I found this on the Collector's Weekly eBay Auction page, and apparently the seller accepted a BiN even though it was strictly an auction at $25 starting bid.
It looks like the base was marked similarly to the 500 equipped with an electronic ringer mentioned last year.
Does anyone know exactly what it is?
www.ebay.com/itm/322065356094
I think the seller got a lot more than $25 to pull it from eBay. Some collector wanted the marked base. Ringer looks like it is MIA as the volume control is empty. I would have loved to have seen the inside of it. Those are some deep scratches on the base....Doug
It is labeled as a trial set. It is dated July 1956. I figure they were testing some sort of phone related component or accessory with this phone. What it could be I have no idea. A new 425-type network?
Apparently what they were testing was a ringer, I sent the seller a message about the phone and she states it has a ringer box inside, I also think some "helpful" eBayer advised her of what she had. Here is her message:
I happened to find some research on the phone and realized, as you probably knew, that it is an extremely rare phone. It has the ringer box inside as the phone was used for testing it. They made 400 or 500 of these phones. Mine is number 380 I believe. My research shows that the phone is worth much more than I realized. If you are interested in making an offer, let me know. i Have received several offers already on it.
Thanks
What offer should I make her?
Without seeing just what this "ringer box" inside is, I wouldn't offer much at all. What they tested could have been removed.
But, we do know that they did conduct tests in 1956 for the tone ringer that was used later in the Morris trial.
The suffix —R might indeed mean that it was a ringer that was tested.
The seller is located in West Orange, NJ, and seems to be a reseller of estate items. The Oranges (West, South, East) used to be upscale towns where a lot of Bell Labs engineers lived. From there it is just a short train ride to get into Manhattan to AT&T, WECo, and BTL may still have had offices there too, on the other hand Whippany isn't far to the West, were Bell Labs was, and where the Morris System was developed.
So it does make sense that the seller would find something like this.
Note that the line cord of the set was shown in the ad, and it has only two conductors, no ground! This might also indicate that the test was for a ringer that operated only on tip and ring.
Another auction photo
The trial at Crystal lake in 1956/7 supposedly only involved 300 sets, but who knows whether they started with number 1, or perhaps 100?
I wonder how she "just happened to find some research on the set". Perhaps she found some notebooks by the engineer?
Other than that, it is rather difficult to find coherent research on these developments, surely not something a novice might be able to pull together.
Quote from: unbeldi on April 07, 2016, 08:50:45 PM
The trial at Crystal lake in 1956/7 supposedly only involved 300 sets, but who knows whether they started with number 1, or perhaps 100?
I wonder how she "just happened to find some research on the set". Perhaps she found some notebooks by the engineer?
Other than that, it is rather difficult to find coherent research on these developments, surely not something a novice might be able to pull together.
Nudge, nudge, "Mr. Helpful."
Ben
The auction pic showing the handset logo shows the "G-1" deliberately scratched out. Would Bell Labs have changed something in the handset and then obliterated the model number, since it was no longer a regular G-1?
Quote from: RotarDad on April 07, 2016, 10:08:37 PM
The auction pic showing the handset logo shows the "G-1" deliberately scratched out. Would Bell Labs have changed something in the handset and then obliterated the model number, since it was no longer a regular G-1?
Very keen observation, this could indeed indicate that this was a transistorized telephone. It might have had a dynamic or condenser microphone, and a different receiver.
Unbeldi - This endeavor seems a bit strange to me. They stamp an entirely different base (expensive tooling) and install different components in 1956, then decide to keep making basically the same old 500 for 30 more years???
Quote from: RotarDad on April 07, 2016, 10:32:00 PM
Unbeldi - This endeavor seems a bit strange to me. They stamp an entirely different base (expensive tooling) and install different components in 1956, then decide to keep making basically the same old 500 for 30 more years???
Well, Bell Labs worked on many 'strange' projects, that either went somewhere, or did not.
BUT, the tone ringer and transistorized telephone were a component of the project toward the first electronic switching system, the 1ESS, the largest research and development project in Bell System's history, before and after, and perhaps the largest any industry ever undertook. The first incarnation, the Morris (IL) system used a different local loop design that had to avoid high voltage AC ringing current. Ringing was by audible frequencies which provided fully-selective party line service for alerting and the same circuit generated ANI toward the central office for message rate.
