Todd Smith (Deal Gone South)

[The BoidSmith]

One, you can try giving the snake some Flagyl and see if that perks up his appetite. Or, if you want, send it back, and I'll get it feeding and then return it to you. Greg says no, I want my money back. You think, well I don't really want to take back a snake that may have contracted some illness while in Greg's care.

In the quote above is where I think there is a flaw in the rationale. First "red flag": "Try to improve his appetite by using Flagyl".

What would everyone think if someone sells you a snake, you see her breathing kind of funny, and the seller suggests to try some antibiotics to improve her condition?

Flagyl may stimulate the appetite in an animal that suffers from regurgitation due to a protozoan infection. Personally I would never suggest to dose a healthy animal with Flagyl.

 

[bpc]

Alvaro, I'm not trying to argue the health of the animal. I'm trying to make everyone realize that a seller, in any transaction, can make whatever policy they want. Should a $1000 snake eat? Yes. Should Todd try to rectify the situation if it doesn't? Yes, as long as Greg notified Todd within an agreed upon amount of time. Did Todd make an effort to fix the problem? Yes, he made not one, not two, but three different attempts, and instead of Greg choosing of those options, he came here and tried to force Todd into a fourth. As of right now, Greg lost.

I'm willing to take Greg's story at 90% of face value. And yes, everyone is right, if Todd did just screw Greg over to do so, and this is his normal modus operandi, he won't last long in the business. Especially not in the high end boa market. But everyone please realize, that not everyone offers these "health guarantees" to their buyers. Do not assume when you make a purchase you're covered by some "normal warranty period." You are not buying a brand new Ford Expedition off the showroom floor of your local dealership, you're buying a 1991 Ford Tempo off EBAY. A car (or snake) that you can't touch, test drive (akin to checking for normal behavior), or even see up close an personal. And in many cases that car (or snake) is sold as is. Just because it runs when you drive it off the lot or when it gets delivered doesn't mean it will run tomorrow when you try to go work. CYA!

Ask, what is your return policy if I am unsatisfied with the animal.

Ask, for a feeding guarantee. "Was/is feeding" IS DIFFERENT than "will feed for you."

Save all emails between you and the seller. If you discuss something over the phone, MAKE THEM send you an email containing all the details. If they won't, spend your money elsewhere, there's a reason.

If there is a problem, notify the seller 10 minutes ago! Not next week sometime when you get around to it. DON'T say well it's probably just from shipping and then later find out it wasn't, NOTIFY THE SELLER IMMEDIATELY (if not sooner)!

And if the seller asks you to return the animal for refund or so they can fix the problem, you have to do it! I know, I know, that really sucks, but that is the cost of doing business over the net. Don't hem and haw. Get it done and get it over with.

I think that the above are the buyer's responsibilty, because it's the buyer's feet that are over the coals here.

If you, as a buyer, cannot live with these rules, then you would really be better off buying all your animals in person.

And, know this, even if you do manage to do everything right, there are still people out there who lie. When they do that, then we (the BOI) can label them bad guys.

 

[Greg Riso]

