ShortScale.org

Fran wrote: An extreme example would be if someone with a username like k0rnFreak2002 was selling an Ibanez guitar, with one blurred picture and the dsecription said 'it sounds awesome. only two strings tho', I wouldn't touch the guitar with a bargepole. You can guarantee its been thrown across the guys room several times and not been cared for.

See, I'm the opposite. If I see that I think that the guitar has probably been bought by someone who hasn't valued it and doesn't realise the value of it now. I also think that other buyers are likely to be put off by all the stuff you've just mentioned, and that with a bit of know-how and tweaking this guitar will be more than a k0rnFreak guitar. I look at it as an inefficiency in the market and that's the sort of thing I'd go for. I suspect you would get more guitar than you would pay for.

I would read reviews and try to work out if they guitars are consistently good or not. If it's a guitar where quality is an issue (say a first run Squier '51) then I probably wouldn't buy it without playing it. If it's one that I know had good quality control and a decent set up can save, then I'm probably happy enough to buy.

Also, distance selling regulations and all that. So you're pretty safe.

Bacchus wrote:See, I'm the opposite. If I see that I think that the guitar has probably been bought by someone who hasn't valued it and doesn't realise the value of it now. I also think that other buyers are likely to be put off by all the stuff you've just mentioned, and that with a bit of know-how and tweaking this guitar will be more than a k0rnFreak guitar.

There is that, but in my experience they have some annoying damaged parts like a chipped nut or something. Usually covered in DNA as well.
If the model in question is worth the aggro I'll go for it, wouldn't bother with any budget stuff though.