Interesting read: LEs Paul burst 1960 found in South Africa

kapepper · 2012-05-10T09:05:36+00:00

Hi guys Interesting link regarding a Les Paul burst 1960, found in South Africa.... http://www.lespaulforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=178642 More pictures there, but it looks the original owner put those horrible Ibanez seventies tuners on it LOL The most amazing thing to for me is that you can still find these are in South Africa, next to a lot of other great gear. And since we are far away from everywhere, there is still a lot of good stuff under the South African bed ?)

ZarK

If this guitar was purchased for under $45k and is now available at $200k - $260k (as stated in the original thread), I believe the person who got screwed the most by far is the original seller... If these figures are correct, to me it borders on theft...

Jevon

My two cents.... if your dealing with a 50-100k $ deal then get everything in writing.... on another note, If I had 100k I would have bought this http://www.ebay.com/itm/Spitzer-Collection-90-Rare-Vintage-Collectable-Instruments-/270917093648?pt=Guitar&hash=item3f13eac910]

Way more interesting imho

vic

flatfourfan wrote whoa...............totally awesome thread.........

The thing is, you just KNOW that the guy who wanted to buy it shot out a lowball offer and was thinking at the end of the day he's gonna make a freaking fortune when he sells it on.

Two imaginary scenarios..... ?

A. FFF contacts Vic to check out an article (on which he'd already made an offer which was accepted by the seller) on his behalf down here in Stellenbosch. Vic agrees and checks it out but decides this is such a good deal,he'd rather buy it for himself. FFF contacts Vic to hear of the outcome, but Vic ignores him and ends all communication.

B. FFF contacts Vic to check out an article (on which he'd already made an offer which was accepted by the owner) for him down here in Stellenbosch. Vic tells FFF he is aware of this article (and its location) and would also be interested in it .....and as a result it would be a conflict of interests if he checks it out

In any of the scenarios A or B, is the issue of making a potential profit by whoever of any significance ?

makepeace

ZarK wrote If this guitar was purchased for under $45k and is now available at $200k - $260k (as stated in the original thread), I believe the person who got screwed the most by far is the original seller... If these figures are correct, to me it borders on theft...

To a seller, something is only worth what he/she can get for it.

Tokai-SA

Jevon wrote My two cents.... if your dealing with a 50-100k $ deal then get everything in writing

No need.
Diamond dealers do deals everyday without anything being in 'writing'...if you agree to buy the diamond you say one word, "mazel", and the contract is done.
In the diamond business, "a man's reputation and his word mean everything".

In fact, an agreement accepted by both parties VIA E MAIL, is admissible in court, the e mail is the evidence of the agreement...and, a verbal agreement is also admissible in court.

I guess you have to have the money to go to court. ?

kapepper

Vic wrote
flatfourfan wrote whoa...............totally awesome thread.........

The thing is, you just KNOW that the guy who wanted to buy it shot out a lowball offer and was thinking at the end of the day he's gonna make a freaking fortune when he sells it on.
Two imaginary scenarios..... ?

A. FFF contacts Vic to check out an article (on which he'd already made an offer which was accepted by the seller) on his behalf down here in Stellenbosch. Vic agrees and checks it out but decides this is such a good deal,he'd rather buy it for himself. FFF contacts Vic to hear of the outcome, but Vic ignores him and ends all communication.

B. FFF contacts Vic to check out an article (on which he'd already made an offer which was accepted by the owner) for him down here in Stellenbosch. Vic tells FFF he is aware of this article (and its location) and would also be interested in it .....and as a result it would be a conflict of interests if he checks it out

In any of the scenarios A or B, is the issue of making a potential profit by whoever of any significance ?

but where leaves that the third party, in this case Mark Grace?
He is not breaching any sales agreement....
Isn't this between the seller and the US buyer?

vic

kapepper wrote
Vic wrote
flatfourfan wrote whoa...............totally awesome thread.........

The thing is, you just KNOW that the guy who wanted to buy it shot out a lowball offer and was thinking at the end of the day he's gonna make a freaking fortune when he sells it on.
Two imaginary scenarios..... ?

A. FFF contacts Vic to check out an article (on which he'd already made an offer which was accepted by the seller) on his behalf down here in Stellenbosch. Vic agrees and checks it out but decides this is such a good deal,he'd rather buy it for himself. FFF contacts Vic to hear of the outcome, but Vic ignores him and ends all communication.

