Jump to content

Contact RHINO MODELWORK


Recommended Posts

Playing the devils advocate here but if you havnt seen his stuff how do you know it has been copied the Dmold version.

Is Dmold the only person in the world with the ability to do resin intakes?

If so you better take a look around as plenty of F4 intakes have been done by several manufacturers..as well as Hornets etc.

Seems to me that anyone who does there own unique work is likely to be labeled a pirate simply because everyone is modelling the same thing.

IE If everyone did accurate intakes then everyone could accuse each other of piracy..IE whats to stop mister Rhino from accusing Dmold of pirating his work??

I made that point in a post earlier. If a master maker is using the exact references, and has the same ability to make them as well as the other person doing that item, you can run into this issue.

However, I also stated that we know the good guys,, and know some of the ones that are ripping off the hard work of the good guys.

Maybe this guy could show some of his building up of prototypes. I can do that, and I know the other guys can do the same if there are any questions.

Cheers,

Harold

Edited by Harold
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not my post. This is the post on same subject, but from another forum. I'm jut citing:

There are many approaches to doing masters from CAD/STL, 1 to 1 referencing, modifying and correction kit parts, to flat out just copying one kit part to correct another

So, if someone used HB intakes for example to do that, is he a copycat? It is very hard to legaly prove that somebody made a copy of somebody else parts. What is the tolerance in production process? If we get 20 samples of the same intake of the same manufacturer, are you sure that all these will be the same? If somebody produce the perfectly correct nose cone for Su-27 and if I develop my own nose cone to be the perfectly accurate as well, would it be normal that both nose cones should be the same or at least very similar? Or is there a rule that one who produce the first, owns the right to that product?

Just for example:

You were used the original Hasegawa intakes as a base for producing of yours and you have made some corrections. If I take yours for a base and if I make corrections, am I a copycat and you are not? In that case, you have a right to use somebody else work to make your own product and I do not have?

I have never produced any resin parts, except when I have experimented with that and I have made couple of parts just to prove to myself that I am capable to do that. But I wonder if I started to produce parts and at one moment somebody think that I stole his work, what my reaction would be?

It is very simple, order the parts and pay for them if you want to check and compare with yours. I do not understand at all, why Dimitri insisted on free samples when he was able to by the one he wanted to check? In that case, he would have some arguments to enter discussion with Rhino owner.

In this way, you guys blaming somebody and his work and we have to trust you on what evidences? It is not fair. And what if at the end, he proves that these are their own, authentic and self designed products? Who will compensate him the bad words and accusation expressed publicly on different forums?

Actually, a lot of sense. Why you Dimitri didn't simply buy these products and compare these? Using the laser shape reader you could create the exact replica of samples in CAD software and it will facilitate the process of comparing the samples.But if these Rhino products are just the copy of other manufacturers products, then the quality should be much worst, aren't it? You owns the master and if he was able to use your, comparing to master, not so perfect parts to make his own parts. So it is obvious that the quality have to be much worst. But in the case that he was used your parts to make his own master, what then?

If you have used the original manufacturers kit's part to make your own master, are you the plagiarist then?

And I would like to add... he don't need to prove anything, burden of evidence is on you. And if you, at the end fail to prove that his products are direct copy of yours, what then?

Edited by bungynik
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, it is really tough to do anything without using something to start with. Especially if you do it the old school way. (like I do)

I have used kit parts to get a start on, say, intakes. I want them to FIT. It takes a long time and a lot of rubber and resin (and WORK) before I feel they are close to being ready.

Unfortunately some people just don't care about that. I have seen things on ebay that are direct copies of others and my resin.

I know because I bought them and compared them to my masters, After I determined they were copies, (the casting blocks had a distinct attachment point) I contacted ebay. They stopped for a while and then returned with "new" resin that was copied from others.

Trouble is, I PAID them for the copied parts to be able to protect myself. I felt violated!

Most of the things came from south of the border.

Some came from Texas.

I guess it is just one of the things we must deal with in this industry.

Harold

Edited by Harold
Link to post
Share on other sites

Harold, it is actually very hard to prove that somebody have infringed your copyrights (if you copyrighted your product). According to copyright attorneys 20% change is mainly enough not to have a case. A copyright infringement is not something you can pop into small claims court about. The minimum award is $250,000 if I remember. So we are talking big money for court costs and lawyers. If you get ripped off by someone without enough money to pay and sue them, you'll end up paying the costs anyway. And all this you can start in case that you have copyrighted your product.

