FlytrapCare Carnivorous Plant Forums

Hey guys,

Now, to start off this topic: The purpose of this post is in NO way, shape or form, meant to incite anger or to be disrespectful, a personal attack, rudeness or insulting. This post is merely meant as a warning when dealing with this particular seller and, in general, eBay. If this post violates the Flytrapcare forums rules, please remove it immediately. Thanks!

I recently was browsing through eBay auctions for Nepenthes and I stumbled upon a Nepenthes hamata from a seller by the name of "Chipi3s (now native_shop- April 4th 2016)". I recognized this particular hamata because I have seen it in a previous auction shown in this picture. Take notice of the description. He clearly states that it is a Wistuba clone and you can see the Wistuba tag in the background. This auction ended on December 25th. Now observe this auction which was placed on eBay on January 23rd.
He states now that the exact same plant is a Borneo Exotics clone which is rarer and much more valuable. A BE clone from predatoryplants sold for $480 recently. By the way, with all this talk of the difference between clones, what is really the difference between an AW and BE clone?
If this post becomes a center of argument (or if there is proof of this auction being legitimate) , I will simply remove this post. If someone were to respectfully agree or disagree with this post then that's fine with Flytrapcare forum regulation and therefore, fine with me.

Um, I think he is a member of FTC too.

I am by no means an expert on Nepenthes; to me, the leaves of most Nepenthes are so similar, I certainly cannot distinguish varieties based off of the leaves. But when I look at the two plants pictured, and examine each leaf starting at the top, there does appear to be some difference in the leaves between the 2 photos; and even though it could have been repotted, the media is not identical (placement of perlite pellets, etc.
The top photo has the two biggest, widest leaves just below the top growth point; both of those leaves are pointing down.
The second photo has a smaller leaf in between the top growth point and the 2 biggest leaves; that leaf is pointing up.
Maybe this just represents the change in growth since then? I dunno.
My guess is that these are 2 different plants, they just look very similar based on size and lack of pitchers.

sbrooks wrote: The top photo has the two biggest, widest leaves just below the top growth point; both of those leaves are pointing down.
The second photo has a smaller leaf in between the top growth point and the 2 biggest leaves; that leaf is pointing up.
Maybe this just represents the change in growth since then? I dunno.

You are indeed correct. It does represent the change in growth. The newest leaf has grown out from the growth point in the course of a month. Look at the placement of the 2 largest leaves, especially the one hanging over the pot where the tag slot is located. I'm pretty sure it is the same plant.

Yeah, I think you're right. And the more I look at some of the perlite pellets, there is a lot of similarity in the two photos with the media; where it indents a little here and there, where certain larger pellets are placed, etc.
I am officially retracting my original stance. These are the same plant.

chipi3 is a ftc member, he doesnt seem like he would scam or anything...

Lol it looks like the same plant, media does too. He/she was clearly lying in one of the two auctions or was mistaken ( which I doubt) since the tag is present in one photo but not the other. Unless there is proof that the plants are different I have no reason to believe it's not a scam.

What I see might be the same plant ( all leafs match in position) but the second pot appears bigger in comparison to the plant.
So it might be repottet. Could be a trick of angle.

The first auction actually states:
"(Possibly clone 4)."

Perhaps the seller was unsure of the plant's origins, then re-listed it.

Was the original auction a completed sale, or closed by seller?




- - - - -
My grow list with pics: http://www.flytrapcare.com/phpBB3/viewt ... 73#p222104


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chipi3s wrote:First of all you are trying to start an argument by using my username. Second the post clearly says "possibly clone 4" I have contacted the original owner who sold me it and it is in fact Borneo clone. Third when I have time I will be posting on here all the screen shots of you scamming people a nepenthes macrophylla and the private messages of you begging me to take down a thread of me proving you scam. Talk to you soon.

I have been respectful to you and I even did remove the thread. I don't appreciate you attacking me when I'm an honest and respectful seller and forum member. Sorry it came to this but I've had so many issues with you last year and now this year.

I also want to note I have made personal trades with this user. He traded me a "supposedly" Nepenthes Edwardsiana for some other nepenthes. The plant is very small and indistinguishable so if it turns out to be a different plant I would like that to be on record.

I

To be clear, Chip3s, I am not being attacking, nor am I trying to start an argument. I just wanted to make people aware of this possible scam. If you can provide evidence of contact with the original owner and clarification of this hamata indeed being a BE clone, I will renounce my original stance.

I will not lie. I did attempt to sell a clone N. macrophylla as a seed-grown. I was desperate at the time and I formally apologize for committing such an act. From now on, I will properly and truthfully identify all the plants I sell.
Edit- May I also point out the fact that in your original post, you claimed that I went as far as photoshopping a picture of the macro. I did not photoshop that photo, I don't know from where you could have assumed such an act.

