RCA CTC-7 Worthington: Where are the legs?

[John Folsom]

The Worthington offered on this ebay auction

http://cgi.ebay.com/RCA-Color-Televi...QQcmdZViewItem

seems to have a cosmetic mystery. Ed Reitan provided this photo of his set, and the RCA sales brochure on his website shows the same set as in this photo. It would appear the set for auction has had its legs shortened somewhere along the way, though the seller says he cannot find any evidence of the legs being shortened.

I am NOT bidding on this set, and do not know anyone who is. IF you know someone who is, you might want to make them aware of this discrepancy.

[Chad Hauris]

I wonder if it had to fit in an alcove of some type where there was a shelf or something above it and there was not enough vertical clearance with the original length legs? Unless the ebay seller was the orginal owner there may not be anyway of knowing why they were shortened. The job may have been done by a professional that tried to obscure traces of the cutting by sanding and re-staining.

[ohohyodafarted]

Yep.. sure looks like they were cut off. Having done considerable furniture restoration, I can assure you that a competant furniture restorrer can replace those legs in such a way as to make them as good as new. So good that you would have a hard time telling that a restoration was done.

In the normal course of the life of a piece of old furniture it is not uncommon for a leg to be broken off, and there exists methods of properly restoring a broken or, as in this case, a sawed off leg.

Although I realize the set is not "original" in it's present state, I actually like the way the set sits lower to the ground with the short legs. It gives it a more contemporary look, like some of the large console sets of the 80's.

[Eric H]

AK member Jstout66 knows the seller of this set, perhaps he needs to contact him and let him know.
I'm betting the seller's unaware of this problem.

Edit: I just sent the seller a note with a link to the picture.

I am the seller of this television, this is the exact condition of the set when I found it and brought it home from a neighbor's house. In fact, this was debated on these forums back in Spring of 2005 when we posted pics of this set here. Nobody could explain why the set is this way but as I've stated, I can't see any obvious sign that legs were removed or cut off. It was in a family room of a neighbor's house and hadn't been used in over 20 years. It wasn't built-in or in an alcove of any kind, just sitting on the floor in the middle of the wall. There are clear and numerous pictures on the auction that shows the condition of the set, I'm not trying to pass off any "discrepancy" or flaw that isn't disclosed - I know little to nothing about these units so what you see is what you get ;-) and I'll do my best to answer any questions I can.

[vintagecollect]

...

[John Marinello]

You can find a promo film for this set at youtube.com.
Search keywords "RCA 1961", and it's entitled "The New RCA 1961 Color Television - RCA Promo Film".
Year 1961 must be an error, unless RCA decided the only way to go with this set was "up", 4" that is...

[John Folsom]

Gansky1,

In a way, I wish I had not brought up this issue about the legs, because I really did want to bid on the TV. All I ever wanted was for you to point out this leg issue on your auction page, as you were aware that there was an issue when you ran the auction. If you had done so, I would have been one of the bidders. But as you did not want to alert bidders to this issue, I felt it only fair to my fellow collectors to let them know that there was an issue.

Having done this, I could not in good concience then bid on the set. I do hope someone gives this fabulous set a good home, and that you, the seller, get as mcuh for the set as possible.

[John Marinello]

Originally Posted by John Folsom

Gansky1,

In a way, I wish I had not brought up this issue about the legs, because I really did want to bid on the TV. All I ever wanted was for you to point out this leg issue on your auction page, as you were aware that there was an issue when you ran the auction. If you had done so, I would have been one of the bidders. But as you did not want to alert bidders to this issue, I felt it only fair to my fellow collectors to let them know that there was an issue.

Having done this, I could not in good concience then bid on the set. I do hope someone gives this fabulous set a good home, and that you, the seller, get as mcuh for the set as possible.

I agree. I too was going to bid on this set. Apparently, one of the other bidders feels the same way because they've retracted their bid.

[jstout66]

Isn't this whole "leg issue" somewhat of a non issue, especially since this set is so rare? I've seen more CT100's pop up than this limited run model. Most collectors feel the CT100 is the "holy grail" yet think nothing of having to do a total rebuild if the set has sat in an attic, or worse yet a damp basement where the whole bottom of the cabinet has been destroyed. Does that make a CT100 any less rare when it's been so rebuilt there isn't much original left? Yes.... I do know the seller and also advised him NOT to put a comment in his auction for something that isn't certain. I've seen the set and if the legs were shortened (which I doubt) it was done by a professional. The set has no signs of saw marks, the set sits evenly on the floor with no "wobble" which would more than likely be the case if someone did a hack job on it. Also if the set did indeed have its legs shortened how hard could that be to have corrected? It is such a MINOR issue for something that is almost 50 years old. It's not like one can run into a chain store and find this set, or a few pop up every year like a CT100. (which in my opinion wouldn't be that desirable for myself because of the picture tube issue)
Nitpicking about this "issue" is comparable to finding some other rare set and than declaring it worthless because it is missing a knob or has a scratch on it. Or perhaps finding a vintage car that is near perfect and missing the hubcaps, for example "I found a near mint 1959 Imperial, but it is missing the hubcaps and has a tear in the seat, so I am not going to bid on it now" Does that person realllyyyy think they are goin to run across something that is 50 years old that would be "out of box fresh"? Hummmmmmmm....
I have no gain or incentive if this set sells or not, but I had to point out that this whole issue that may or may not be a fact is somewhat stupid in determining if one is going to bid on it or not. How many of these are out there? Also, the set is near spotless and still fires up with a good picture tube. How often does THAT happen? Just my 2 cents.....

[oldtvman]

I don't think this unit has leggs it's cabinet structure looks similar to my two ctc9's

[John Folsom]

Jstout66,

I think you and the seller are missing the point. You and the seller knew there was an issue with the legs on the set. But the seller decided to hide this from the bidders. This is wrong. It is not the sellers right to decide whit might or might not be important to the bidders. That decision is the right of the bidders to make. It is the the responsibility of the seller to ACCURATELY and HONESTLY describe the condition of the object. Then the bidders can make up their own minds about what is inoortant, and what is not. Even after I contacted the seller and informed him of this issue (which he was apparently already aware of), and asked him to update his description on the auction page, he did not. So I felt I had no choice but to give the potential bidders all the facts.

[jstout66]

John, It wasn't a known issue until it was brought up that it "may" have had it's legs shortened. He posted MANY pictures of the set so I don't see how he was trying to "hide" anything. I made a post about this set last week when he listed it, and NOTHING was brought up untill a day before the auctions end. It's like pounding sand at this point because when you sell on eBay you know you can't revise a listing once the reserve has been met and it's less than 24 hours from the auction end.
He isn't forcing anyone to bid on this set. I think you are missing the point I was trying to make which was "what might be a concern to you, may not be to others" The set is rare, there are few to none out there anymore, and this would appear to be a bunch of "hype" to bring this up when it is too late to revise the description, when ALL buyers have seen the pictures of the set and it's had a post here on AK for a week.........

How much more disclosure and honesty does a prospective bidder/buyer need more than pictures and ample opportunity to ask questions? As I stated before, I don't know anything about this set and when it was found and posted here, there was some dissention of those who know these units as to whether or not this unit had legs or didn't have them - as there is apparently some dissention now. Let's not make a mountain out of a molehill, if you are interested in the set - place a bid. If not, don't.

[Adam]

Here's a crazy idea. Could that lower part of the legs have been somehow detachable? Look closely at this picture here and notice how there appears to be a straight line across the leg below which the wood appears darker, making it look like that lower part which is missing on the other set is actually a seperate piece of wood. I don't see it on the other leg though.