原文 / 日本語
コピー
問題の本質であるダメージについて議論しましょう。
審査は「ＡＢＣ」会社にして頂くため、ここで文章連絡します。
問題は出品説明文と商品が大きく異なることです。
最初にご説明した通り、受け取ったTromboneはとても“like-new condition”とは言い難いものでした。考えられる推定原因は４つです。
１：輸送中にダメージを受けた。
２：出品説明にある写真のヘコミを画像処理ソフトで修正し合成している。
３：ヘコミが写らない角度で写真を掲載している。
評価
60
翻訳 / 英語
- 2011/08/23 02:01:24に投稿されました
Let's discuss the true nature of the problem - damages.
The evaluation will be done by "ABC". As such, I am only reporting the problem in writing.
The problem is that the item description and the item itself differ on a large scale.
As I explained earlier, the trombone I received was not even close to "like-new condition". The following 4 reasons are what I have presumed : -
1. The item was damaged during the shipment.
2. The image in the item description has been edited by a photo editor to hide the dents.
3. The image was taken from an angle where the dents cannot be seen.
The evaluation will be done by "ABC". As such, I am only reporting the problem in writing.
The problem is that the item description and the item itself differ on a large scale.
As I explained earlier, the trombone I received was not even close to "like-new condition". The following 4 reasons are what I have presumed : -
1. The item was damaged during the shipment.
2. The image in the item description has been edited by a photo editor to hide the dents.
3. The image was taken from an angle where the dents cannot be seen.
評価
50
翻訳 / 英語
- 2011/08/23 03:02:27に投稿されました
Let's argue about the damage that is the essence of the problem .
Because an "ABC " company examines it , I make a sentence here .
This problem is that a item is different from an exhibition explanation greatly .
First according to explanation , Trombone which I received were hard to be called "like-new condition" very much .
The estimated cause thought about is four points .
1： The item caught the damage during transportation .
2： The dent of the photograph in the exhibition explanation revises it in Software of the image processing and composes it .
3： The dent copies an image at an angle not to come out .
Because an "ABC " company examines it , I make a sentence here .
This problem is that a item is different from an exhibition explanation greatly .
First according to explanation , Trombone which I received were hard to be called "like-new condition" very much .
The estimated cause thought about is four points .
1： The item caught the damage during transportation .
2： The dent of the photograph in the exhibition explanation revises it in Software of the image processing and composes it .
3： The dent copies an image at an angle not to come out .
評価
50
翻訳 / 英語
- 2011/08/23 02:42:49に投稿されました
Let's discuss the actual damages, as these represent the core of the problem.
ABC is the company that will be carrying out the inspection of the trombone, and so I have cc'd them here.
In essence, the problem is that the description in your listing differs massively from the actual condition of the item.
As I explained to you at the beginning, it would be extremely hard to say that the trombone I received is in "like new condition". I can only imagine 4 possible reasons for this:
1: It was damaged during transport.
2: The photo shown in your listing was altered using image processing software to hide the dents.
3: The photo was taken at an angle so that the dents do not show.
ABC is the company that will be carrying out the inspection of the trombone, and so I have cc'd them here.
In essence, the problem is that the description in your listing differs massively from the actual condition of the item.
As I explained to you at the beginning, it would be extremely hard to say that the trombone I received is in "like new condition". I can only imagine 4 possible reasons for this:
1: It was damaged during transport.
2: The photo shown in your listing was altered using image processing software to hide the dents.
3: The photo was taken at an angle so that the dents do not show.
原文 / 日本語
コピー
４：ダメージのない綺麗なチューニング管で写真を撮り、
写し終わった後、ダメージのあるチューニング管とすり替えて出荷した。
推定原因１：について、ダメージのある場所は輸送中にダメージを受けるような
場所ではありません。しかも、ダメージのある場所は少しサビています。
このサビはダメージを受けてから少なくとも３か月以上経過している証拠です。
したがって、２，３，４の可能性が濃厚と考えています。これらを否定する証拠を示せますか？あなたの主張は“無い”ですが、私は証拠を示せます。
評価
60
翻訳 / 英語
- 2011/08/23 02:11:20に投稿されました
4. The image was first taken of a tuning slide in perfect condition. After the image was taken, the damaged tuning slide was shipped out instead of the one in a good condition.
With regards to my presumption 1, I do not think the damage made on the tuning slide could be made during the shipment. Also, the damaged part is a bit rusty.
This rust shows that the tuning slide was damaged at least 3 months ago or so.
Therefore, I think my presumptions 2, 3 or 4 come stronger in this argument. Can you prove to me that these presumptions are negative? Your answer is simply "no", but I can provide evidence to this claim.
With regards to my presumption 1, I do not think the damage made on the tuning slide could be made during the shipment. Also, the damaged part is a bit rusty.
This rust shows that the tuning slide was damaged at least 3 months ago or so.
