Superspeed Not as Described on Classifieds

[sfong33]

I didn’t make the request initially because I thought I may have been mistaken about the original wording of the For Sale post. I only retrieved the original posting yesterday night when I came across a link that linked me back to it, it Is not a straightforward process once the posting is deleted.

[jaw2k9]

Split the shipping cost, move on with your lives.

[DFS PFD]

Yikes at this whole thread. Unless OP is flipping these, I don't see the problem.

[TooMuchAwesome]

Someone made a decent point earlier that if turning around to gift, you'd also want to purchase brand new.

[xabia]

how is brand new only defined as something that has absolutely no wear?? I have a few older club right now that are brand new, have 100% never been hit, but have been transported between storage bags and show similar wear.

I also have clubs that were bought brand new and have been hit 3-4 times that look better than the brand new ones referenced above. I have also seen, back in the day when we could go to stores, new clubs at Golf Galaxy / Dicks that had similar or worse wear than the ones pictured.

so what would be the appropriate way to describe things in this situation? he says they are new, which means he never used them and it something the seller is sticking to. Light wear does not invalidate that, unless you are all calling him a liar.

[sfong33]

Not a flipper, never sold a single item on golfwrx. The Superspeed is a very popular item (there is a 1200+ thread on it), do I really have to justify my reasons for wanting a set?

[sfong33]

I am open to this option.

[sfong33]

I am going to let others comment on this reply, I must not know what “never used” means.

[jj9000]

I've done over 300 deals on this site, and I know who I won't be Buying from, or, Selling to.

....and it's not the Seller in this case.

[dmecca2]

agreed. They're not used, another buyer has stated they show exactly the same wear as a set he purchased directly from the factory, and he is still complaining. PLUS, whatever wear is shown does not affect usability at all. 0%. Seems to me like the buyer is seeking a problem, especially requesting the fee for shipping 14 days post return.

[MaineMariner]

The seller was intentionally and admittedly deceptive in his listing. I'm astounded that folks are coming down on his side.

I get that making a stink over $10-15 bucks might be a bit gauche, and I probably would have just rolled my eyes and moved on with my life (and used the used Superspeed sticks)... but come on. Are you guys really okay with shady listings like that? I thought this place was supposed to be a little better than Craigslist or the Facebook Marketplace or whatever.

[raywutang]

theres a term for the condition of all the clubs you just described and it is called "light shop wear". "light shop wear" does NOT equal "brand new". "brand new" would be straight from the factory and zero signs of wear imo.

now if all superspeed sticks come from the factory looking like that then, that throws a real wrench in this situation. i would hope they have better QC than that.

for a quick resolution, maybe just split the return shipping costs and call it a day?

[jj9000]

 

I'm certainly not on anyone's side.

But, I've seen enough of these deals go sideways over the years to know who I want to deal with, and who I don't want to deal with, in the BST.

I have a set of SuperSpeed Sticks, and the metal ends of the sticks scratch and wear if you look at them the wrong way.

I've also seen guys (similar to the OP) b*tch and moan to the Club Pro because the paint on the range balls smudges on his AP2 faces after a large bucket.

Get my drift?

[sfong33]

For the last time, the set was listed as “never used”. I received them, noted that there were scuffs on the shafts, grip wear, and small scratches and dings on the heads (you can’t see them in the posted pictures). Seller relisted as “light shop wear” on repost. I didn’t ask for reimbursement for return shipping originally because I thought I may have misunderstood the original For Sale post. I tried to look for it but it was deleted. Last night I found a link to it and it was then that I saw the term “never used” in the description. Hence my request for reimbursement for the return shipping costs. If I use the logic that you/some others are suggesting about what is new, why did the seller change the description of the condition of the item from “never used” to “light shop wear”? So “never used” = “light shop wear” now?

[seanjk123]

if you bought a club from your pro shop that never left the shop, but had some light shop wear from people taking it off the shelf, would you not consider that item a new club? The seller clearly changed the wording to avoid another issue like this one.

 

OP - do you think the sticks you were had any influence on performance? Are you planning to buy another set that is in pristine condition (don’t know if Sotheby’s offers ratings for golf training aids).