Here is some recently relevant history: http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=14504.0
But, indeed, while the Electronic Office became a reality, the tone ringer was abandoned after the Morris trial of 1960-62, in favor of the traditional local loop design with analog ringing and rotary dialing. To convert the entire continent to this concept was apparently prohibitive.
But we don't know what this set really was for.... so let's see if we get more info through another auction.
They probably tried different things that either turned out to be impractical or too expensive to produce at the time. They could've come back to them later when they were more practical and less expensive to produce.
Quote from: andre_janew on April 08, 2016, 12:19:45 PM
The probably tried different things that either turned out to be impractical or too expensive to produce at the time. They could've come back to them later when they were more practical and less expensive to produce.
The first tone-dialing (later known as Touch-Tone) experiments were carried out around 1941 and after the war several field trials were held, but the project was shelved (but not really) for a decade until the transistor made it all reliable enough for consumer use.
I have a MAJOR question. When did they start marking the bases as Field trial sets ?
D/P
Dan...I only saw them on the inside of phones, but it does look real to me. I would really like to see the inside of it!!....Doug
It is real, the Morris trial sets were marked very similarly.
My "Field Trial Set", is not marked as such, only marked, " Do Not Open, If any trouble occurs, return to Bell Labs, Murry Hills, New Jersey."
Now I wonder if my set falls under a different category, other than "Field Trial Set" ?
D/P
I sent another message telling her I am interested and asked for some pictures of the inside. We will see or not see!
Wait, does the auction page show the listing as still active for everyone else? For me, it shows the phone as having an 'error in the listing'.
eBay item number:
322065356094 ENDED $25.00 0 Bids
This listing was ended by the seller because there was an error in the listing
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe the seller still has the phone and is considering several offers. Harry's first inquiry netted such a response, and the listing had already ended. Harry can you confirm?
I think Ebay needs to update their choices for ending auctions. I suggest:
1) This auction was ended by the seller because there was a fortuitous visit by Mr. Helpful.
2) This auction was ended by the seller because there was an offer made for a lot more than the seller expected, but still way less than the item is actually worth.
D/P's set may be marked differently because they were testing an entirely new type of phone. His set could be classified as a working prototype.
Quote from: andre_janew on April 09, 2016, 02:02:30 PM
D/P's set may be marked differently because they were testing an entirely new type of phone. His set could be classified as a working prototype.
I just wish I had more information on my set. I know it has been scrutinized to death here, but still not one piece of actual documentation of it's origin, OTHER than it matches the original Patent drawings submitted to the Patent office in 1947. If it didn't say, "Return to Bell Labs", I would be completely convinced it is a prototype, but because it obviously was in the field, it has to be one of several. Yet no one has seen another or documentation to support that. You would think at least one other example would appear.
On the other hand unique is good also.
D/P
Dan - There may well be another that will surface at some point. As the old timer's estates are liquidated, stuff shows up (this is a huge benefit of Ebay imho, where stuff that might get tossed, gets a week or two on Ebay instead). As you know, in there early years of this forum, most believed a 49er 500 was just legend, but now we know some examples survived and 2 showed up on Ebay in the year or so. We'll keep looking..... in the meantime, you have the "King Of 500s"..
For posterity, here is a composite of the eBay screen shot with the seller description superimposed with the line cord end and a composite of the 4 other photos offered by the seller in the listing.
Quote from: RotarDad on April 09, 2016, 12:19:19 PM
I believe the seller still has the phone and is considering several offers. Harry's first inquiry netted such a response, and the listing had already ended. Harry can you confirm?
Yes, according to the message I got from the seller she still has it and is accepting offers. Yes, the listing was ended. My guess was Mr. Helpful also.
Quote from: HarrySmith on April 09, 2016, 05:45:30 PM
Yes, according to the message I got from the seller she still has it and is accepting offers. Yes, the listing was ended. My guess was Mr. Helpful also.
After finding the ended listing for the above photos, I sent a message to the seller asking if the phone was still for sale.
All she replied with was
"What would you offer on it?"I take that as a yes, it's still out there and it will be until the offers stop coming in and the best one of them is acceptable to the seller.
Just my humble opinion but at this point in time, wouldn't it be better for the seller to put it up on eBay with a lot of good photos (inside and out) with a very high BIN (a gazillion bucks) along with the make an offer option? Many probably don't know it exists, and is for sale.