Edited by bungynik
Link to post
Share on other sites

Harold, it is actually very hard to prove that somebody have infringed your copyrights (if you copyrighted your product). According to copyright attorneys 20% change is mainly enough not to have a case. A copyright infringement is not something you can pop into small claims court about. The minimum award is $250,000 if I remember. So we are talking big money for court costs and lawyers. If you get ripped off by someone without enough money to pay and sue them, you'll end up paying the costs anyway. And all this you can start in case that you have copyrighted your product.

Yep, that is why I said it is just something we have to deal with.

There are several things about copyrights, if you just post your work anywhere, it is then YOUR work, and it is automatically copyrighted, however, if anyone copies it, you have to take action, that is where the cost come in.

The other way, is to actually apply for and pay for each part you do. It has an official copyright listed with the GOV, then you can have an automatic law suite if someone copies it...with the GOV's blessing.

Copyrights are passed on and are usually good for 75 years. I need to go back to check if anything has changed though.

Here it is:

http://copyright.gov/title17/

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not my post. This is the post on same subject, but from another forum. I'm jut citing:

As long as you are quoting from the other forum you really should have included the quote from Mike V of Sierra Hotel:
If you or anyone else hasn’t noticed, just about every intake product Rhino models has put out just so happens to mimic the former Cutting Edge’s intakes; right down to the scale. Not too long ago a couple of other modelers and I made some comparisons of Rhino and CE intakes; specifically the 32nd F-18, F-4, 48th F-4, and 48th A-7 intakes. The Rhino intakes have signs of CE’s intake casting flaws and some definitive details in for the form of scratches, notching, and or shaping. Rhino did make changes to CE’s work, like adding a NLG wheel well to the A-7 intake and the intake mouth and very-ramp for the Legacy Hornet intakes, but that still does make it right
If the Rhino parts have the same sanding scratches don't you think it's pretty obvious they are copies?

He mentions that Rhino has made changes to Cutting Edge's parts such as adding a wheel well to the A-7 intake.

I wonder where they got the gear well?

I bought a few months ago the Rhino seamless for the A-7 corsair II, and I noticed that the wheel bay is an exact copy of the Aires (I have the wheel bay set), but I do not know the rest of the trunk ..

So we've got a cutting edge intake mated with an Aires wheel well sold by Rhino as an original part?

I can't understand why any of you are defending them or arguing against what looks like obvious piracy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, you can apply to, but it is not certain that you will be able to copyright your product. There are strict rules and requirements to be met if you want to copyright your product.

WHO ARE DEFENDING HIM? Do I have to believe to you or to anybody else, just because you say that it is the copy? I didn't say, not for the single moment, that it has copied or not somebody else work! I have just asked the simple questions and I didn't get an answer:

If you have used the original manufacturers kit's part to make your own master, are you the plagiarist then?

And I quoted the post because of this sentences especialy:

If somebody produce the perfectly correct nose cone for Su-27 and if I develop my own nose cone to be the perfectly accurate as well, would it be normal that both nose cones should be the same or at least very similar? Or is there a rule that one who produce the first, owns the right to that product?
You were used the original Hasegawa intakes as a base for producing of yours and you have made some corrections. If I take yours for a base and if I make corrections, am I a copycat and you are not? In that case, you have a right to use somebody else work to make your own product and I do not have?

So please, answer me these question. At the end, if any of the guys that have feeling that they are robed, he could take the detail macro photos of problematic parts and posted it alongside with photos of his own products. And of course they could do some measurements and to present us the results of these measurements so we can compare the products. It is not so hard to do that if you have intention to stand behind your claims.

As I stated "Using the laser shape reader you could create the exact replica of samples in CAD software and it will facilitate the process of comparing the samples.". Then, I could tell you my opinion.

Otherwise, it is just his words against somebody whose word we didn't have opportunity to hear until now. If I say that Maker is a thief and he stole me money, is it normal that all forum members believe in my words, just because I have wrote that? Please, this is not the kids play, so you should chose the side because you like somebody more than another... this is something that everybody not involved directly, should be careful and not to express opinion or to claim something without a single evidence.

Edited by bungynik
Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, a lot of sense. Why you Dimitri didn't simply buy these products and compare these?