Update

For those of you who are wondering what Todd has done towards rectifying this situation the answer is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Yesterday I at least succeeded in getting the hypo to feed on live mice. I tried following up with a f/t mouse or rat and he still won't have anything to do with them. I still have my doubts whether or not this animal has EVER fed on f/t before but at least I can sustain him and keep him from withering away to nothing. Ever try feeding a five foot boa live mice? They don't go very far. Hopefully with time I'll be able to convert him over from live mice. I hate feeding live anything because of the well known dangers involved. This is precisely the reason I was very adament about asking about his eating habits in my first letter to Todd and over the phone. I was assured this hypo was NOW FEEDING ON F/T RATS, NOT WAS. Now let's just assume I can get this animal feeding the way it was represented to me as doing in the first place. That only would resolve half of the problem.
I think it's high time Todd provides me with the appropriate genetic documentation or take the animal back. This animal was represented as a hypo het for anery and I still have not received any proof from Todd to back this up. I requested this information no less than four times over the phone and in letters to Todd BEFORE this thread ever came into being.
Contrary to Brian's spin on the subject I was not negligent in my questioning about this animal and I never acted in the self serving manner manner he has portrayed. I was very civil and patient with Todd in trying to rectify things and even warned him beforehand that I'd have to take this to the BOI if everything was not properly resolved. That's when he gave me his ultimatum of shipping the animal back so he could get it feeding or taking a $250 loss not to mention my cost to ship it back.
Jeremy Stone assured me he provides proper documentation with every het he sells. Jeremy has also stated he has never sold anything to Todd Smith directly. So if this het animal truly originated from Jeremy there was paperwork for it at one time. I have never been given any previous history of owners from Todd so there is no way for me to track said paperwork down. I would think that no matter how many hands this animal's been through that documentation would have been passed along. No one in their right mind (not even you Brian) would ever think of buying a het without it.
Todd posted this animal as having come from Jeremy Stone which was one of my main reasons for buying it. I have requested genetic proof of origin several times and have only received an e-mail with no picture of the hypo as "proof" this animal is what Todd says it is. I don't think there's anyone out there that feels this is adequate or acceptable. Anyone that feels it is is either lying or foolish.
Putting the feeding issue aside I think it's high time Todd take this animal back based on the fact that he has not adequately proven this animal is what he says it is and advertised as such. I have given Todd every opportunity to make this right yet he has chosen to pretend there's not a problem here. After all "this matter is closed" according to him. An attorney may feel otherwise is all I have to say.

 

[kim felts]

greg

i dont think your going to get anywhere with this snake and todd but at least the animal is eating..
hopefully when all is said and done at the end of the day the snake will do a turn around and it will be chalked up to a good learning experience for us ALL at your expense.
i cant help thinking though even if you had done what others have suggested the outcome would have been the same.
regardless..there are people that understand and work with buyers and there are those that make their own rules and thats that period.
it could have been worse though..look around and you will see other threads about situations that didnt have the best of the worst outcome that yours did..
just a little condolence for you and hopefully better then nothing.
todd will get his..just because this thread dies down doesnt mean we wont remember it and keep in our minds what has happened.
one thing i dont appreciate though is how others refer to a pity party..although in some cases ive seen people nit pic around about things to a nauseated degree i dont agree that all threads and situations that warrant the support from others as being referred to as a pity party that kind of irks me a little..
it seems a little thoughtless and heartless to pass that over to a person as a criticism.

best wishes and of course as always if you need help in any way please let us know..we are always here for you.

 

[Seamus Haley]

Do not assume when you make a purchase you're covered by some "normal warranty period."

I agree with that statement to a certain point...

I concur that it is the responsibility of both parties to hammer out the "What ifs" well in advance of the transaction being completed, and agree that it's not safe to assume that every animal has an identical guarantee or how longit should extend and what that guarantee should cover in terms of specific problems...

However there really is no need to get an advance guarantee that the animal isn't misrepresented.

Whatever an animal is sold as, it needs to be delivered as. There does exist a basic guarantee that extends to all sales that the buyer will get an animal that is alive and that it will be the specific animal they decided to purchase, meeting all specifications and descriptions (Mass wholesalers or shipping when it is clear in advance that live arrivel isn't guaranteed and is AGREED TO prior to shipping is a separate matter).

The customer did not purchase a dead animal.

The customer did not purchase a sick animal.

The customer did not purchase an animal two feet smaller than advertised.

The customer did not purchase the seller's mites.

The customer did not purchase bacteria or viruses.

The customer did not purchase an animal that is opposite of the gender that was indicated.

The customer did not purchase an animal that does not have the genetics it was represented to have.

The customer did not purchase an underweight off feed animal unless they were warned "This animal is underweight and hasn't fed because it was breeding, chances are good that it can bounce back to full with a bit of attention, but you need to be aware of it before purchase" after which it becomes their choice.

In this specific instance, the animal was advertised as being Healthy... there is a disagreement over that. It was advertised as feeding... there is a disagreement over that. It was advertised as hypo... that opens up a whole new host of questions, but there is disagreement over that.

The fact remains that a lot of those qualities that an animal can be advertised as having are somewhat subjective. I may not see an animal as being healthy when you see it as acceptable, the amount of experience a person has and the nature of that experience plays a huge role in how they view some of these terms that are used. That's a whole separate discussion that I think I might open up on the GBD forum, but it's relevant here...