I made him an offer and was willing to pick it up today as he's 40 minutes away. I asked him to list all dates he finds on the components inside the phone, cords, network, bell?? and open the handset with pic's of the transmitter and receiver and dates. The phone will be re listed by the seller.
Zapper
This set surfaced on eBay again for a starting price of $600, only to be withdrawn "because of error in the listing" at 07:08 EST.
This time around, the seller tried to appear a little bit more knowledgeable than the first time around, but still got the wrong advice from whomever they talked to:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/371644771278
Bell System - Bell Tel. Lab. Trial Set Telephone - 1956- RARE
This is a rare telephone. It was a phone used as a trial in Morris, Illinois trialling the first electronic switching office.
They only made 400-500 of these phones. This is phone number 380.
Western Electric Headset.
Appears to be complete inside.
See all photos for best description.
SOLD AS IS
Morris was in 1960, not 1956. This set is from the Crystal Lake trial, just as I suspected previously. Now, with the pictures of the inside, and the sound slots in the housing, we have proof. The estate that the seller happened to plunder, probably belong to one of the Bell Labs engineers of the time, the seller is closely located to labs, and South Orange, like all the Oranges, was an elegant neighborhood to live at the time.
The reason that the set does not have a dial is that the Crystal Lake trial was not a full electronic office. It only tested some subsystems, particularly the tone ringer. The set probably does not have the ANI circuitry yet for station identification.
Bell Laboratories Record, March 1956, p 116.
Here are some new auction pictures not previously seen.
Quote from: unbeldi on June 02, 2016, 08:58:31 AM
The reason that the set does not have a dial is that the Crystal Lake trial was not a full electronic office. It only tested some subsystems, particularly the tone ringer. The set probably does not have the ANI circuitry yet for station identification.
Bell Laboratories Record, March 1956, p 116.
It has only red and green conductors in the mounting cord, and hex nuts rather than screws blocking the G (ground) terminal on the network. So this set was apparently not for party lines.
Were other sets with tone ringer equipped for tip party ID? If so, did they have to add an inductor, rather than use the tone ringer to detect high resistance to ground when off-hook?
Quote from: poplar1 on June 02, 2016, 09:30:12 AM
It has only red and green conductors in the mounting cord, and hex nuts rather than screws blocking the G (ground) terminal on the network. So this set was apparently not for party lines.
Were other sets with tone ringer equipped for tip party ID? If so, did they have to add an inductor, rather than use the tone ringer to detect high resistance to ground when off-hook?
Party line service worked differently in the Electronic Office than in the traditional plant. Selective ringing did not require the ground connection, and therefore a two-conductor mounting cord was good enough.
The tone ringer used audible frequencies for ringing at a power level comparable to speech. The telephone set amplified this signal for the tone ringer with a transistor. Different subscribers on the same line were signaled with different sets of frequency. Selective ringing was achieved by strapping each set on the large connection plate to be responsive only to the frequency assigned for the station. This was achieved by a resonant L-C circuit with a set of selectable inductances and two or three capacitances.
This is very similar actually to the principles of the touch tone dial, only in the opposite direction of signaling. Party id generation worked similarly, only in the reverse direction, almost like the TT dial. However, I don't know whether this was developed already in 1956.
PS: The BLR document that I just posted explains that the indeed the trial involved subscribers on up to eight-party lines. This was fully-selective ringing even for eight parties. I will try to find out how ANI worked in these cases, but given that the instrument does not have a dial, indicates that placing a call, probably involved the operator anyways.
The paper also states that only ca. 100 lines participated in the trial, yet some 300 telephone sets were involved.
I also seem to remember that the trial participants also still had a traditional line, the test line did not replace the existing service, but I don't remember the source of that statement. I am also wondering whether Crystal Lake was not still a manual exchange anyways at the time, as was the case for Morris, IL. where the full system had its debut. | (http://www.telephonearchive.com/numbercards/assets/we_black/125s/crystal_lake_1426.jpg) |
PS 2: In my dual line statement, I think I am confusing it with the Morris trial. In Morris, Western Electric actually built two switches in parallel, one was a crossbar, and the second was the ECO. The crossbar was finished well ahead of the electronic switch. Previously, Morris was all manual.