My ethics does allow me to pay a thief NO one cent. A sence of this thread is to explain that the things which are being sold on ebay under Rhino Modelworks trademark are nothing else than just stolen articles from another producers. If you are ready to pay such persons, OK. I'm not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My ethics does allow me to pay a thief NO one cent. A sence of this thread is to explain that the things which are being sold on ebay under Rhino Modelworks trademark are nothing else than just stolen articles from another producers. If you are ready to pay such persons, OK. I'm not.

That was why I said I felt violated when I actually paid for resin copies of my own work from someone on ebay.

If there is enough voices letting the Rhino producer know, we would appreciate some photos of his/hers/it's, in process build ups, we would feel better about the products.

All I hear from Rhino is crickets.

Harold

Edited by Harold
Link to post
Share on other sites

My ethics does allow me to pay a thief NO one cent. A sence of this thread is to explain that the things which are being sold on ebay under Rhino Modelworks trademark are nothing else than just stolen articles from another producers. If you are ready to pay such persons, OK. I'm not.

Yes, you are spreading the word, but still you are not ready to show us not a single evidence of your claims. What's more, as I can see, you actualy didn't have a chance to hold these parts in your hand, but you are still spreading the words... it would be nice if your words have some foundation. So until you don't prove that he is guilty, he is innocent in my eyes. It is not on him to prove your accusations but on you. At least, it was the way in normal times.

And please, how do you know that he is a thief before you have a chance to see the samples? If yo know that he is a thief, then your request for parts is without any sense, because even without that you know what you know... isn't it? You KNOW that he is a thief, so I don't see the reason for parts request.

The part request would have a sense if you have some suspicions about his work and you needed his parts to make a final proof, everything else is senseless.

Give us the irrefutable evidences and I will support you fully and unreservedly.

Edited by bungynik
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to make a couple of points here.

Patterns made form injection kit part vs. patterns made from modified aftermarket parts:

It doesn't hurt the plastic company but it kills the aftermarket company.

There's a big difference here in my mind between modifying an original kit part and selling it and modifying an aftermarket part and selling it.

If I modify a Trumpeter part, improve upon it, make molds and sell a copy to you, you would still need to buy the Trumpeter kit to use my part. Trumpeter still makes 100% of their profit for their hard work.

If somebody copies and sells my part, modified or not, then I am making 0% profit, even though it was my hard work that made the original pattern.

To me it's a matter of ethics. Copyright law might allow someone to purchase and modify a competitors aftermarket part but it's just wrong...

I have no idea who is telling the truth, who is ripping who off. It's a he said she said ordeal at this point for me.
As posted above, Mike V says that he (with others) made a comparison and determined that the parts are copies. His word is good as gold to me.

Mike has a good eye for detail and says he positively identified details such as "the same casting flaws, scratches, notches and shapes". That can not be defended.

As Harold has suggested, the best way possible to defend yourself from a piracy accusation is to show pictures of your patterns in-progress.

Let's see if that happens...

:cheers:

Link to post
Share on other sites

As posted above, Mike V says that he (with others) made a comparison and determined that the parts are copies. His word is good as gold to me.

Mike has a good eye for detail and says he positively identified details such as "the same casting flaws, scratches, notches and shapes". That can not be defended.

As Harold has suggested, the best way possible to defend yourself from a piracy accusation is to show pictures of your patterns in-progress.

Let's see if that happens...

:cheers:

Well, if yo know Mike personally, it is on you to trust his judgement, but he is the one who have interest in all that, isn't it? The classical conflict of interest. But it is not on the Rhino guy to defend himself! If you want a case, collect the evidences! If I was he, I wouldn't care to react on all this, not for a single moment. Words are not evidence. And what if we see that he is clean at the end... who will have to wash prosecutors mouths for "spreading the words"? Spreading of the knowledge, photos, measurements and any other proof is the only valid thing. He is selling his resin for a long time and I just don't buy it that nobody do not have, not a single valid evidence to present to us... just the words!

Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. If I want to protect my business I will invest in protection, which means that I will buy the suspicious parts and I will do my best to present the valid evidences for my claims. I will not act as offended child who does not want to play! I'm running my own private business now and it is on me to protect my business, not on someone else. I cant imagine to go to competitive company to ask for their products for free, with excuse that I want to prove that they are the thieves! :bandhead2:

It really sounds as a total nonsense and nebulous and I can not believe that anyone thinks that this is the correct way ... perhaps it is, but only in his head. So he have to pay you from his own pocket in order to protect your own business? :rofl: I would be quiet and I will buy the product, so if I am right than I would know what to do, but if I'm not than blame on me. But the way you guys are running this campain is completely wrong and inappropriate.

