Up to his old games - here's the most recent 'won' auction:

http://tinyurl.com/2w2ns6

The 'lucky' bidder wanked it up to $2000. Of course, we all
know that Radio Mart uses alternate IDs to shill bid his own stuff
into the stratosphere, and occasionally ends up the high bidder himself.
Whereupon he has to reslist cuz the 'buyer' failed to pay (he sure
gets a LOT of 'non paying bidders' doesn't he!!)

Sure enough in this case, cuz he's just relisted it:

http://tinyurl.com/32d4lz

Of course, he always says 'non paying bidder' - naturally.

But hey Martyn - we all know you like to occasionally win the
shill auctions yourself! Have fun paying those Final Sale fees to
Ebay on your shills - or do you report yourself as the non-paying
bidder perhaps?

Did you know that shill bidding, even on Ebay, is illegal in all 50 states?
Just curious...

On Dec 24, 1:47 pm, "None" wrote:

Sure enough in this case, cuz he's just relisted it:

http://tinyurl.com/32d4lz


Interesting how his mind works. He knows how much a real bidder was
willing to pay so he set the Buy-It-Now at exactly that amount.

He won't even give the guy a 10% discount for getting jacked around.

It's also funny how he pretends to be Rick Mish's acquaintance and
tries to "pump" up Rick, calling him "the Man" and mentioning his
family.

Angry Hallicrafters mob takes on eBay. The following is from an eBay
listing.

http://cgi.ebay.com/HALLICRAFTERS-SX-28A-PM-23-IS-IT-
MISREPRESENTED_W0QQitemZ170181847596QQihZ007QQcate goryZ4673QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem



This is a heads-up warning to please be careful when considering any
high priced Hallicrafters SX-28A at auction in the Ham Receivers
category. It was brought to my attention that there is a second
Hallicrafters SX-28A currently listed that is using copied pictures of
my SX-28A from a previous auction that ran here and concluded just
last week. Please carefully compare the inside view in auction
#130186049284 with the pictures of my receiver from auction
#170179225705. Notice how the yokes on the tuning shaft couplers are
in exactly the same positions, spots are in the same places and dial
lamp light is reflecting off the backside of the dial in the same
place. The seller's intent to deceive is more evident by his strategic
cropping of my original picture which is an attempt to hide the more
obvious identifying features appearing in the background. The seller
is plagiarizing pictures copied over the Internet and posting them as
his own. Using pictures of my receiver in his auction is serious
misrepresentation.

BREAKING NEWS: We just learned the seller admitted all pictures
connected to the SX-28A auction #130186049284 featured at the top have
been copied and pasted from various sources on the Internet. The
auction requires immediate payment via PayPal and is running as a
private auction which means a bidder's ID will be hidden from all
other viewers. A hidden ID prevents other members from contacting the
bidder before he has had a chance to pay. The auction has been
reported to SafeHarbor for investigation into pirated pictures which
is prohibited and we also asked to check for a possible hi-jacked ID
running a fraudulent annonymous auction. We will keep you posted by
updating the information as it becomes available.



I Received This Alert From My Buyer and Decided It Was Important and
Should Be Reported:

Rusty:
You might find it interesting to know that one of your pictures from
your,
now our, SX-28 listing, is presently being used by another person
on a present eBay listing. Namely, this pictu




is being used by : devin3247 (144)

for item: 130186049284

Not only is this person stealing your picture, but, the picture is
SUPPOSED to be an interior shot of HIS radio for potential buyers;
instead, it is an interior shot of YOUR radio which you have already
sold to me and for which I have already sent the payment.

Although this doesn't harm either of us directly, it still "ain't
right".

Thought you'd like to know.

DP



I was also contacted by a good friend who asked the subject seller for
more detail about the condition of his SX-28A and this is the reply he
received which he then forwarded to me:

Hi, the cabinet top was discolored for some reason so it has been
painted.
I'm not so sure about the capacitors, I'm pretty sure that some have
been
replace, but most I think most of them are original. I'm not able to
lift
or turn the radio over anymore. My son should be over this weekend and
I'll
have him take a look.

Thanks!

I noticed he did not allow this answer to post to the description like
one of the others so this indicates selective description posting and
more deception.



