Hi MAF, The theory of your argument is (as far as I'm concerned) undisputed, but I do want to query some of your wording?.. "unfounded"? "based without foundation"? When I come to buying my next car, what do I need to do (in between everything else that occupies my life) to be on a firm foundation without doing what Adam has done and indeed what dickygrace has done?
Yes in an ideal situation each and every buyer would view each and every car that a) they are emotionally attracted to, b) meets their requirements and c) can afford, and therefore arm themselves with each and every actual factor they choose to use as measurement before deciding their impression of any appropriate examples value, but for most life doesn't allow for this and so they rely on key indicators, and yes we're talking about key indicators someone else has decided upon, but we're talking about key indicators that have driven the used market for many decades, whether related to cars or other items offered for sale (a house is another good example).
It seems (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that if I follow your argument, Pistonheads classified would be a generic model description, and a price; nothing more. No photo's, no mention of condition and care, no mention of usage or location, storage, modification, mileage, age, etc, etc, as these are all key indicators that could lead to a misconstrued impression of value prior to actual viewing and therefore a potentially unfair pre-selection?
I do have to say that, in real-life terms, I see no issue in the comments Adam made, as I know he keeps a keen eye on the market indicators, albeit predominantly internet driven I assume, but isn't this true of almost all of us?
As for sharing his views on the forum, then yes this demands common courtesy, but taking that as read, isn't that the purpose and nature of a forum?
Cheers, Miles.
