I forget: What is the meaning of MINT again?

[synapseman]

I always thought it to be

"unused or appearing to be newly made and never used: a book in mint condition."

as defined by dictionary.com.

How is it that a camera with "less than 1k shutter count" be considered mint? Or when something is "mint condition, with the exception of some scratches"? Or worse still, now there seems to be a new category: "minty" condition. WTH?

Something is either in mint condition, or it is not. Almost mint is not mint, nor is it "minty". There is no such thing! Please stop abusing words and distorting their meanings to mislead people. :nono:

(Now where's my packet of Fisherman's Friend?)

 

[calebk]

I always thought it to be

"unused or appearing to be newly made and never used: a book in mint condition."

as defined by dictionary.com.

How is it that a camera with "less than 1k shutter count" be considered mint? Or when something is "mint condition, with the exception of some scratches"? Or worse still, now there seems to be a new category: "minty" condition. WTH?

Something is either in mint condition, or it is not. Almost mint is not mint, nor is it "minty". There is no such thing! Please stop abusing words and distorting their meanings to mislead people. :nono:

(Now where's my packet of Fisherman's Friend?)

Alamak then my camera is Mentos already lah....got quite a lot of scratches, but quite minty. Maybe a hint of spearmint flavour... :bsmilie:

 

[madmacs]

haha..yeah. every time i view a cam listed as mint, it looks a lot more like cond 9 or 10. but when i sell a cam which i list as 9 or 10, the potential buyer expects it to look mint! :dunno:

 

[blazer_workz]

I would think mint only counts for its physical appearance..if the camera looks brand new without any scratches, but the shutter count is maybe 5k..sellers should still be ok to classify as mint..

 

[Rashkae]

I would think mint only counts for its physical appearance..if the camera looks brand new without any scratches, but the shutter count is maybe 5k..sellers should still be ok to classify as mint..

No, then it's condition 10. The guidelines describe it quite perfectly.

 

[madmacs]

I would think mint only counts for its physical appearance..if the camera looks brand new without any scratches, but the shutter count is maybe 5k..sellers should still be ok to classify as mint..

cs classification:/url]

Condition: New
Description: Never used. Original packing with markers still intact.
Also known as: New

Condition: Mint
Description: Like new. Not used since it left the shop. No signs of use.
Also known as: Mint

Condition: 10
Description: Very carefully used. Only very light user marks. Without close inspection, item would pass for mint.
Also known as: Mint(-), Near-Mint, A


so unless you tested the cam by firing 5k shots before leaving the shop, at best the cam should be a 10.

 

[blazer_workz]

Condition: Mint
Description: Like new. Not used since it left the shop. No signs of use.
Also known as: Mint

No, then it's condition 10. The guidelines describe it quite perfectly.

After looking at the post quote by madmacs..then mint doesn't applies only to its appearance, as stated by CS guidelines.

I always thought it to be

"unused or appearing to be newly made and never used: a book in mint condition."

as defined by dictionary.com.

but then, if u look at the definition extracted by synapseman..
"..appearing to be newly made and never used" - the word "appearing" is used here..:think:


Edit: I try reading it again..and found that ..."Not used since it left the shop. No signs of use."
"Not used since it left the shop". - which means new
"No signs of use". - which can means appear new
I'm getting confused now..ang moh is so chim..

 

[denniskee]

Alamak then my camera is Mentos already lah....got quite a lot of scratches, but quite minty. Maybe a hint of spearmint flavour... :bsmilie:

:bsmilie::bsmilie::bsmilie:

there is always 2 extreme ends, at one end we have minty camera (maybe the neack strap is sprayed with perfume), whats the other? rotten salt fish camera (neck strap has never been wash since day 1)?

 

[contaxable]

I think he/she thought whoever bought the camera, a mint can be given.

 

[madmacs]

After looking at the post quote by madmacs..then mint doesn't applies only to its appearance, as stated by CS guidelines.



but then, if u look at the definition extracted by synapseman..
"..appearing to be newly made and never used" - the word "appearing" is used here..:think:


Edit: I try reading it again..and found that ..."Not used since it left the shop. No signs of use."
"Not used since it left the shop". - which means new
"No signs of use". - which can means appear new
I'm getting confused now..ang moh is so chim..

lol...the definition of mint by synapseman was taken from dictionary.com as stated in his post.

the line between new and mint is very narrow. my interpretation of the NEW in the guidelines is the product is still in the original packing, never opened and possibly still sealed. MINT means the product has been opened in the shop and tested to make sure it is in working condition. subsequently it has not been used.

i would say most of the items in b&s are unlikely to be mint or new. at best condition 10.

 

[madmacs]

:bsmilie::bsmilie::bsmilie:

there is always 2 extreme ends, at one end we have minty camera (maybe the neack strap is sprayed with perfume), whats the other? rotten salt fish camera (neck strap has never been wash since day 1)?

speaking of neck straps...some of my neck straps are NEW - still in original packing..NEVER OPENED :bsmilie:

 

[blazer_workz]

lol...the definition of mint by synapseman was taken from dictionary.com as stated in his post.

the line between new and mint is very narrow. my interpretation of the NEW in the guidelines is the product is still in the original packing, never opened and possibly still sealed. MINT means the product has been opened in the shop and tested to make sure it is in working condition. subsequently it has not been used.

i would say most of the items in b&s are unlikely to be mint or new. at best condition 10.

yeah, u r right..actually the rating for mint is quite redundant..and sometimes misleading..however when i make purchase from B&S..i have to personally see/review the item first..because everyone has their own intepretation on the rating..:bsmilie:
i've seen rating 7 items and its in darn good condition that i would have rate it 10..;p

 

[madmacs]

yeah, u r right..actually the rating for mint is quite redundant..and sometimes misleading..however when i make purchase from B&S..i have to personally see/review the item first..because everyone has their own intepretation on the rating..:bsmilie:
i've seen rating 7 items and its in darn good condition that i would have rate it 10..;p

ah..those items would be a pleasant surprise

 

[synapseman]

In the world of collecting (e.g. Swatch watches, comics, toys, and even cameras etc), "mint" means totally un-used, and in most cases, the original sealed packaging still intact. Why should the definition for cameras be any different?