... One of our lawyer modelers happened to see the posting on this site, he informed me that he would be happy to take care of it for me. He also suggested I DON'T send the seat, they could easily copy it and then just say it was theirs to begin with. ...

Edited by bungynik
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if yo know Mike personally, it is on you to trust his judgement, but he is the one who have interest in all that, isn't it? The classical conflict of interest. But it is not on the Rhino guy to defend himself! If you want a case, collect the evidences! If I was he, I wouldn't care to react on all this, not for a single moment. Words are not evidence. And what if we see that he is clean at the end... who will have to wash prosecutors mouths for "spreading the words"? Spreading of the knowledge, photos, measurements and any other proof is the only valid thing. He is selling his resin for a long time and I just don't buy it that nobody do not have, not a single valid evidence to present to us... just the words!

Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. If I want to protect my business I will invest in protection, which means that I will buy the suspicious parts and I will do my best to present the valid evidences for my claims. I will not act as offended child who does not want to play! I'm running my own private business now and it is on me to protect my business, not on someone else. I cant imagine to go to competitive company to ask for their products for free, with excuse that I want to prove that they are the thieves! :bandhead2:

It really sounds as a total nonsense and nebulous and I can not believe that anyone thinks that this is the correct way ... perhaps it is, but only in his head. So he have to pay you from his own pocket in order to protect your own business? :rofl: I would be quiet and I will buy the product, so if I am right than I would know what to do, but if I'm not than blame on me. But the way you guys are running this campain is completely wrong and inappropriate.

I see both your point and Chris' point, however....I HAVE bought resin from ebay and found it a direct copy of my work. I did contact ebay and they did take it under consideration. That was all they did, however. It was action from my post here and on other forums that actually did the trick.

I also understand your comment about buying the part and not expecting a free sample to compare. That isn't how real life works.

As far as Chris believing the results of the comparisons, I would as well. I know who did the look see and I would trust him or Chris before I would anyone else. They both are some of the best master pattern makers and casters known to mankind..LOL

Harold

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see both your point and Chris' point, however....I HAVE bought resin from ebay and found it a direct copy of my work. I did contact ebay and they did take it under consideration. That was all they did, however. It was action from my post here and on other forums that actually did the trick.

I also understand your comment about buying the part and not expecting a free sample to compare. That isn't how real life works.

As far as Chris believing the results of the comparisons, I would as well. I know who did the look see and I would trust him or Chris before I would anyone else. They both are some of the best master pattern makers and casters known to mankind..LOL

Harold

Not to mention but those of us "smaller" (meaning not Aires/Eduard/CMK) type of producers tend to know each other and look out for one another whenever we see something fishy. I know Mike V personally, he started Two Mikes with me and I can attest that he is quite possibly the most detail oriented guy I have ever met. I trust his judgement beyond reproach. I think this thread is running its course as there are valid points made by all and it would be a shame to see it turn into a mudslinging match.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention but those of us "smaller" (meaning not Aires/Eduard/CMK) type of producers tend to know each other and look out for one another whenever we see something fishy. I know Mike V personally, he started Two Mikes with me and I can attest that he is quite possibly the most detail oriented guy I have ever met. I trust his judgement beyond reproach. I think this thread is running its course as there are valid points made by all and it would be a shame to see it turn into a mudslinging match.

Agreed!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to make a couple of points here.

Patterns made form injection kit part vs. patterns made from modified aftermarket parts:

It doesn't hurt the plastic company but it kills the aftermarket company.

There's a big difference here in my mind between modifying an original kit part and selling it and modifying an aftermarket part and selling it.

If I modify a Trumpeter part, improve upon it, make molds and sell a copy to you, you would still need to buy the Trumpeter kit to use my part. Trumpeter still makes 100% of their profit for their hard work.

If somebody copies and sells my part, modified or not, then I am making 0% profit, even though it was my hard work that made the original pattern.

To me it's a matter of ethics. Copyright law might allow someone to purchase and modify a competitors aftermarket part but it's just wrong...

As posted above, Mike V says that he (with others) made a comparison and determined that the parts are copies. His word is good as gold to me.