B. FFF contacts Vic to check out an article (on which he'd already made an offer which was accepted by the owner) for him down here in Stellenbosch. Vic tells FFF he is aware of this article (and its location) and would also be interested in it .....and as a result it would be a conflict of interests if he checks it out

In any of the scenarios A or B, is the issue of making a potential profit by whoever of any significance ?
but where leaves that the third party, in this case Mark Grace?
He is not breaching any sales agreement....
Isn't this between the seller and the US buyer?

It all depends on the available documentation....emails in this case. And any court will insist on this. Here and in the USA (a jury) will interogate scenarios A, B, etc. mentioned.
If scenario A can be proved both the "alternative" buyer and the seller could be ruled to be at fault (what would a reasonable person have done, or how would a reasonable person have acted under the circumstances).
In case of scenario B, clearly only the seller could be ruled to be at fault provided there was (preferably) a written offer from the US buyer and acceptance of that offer by the seller.

(I'm only speculating of course ? )

ZarK

makepeace wrote To a seller, something is only worth what he/she can get for it.

Exactly. Offering less than 1/4 - 1/5 of the value of such a scarce and valuable item doesn't sit right with me -to put it mildly...

vic

ZarK wrote
makepeace wrote To a seller, something is only worth what he/she can get for it.
Exactly. Offering less than 1/4 - 1/5 of the value of such a scarce and valuable item doesn't sit right with me -to put it mildly...

Bear in mind that the seller originally wanted $100k but was offered around $45k (?). This he accepted. But now it would appear that the "seller" was not the "owner" at the time when MG was asked to clinch the deal on behalf of the US buyer.. ??? ???..

StefStoep

I have read the thread on the LPforum and something isn't cool with this deal!

I'm not gonna point a finger but some one got screwed!

Nice guitar though!

makepeace

ZarK wrote
makepeace wrote To a seller, something is only worth what he/she can get for it.
Exactly. Offering less than 1/4 - 1/5 of the value of such a scarce and valuable item doesn't sit right with me -to put it mildly...

Vic wrote
ZarK wrote
makepeace wrote To a seller, something is only worth what he/she can get for it.
Exactly. Offering less than 1/4 - 1/5 of the value of such a scarce and valuable item doesn't sit right with me -to put it mildly...
Bear in mind that the seller originally wanted $100k but was offered around $45k (?). This he accepted. But now it would appear that the "seller" was not the "owner" at the time when MG was asked to clinch the deal on behalf of the US buyer.. ??? ???..

+1.

But as I see it, that's a bone between the 'seller' and the 'owner' and centers around if the 'owner' gave permission to the 'seller' to accept offers.

deefstes

OK, there's something I find very funny in all of this. The original would be buyer says that he agreed to buy the guitar from Braam v.d. Westhuizen and Joe Slovo. Joe Slovo?!?! Really?!?!

If I'm about to surrender $45k to two guys in a country halfway across the world, the first thing I would do is to type their names into Google or have a bit of a look see on Facebook.

But then, as I was reading through the MyLP thread, I found this exchange of e-mails that the original would be buyer posted and it all made sense to me. See if you can spot the mistake ?

=========================================
From: Clay [mailto:cfh@provide.net]
To: Braam Van Der Westhuizen
Sent: Sep 22, 2011 04:39:36 PM
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Les Paul # 0 7453

do you ever come to New York City?

Sep 22, 2011 10:03:33 AM, braam.autoworld@telkomsa.net wrote:

===========================================

Joe Slovo 3 Klerksdorp South Africa

-----Original Message-----
From: Clay [mailto:cfh@provide.net]
Sent: 22 September 2011 03:55 PM
To: Braam Van Der Westhuizen
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Les Paul # 0 7453

Ok great!
Where are you located?