When there is a disagreement about the representation of an animal and both individuals are being honest to what they percceive as the truth and neither is trying to "get one over" on the other, then it's an unfortunate reality but... the responsibility lies with the seller to correct that problem in a reasonable manner and to the buyer's satisfaction. It's what customer service is all about. I could see in this instance, where Greg wanted a refund... deducting shipping costs to have it returned, so that there's no substantial loss there, but I get the feeling Greg wouldn't have been upset if he had been offered $950 out of the $1000 he paid because he would reccognize it as his personal dissatisfaction (ignoring the unsubstantiated genetics issue for the moment). But a 25% cut on an expensive animal in punitive costs? That's absurd.

If the animal is healthy and feeding (or potentially feeding) and it's really an issue of buyer's remorse... then there should be no problem issuing a full refund and having the animal returned, because it can easily be resold to someone who's willing to take it at that price in that condition.

 

[The BoidSmith]

PASTEL BREEDER MALE
SANTA ROSA, CA
Posted by TODD SMITH (Contact Me!) on April 12, 2003 at 10:20:30

Click on thumbnails to view fullsize in a new window

CB 1996 (by Rick Staub) a "High Orange" (aka "Pastel") Boa. He was cycled for the first time this year and is an excellent breeder! Offered at $375 (INCLUDING Next Day shipping to your door). Feel free to e-mail or call 707-576-3927 before 9:00pm PDT, if you have any questions.

I have never dealt with Todd but here is another ad posted today. Maybe it was not worded properly (benefit of the doubt), but someone please explain to me how can a boa be cycled for the first time this year (2003) and yet be labeled as an "excellent breeder". Yes, he might have been seen copulating with females, but as far as I am concerned you can't label an animal an excellent breeder until you actually obtain offspring from him/her.

Just my opinion.

 

[Greg Riso]

Complete Role Reversal

Throughout this whole thread I've had to put up with Brian Conley stating that I was at fault here for not getting enough information prior to the sale, not being aware of the seller's warrantee, not notifying the seller there was a problem right off.....blah blah blah.
Now read Brian's post 14 pages into the Bobby Pruett thread concerning the $10,000 blind snow boa topic. Keep in mind by the time Brian posted Bobby had already agreed to reverse the trade with Randy Bush. For what it's worth read what Brian had to say regarding an issue similar to what's happened to me. In his first paragraph he criticizes Mike for backing Bobbie and in the second paragraph he is so understanding concerning the BUYER.:

bpc
Senior Member
Offline

Registered: Mar 2002
Location:
Posts: 179
Posting the pics is in no way a low blow. It proves Randy wasn't making this up. And Mike come on! No way a Boa gets that skinny in 18 days! You're starting to look foolish in your attempts to vindicate Bobby at this point. Bobby did the right thing and agreed to trade back, leave it at that.

I can understand the concern about the time that Randy had the snake, but come on, you have to allow for some human nature here. He had just recieved a SNOW BOA! The last thing he wants to do is send it back. He was even warned that it was skinny so he's prepared himself to see a skinny snake. It probably took a few days for the reality of the situation to set in. And he did voice his concerns about the weight/condition of the snake, and it's unwillingness to feed easily.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So here you have a complete role reversal on Brian's part in less than two months. My how his supposedly unbiased opinion has changed since 2/20. After all, because it was a "SNOW BOA!" and $10,000 was at stake it's okay for a buyer to give the seller the benefit of the doubt when the animal arrived thin and emaciated, not feeding properly and not notify the seller until later on. This after the other party was even warned of its appearance beforehand!
If I had the luxury of being made aware the hypo I was buying was skinny and not feeding I wouldn't have bought it in the first place. I would certainly have been on my guard from the time I first opened the box. And all of this with no paperwork to boot.
Man, all I can say is either Brian either is a complete hypocrite or has multiple personality disorder. Either way I'd take his opinions with a grain of salt because his stance appears to flip flop according to his alliances and not the facts at hand.

 

[Boavoyage]

Hey Brian, another quote from you

Imagine you are Todd, you have this snake, and yes, you've used it as a breeder for the last 4-6 weeks. You are finished with the snake and put it up for sale. Greg calls asks what its feeding on and you tell him F/T rats (because that is what it fed on the last time you fed it).