Mike has a good eye for detail and says he positively identified details such as "the same casting flaws, scratches, notches and shapes". That can not be defended.

As Harold has suggested, the best way possible to defend yourself from a piracy accusation is to show pictures of your patterns in-progress.

Let's see if that happens...

:cheers:

I think Chris sums up the whole situation. Rhinos sales killed D-Mold, and the part was copied.

Granted Dimitri should have bought the parts in question 1st, but as he mentioned he just found out about it.

I don't feel we (the small guys) need to justify our claim to the Modeling Police here on ARC, ARC is not the center of the Modeling world and Rhino may not even know it exists,and by doing this would also give opportunity for Rhino to modify or erase the identifying feature.

The micro management of what came 1st the part or the kit, without the kit there would be no need for the part, but the part made by the A/M company is that A/M company's work, granted a modified kit part in some cases,but it is not a remake/copy of the entire kit and does not hurt the parent companies sales.

The identification of the a/m part as Chris said, one knows their work, look at the group builds here, you are all starting out with the same kit, but no 2 are alike, most of these parts are made by hand, and although there are areas that do look the same the entire part cannot be duplicated exactly by another person.

Curt

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to delve too deep into this discussion but I think the method you're mentioning isn't the best thing for resin casting.

As I stated "Using the laser shape reader you could create the exact replica of samples in CAD software and it will facilitate the process of comparing the samples.". Then, I could tell you my opinion.

I don't doubt your knowledge about copyright laws, litigation and stuff, but let me add my 2cents.

First, purchasing an end user level laser scanner is already pretty expensive adding to that the cost of a 3D CAD program to analyze the results. Even so you need to be familiar with this program to do this comparison work. Someone that builds scale models or makes AM masters or even an sculptors doesn't by default turns into a computer 3D artist in a matter of seconds. On the other hand you'd find a company to do this work for you and even then their services are expensive, in the range of hundreds of dollars. Money that a lot of AM manufacturers can't afford since they work out from their garage, and barely survive selling their stuff.

Secondly, the laser scanner method is flawed if you try to match exactly the pirate copy to the master, in a sense because already comparing a 1st gen casting to the masters there's already tiny differences, more so in the pirated copy. Where do this differences come? This tiny differences comes from resin shrinkage which depending on manufacturer and quality can be from 0.5% to 5%!!! And the shrinkage it's not constant across the whole shape and don't mention other slight differences or warpage from the silicon molds since they are a soft material. All this tiny differences compound into bigger ones the further you go in the chain of copying.

On this subject really, finding if a resin is really a copy is more like forensic procedure than a straight comparison. Just like denying that pirated article is a copy from a genuine resin part just because of alterations or slight differences is comparable to saying that a decomposing corpse isn't X person because their faces don't look alike. In the end you have to got deeper like checking fingerprints, dental work or even DNA, just like people did finding the similar mold flaws, scratch marks and other tiny hints; stuff that you wouldn't easily compare using your 3D laser scanned models method but a MK1 eyeball would.

In the end most of the small cottage AM manufactures can't afford the money to spend on lawyers or going to court over someone pirating their products. What we are complaining is the complete lack of ethics and scruples from this pirates that tend to kill the little income that the hardworking AM people can get.

Edited by Inquisitor
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to delve too deep into this discussion but I think the method you're mentioning isn't the best thing for resin casting.

I don't doubt your knowledge about copyright laws, litigation and stuff, but let me add my 2cents.

First, purchasing an end user level laser scanner is already pretty expensive adding to that the cost of a 3D CAD program to analyze the results. Even so you need to be familiar with this program to do this comparison work. Someone that builds scale models or makes AM masters or even an sculptors doesn't by default turns into a computer 3D artist in a matter of seconds. On the other hand you'd find a company to do this work for you and even then their services are expensive, in the range of hundreds of dollars. Money that a lot of AM manufacturers can't afford since they work out from their garage, and barely survive selling their stuff.

Secondly, the laser scanner method is flawed if you try to match exactly the pirate copy to the master, in a sense because already comparing a 1st gen casting to the masters there's already tiny differences, more so in the pirated copy. Where do this differences come? This tiny differences comes from resin shrinkage which depending on manufacturer and quality can be from 0.5% to 5%!!! And the shrinkage it's not constant across the whole shape and don't mention other slight differences or warpage from the silicon molds since they are a soft material. All this tiny differences compound into bigger ones the further you go in the chain of copying.