Sent from my Samsung Replenish

Braam Van Der Westhuizen wrote:

>Clay
>
>I spoke to my friend who is a co owner in this guitar, and we dicided to accept your offer of $45000
>Let me know the procedures from here
>
>Thanks
>Braam
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: cfh@provide.net [mailto:cfh@provide.net]
>Sent: 22 September 2011 12:18 PM
>To: braam.autoworld@telkomsa.net
>Subject: Re: RE: RE: Les Paul # 0 7453
>
>i can't help at that level.
>if the guitar didn't have those
>changed tuners and the gibson logo
>stuck on the top, that would make
>things better. the neck profile turns
>off a lot of guys, me included. the
>bright red sunburst too. early 1960
>models (pre serial 0_2000) do much
>better.
>
>
>Sep 22, 2011 06:14:17 AM, braam.autoworld@telkomsa.net wrote:
>
>===========================================
>
>I thought closer to $100000
>Please let me know
>Thanks Braam
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: cfh@provide.net [mailto:cfh@provide.net]
>Sent: 21 September 2011 09:51 PM
>To: braam.autoworld@telkomsa.net
>Subject: Re: RE: Les Paul # 0 7453
>
>guitar looks good, but a couple things going
>against it. one it's a very late 1960 with the
>thin neck profile. not my favorite neck style.
>also the "gibson" logo on the face isn't a good
>thing. nor are the replacement tuners. hence
>my offer is $45,000.
>thanks clay
>
>
>Sep 21, 2011 09:16:02 AM, braam.autoworld@telkomsa.net wrote:
>
>===========================================
>
>Attached is the photos of the guitar.
>
>I have seen on a webpage that these guitars are highly collectable, and is worth a lot.
>
>Give me a offer.
>
>Braam
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: cfh@provide.net [mailto:cfh@provide.net]
>Sent: 21 September 2011 01:26 PM
>To: braam.autoworld@telkomsa.net
>Subject: Re: Les Paul # 0 7453
>
>ok sounds good. can you email a front and back picture?
>also did you have a price in mind?
>thanks clay
>
>
>Sep 21, 2011 07:22:26 AM, braam.autoworld@telkomsa.net wrote:
>
>===========================================
>
>
>Good day
>
>
>
>I have a 1960 Gibson Les Paul serial nr: 0 7453, that I wantto sell
>
>
>
>Braam

Too funny. ?

AlanRatcliffe

Everyone has the Joe Slovo Thing wrong. Read from bottom to top and you realise that that is an address in response to being asked "Where are you?". #3 Joe Slovo Road, Klerksdorp (or Joe Slovo 3 if you are Afrikaans speaking). That is the address of Autoworld in Klerksdorp, which ties in with the email address for Braam.

Kalcium

I read the posts of the 3 people involved on the MyLP forum and from what I can gather it seems like Braam was just a guy trying to make a quick buck. It looks like Braam was gonna buy the guitar for lets say $20k, then sell the guitar to the US buyer (Clay) for $45k. The US guys only spoke to Braam and never with the owner himself. In the emails between MG and the US buyers friend (Clay's friend) MG clearly indicates he doesn't mind going to get the guitar for them because he is going there already to look at a 60 Burst and a strat etc. This was before the US guy gave out a number or address. The US guys think the 60 burst he mentioned here was a different guitar (A plaintop which MG did know about and had tried to sell to the US guys) but I think it was actually the same 60 burst since MG had the contact of the orginal owner, not Braam. The US guys knew only Braams contact details and if Braam was a middle man as I assumed him to be, he wouldn't be keen on giving the owners details to MG since he would lose out of the profit he was going to make, so I think MG got the owners details of his own means and was on his way to check it out for himself before the US guys asked him to check out 'a guitar'.
I think the US guys assume the 60 burst he was going to see was the plaintop burst when actually it was the flametop burst in question and so the US guys assume he only knew about the flametop burst from them and stole their deal, when in fact he actually knew of the flametop burst and was already on his way to see it, hence the "im already going to JHB to see a 60 burst so its not an issue to go check out the guitar that is yet to be specified for you guys"
Just 1 possible interpretation which would mean a misunderstanding and both parties assuming they are correct

