Please see photos as part of the description...

Posts
1,541
Likes
3,350
In other words, "there's stuff wrong with this watch which I'm not declaring and if you can't spot it then that's your problem."
 
Posts
9,148
Likes
48,162
Respectfully, I don't agree. When I sell a watch, I describe it in detail in the listing including all faults of which I'm aware and I include many photos from all angles. I include the language that you cite along with language encouraging purchasers to ask questions before buying. I do this because I usually offer conditional returns on what I sell, but that becomes a pain and can be expensive especially with international transactions. Unfortunately, there are plenty of unethical buyers out there, especially on eBay, who will seize upon any scratch or ding as leverage to file a complaint and negotiate a better price after they receive the watch. If, on the other hand, you are talking about a seller deliberately concealing defects through poor photographs of the watch and a vague description, and then shifting the responsibility for discovering those faults to the buyer, then I absolutely agree that this would be an unethical practice.
Edited:
 
Posts
16,737
Likes
35,088
AKA "What am I hiding? Perhaps you'll never know!"
 
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,998
But also AKA “some buyers assert the strangest things as ‘flaws’ despite having been visible in the high res photos provided”
 
Posts
9,148
Likes
48,162
But also AKA “some buyers assert the strangest things as ‘flaws’ despite having been visible in the high res photos provided”
Exactly.
 
Posts
16,756
Likes
47,418
Sometimes it’s

“ you paid for it and I shipped it across the world and you saw the small little dot in the 7 pictures FFS “
 
Posts
1,541
Likes
3,350
Respectfully, I don't agree. When I sell a watch, I describe it in detail in the listing including all faults of which I'm aware and I include many photos from all angles. I include the language that you cite along with language encouraging purchasers to ask questions before buying. I do this because I usually offer conditional returns on what I sell, but that becomes a pain and can be expensive especially with international transactions. Unfortunately, there are plenty of unethical buyers out there, especially on eBay, who will seize upon any scratch or ding as leverage to file a complaint and negotiate a better price after they receive the watch. If, on the other hand, you are talking about a seller deliberately concealing defects through poor photographs of the watch and a vague description, and then shifting the responsibility for discovering those faults to the buyer, then I absolutely agree that this would be an unethical practice.

That's fair, and indeed, I have listed with this statement in the description as well. The OP was inspired by those who don't put much effort into their written description and simply imply that you should use the pictures to decide on whether to bid. I posted it after seeing a watch where the seller had described it as all original, stunning, etc, and that he had stripped it to show its condition, but not said anything about the fact that it was a redial, and a poor one at that.

Now maybe that's not an issue for non-collectors, but it takes a while to get ones eye in to notice uneven minute marks, etc, and you can bet that a naive buyer will easily miss such a thing, and then may realise in the future they have been misled. That seems to me unfair. Of course there are no rules governing the sale of secondhand items, but, well, maybe I'm the naive one, still "buyer beware" is a rotten way for a seller to conduct themselves.
 
Posts
2,066
Likes
14,595
I don’t think it’s usually a case of ‘buyer beware’. I’ve never had a problem with a buyer, but I’ve heard some horror stories out there. To the extent that it makes a potential buyer, stop, think, examine, do some research, and make sure they have asked potential questions / and are really ready to move forward, I think that’s on the whole more useful than not, to be honest…