I find your response quite rude and aggressive. "Talk to you soon" and "begging me" is not really appropriate for this situation. Any further response should be in accordance with the propriety mentioned in the Flytrapcare forum regulation.

Also, I have clear proof (both written and verbal, from several witnesses) of the authenticity of the N. edwardsiana. If you have any proof that states that the plant I traded with you is not what it clearly is, I'd certainly like to see it.
This thread is meant to be completely respectful, so do please try to keep it that way. If things get out of hand, I will request for it to be removed.

Leathal_Traps wrote:Lol it looks like the same plant, media does too. He/she was clearly lying in one of the two auctions or was mistaken ( which I doubt) since the tag is present in one photo but not the other. Unless there is proof that the plants are different I have no reason to believe it's not a scam.

I take back what I said. Sorry, Chipi3s.

Chipi3s wrote:Me and you have a history, you knew I would respond as soon as you posted this. The point of this thread was obviously to attack me.

That was not the point of this thread. Refer to the original post. "This post is merely meant as a warning when dealing with this particular seller and, in general, eBay."

You have no proof of what you say.

I beg to differ. Provide evidence of my claim being false. So far, readers have no reason to not assume that this eBay auction was illegitimate without evidence of it being valid. In addition, the pictures I provided support the fact that either you were mistaken (as Leathal_Traps and Alvin suggested) or that you deliberately altered the hamata's origin to sell it for more money than you would have selling it as a Wistuba clone. Why would the seller (LLB) provide you with a Wistuba tag if it was actually a BE clone? Claiming that "the seller contacted you and told you that it was indeed BE" is not enough proof.

I have 100% positive feedback and I've never had a complaint.

So have I. I do not see how this supports your argument.

You try to act professional but no one here is dumb.

Firstly, I am being professional by providing my statements in a way that is a) non-aggressive, b) justifiable and c) reasonable. How does "acting" professional reduce my stance as a person competent of providing an argument for a possibly false eBay auction? What do you mean "no one here is dumb"? Being professional is appropriate for this situation.

Also the one thing you have on me is

"POSSIBLY CLONE 4"

Exactly. Provide evidence that disproves my stance.

You made a whole thread to try to lie and say I'm a scammer

How am I "trying to lie"? At this point, the entire thread would be considered "flexible", meaning that any form of evidence could reject or support this "perspective". It was never a fact that you attempted to scam. I'm not spreading falsehood. I just mentioned these auctions because, frankly, they're quite suspicious.

Then you turn around and admit you tried scamming recently.

It is only proper to admit one's mistakes. No one is infallible.
"Admit your mistake, do not dig in deeper with lies" -John Baker, U.S Marine Corp.

Why should anyone believe anything you have to say.

Because I, along with every other FTC member and yourself, have a passion for CPs and because I'm an established member of the community. I have been growing CPs for years and have accumulated many dear friends on these forums. The fact of the matter is that I truly felt that these auctions were extremely suspicious as they contradicted each other. This thread "Caution when dealing with eBay" is meant as an advisement against not only these mentioned auctions, but also other suspicious auctions.
All in all, I do hope that we can have closure now. I'm still not convinced of the authenticity of the N. hamata but if you could indeed provide evidence, I'd gladly repudiate this topic.

BrunoL wrote:Why would the seller (LLB) provide you with a Wistuba tag if it was actually a BE clone?

This is the only part of this that doesn't make sense to me.

Chipi3s wrote:EVEN MATT the owner of this website has misrepresented products he sells such as "Dracula" you should all know the "polish Dracula" mix up that happened. Did he do it on purpose? Of course not.

I wouldn't use the term "misrepresented" here, as that insinuates that there was knowledge of the plant not being "Dracula" from Trev Cox, but presenting it as such.

What happened in the Dracula/Polish Dracula case is that I received a plant from a reputable grower who had gotten the plant from someone else (a Polish grower) who was not reputable, but I was not aware of my supplier's source, as I had no reason to question it. In our dozens of past dealings, the plants were always labeled correctly.

Misrepresenting means to give a false or misleading account or spin on something. I truly believed that the plant I had was Dracula until I found out it wasn't and then immediately announced that fact. That's not misrepresenting or misleading anyone.

As you say though, it wasn't on purpose and I do believe these sorts of mislabels honestly happen from time to time. Other times they are deliberate, as BrunoL admits to doing, in order to make money. Anyone purchasing on eBay from someone they don't know or haven't dealt with personally before runs a higher risk of such a thing happening.

Chipi3s wrote:So you have your proof the plant is what it is. You can delete this thread or edit me out of it. Thanks.

Well, not necessarily. It's easy enough to send an email to yourself or have a friend send you one making that statement. Also, even if the email is legitimate, it's pretty terse and you have to believe that the sender is being honest. Not knowing the sender or his reputation, it's not necessarily a given.

As the subject of this thread states, USE CAUTION!