kapepper

Kalcium wrote I read the posts of the 3 people involved on the MyLP forum and from what I can gather it seems like Braam was just a guy trying to make a quick buck. It looks like Braam was gonna buy the guitar for lets say $20k, then sell the guitar to the US buyer (Clay) for $45k. The US guys only spoke to Braam and never with the owner himself. In the emails between MG and the US buyers friend (Clay's friend) MG clearly indicates he doesn't mind going to get the guitar for them because he is going there already to look at a 60 Burst and a strat etc. This was before the US guy gave out a number or address. The US guys think the 60 burst he mentioned here was a different guitar (A plaintop which MG did know about and had tried to sell to the US guys) but I think it was actually the same 60 burst since MG had the contact of the orginal owner, not Braam. The US guys knew only Braams contact details and if Braam was a middle man as I assumed him to be, he wouldn't be keen on giving the owners details to MG since he would lose out of the profit he was going to make, so I think MG got the owners details of his own means and was on his way to check it out for himself before the US guys asked him to check out 'a guitar'.
I think the US guys assume the 60 burst he was going to see was the plaintop burst when actually it was the flametop burst in question and so the US guys assume he only knew about the flametop burst from them and stole their deal, when in fact he actually knew of the flametop burst and was already on his way to see it, hence the "im already going to JHB to see a 60 burst so its not an issue to go check out the guitar that is yet to be specified for you guys"
Just 1 possible interpretation which would mean a misunderstanding and both parties assuming they are correct

Kalcium....Makes sense what you are saying. How many more bursts are there in SA ?

On the side: In a few years this is a movie by the Coen brothers.
And Braam will def be played by Steve Buscemi.....

LooneyAtTheGate

Ha definitely!
This is more exciting than James Bond and Pulp Fiction rolled into one! Can't wait for the movie to come out!
And there's a zombie Joe Slovo rocking out on a Gibson, how cool is that? ?

makepeace

Kalcium wrote I read the posts of the 3 people involved on the MyLP forum and from what I can gather it seems like Braam was just a guy trying to make a quick buck.

Sorry to ruin the party. But how the something can you can you make that kind of assumption? There is absolutely no backing for that except perhaps possibly this:

Braam:

I spoke to my friend who is a co owner in this guitar, and we dicided to accept your offer of $45000

Which doesn't back it at all, unless you're assuming Braam is a liar from the get go. Have you ever met, spoken to or smelled Braam?

Sure dude, it might seem possible - anything's possible. But you shouldn't go around making those kind of assumptions about people and putting them out on a public forum, where they have no means to defend themselves. I mean you sound convinced.

deefstes

Alan Ratcliffe wrote Everyone has the Joe Slovo Thing wrong. Read from bottom to top and you realise that that is an address in response to being asked "Where are you?". #3 Joe Slovo Road, Klerksdorp (or Joe Slovo 3 if you are Afrikaans speaking). That is the address of Autoworld in Klerksdorp, which ties in with the email address for Braam.

Exactly

Kalcium wrote I read the posts of the 3 people involved on the MyLP forum and from what I can gather it seems like Braam was just a guy trying to make a quick buck. It looks like Braam was gonna buy the guitar for lets say $20k, then sell the guitar to the US buyer (Clay) for $45k. The US guys only spoke to Braam and never with the owner himself. In the emails between MG and the US buyers friend (Clay's friend) MG clearly indicates he doesn't mind going to get the guitar for them because he is going there already to look at a 60 Burst and a strat etc. This was before the US guy gave out a number or address. The US guys think the 60 burst he mentioned here was a different guitar (A plaintop which MG did know about and had tried to sell to the US guys) but I think it was actually the same 60 burst since MG had the contact of the orginal owner, not Braam. The US guys knew only Braams contact details and if Braam was a middle man as I assumed him to be, he wouldn't be keen on giving the owners details to MG since he would lose out of the profit he was going to make, so I think MG got the owners details of his own means and was on his way to check it out for himself before the US guys asked him to check out 'a guitar'.
I think the US guys assume the 60 burst he was going to see was the plaintop burst when actually it was the flametop burst in question and so the US guys assume he only knew about the flametop burst from them and stole their deal, when in fact he actually knew of the flametop burst and was already on his way to see it, hence the "im already going to JHB to see a 60 burst so its not an issue to go check out the guitar that is yet to be specified for you guys"
Just 1 possible interpretation which would mean a misunderstanding and both parties assuming they are correct

That is how I also interpreted the whole thing. At first I was very unimpressed with Mark Grace's despicable behaviour but, as I read through all of the messages (and yes, I spent the better half of last night doing that), I started seeing that the picture was very different from what Fred (the original would be buyer) painted.

It would seem that Mark Grace knew about this guitar before Clay had even contacted him to act as local agent. They hadn't even put him in touch with Braam yet by the time he had already sealed the deal, not with Braam but with the real owner of the guitar.