So, I do suspect that Crystal Lake was also manual, obviating the need for dials, and simplifying the testing of tone-ringing telephone sets. At the exchange, only the outward signaling equipment needed to be replaced by the tone generation system.
Here is the announcement of the Crystal Lake trial in the BLR:
It seems to be an attempt at an electronic ringer or what my dad would call a "tweety bird" ringer. I had no idea they started working on such a ringer so early, but I imagine it had to start sometime. I have no idea when the first mass produced electronic ringer first appeared, but I think it was a lot later than 1956!
Quote from: andre_janew on June 02, 2016, 10:52:27 AM
It seems to be an attempt at an electronic ringer or what my dad would call a "tweety bird" ringer. I had no idea they started working on such a ringer so early, but I imagine it had to start sometime. I have no idea when the first mass produced electronic ringer first appeared, but I think it was a lot later than 1956!
This type of tone ringer was never mass-produced. It was only used in production once at Morris, IL, for about a year and a half. For the No. 1 Electronic Switching System (1ESS), which debuted in Succasunna NJ in 1965 (http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=14504.msg150803#msg150803), they went back to a conventional local loop design.
What Western Electric later called a
tone ringer, for example the
S1 Tone Ringer, is somewhat different in that it rings from the same high-voltage ringing current that any other telephone uses. Its transducer however is an electronic ringer amplifying an internally generated dual-frequency signal (~750 and ~1500 Hz) to drive the tweeter. The high-voltage ringing signal from the line was reduced with a transformer in the ringer set to trigger the oscillator.
PS: BSP 501-260-100
What is very unfortunate for the finder, but more so for the buyer of this set, is that the actual ringer appears to have been removed from the set.
Perhaps the seller was actually wise to take whatever private offer (s)he received to cancel the auction.
I can't imagine the set being worth $600 without its most-prized component.
I have a "bell chime" (style) ringer that is a tone ringer. I think that was the only production model of tone ringers. I have never opened or tested it.
Jim S.
Quote from: unbeldi on June 02, 2016, 10:05:42 AM
The paper also states that only ca. 100 lines participated in the trial, yet some 300 telephone sets were involved.
From the BLR article then all subscribers participated. There were 300 customers on 100 lines due to the party lines.
Quote from: andre_janew on June 02, 2016, 10:52:27 AM
It seems to be an attempt at an electronic ringer or what my dad would call a "tweety bird" ringer. I had no idea they started working on such a ringer so early, but I imagine it had to start sometime. I have no idea when the first mass produced electronic ringer first appeared, but I think it was a lot later than 1956!
Refresh our memory...the desire for a new type of ringer was in conjunction with the development of electronic switching. Either technology didn't exist initially in electronic format to Inexpensively or reliably superimpose the 90 VAC ringing onto the 48VDC lines for ringing OR it was seen as a potential cost saving to go with a newer type of ringing.
The conversion to new CO equipment was the opportunity to make this change to the ringing format. Tone ringing was being designed to meet a need in electronic switching or cost control rather than as a novelty.
Terry
Quote from: Jim S. on June 02, 2016, 03:10:06 PM
I have a "bell chime" (style) ringer that is a tone ringer. I think that was the only production model of tone ringers. I have never opened or tested it.
Jim S.
Are you talking about the F1A BellChime ?
It has a two gongs.
Quote from: AE_Collector on June 02, 2016, 03:45:04 PM
From the BLR article then all subscribers participated. There were 300 customers on 100 lines due to the party lines.
Refresh our memory...the desire for a new type of ringer was in conjunction with the development of electronic switching. Either technology didn't exist initially in electronic format to Inexpensively or reliably superimpose the 90 VAC ringing onto the 48VDC lines for ringing OR it was seen as a potential cost saving to go with a newer type of ringing.
The conversion to new CO equipment was the opportunity to make this change to the ringing format. Tone ringing was being designed to meet a need in electronic switching or cost control rather than as a novelty.
Terry
Yes it was solely developed for electronic switching.
In the Morris-type electronic switching system that was already in the design stage in the early 1950s, the signal switching network, which supplies ringing and other tones is also constructed from gas-filled diode cross-point elements, and these could not operate at the high-current (10 mA) and high-voltage (90 V) of traditional ringing with high-impedance C-type ringers, and therefore the ringers had to be redesigned for much less power transmitted through the signal network. As a result the ringing signal was on the order of less than 1 V to max of 2 volts. Also, the local loop did not operate at 48 V, but only at ca. 20 V.