Help me out Brian, since English is still my second language, if there is any different between
what its feeding on (I assume what it is feeding on)
and
what it fed on the last time you fed it
Because to me my buddy, the snake is feeding on F/t means the snake just took a F/t from last night, not from the last time you fed, which like you said 4-6 weeks before he put him in for breeding.
And I don't know why you are still in denial to compare car with snake. Do you have a male car and a female car? When was the last time you see your "male" car jump your "female" car? Duh!!!

 

[kim felts]

about the pastel male.
he was cycled..used and todd has gravid females.
i mentioned this in my prior post about his straub line
male.
so ..he considers that a male that got females gravid with no outcome of babies yet great breeders..no biggie BUT
after hearing the outcome with gregs thread would it be safe to assume that his excellent breeding male may also be thin and worn out?
in my opinion it would
i guess its important to ask when told about EXCELLENT BREEDER males whether there are live babies to prove it or just bloated females...
another lesson to take note of.

 

[bpc]

Greg, in the snowboa incident, the buyer informed the seller of his misgivings about the snake immediately, not a week later after he got back into town. I believe it was something along the lines of... it got here, and man! Is it thin! And in that case wasn't there also an issue dealing with snake being blind or something. I'd have to reread it. But, I believe if you do a little more reading and a little less ranting about how much I'm out to get you, (even though I've said you should get a refund about 50 times), you'll also see that I gave that buyer hell for buying a $10k snake w/o seeing it also. That case was even worse than yours. $1000 bucks for a snake I'd never seen, maaaaaaybe, if I really knew the seller. $10,000!, not even if I was buying it from my mother.

According to you, you were given no warning that the snake was thin. You were told it was 100%. So, in my mind, when you opened the box, and saw this skinny, emaicated, piece of crap you've described to us, you should have RAN TO THE PHONE and said, hey Todd, what gives. Did you do that? If so, Todd should have taken the snake back right then. But, I think what you did instead, was to call Todd, and tell him the snakes "arrived alive and in GOOD condition." Is that right? Then several days later, you changed your mind. Is that right?

John, I fed on pizza for lunch. What do you want to bet I'll eat something else later? Better yet, I'm a 3 year old ball python, feeding on rats. Guess what, next week, I'm gonna do that cool little ball python trick where I'll only eat white mice for a couple of months, and then after you get good and used to that, I'm gonna change it up again. In fact, I have a boa in my basement right now, that just went from jumbo rats down to smalls. I have no idea why, but it won't look at jumbos anymore. So just on a whim a threw a small in front of it, looked like a bum on a ham sandwhich. If you've really never had a snake change it's feeding habits on you, then consider yourself very lucky.

I can compare reptiles to any other product purchased over the net you would like, pick one. Better yet, just keep spending your money w/o asking the right questions and see where it gets you. I bet eventually, it will get you in the same spot Greg is in.

 

[bpc]

Seamus, I like the way you think, we should get drunk and discuss life sometime. I only have two problems with what you wrote.

If the animal is healthy and feeding (or potentially feeding) and it's really an issue of buyer's remorse... then there should be no problem issuing a full refund and having the animal returned, because it can easily be resold to someone who's willing to take it at that price in that condition

There is a problem with that I think. Several really. One the animal has been out of your care, so it has to quarantined all over again. Two, if the animal was shipped, it has to be shipped again, we all no what kind of problems that can lead to. Three, how are you supposed to know what the buyer did to the animal while in his care? Maybe he just needed to borrow that albino ball python for a quick shot of sperm. Four, time=money. And no you can't say, "well, it's not about the money." It is somewhat about the money or we wouldn't sell these things, we'd give them away. Packaging, driving, taking time off work to receive the snake, etc. all add up to costs. And costs must be considered, or you don't stay in business very long. And even if it's just a hobby, costs have to be considered or you will end up sleeping on the couch! Just ask my wife.

The second problem I have is about the $250 being absurd. So what? The local Petland here (where I live) charges $200 to return a puppy. It says so right there in the store, and in some cases that's closer to 50%. You know what, they still sell a butt-load of puppies, so the american consumer must be willing to take that risk. The refund should have been discussed up front, if it had been, we wouldn't have anything to talk about here. Seamus, and everybody else, YOU KNOW, THAT NOT ALL TRANSACTIONS GO SMOOTHLY, that's what this board is all about. So don't tell me you shouldn't have to discuss returns up front, you know better. Especially, when you're buying from someone you don't know, cmon! I can live with Todd having a 75% refund policy, it's not the best policy out there, but it sure ain't the worst either.