 

[squishyy]

There are some very fishy comments being made by the seller:

The original ad stated "never used". This means that the item for sale was new. Yet, the seller never stated he purchased it new and even stated that it was never used by him. So, is the item new or not? Which leads to the next question...If the item was "never used" and seller stuck to it, why did he change the description of the item in his second For Sale ad? Why wouldn't he stick to the "never used" condition?The buyer purchased the item and notices apparent use and markings which identifies that the item has been "used" and not "never used" according to the seller. In addition, the seller changing the item condition in the second for sale ad leads me to believe that he also knows the item was used at some point, just not by him, as he stated. The buyer is entitled to full refund including shipping the item back due to item not described. It doesn't matter if it was 5 days, 7 days, or 14 days after. This isn't a too bad you waited too long. However, given the duration to request the shipping refund, I think it's best to settle at half.

 

 

[Krt22]

It's entirely possible he bought them under the same assumption, never used them himself, and simply resold them. The fact that someone else stated their new set straight from SuperSpeed was in similar condition seems to support that idea. Not wanting to get in the same pickle twice, the next time he listed them he stated they were showing shop wear

[ProphetLogic]

My set came from straight from superspeed looking a little grungy, who cares? It's not like there's a crown to scratch up, it's a cheap grip and cheap shaft with a weight on the end. I bounced one off the driveway the first time I used them anyways. If I was that picky i'd be staying off BST and ebay.

[larryd3]

O M G, being stuck in the house is getting to everybody. Why not worry and spend time on something really important instead of getting all upset over $10 or $15. They are training aids not showpieces and like another poster said, his came directly from the factory and look like those. I just don't get it..... I got no dog in this hunt but come on let's be reasonable and decent to each other.

[larciel]

I just opened my new! Ss and I find the head not 100% pure smooth.

So this may be ss quality.

But the grip is in plastic wrap.

[jj9000]

 

You'd better open up a PayPal case ASAP, and DEMAND they pay for return shipping!!!

Then, blast them on social media!!

The nerve of that company!!

[ASN21]

lol at the comments in this thread. The seller is in the wrong 100%. Buyer deserves his money back. Case closed on to the next.

[t4t3r]

The grips do come wrapped in plastic so that is an easy tell that they had been used in some fashion before the buyer received them.

[drake47]

I had a set of these straight from the factory, the grips are cheap, the shafts have cheap stickers on them and the heads didn't look any better than the ones here. These aren't real golf clubs, what you received is basically what they look like right out of the box.

[squishyy]

So I guess we solved the question of whether the item is new or not. Grips come in plastic according to some members here.

[seanjk123]

Why is this material? There is no significant wear and you can’t even tell the difference from op’s photos and the member posting his set from the factory. Is there any concern on how much these would improve your game vs a set right off production?

When you buy off this forum vs new, you accept some margin of error that is higher than what you get from a retailer. If you have material concerns over conditioning (e.g. sky marks on a driver), you can request additional pictures. Nit picking condition and expecting return shipping when legitimate businesses would not offer it will only deter future sellers offering perfectly good items. If you want to buy customer service to the level OP desires, buy from tgw or CPO. I’ve had great experiences in my limited transactions on the BST, but I’m always aware that there is risk associated with conditioning, and will not buy an item until I have received photo evidence to confirm condition to the standard that I require - this limits surprises and misunderstandings.

[dethman]

what i gleaned from this thread:

 

a) seller was deceptive and misrepresented clubs in ad.

b) it made no difference and buyer overreacted.

 

won't be buying/selling from either.

[StarFleetGolfer]

I bought straight from SS and my grips were not in plastic. Go look at clubs on display at PGA store or Golf Galaxy and even with shop wear you are still paying the new price.

[GoIrish17]

This is too much. I'm so thankful I've never had to deal with one of these deals, nit picking condition like they're buying gems. How much was shipping? Because anything less than $100, I'd be sending it the buyer pronto... along with a suggestion to never stray from buying retail and a request to just go away.

[sfong33]

No, I would not purchase a club with shop wear from a retailer nor would I consider it new. Those are called demo clubs and are generally sold at a slight discount.

Does it affect performance? Probably not, but the set was clearly used beyond light shop wear.

The main point being brought up here for the umpteenth time is “never used” is not the same as “light shop wear”.