On this subject really, finding if a resin is really a copy is more like forensic procedure than a straight comparison. Just like denying that pirated article is a copy from a genuine resin part just because of alterations or slight differences is comparable to saying that a decomposing corpse isn't X person because their faces don't look alike. In the end you have to got deeper like checking fingerprints, dental work or even DNA, just like people did finding the similar mold flaws, scratch marks and other tiny hints; stuff that you wouldn't easily compare using your 3D laser scanned models method but a MK1 eyeball would.

Exactly right.

I determined the copies by the way I did the casting blocks attachment. Plus the finger print I accidentally left on the inside of the intake.

(really, not a joke)

Harold

Link to post
Share on other sites

My hole thinking is that I'm not 100% sure that there is any pirating going on ,Like I said before I parched a intake set for a A-7 kit I do not know of any other company that is making them before this is the only thing that I have bought from them as far as quality goes the intake wasn't too bad . I think the person that is behind Rhino should at least step forward and address the issues . Like is said this is my thought

Link to post
Share on other sites

To exclude any misinterpretation.

I continued my correspondence with this person and just sent a notice to him via the same ebay messaging system.

Text of this message:

"I would like to make you aware about this thread on ARC forum http://s362974870.onlinehome.us/forums/air/index.php?showtopic=228880&st=60

You wrote below that these comments 'insult you and your company'.

Now this has been done publicly.

Would you like to share some of your own comments at this board?"

Edited by Dimitri
Link to post
Share on other sites

For a while, the rumor was going around that Rhino WAS Cutting Edge re-incarnated. Has that been proven to not be the case? It does not make the copying of the Aires wheel well for the A-7 any better, but if he's re-selling the CE stuff that he owns the right to, then there is not (as much of) a problem.

Aaron

Link to post
Share on other sites

For a while, the rumor was going around that Rhino WAS Cutting Edge re-incarnated. Has that been proven to not be the case?

If Rhino was Cutting Edge I doubt they would be buying their own 1/32 A-10 cockpit set:

http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback2&userid=rookielsp&ftab=AllFeedback&myworld=true

Any bets that Rhino will be releasing an A-10 cockpit soon?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've used DMolds F4 Intakes several times before and I've processed orders for over a hundred of these sets and from the pictures of Rhino Works Intakes over on Ebay, even I can tell that they are copies.

Having dealt with Dmitri several times on large(ish) orders I trust the man 100%, I also know that his eye for attention to detail is second to none and if he says they are direct copies of "HIS OWN WORK" then I believe him. I've been the victim of purchasing past DMold copies from a Mr Miller of Arlington, Texas although I wasn't aware of them being pirated copies at the time but I was aware of the poor quality of the set and just put it down to a inferior batch from DMold. However since then I've got to know Dmitri and I know that he wouldn't let such sub standard items leave his workshop.

It's hard to believe that this Rhino person is not active on here or on any other Modelling forum(not to my knowledge), as a business man surely he wants to keep in touch with his client base and get feedback on his current items and ideas for future releases. Two Mikes, Royal Resin, Steel Beach, DMold, AMS Resin, Zactomodels to name a few are all in touch through this and other forums. His Ebay profile speaks for itself as well, he floods the market with resin sets then disappears for weeks even months before appearing again and flooding the market yet again. He does not reply to messages sent to him through the Ebay system as I've tried to get in touch with him on a number of occasions without reply, again hardly the way to endear yourself to a potential customers(not that he will get any of my money now). If he is above board then why isn't he defending himself, as every business person I know of would be protecting their interests.

If any one on here has had stuff from Rhino do you know where the package was posted from as I would be interested in knowing

Link to post
Share on other sites

If he is above board then why isn't he defending himself, as every business person I know of would be protecting their interests.

Hi scotthldr, I was happy to have bought in the past original dmold stuff from you, the answer of your question is simple: he sell lot of sets, check the dates of his new profile feedback on ebay ..

Finally a personal consideration: people believe that ARC has more visibility of ebay? imho not.. ebay is tremendously larger place!

I bought in the past rhino a-7 seamless in good faith and I think (also after this post) most of modellers in the world will do if can't read this post!.. asking here do not buy from ebay is like asking people do not watch football..put something into ebay at the same time with lot of images, comparisons, link to ARC... everything can advise people to understand something..

Edited by Lucio P.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...