Also, for anyone who is interested, I took Todd's number out of that post and gave him a call. I got his answering machine. I left a message asking him to call me so I could hear his side of the story, or even just come to the BOI and talk about the situation, as he was getting bashed pretty hard. Greg, I even told him that I thought he should either provide you with the proof or genetics or refund your money. I'm not against you getting your money back man, I'm really not. Your post was just another post that caught my eye where I thought I could discuss my pet peeve-buyers who can do no wrong.

And further, the only thing I think you did wrong, that I bet you won't do again, is buy from someone you didn't know and fail to discuss returns upfront. And then assumed that Todd could be pressured into doing business your way. Your way, Rick Struab's way, Ben Siegal's way, Rich's way, Todd's way, even my way are all allowed, so ask up front.

 

[The BoidSmith]

Here is what happens when a problem goes unresolved. I would have probably paid no attention to Todd's recent ad. But now, knowing what I know and how he handled Greg's situation...

If the pastel male that's up for sale was cycled this year (January?), and bred the females sometime in February there is no way that in early April he can say the male in question is an excellent breeder. An animal that copulates should not be labeled an excellent breeder until he has offspring.

i guess its important to ask when told about EXCELLENT BREEDER males whether there are live babies to prove it or just bloated females...

My point exactly Kim. Had Todd addressed Greg's situation promptly his current ad would have probably gone unnoticed.

Regards.

 

[Rainbowboaman]

Brian,
Do you think if Todd told Greg before he bought them that if after they arrived if they weren't eating or didn't look like the pictures or if he didn't send the paper proof on the genetics that he could return them for a $250.00 loss that Greg would of still bought them?. Brian, put yourself in Gregs place on this & think how you would feel if it was your $1000 spent on a non eating no proof to verify genetic het?. I went right over his ad on KS & Im sure alot of other people have because of his way of dealing with this problem. Maybe he doesn't have many animals left to sell so he's not worried about fixing this, but an unsolved matter not only stops someone from buying from you it also can alter who will sell to you. The no proof of genetics that was promised & not delivered is enough for me to label Todd as a bad guy in my book. I'll be really surprised if he actually come here to give his side of the story.

 

[bpc]

IS ANYBODY ACTUALLY READING WHAT I AM TYPING???

I have already said like 50 times Greg should get his money back! He was not provided with the proof of genetics. Therefor he was not given what was promised. Case closed, refund the money! That's the easy part. And just to piss John off, I'll use another one of my analogies. It would be like winning an EBAY auction for a car that was supposed to have a clean title, and the when you get the car there is no title. How'd ya like that one John

And no, Rainbowboaman, I don't think Greg would have bought them, THAT'S MY FREAKING POINT PEOPLE! Know what you're getting into up front.

Now here's something else to chew on. The snake is now eating, so we can't call it nonfeeding anymore. Skinny yes, well maybe, but we haven't seen pictures. Greg, throw up some pics of this thing so we can see it now please. So I guess the next question is should you be able to return a snake just because it doesn't feed on what you were told it would. Not extreme like a hognose that only eats frogs/toads instead of mice, but like in this case, mice instead of rats, and/or live instead of dead. How big of a deal is that to everyone. it wouldn't really matter to me, but I buy anywhere from 100 to 400 rats and mice a week so I'm going to the farm anyway.

 

[Stardust]

Brian,
What may not be a big deal to you can certainly be a big deal to others. Others that believe their snake could get hurt also by eating live instead of frozen.
He still did not get his paper work. Both those are misrepresentations.
OK so your big point is buyer beware. I think we all know that, but there is always a chance that whatever you do or say or ask, can be wrong and you could be lied to.
Your point was driven home pages ago. I, quite frankly find it amazing that you continue to look at Todd's side of it when he doesn't even bother to come on.
Who put a halo on your head with the intent of you being the guardian angel of sellers?
Get real, if this happened to you you wouldn't like it. Go buy from Todd, I know I won't and probably wouldn't from you either.

 

[bpc]

AUGGHHHH!!!!

Seamus, I need to borrow that logo, the one w/ the guy banging his head on the keyboard!