Quote from: unbeldi on June 02, 2016, 03:52:50 PM
Are you talking about the F1A BellChime ?
It has a two gongs.
I believe he is talking about the S1A that you mentioned earlier. It has the same cover as the F1A Bell Chime.
Quote from: poplar1 on June 02, 2016, 04:44:22 PM
I believe he is talking about the S1A that you mentioned earlier. It has the same cover as the F1A Bell Chime.
That's what I am talking about.
Jim S.
What year did Stromberg-Carlson start using tone ringers in their Petite (?) (Princess Style) sets?
And what about the Ericofons, whether Ericsson or North Electric?
2500DMGB and 2500MMGB sets made by WE/AT&T Technologies?
Quote from: poplar1 on June 02, 2016, 04:48:36 PM
What year did Stromberg-Carlson start using tone ringers in their Petite (?) (Princess Style) sets?
And what about the Ericofons, whether Ericsson or North Electric?
2500DMGB and 2500MMGB sets made by WE/AT&T Technologies?
I have two North 541-type sets that have Ericsson tweeters. They were reportedly removed from service in Iowa.
The ivory set arranged for the sound to go out the bottom of the set is dated 12-55.
The white set with a side-firing horn is dated 2-59.
http://www.paul-f.com/North555.htm (http://www.paul-f.com/North555.htm)
Quote from: unbeldi on June 02, 2016, 10:05:42 AM
...I do suspect that Crystal Lake was also manual...
Crystal Lake was served by a manual exchange.
TCI members can find the article "Transistorized telephone summons you with a musical tone" in the November 2014 issue of
Singing Wires in the on-line
Singing Wires Archive.
In addition to confirming the Crystal Lake exchange, it includes a timeline of tone ringing and switching in the Bell System from a patent application in 1949 to the Morris installation in the early 1960s. The Bonus Pages include reprints of ads, lots of photos and diagrams and an extensive bibliography.
The field trial 500 is ba-a-ack:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/371645501602
$499 starting bid
We still don't know what is inside that handset. There must be a reason for the G-1 marking being ground off.
Just to close out this thread: The object sold for USD$1045 on 2016-06-12 with four bids.
A high price for a rather defunct shell without its most important part.
F-51674-R
7-56
PROPERTY OF
BELL TEL. LAB.
TRIAL SET
380
New topic 11/4/16:
http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=17049.msg175857#msg175857
Quote from: poplar1 on November 05, 2016, 12:19:15 AM
F-51674-R
7-56
PROPERTY OF
BELL TEL. LAB.
TRIAL SET
380
New topic 11/4/16:
http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=17049.msg175857#msg175857
So, the current owner, in the description, says
"This is being sold AS IS and as found." indicating to me that the seller did not buy this, or buy it for more than $5, at an estate sale or something similar. Had the seller known it was worth more than $100, would he not have started it higher or put a reserve on it? By doing neither of those, it means he was not the one who paid $1,045 for it only 5 months ago. Had he paid the $1,045 I'd say he was taking a big chance on getting anything near that price on this auction.
Something happening here but what it is I'm not exactly sure . . .
Any thoughts on that one sentence and the starting price?
Quote from: TelePlay on November 05, 2016, 12:57:05 AM
So, the current owner, in the description, says "This is being sold AS IS and as found." indicating to me that the seller did not buy this, or buy it for more than $5, at an estate sale or something similar. Had the seller known it was worth more than $100, would he not have started it higher or put a reserve on it? By doing neither of those, it means he was not the one who paid $1,045 for it only 5 months ago. Had he paid the $1,045 I'd say he was taking a big chance on getting anything near that price on this auction.
Something happening here but what it is I'm not exactly sure . . .
Any thoughts on that one sentence and the starting price?
Both the June buyer (g***c) and the November seller (Yankee-carpetbaggers) have a feedback of 1421.
Quote from: TelePlay on November 05, 2016, 12:57:05 AM
So, the current owner, in the description, says "This is being sold AS IS and as found." indicating to me that the seller did not buy this, or buy it for more than $5, at an estate sale or something similar. Had the seller known it was worth more than $100, would he not have started it higher or put a reserve on it? By doing neither of those, it means he was not the one who paid $1,045 for it only 5 months ago. Had he paid the $1,045 I'd say he was taking a big chance on getting anything near that price on this auction.