The way I see it, Mark bought this guitar fair and square and got himself a magnificent deal by the looks of it. The Fred character has sour grapes and now he's embarking on a smear campaign. But come on! The fact that he knew of the guitar's existence does not give him first dibs on the deal. He didn't even know who the owner of the guitar was (it wasn't Braam and it sure as heck wasn't Joe Slovo!) Naah, I'm not convinced that he deserved to get this guitar so all's well that ends well and he should suck it up and get on with his life.

Of course I'd recant all of the above if the assumption is false that Mark knew of the guitar prior to being told of it by Clay. It does bother me though that it would seem as if all the parties involved here (Mark, Clay and his US friend) appear to be very economical with the truth. They are posting private e-mail exchanges on open fora that paint a certain picture but it would seem they're leaving out other exchanges that paints a different picture. But these selective truths seem to have started in the negotiations for the sale already. Braam referring to a co-owner of the guitar when it seems that he wasn't even a co-owner himself. Clay strategically misleading Mark as to the type of guitar in question. etc.

But really, if I was in Mark's shoes, and if the above is indeed accurate, I would have reacted with much vigour to the very first allegation that was leveled, with something along these lines:
"WHOAAAAH buddy, those are some serious allegations when that is nothing like what happened. I knew of this guitar before you guys had even contacted me, that's why I was flying up to JHB in the first place. Braam is not the owner of the guitar, Joe Slovo is his address, not his silent partner, and you were being misled by Braam or by your US friend or by both. The guitar wasn't Braam's to sell and whatever agreement you had with him is irrelevant. And only after I had bought the guitar that I went up to JHB for in the first place, did Clay eventually give me the contact details for Braam."

Shall I just say, I get the impression Mark is innocent here but I do get the impression he could have killed this whole storm before it even started by splashing the whole truth all over post 2 in that thread.

deefstes

makepeace wrote
Kalcium wrote I read the posts of the 3 people involved on the MyLP forum and from what I can gather it seems like Braam was just a guy trying to make a quick buck.
Sorry to ruin the party. But how the something can you can you make that kind of assumption? There is absolutely no backing for that except perhaps possibly this:

Braam:
I spoke to my friend who is a co owner in this guitar, and we dicided to accept your offer of $45000
Which doesn't back it at all, unless you're assuming Braam is a liar from the get go. Have you ever met, spoken to or smelled Braam?

Sure dude, it might seem possible - anything's possible. But you shouldn't go around making those kind of assumptions about people and putting them out on a public forum, where they have no means to defend themselves. I mean you sound convinced.

Jeepers makepeace, do you know Braam or know more about the sale that you are reacting so vigorously? I don't think Kalcium "sound convinced". He made it very clear that it was merely his interpretation. And unfortunately the whole story, after MANY pages of discussion, there are still huge gaps in what we actually know, not least of which is Braam's true involvement in the whole deal. So yes, we are left with having to make assumptions.

What we do know is that:
1. Braam was trying to sell a guitar to Clay and he was having Clay believe that he is at least a co-owner of the guitar. Admittedly, he never said so in as many words but what exactly does "I spoke to my friend who is a co owner in this guitar, and we dicided to accept your offer of $45000" mean?
2. Mark made it clear that Braam was not the owner of the guitar.

So I have not met, spoken to or smelled Braam either but I am smelling a rat.

makepeace

Jeepers makepeace, do you know Braam or know more about the sale that you are reacting so vigorously?

Don't know what I'm supposed to do with that, but thanks for assuming that I have some kind of involvement in this just because of a tone of voice you think I used to type with.

And unfortunately the whole story, after MANY pages of discussion, there are still huge gaps in what we actually know, not least of which is Braam's true involvement in the whole deal. So yes, we are left with having to make assumptions.

Why? What good can come of that? Do you need an answer that badly that you need to try and come up with one? It's someone else's business, and has already been discussed to death. I also can't believe that with all the to and fro that has gone on between the other three that they are now assumed to be correct - seems implausible based on their tales of the story.

what exactly does "I spoke to my friend who is a co owner in this guitar, and we dicided to accept your offer of $45000" mean?

Neither of us will most likely ever know the answer to that. So whats the point in assuming and making wild judgements?

All I'm saying is you shouldn't go around defaming people just because it seems like a fun thing to do or an interesting/sensational thing to talk about. I certainly did not enjoy reading all of that rubbish in that thread from the peanut gallery, and it left me making serious judgements..

« Previous Page Next Page »