Reused Item Photos. Misleading?

I noticed today that there are two Ruby 3 carts for sale from different buyers. Each uses the same photographs to seemingly represent the condition and packaging of the item for sale. I think it is misleading practice unless disclosed as a representitive photo of a similer item.

How do members feel about this practice?
I feel it HAS to be disclosed if the pics aren't actual ones.

If I use a stock photo, as opposed to a photo of the actual item, I always disclose. It is the ONLY way to do it.
Most of the stuff that I sell on this site is totally thrashed, so I pretty much have to harvest pictures of nicer examples off of the net or I wouldn't sell a thing. I don't have a problem with it. You can also squeeze out a few more bucks by finding pictures with better options or exotic finishes than the crap that you have. Works like a charm. Pepper up your prose like that guy from the DAK catalog, Drew; "sound explodes out of the speakers", etc. And don't forget to use clear descriptors like "minty" and "used in second system". Happy selling.
That was funny Viridian!

in this case, it seems like they're the same cartridge. looks like someone bought it and decided to sell it and used the pics from the previous seller.

i agree the pics in the ads should be of the actual item or disclose otherwise.
Viridian- You are on my black list.
$##&%$*!#@ like you - are the ones that screw-up this
whole exp.
Good luck on your next sell.....????
Mariusz Stark
I agree completely with Viridian.

He does sell nothing but complete crap.
Sometimes, I have trouble even recognizing the unit in question from the photo he supplies through all the dust, rust, dirt and debris. The set of "Minty" speakers you sold my friend had a picture of what looked like three way speakers, and yet the speakers that arrived were two way speakers, and were labeled "Kraco". Still, they do work, which was somewhat surprising. (PS My friend is coming over next week and is bringing a few buddies to thank you personally. I knew you would not mind me giving him your real address, (Not the address you use when selling items, but the one you use when buying items. BTW, how are those Wilson Alexandria speakers I sold you for $500 sounding. Ha! Ha!)

(Marty, btw, that last amp you sold me was really something special. I was expecting a nice solid state amp, but when I opened the box and saw the tubes, I was pleasantly surprized. Of course, the fireworks display it put on when I plugged it in was worth the cost of admission alone! (At least according to my kid!) And I should note, that the local Fire Dept. (and my insurance carrier), would like to talk to you about the extension cord you substituted for the power cable.)

So to answer the question posed, No, I don't think having pictures of the actual unit in question is necessary at all.


You forgot to include "but I digress" somewhere in the middle of your description.

In case you didn't know, that's a sure fire way to show you're a clever writer.
Viridian, where did you get those cool pics. of my Thorens TD150AB MK2. I check my HD and still couldn't find it.
Sand me a copy would you?

If you have Rockport or SME TT for sale
I will be more then happy to buy those pictures,
just make sure it is double boxed.
yes..and has anyone else noticed that in ratings, '7 is the new 8'.....everthing is 'excellent, except for.....'
I always use someone else's photo, and begin the ad with "Selling my beloved xyz, used only in my guest bedroom system on Thanksgiving holidays. Tubes have 13.7 hours on themThis amp cherry girl, she serve you long time".

That usually gets 'em.

P.S.- Viridian- can you please return the $14,000 money order I sent you for the Bose 901 speakers? I'm starting to get the feeling you snookered me.
Hey I pay for my feedback fair and square, just like the next guy. And Kurt, when I said the amp was "near mint", I meant that it was on the shelf next to a mint amp.

Jaybo, in my world, 7 is the new 4. But I digress..........
That was clever of you Marty, accepting my suggestion to use "But I digress..."

Now that I'm convinced you're a clever writer, I want to make an offer on those Bose 901's Danlib1 foolishly mentioned returning.

My bid is $15.500.00 or best offer above that, whatever you say. My jaw hit the floor when I didn't hear those in my system.

Now if only I could find a way to work PRAT into this post.
"And Kurt, when I said the amp was "near mint", I meant that it was on the shelf next to a mint amp."

That reminds me of the story of the rich bank vice-president who has a 2nd story office directly over the vault. His assits over a couple million dollars.
Come on Guys - PLEASE, lets concentrate on the subject.
Personally, I would never use some-"body's" pictures to try selling my less then perfect beloved treasures........?
Well, maybe in one case, but I don't think she would be happy to hear that 7 is actually 4. Anyway, Viridian can you hook the brother up with some curvy/mint pictures.
On a serious note - as suggested ;) - The copying of others auction photos was part of a major scam on eBay where they would use the photo of someone else's auction and then say "Don't contact us via eBay - email us direct" with offer to sell very high end equipment for GBP700.
I've been considering using this curvy/mint picture

But I know Tabl10s will come after me for diluting his quality image for the sake of a couple of bucks.
Albert, that is nice - really.
I think we have a deal.

I will double box my and bubble wrap it.
I could include the pump but I need it for my Advanced Analog MG-1 Linear Arm.
It is mint and I used it for....? about 1hour a day in the past 3 months. Approximately 100 hours give or take.
I rate it 4 but it looks like a 7.
Thank goodness Marty joined this thread! I always love it when he talks about his equipment pictures, especially when he gets a rise out of someone who just doesn't get it.
That is one dog of an audiophile!
If I ever find out where you live...