billhinge wrote:

This site uses affiliate links for which we may be compensated

Rare Tolkien Books: First Edition Collector Bundle - Lord of the Rings (8/7/7)

314488027252

Seller: rarebooksasgifts

(274)

Ended Mar 31, 2023

This item ended more than 90 days ago

Removed by me

Dagoth wrote:

Not impressed at all for a $3000 starting bid. A lot of foxing and stains. Certainly not one of the “most vibrant ever”.

Dealers can be prone to a bit of hyperbole, but I do think in this case the seller was careful to say "that I have ever seen". Are you arguing that they have seen a more vibrant set? Compared to most sets that I have seen, this has great topstain (which is what the seller is calling vibrant), and the boards as pictures look fine (ie better than "very good"), and yes the jackets have some staining, but the seller calls that out. There's no misdirection or masking or sophistication going on here, so I don't think listing this warrants your repudiation.

I think everyone here knows that not all sets are perfect. If a "hens teeth" perfect set does come on the market, it will end up selling for £100,000 or more. You are going to be extremely busy if you keep pointing out all the non-perfect sets in the world.

Removed by me

billhinge wrote:

This site uses affiliate links for which we may be compensated

Rare Tolkien Books: First Edition Collector Bundle - Lord of the Rings (8/7/7)

314488027252

Seller: rarebooksasgifts

(274)

Ended Mar 31, 2023

This item ended more than 90 days ago

A nice set, though I think this is expensive for these editions, I would want earlier editions for this price.

Dagoth wrote:

Someone who doesn’t really know what an amazing set actually looks like will gobble that up.

Why do you care? How is your comment helpful? Anyone with eyes can see what you have pointed out. Regardless of how a seller may frame a description, if someone is looking for particular item and it meets their search criteria and they have taken into account the age and wear that 99% of these books have been subject to, why should they have to read your negative comments about a set in good condition for it's age?

Dagoth wrote:

Everyone is able to make their own decision whether they think its condition meets their criteria so

That's right they are, and if you don't have anything constructive to contribute or point out about an item perhaps you should keep your comments to yourself.

Also I’m wondering how a 5th fellowship jacket ended up on an 8th book? I know they reused jackets supposedly, but that doesn’t seem to be the case here. For instance, my 10th two towers has an 11th jacket. I’m guessing sometime over the years the jacket got replaced? Curious.

Dagoth wrote:

but that doesn’t seem to be the case here.

How do you know? What evidence do you have to make this claim?

Mr. Underhill wrote:

Dagoth wrote:

but that doesn’t seem to be the case here.

How do you know? What evidence do you have to make this claim?

I don’t which is why I’m asking. I just think it unlikely a 1957 jacket was reused for a 1959 book. But then again anything can happen. The keyword there was “seem”.

Dagoth wrote:

Also I’m wondering how a 5th fellowship jacket ended up on an 8th book? I know they reused jackets supposedly, but that doesn’t seem to be the case here. For instance, my 10th two towers has an 11th jacket. I’m guessing sometime over the years the jacket got replaced? Curious.

Equally as curious as the 1st. impression FoTR on for sale at £6.5K but with a 5th impression DJ, must have sat in the shop a long time.

On the other hand I have a 2nd and 4th impression Two Towers but with one good quality 3rd impression DJ between them, how did that happen