First, this is not another "let's bash GC" thread, so please go elsewhere if that's what you want to do. But I had an interesting trade-in experience today and was curious for opinions.
I have a mid-2000s Mesa Maverick 2x12 combo that I just haven't played in the last few years. The amp is in very solid overall physical condition and still sounds great on both channels, but here's the rub: the reverb is totally out and I haven't bothered to get it fixed. I've casually listed the amp a few times on CL in years' past and just had a few lowball offers here and there. But now I'm more motivated to sell it to free up some space for an upcoming house renovation, so I figured I'd see what GC would offer before relisting it after the holidays.
So, I roll into GC with the amp today and immediately start talking to two of the sales guys there. Before we even went to plug it in, they were digging how cool the amp looks and the shape it was in. I immediately told the main guy I was talking to about the reverb and he just stops in his tracks and tells me, "Sorry, we can't take it if anything's not working, we'll just get people asking for us to take something off the price." I asked him if he wanted to at least plug it in and hear how great it sounds, and he declined. (The other sales guy asked me how much I wanted, I gave him what I think is a reasonable number on the spot given the reverb issue, and he smiled and said "Damn, I wish I had $x right now").
After that, I took a quick walk around the store because I can't help myself (man, if I would've gone to sell an amp and bought something instead, that would've turned out even worse at home than the string trip that turns into a new LP). I saw that a bunch of the used amps were in horrible cosmetic condition. For instance, they had a 2010 Fender Twin '65 Reissue that was so beat to hell I could see wood underneath the cabinet exterior and the left panel of the cabinet completely separating from the rest of the amp. It may well sound great and work perfectly, but it was marked down to $549 for the obvious poor cosmetic shape (I typically see GC list these between $650-$850).
I get that certain gear is unacceptable/unsellable in "non-functioning condition" and certainly understand the overall policy, but I was a little surprised in this context. This is a pretty cool amp that GC customers wouldn't see every day, and if they're willing to mark a used amp (or guitar) down for cosmetic issues, I don't see why it would be any different for at least certain functional issues like this. If one of the channels is completely out or the speakers are blown? Sure, I get it in situations like those. But here, we're talking an amp in solid condition that sounds great that can be paid for by GC and priced accordingly with the reverb being out. I don't get the sales guy's stated concern about inviting haggling any more so than with any other used gear, especially when so much of their used inventory is already in poor shape. I think a lot of customers would love to buy the amp as is for a fair price that GC could still make some money on.
Oh well, I'll move the amp elsewhere. It just seemed like a strange application of what's a reasonable policy in many other contexts. Thoughts?
I have a mid-2000s Mesa Maverick 2x12 combo that I just haven't played in the last few years. The amp is in very solid overall physical condition and still sounds great on both channels, but here's the rub: the reverb is totally out and I haven't bothered to get it fixed. I've casually listed the amp a few times on CL in years' past and just had a few lowball offers here and there. But now I'm more motivated to sell it to free up some space for an upcoming house renovation, so I figured I'd see what GC would offer before relisting it after the holidays.
So, I roll into GC with the amp today and immediately start talking to two of the sales guys there. Before we even went to plug it in, they were digging how cool the amp looks and the shape it was in. I immediately told the main guy I was talking to about the reverb and he just stops in his tracks and tells me, "Sorry, we can't take it if anything's not working, we'll just get people asking for us to take something off the price." I asked him if he wanted to at least plug it in and hear how great it sounds, and he declined. (The other sales guy asked me how much I wanted, I gave him what I think is a reasonable number on the spot given the reverb issue, and he smiled and said "Damn, I wish I had $x right now").
After that, I took a quick walk around the store because I can't help myself (man, if I would've gone to sell an amp and bought something instead, that would've turned out even worse at home than the string trip that turns into a new LP). I saw that a bunch of the used amps were in horrible cosmetic condition. For instance, they had a 2010 Fender Twin '65 Reissue that was so beat to hell I could see wood underneath the cabinet exterior and the left panel of the cabinet completely separating from the rest of the amp. It may well sound great and work perfectly, but it was marked down to $549 for the obvious poor cosmetic shape (I typically see GC list these between $650-$850).
I get that certain gear is unacceptable/unsellable in "non-functioning condition" and certainly understand the overall policy, but I was a little surprised in this context. This is a pretty cool amp that GC customers wouldn't see every day, and if they're willing to mark a used amp (or guitar) down for cosmetic issues, I don't see why it would be any different for at least certain functional issues like this. If one of the channels is completely out or the speakers are blown? Sure, I get it in situations like those. But here, we're talking an amp in solid condition that sounds great that can be paid for by GC and priced accordingly with the reverb being out. I don't get the sales guy's stated concern about inviting haggling any more so than with any other used gear, especially when so much of their used inventory is already in poor shape. I think a lot of customers would love to buy the amp as is for a fair price that GC could still make some money on.
Oh well, I'll move the amp elsewhere. It just seemed like a strange application of what's a reasonable policy in many other contexts. Thoughts?