For example, a Sony Alpha 700, un-used since the day it was brought back from the shop may be classified as "mint", if it was TOTALLY un-used. i.e. All the sticky tape holding all the packaging has not been broken, and it has ZERO shutter count.

The moment you load the battery and trip the shutter once, it immediately becomes "Like New - Condition 10+". It is used; no longer mint. "Opened the box only for testing" also makes the camera a used camera.

Why then do we need to have a "mint" category? This is for the ultra-rare instance whereby you wish to sell your original Nikon F which you first got from the factory in Japan way back in 1959, with the shrink wrap still intact. i.e. a collector's item. This then will sell for a very high price, and precisely because of this, the meaning of "mint" has to be very narrow.

I know I might be a little uptight about this, but I feel the meaning of "mint" is actually very special, and we should not change it at our whim and fancy just to suit our own interpretation/needs.

(Then again, this is merely an opinion. I could be wrong.)

 

[Canonised]

The moment you load the battery and trip the shutter once, it immediately becomes "Like New - Condition 10+". It is used; no longer mint. "Opened the box only for testing" also makes the camera a used camera.

Technically speaking, all cameras will have been loaded with battery, and the shutter would have been triggered many times during the QC and final stage of the production process BEFORE they are wrapped and put into box.
Are they still, technically "Mint" then, based on your "virgin" theory? :think:

 

[madmacs]

In the world of collecting (e.g. Swatch watches, comics, toys, and even cameras etc), "mint" means totally un-used, and in most cases, the original sealed packaging still intact. Why should the definition for cameras be any different?

For example, a Sony Alpha 700, un-used since the day it was brought back from the shop may be classified as "mint", if it was TOTALLY un-used. i.e. All the sticky tape holding all the packaging has not been broken, and it has ZERO shutter count.

The moment you load the battery and trip the shutter once, it immediately becomes "Like New - Condition 10+". It is used; no longer mint. "Opened the box only for testing" also makes the camera a used camera.

Why then do we need to have a "mint" category? This is for the ultra-rare instance whereby you wish to sell your original Nikon F which you first got from the factory in Japan way back in 1959, with the shrink wrap still intact. i.e. a collector's item. This then will sell for a very high price, and precisely because of this, the meaning of "mint" has to be very narrow.

I know I might be a little uptight about this, but I feel the meaning of "mint" is actually very special, and we should not change it at our whim and fancy just to suit our own interpretation/needs.

(Then again, this is merely an opinion. I could be wrong.)

clearly from our discussion you can tell that each one of us interprets MINT differently. hence we have the cs guidelines. maybe you can suggest to cs admin to finetune the guidelines. ;p

one reason they did the guidelines that way could be to cater for those who are indeed selling brand new items. i have seen a few of those around - esp where the seller has already secured an item at the shop, but subsequent not able to complete the purchase so he sells it to someone else in b&s. to combine NEW and MINT in this situation will not be fair to the seller.

 

[madmacs]

Technically speaking, all cameras will have been loaded with battery, and the shutter would have been triggered many times during the QC and final stage of the production process BEFORE they are wrapped and put into box.
Are they still, technically "Mint" then, based on your "virgin" theory? :think:

we should consider the item MINT (dictionary definition) until it is unwrapped by the buyer. otherwise we will all be using very used products..considering that some of the components might have undergone testing themselves :bsmilie:

 

[ISOhunt]

we should consider the item MINT (dictionary definition) until it is unwrapped by the buyer. otherwise we will all be using very used products..considering that some of the components might have undergone testing themselves :bsmilie:

would the tested components be called MOULDY then? :bsmilie: i agree, mint seems to give an almost brand new impression

 

[madmacs]

would the tested components be called MOULDY then? :bsmilie: i agree, mint seems to give an almost brand new impression

you trying to be funny right? mouldy is mouldy! :hammer:

:sweatsm:

 

[Canonised]

we should consider the item MINT (dictionary definition) until it is unwrapped by the buyer. otherwise we will all be using very used products..considering that some of the components might have undergone testing themselves :bsmilie:

Ppl who still classify and place difference monetary value on the condition of a new cam into what Mint, New, 10, etc... is either having mental block problem or still living in the Ice-age :bsmilie::sweatsm:
Many many years ago, ppl classify a virgin as someone who has never seen or dream of another person of the difference sex, and whether it is a physical, psychological, or spiritual state.
Then many years later, the term includes as someone who has never touch another person of another sex, physically.
Then years later, the "virgin" include someone who doesnt have an attached partner of the different sex.....
In modern defination, virgin is simply the unbroken hymen .... :think:

In this digital time, why can't we simply classify all little used (as in the shutter count, say below 50?) cam as simply "mint" condition?:think: