Re: "Antique" cue case
- From: "Rodan" <Rodan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 03:32:53 GMT
Jim W wrote:
If anyone is bidding on this case <ebay auction link>,
be aware that it is NOT an antique. I bought the exact
same case new in 1990 for $50. It is a very good case,
it is just not an antique. I sent an email to the seller but
it has been disregarded. Although it is a good case the
ad is deceptive.
______________________________________________
"Dhakala" wrote:
Remarkable how you can tell a thing's age by buying a
different one 25 years ago, Jim. Were you born with that
talent, or did it grow on you?
______________________________________________
1.) He said he bought the exact same - not different - case.
2.) He said he bought it 16 years - not 25 years - ago.
3.) He never said he was claiming a particular talent.
His post was courteous. What's the reason for the rage
against him ? Did I miss something here ?
Rodan. <---- Thought that only FL sneered at RSBers.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: "Antique" cue case
- From: Dhakala
- Re: "Antique" cue case
- References:
- "Antique" cue case
- From: Jim W
- Re: "Antique" cue case
- From: Dhakala
- Re: "Antique" cue case
- From: Roger Orsulak
- "Antique" cue case
- Prev by Date: Re: What women want
- Next by Date: Re: Toronto...
- Previous by thread: Re: "Antique" cue case
- Next by thread: Re: "Antique" cue case
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