Stardust, what does the second sentence in the post before yours say? .....Todd shoulg get a refund. Then check the signature at the bottom... I think that's me.

I'm sorry I don't follow the rank and file of the BOI. I'm sorry if I ask a few more questions than most. I'm sorry if I require a little more out of the seller than most. And it's ok if everyone needs to take their frustrations about this deal out on me, I have big shoulders, I can take it.

Stardust, about the feeding issue, I was just asking how big a deal is it? I wasn't trying to say it didn't matter here. I said it wouldn't matter to me, it may mean a world of difference to Greg and you. And there's no way this would happen to me, because I read the BOI, and I'm not sending ANYONE $1000 for a snake I've never seen. It's quite obvious, its not worth the risk.

 

[Boavoyage]

And just to piss John off, I'll use another one of my analogies. It would be like winning an EBAY auction for a car that was supposed to have a clean title, and the when you get the car there is no title. How'd ya like that one John

Brian,
I like it very much. Much more than "Dumb and dumber!" It's the dumbest comparison, since we all ready know the answer. How's about this one, Brian, just to wake you up:
You go to an electronic store such as Best Buy, Circuit City, etc... you name it, to buy a CD rewriteable for your computer. After you get home, install it, and find out it read the CD-ROM, but doesn't write, you uninstall it, and take it back to the store to return it, not exchange but return, period. The store said they are gladly to give you the refund, but have to charge you 10% for restocking fee, and they had this policy printed and posted in the store. How do you feel PAL????

 

[Wilomn]

Gentlemen, these clever little analogies really have nothing to do with the problem here. Perhaps you should save the verbiage for another forum. I think we all agree that on the genetics issue alone a refund was called for long ago. Without seeing before shipping and after arrival pictures it's really hard for me to say just what I think of the animals weight. The wording here is what is the key issue. Was feeding or Is feeding. If the wording WAS then it may not have been when Greg got it. Thems the breaks and a good lesson in how to split a hair. If the wording told him IS feeding then the snake should have eaten soon after arrival. Soon needing to be difined but, I figure 3 to 7 days. Either way it is totally irrelevant, AS NO PROOF OF GENETICS HAS BEEN PROVIDED!!! Since we all agree on that let's let the rest go for now. Should Todd come through on the paperwork then we can deal with the non-feeding issue at that time.

I feel like you guys are in some sort of pissing contest and I am coming dangerously close to getting splashed. I really don't want that to happen and I'm sure you don't either. So, how 'bout you two put em away and we see what happens.

How was that analogy? I just couldn't resist. But really, I do think you're going a little too far.

Wes Pollock

 

[bpc]

John, I like it! Way to go! I feel fine, however, knowing that the restocking fee is there, I would make sure that part was exactly what I wanted before I bought it. That way Icould just exchange it and not have to worry about losing 10%.

 

[Seamus Haley]

It's called "headbanger.gif" without the quotes, a google image search will bring it up, just pick one of the appropriate size and upload it.

Since nobody else seems to be paying attention to the man's words... I'll say it in really big ones...

BRIAN IS NOT DISAGREEING WITH ANYONE

What he is doing however, is providing a fairly valuable service in playing the devil's advocate... he raises interesting points, some of which other may believe to be valid others they might not, that represent the arguments that might have been presented by Todd, had he bothered to show up.

He makes an excellent point by saying that the issue of the lack of paperwork is an ironclad reason for a refund... a full one because it's a misrepresentation of the animal. As such, he pointed out pages ago, quite rightly... that the focus really should have been maintained on that... not that the other problems shouldn't have been mentioned, but that the real clincher that pounded home the point was the genetics issue and as such it should have been the primary focus for Greg in requesting a refund.

His suggestions that people talk to a seller about potential problems are well intentioned... Can anyone really say that they shouldn't discuss the terms the seller has, at least briefly, no matter how well written they appear to be? Not in anticipation of a problem... but as a preventative measure in the unlikely event that something happens.

