars might not seem like a lot to you but by the time I saved up 75 dollars plus the 50 to ship the dragon my reptile money was gone. So god forbid I actually believed I found a good deal of a highly colored yellow dragon for 75 dollars. And all this about the ad for the lot of dragons for 100, This was not placed on kingsnake until after I bought my "common" dragon. The ad was for a sunburst dragon (dragons Den bloodline) for 75 dollars.