Page 3 of 3
Re: Request for feedback on 62' Jag
Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2019 9:23 am
by blackbox
marqueemoon wrote: ↑Mon Dec 31, 2018 3:13 pm
blackbox wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 9:37 pm
The seller told both myself and a friend in private messages that the finish is original.
I would go to Reverb on this and show them the earlier listing if they want to put you on the hook for any money on this transaction.
Granted, we don’t know how the seller acquired this guitar, but if they bought it from the previous seller through Reverb they will have that on record.
700+ positive feedback or not it’s dishonest to represent this as an orginal finish guitar if you know better.
Thankfully I cancelled the purchase before it had even been shipped.
Re: Request for feedback on 62' Jag
Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 7:26 pm
by blackbox
Looks like the guys over at MM Guitar Bar bought this one.
Re: Request for feedback on 62' Jag
Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 7:34 pm
by blackbox
I should have pulled the trigger. The guys over at M&M also think the headstock finish is original, like I suspected. They think fiesta over dakota over original fiesta
Re: Request for feedback on 62' Jag
Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 8:19 pm
by bterry
sorry, so still a body refin? I have to say I’m suspect of m&ms evaluation.
Re: Request for feedback on 62' Jag
Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 8:47 pm
by marqueemoon
M&M is like local to me and in my experience are standup folks.
The headstock paint being original defies logic, but so does a lot of the rest of this guitar.
I’m sure they negotiated with the previous seller on the basis of what they could tell about the guitar and now the story of the fucked up paint will be treated as an asset rather than a liability. They stuck their neck out on buying it and that’s how they’ll make money on it. So it goes.
Re: Request for feedback on 62' Jag
Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 8:54 pm
by bterry
marqueemoon wrote: ↑Thu Jan 17, 2019 8:47 pm
M&M is like local to me and in my experience are standup folks.
The headstock paint being original defies logic, but so does a lot of the rest of this guitar.
I’m sure they negotiated with the previous seller on the basis of what they could tell about the guitar and now the story of the fucked up paint will be treated as an asset rather than a liability. They stuck their neck out on buying it and that’s how they’ll make money on it. So it goes.
Definitely, they are local for me as well, not saying they are shady - just not 100% convinced. It seems like this particular guitar would get a lot of different evaluations based on the complexity of the paint job.
Regardless of the paint I still find the wear on the body and the paint on the underside of the headstock odd.
Re: Request for feedback on 62' Jag
Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:12 pm
by blackbox
Yeah, they think it was an original fiesta where the body was refined in dakota, and then back to fiesta. Headstock still original fiesta.
Re: Request for feedback on 62' Jag
Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:29 pm
by bterry
blackbox wrote: ↑Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:12 pm
Yeah, they think it was an original fiesta where the body was refined in dakota, and then back to fiesta. Headstock still original fiesta.
Got it, thx!