Since "feeding" and "hypo" and "healthy" are all terms that are subject to interpretation, arguments about semantics can arise easily, it does make sense that they should have formed a secondary aspect to the argument... I'm sure a lot of people who post here have some thin male snakes right now... while you aren't selling them, or would sell them with a disclaimer that they just got done doing their thing and will be a bit underweight... you can't call them "Unhealthy" can you? That would be saying that probably a third or more of the posters on this board have unhealthy animals in their collections and it's simply not true. I personally feel that not mentioning it was a bit of added misrepresentation, but unless there's more of a health problem than picking at food and being a bit skinny (That picture posted doesn't look too bad either, not as fat as you'd like to see ideally, but certainly not emaciated... and Greg hadn't posted a newer one yet) then it can't be called sick.

When someone argues "the other side" it allows them to gain a perspective, to see what their potential opponent (in the debate for public opinion) might try to throw at them. By doing it yourself or having someone of a similar bent perform the action, you gain a better understanding of the entire situation and can perfect your approach to get the results YOU want with greater ease. It's a GOOD THING... I've also got to say... every post Brian has made, or nearly every at any rate, has disclaimers all over it that he agrees that Greg should get a refund.

With that being said... Brian, given the duration of time that has passed at this point, I agree that quaranteening the animals would be something that would have to be done, even with Greg's good reputation, it's just one of those precautions that would need to be taken. It's an unfortunate reality in dealing with livestock however, especially when a seller decides to misrepresent an animal, knowing that it stands a good chance of not meeting the buyer's satisfaction (Although the emails have not been posted, Greg says that he was assured the paperwork would be there, Todd had to have known in advance that he didn't have the paperwork... Greg hasn't really shown anything that would indicate he would lie about this, although he also hasn't proved it... Greg, please prove it, just to put the final nail in the coffin?) that the animal will likely come back. You have mentioned a number of other business types and, while certain parallels can be drawn, the situations are not identical, a living animal, an inanimate object, there ARE moral issues that come into play, there are additional problems... if you buy a VCR, you don't have to worry that it might have IBD. One similarity though... there needs to be a business plan in place for anyone to make a profit... especially with live animals, the profit margin on the average is razor thin, the expenses and risks are high compared to many other businesses... That potential for something to go wrong needs to be worked into your total plan, you need to be able to hit problems (even if they never happen, perparedness is vital) and continue around whatever negative event might have occured. In this case, Todd felt the boa was worth One thousand dollars in it's present condition, he has also indicated (Although I wish he would come indicate it HERE) that he can get the animal feeding again... if he takes it back, quarantines it, fattens it up and sells it in a few months, when people are starting to look around for animals to add to their breeding stock (They start looking awhile before the season starts... it has to be quarantines again mind you)... he could increase the price and make up for that time spent and then some... The fact remains he believed the animal to be worth a certain amount, if he were pricing his animals honestly and not misrepresenting genetics to jack of the price (I really do want proof on that one way or the other) then the animal is still worth the amount he was paid for it. He won't be losing any money (except possibly some of the shipping costs, but if that was the only issue, I'm sure they could work out a 50/50 split or something), Greg wouldn't be losing any money and both of them could have ended it satisfied if not happy.

The problem we have here is that only Greg's side has been presented. Greg seems like an honest guy and I have no reason to doubt that he's telling the truth... as he sees it... But persepctive and bias are inherently human traits and it's impossible for someone to describe a situation like this in a really impartial manner, especially when they feel like (and it now looks like) they have been ripped off. Todd might show up with scanned copies of the paperwork, or at least a paper trail leading back to the breeder that would prove the genetics, the fact is, we haven't seen the "emaciated" boa and the general consensus might not be identical to Greg's opinion... it might turn out that we've got fourteen (fifteen?) pages that get blown away with one post from the other side.

I don't think anyone's opinions will substantially change until such a point as Todd posts here... Brian will continue to argue hypotheticals, Greg will continue to insist that he's right, I will never manage to write a post under forty billion words and everyone else will fall someplace in between. It's impossible not to form opinions when you read something like this, I know I've already got a sense of what I think is right and wrong... but I'm trying to hold judgement (My personal judgement, which may or may not mean anything to anyone else) in check until I see from the other side. Again... it's not that I don't believe Greg, but everything so far has been a bit circumstantial and that definite proof that everyone would like to see hasn't been forthcoming...

Greg, please post the emails where he mentioned the paperwork and if possible, get a picture of that Boa before you go and fatten him up again, so that we can see just how skinny he was.

Todd, please post. Something. Anything. Please.