This is the actual original picture of my receiver from auction
#170179225705 which is now sold

kh wrote:

This is a heads-up warning to please be careful when considering any
high priced Hallicrafters SX-28A at auction in the Ham Receivers
category. It was brought to my attention that there is a second
Hallicrafters SX-28A currently listed that is using copied pictures of
my SX-28A from a previous auction that ran here and concluded just
last week. Please carefully compare the inside view in auction

First, it is my recollection from reading the EULA for ebay that any
pictures you post on ebay become the property of ebay... something they
do to avoid spurious lawsuits from those that think it might be fun to
post their pictures on ebay, and then sue ebay for infringement. The
pictures you post on ebay show up on thousands of affiliate websites,
many of which don't even identify ebay as the source.

Am I the only one who remembers that it used to be when you clicked on the
button for: Sell a similar item, they would copy the original listing, pictures
and all?

If the seller is to be believed, he is older. He says he can't pick up the
receiver and flip it over anymore. Not too hard to imagine, given the high
number of feeble elderly men in the hobby, many of whom recognizing their impending
mortality, and are trying to clear out the heavy stuff. It is also not too hard
to believe that he might not have a digital camera... most of the elderly don't...,
and might have thought that using pictures from another auction wouldn't cause
any concern. Hams are used to sharing everything they get with other hams,
pictures, manuals,... copyright is not even considered... especially when there
is no intention of selling the picture, or even using it more than the once.

The only smoke here appears to be from some ancient ham's cigarette.

Just a thought,

-Chuck

On 30 Dic, 15:31, Chuck Harris wrote:
........
If the seller is to be believed, he is older. *He says he can't pick up the
receiver and flip it over anymore. *Not too hard to imagine, given the high
number of feeble elderly men in the hobby, many of whom recognizing their impending
mortality, and are trying to clear out the heavy stuff. *It is also not too hard
to believe that he might not have a digital camera... most of the elderly don't...,
and might have thought that using pictures from another auction wouldn't cause
any concern. *Hams are used to sharing everything they get with other hams,
pictures, manuals,... copyright is not even considered... especially when there
is no intention of selling the picture, or even using it more than the once.

The only smoke here appears to be from some ancient ham's cigarette.

Just a thought,

-Chuck

Just another thought.
First, why not to specify in the listing that the pictures are not of
the actual listed item?
Further but less important, I see it is unlikely that an elderly ham,
who has enough practice to sell on ebay, is able to copy and past, and
probably would try to sell other stuff too, might not have a digital
camera.
Antonio I8IOV

Antonio Iovane wrote:

The only smoke here appears to be from some ancient ham's cigarette.

Just a thought,

-Chuck

Just another thought.
First, why not to specify in the listing that the pictures are not of
the actual listed item?
Further but less important, I see it is unlikely that an elderly ham,
who has enough practice to sell on ebay, is able to copy and past, and
probably would try to sell other stuff too, might not have a digital
camera.
Antonio I8IOV

Cutting and pasting is trivial on most modern operating systems. So much
so that kids in 1st grade do it, and think it is ok to copy anything that
way.

I still see auctions that have no pictures whatsoever. I agree that the
seller should have identified where the pictures came from, but I have
bought things on ebay that had "found" pictures without identification,
and was not unpleased with the result.

Not everything that seems suspicious is the result of treachery.

-Chuck

On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 11:07:56 -0500, Chuck Harris
wrote:

Antonio Iovane wrote:

The only smoke here appears to be from some ancient ham's cigarette.

Just a thought,

-Chuck

Just another thought.
First, why not to specify in the listing that the pictures are not of
the actual listed item?
Further but less important, I see it is unlikely that an elderly ham,
who has enough practice to sell on ebay, is able to copy and past, and
probably would try to sell other stuff too, might not have a digital
camera.
Antonio I8IOV

Cutting and pasting is trivial on most modern operating systems. So much
so that kids in 1st grade do it, and think it is ok to copy anything that
way.

I still see auctions that have no pictures whatsoever. I agree that the
seller should have identified where the pictures came from, but I have
bought things on ebay that had "found" pictures without identification,
and was not unpleased with the result.

Not everything that seems suspicious is the result of treachery.

However the claims go much farther than this example. IF the photo is
listed as showing the actual item for sale but has been "borrowed"
and shows the interior of an entirely different piece of equipment
wouldn't that be "suspicions confirmed?"

Roger


-Chuck