Something happening here but what it is I'm not exactly sure . . .
Any thoughts on that one sentence and the starting price?
Well, if it the prior sale were 5 years past, I might accept it as innocent. Families or friends of collectors don't value the stuff nearly as much as the collector, when they have to dispose of the belongings. But after only 5 months, it is just another example of him lying about the history of the set, in attempt to get his money back. But, IMHO, this would be far more successful, if he nicely explained the great history of this set, its use and features, instead of the rambling.
I would say, even the addition of the number card frame without mentioning the fact is an attempt of deception when it comes to a special set like this. Because of his selling history, the seller is clearly some kind of collector, he is likely the previous buyer. [PS: Poplar1 just proved it, while I was still writing.]
If Yankee-carpetbaggers gets new feedback for any item, his score will go from 1421 to 1422. It will be easy enough to see whether g***c's feedback number, shown as high bidder on the June auction, increases to 1422 at the same time.
It is the same person. Can be found but not easily.
First, went into all feedback for YCB. Found one where he was the buyer within the past month. Went to that seller's profile page and clicked on items for sale. Selected sold items. Went down to the first of October and opened up each sale and clicked on bids until I got the sold with YCB as the buyer. So, g***c is YCB.
The item I used was eBay item number 131971786287 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/BELL-SYSTEM-514B-TOOL-/131971786287) for a genuine Bell strap wrench (how did we miss that 7 day auction that only got one bid for $30 plus $14 shipping) purchased by
g***c ( 1421 ) US $29.99 Oct-21-16 15:30:02 PDT
Since numbers change, today's eBay listing and bid page are attached.
PS: Terry, here's a way to update your handles list . . . ::)
Quote from: Partyline4 on November 08, 2016, 06:52:04 AM
I've enjoyed reading about this set, and the detective work that went into discovering that this is the same fellow trying to get his money back ;)
eBay will take about 13%, so he needs to make at least $1060....
Seems to be struggling to take off, unsurprisingly to the fact that the bidders probably know the true story behind it!
I'll say $1065
Despite having been a buyer himself, the seller still seems to claim that he knows almost nothing about the set. He also has claimed (in an email) that he did not do ANYTHING to the set since acquiring it.
When knowledgeable and serious buyers participate, the true desire of them shows always only in the last 5 seconds of the auction.
Quote from: unbeldi on November 08, 2016, 09:04:31 AM
Despite having been a buyer himself, the seller still seems to claim that he knows almost nothing about the set. He also has claimed (in an email) that he did not do ANYTHING to the set since acquiring it.
When knowledgeable and serious buyers participate, the true desire of them shows always only in the last 5 seconds of the auction.
But I wonder how many of those knowledgeable and serious buyers DON'T know what's going on here? I find it harder to give a liar his money back, than someone that tells the truth. That's just me! If those buyers know the true story, I find it hard to believe this guy to get all of his money back. I've been wrong a few times before, though.
I also wonder how many of those buyers are sitting right here on this forum?....
I've got a little lost on this thread. The assumption is Yankee Carpet Baggers bought this for over 1K and now has it listed going for $78. Is this the concensus? I have dealt with him before and he has purchased from me. He is less than 1 hour away from me. I find this bizarre! I found him to be a straight up seller...Doug
So YCB bought this for over 1K and sold it for $600. It went up $400 in the last few seconds, but this does not add up. Something is not right....Doug
Someone set a very high bid on the 10th. If that last second snipe at $607 had not been placed, the new owner would have gotten the phone for $208 or so. That one sniper, who did not win the phone, pushed the price up to $617.
Once again, have no idea of what the new owner's high bid was but it was higher than $607.
Yes, strange indeed. This whole situation would have gone unnoticed had it not been for unbeldi's great memory and file retrieval system to the original discussion of this phone, this topic . . . :)
Why would someone pay over $1,000 for a phone and a month or so later list it with no reserve at $10?
Well, it was fairly easy to spot. There aren't many tone ringer phones around, and the scratch marks on the bottom where someone filed off a rivet were easy to remember.