Therefore, I think my presumptions 2, 3 or 4 come stronger in this argument. Can you prove to me that these presumptions are negative? Your answer is simply "no", but I can provide evidence to this claim.
評価
50
翻訳 / 英語
- 2011/08/23 02:57:08に投稿されました
4: You took a picture of the trombone fitted with a tuning pipe in perfect condition, and then afterwards you swapped it for a damaged one before shipping it.
Having said this, reason 1 can be discounted as the damages are not in places that could have been caused due to problems during transportation. Additionally, the damaged areas are also a bit rusty. This shows that the areas must have become damaged at least 3 months ago. Therefore, I believe that reasons 2, 3 and 4 are more likely to be correct. Are you able to give me proof that refutes my assumptions? You keep asserting "no", that you can't, but I can give you proof.
Having said this, reason 1 can be discounted as the damages are not in places that could have been caused due to problems during transportation. Additionally, the damaged areas are also a bit rusty. This shows that the areas must have become damaged at least 3 months ago. Therefore, I believe that reasons 2, 3 and 4 are more likely to be correct. Are you able to give me proof that refutes my assumptions? You keep asserting "no", that you can't, but I can give you proof.
原文 / 日本語
コピー
一方、請求額１４００ドルの内訳ですが、
修理代は多分３００から５００ドルです。
ただし、ヘコミが３個もあるため、この楽器の価値は大きく下がります。
あなたにしてみれば高いかもしれませんね。
しかし私は被害者なので安いと感じています。
もし、私の主張をあなたが納得されるなら１４００ドルではなく、９００ドルの
払い戻しで私は妥協します。（このトロンボーンに敬意を表して）
いかがでしょうか。（拒否なら１４００でエスカレートします）
ところで、このトロンボーンは何歳ですか？
評価
60
翻訳 / 英語
- 2011/08/23 02:22:51に投稿されました
On the other hand, with regards to the breakdown of the bill of $ 1,400.00, the repair fee is most probably going to be around $ 300.00 to $ 500.00.
However, there are 3 dents. These dents will seriously decrease the instrument's value.
To you, this might be expensive, but this is expensive for me as I am the victim here.
If you agree to my claim, I will settle for a bill at $ 900.00 instead of $ 1,400.00 (as a mark of respect to this trombone). What do you think? (If you reject my settlement request, I will escalate the case at $ 1,400.00)
By the way, how old is this trombone?
However, there are 3 dents. These dents will seriously decrease the instrument's value.
To you, this might be expensive, but this is expensive for me as I am the victim here.
If you agree to my claim, I will settle for a bill at $ 900.00 instead of $ 1,400.00 (as a mark of respect to this trombone). What do you think? (If you reject my settlement request, I will escalate the case at $ 1,400.00)
By the way, how old is this trombone?
評価
50
翻訳 / 英語
- 2011/08/23 03:40:33に投稿されました
Now, in terms of the breakdown of the claim amount of $1,400, the repair costs would probably be around $300 to $500.
However, given that there are 3 dents, this reduces the value of this instrument quite considerably.
I can imagine you might regard this as quite expensive.
But I am the wronged party here, and hence I feel that this is actually quite cheap.
If you agree with my assertions here then I would be happy to compromise with
a refund of $900, instead of $1,400. (Out of respect for this trombone.)
What do you think? (If you do not agree then I will escalate this all the way up to $1,400.)
And by the way, how old is this trombone?
However, given that there are 3 dents, this reduces the value of this instrument quite considerably.
I can imagine you might regard this as quite expensive.
But I am the wronged party here, and hence I feel that this is actually quite cheap.
If you agree with my assertions here then I would be happy to compromise with
a refund of $900, instead of $1,400. (Out of respect for this trombone.)
What do you think? (If you do not agree then I will escalate this all the way up to $1,400.)
And by the way, how old is this trombone?
評価
翻訳 / 英語
- 2011/08/23 03:49:37に投稿されました
On the other hand, I asked you for a $1,400 refund, which includes the repair cost that is expected to be $300 to $500.
However, this instrument may considerably lose its value because it has as many as three dents.
The amount might seem high to you, but I think it's reasonable because I am a victim.
If you agree with my claim, I will compromise with a refund of $900 instead of $1,400 (to pay my respect for this trombone). What would you think of this?(If you refuse my proposal, I will raise the amount up to $1,400. )
By the way, when was this trombone made?
However, this instrument may considerably lose its value because it has as many as three dents.
The amount might seem high to you, but I think it's reasonable because I am a victim.
If you agree with my claim, I will compromise with a refund of $900 instead of $1,400 (to pay my respect for this trombone). What would you think of this?(If you refuse my proposal, I will raise the amount up to $1,400. )
By the way, when was this trombone made?
すばらしい翻訳、ありがとうございました。
@takashi 評価とコメント、ありがとうございます。大変励みになります。