It's not so strange really, I think. The bagger got carried away in his bidding to begin with when he bought the set, too big for his bag. Finally he discovered he got much less than he should have had for the price and tried to recoup his Yankee dollars. Polished it up some and took his chances. I wouldn't be surprised if he cancel the sale and it shows up again soon. This was about the fourth time, this set was offered in the last year, I think.
Can you cancel a sale after the hammer? I didn't know you could do that. What reason would you be required to state?
Quote from: Pourme on November 11, 2016, 07:44:51 PM
Can you cancel a sale after the hammer? I didn't know you could do that. What reason would you be required to state?
Here are the options for a seller to cancel after the sale:
Why do you want to cancel this order?
--I'm out of stock or the item is damaged
--The buyer asked to cancel the order, or there's an issue with the buyer's addressSellers will usually not pick the first option, because an "out of stock" counts as a defect against the seller.
So, they pick the second option -- even if it has absolutely nothing to do with the reason for canceling!
Also, Ebay says that the buyer must agree to the cancellation, but that's not true!
I have had two auctions canceled lately, where I was the winning bidder. I found out only when Ebay sent me a message saying the auction was canceled. One seller said she had meant to list it as an auction rather than a buy-it-now. The other said she canceled my order by mistake, while trying to cancel some unpaid items. Neither would let me purchase the item, and there was no way to leave neutral or negative feedback. (Ebay said to go to the ebay.ca site after 7 days, and that I could leave the feedback there, even though I coudn't leave it on the U.S. site where I had bought the items.)
I fear we are getting off subject, one more comment and I will stop.
I had a auction canceled this week. I was the only buyer on the min bid of $25 on a 302 % Continental combo package. The auction wasn't ended yet. The reason was the msd was "lost or broken". I was going to send a screen shot but I can't find any record of the auction anywhere on EBAY not even a note of the auction #. This is the email contact I had with the seller:
New message from: myretirementfun Top Rated Seller(743Purple Star)
Some how I missed that the black mouth cap was chipped bad I will take new pictures and show it and state it
Reply
Your previous message
If this item was lost or broken, I'm sure we won't see it relisted.
Benny
Get to know myretirementfun
• Located: Dearborn, MI, United States
• Member since: Jul 19, 2000
• Positive Feedback: 100%
It upsets me that EBAY users (customers) doing business by EBAY's "rules" can be treated so cavalierly!
I will shut up now...
I think this Yankee fellow just got caught up in the hype over this phone and perhaps got a word that it could be worth much more than he paid for it. Unfortunately, I think the coverage he received on this website didn't help him, I think it in fact HURT his chances of getting his money back. He lied about the set as well, as well as added a dial ring....
I knew once they started talking about it on this forum that he wouldn't get his money back. Heck, the buyer is probably on the forum!
The historical chronology of this phone follows constructed from the above posts.
First listed by suzhoop27 (West Orange, NJ) in early April in a 5 day auction starting at $25
Seller ended the listing early with the reason: " This listing was ended by the seller because there was an error in the listing."
Next listed by booguy27 (West Orange, NJ) in late May in a 10 day auction starting at $600
Seller ended the listing early with the reason: " This listing was ended by the seller because there was an error in the listing."
Next listed by boogy27 (West Orange, NJ) in early June in a 10 day auction starting at $499
Auction attracted 3 bidders and sold for $1,045
Next listed in early November by yankee-carpetbaggers (Salem, MA) in a 7 day auction starting at $19.99
Auction attracted 6 bidders and sold for $617.99
NOTE: When the phone sold for $1,045, there were 3 bidders, one of which was a last second snipe on June 12th by d***d ( 21 ) at 17:22:06 for $1,020.00 (auction ended at 17:22:12). This snipe increased the previous high bid of $555 but did not top a high bid placed by g***c ( 1421 ) at 14:37:48 so the phone was sold for the snipe bid plus the minimum increase by eBay of $25, or, it sold for $1,045. The person who sniped the phone did not bid on the eBay listing that was the subject of an auction contest. The buyer of the $617 phone was r***e ( 217 ) who did not bid in the $1,045 auction.
Excellent recap, John. The bidder who ended up with the phone, r***e (217) is, from the handles list:
sqwerel r***e 85 4-Jun-12 Leslie Gardner USA, California
The 217 feedbacks check out when you search for that member on eBay. Not an active forum member, I don't think.