Retail?

The price it last sold at, retail is fair.
As long as the price is not for an upgraded model, it does not maatter.
Since nearly everyone actually pays below list anyway, buying new.. it is just a ballpark sort of figure.
(I laugh to see folks asking more than most actually pay in ads for mnearly new gear. Like New XYZ still in box, only $995 list $1050.. yeah, what about the fact they actually only paid $800 for it?)

The only retail price that is relevant is the current price. It matters what it would cost to buy a new one. It does not matter what the seller paid for it.

I don't trade much, so I don't really have a dog in this fight, but I would say *current* retail. When evaluating the price of a potential purchase, it seems like the most salient comparison is what I would presently have to pay new, not what I could have paid in the past (and no longer can). If the retail price increased gradually over a period of years, the asking price should reflect age; if there is a sudden large increase (Manley?) the seller got lucky, and that's life.

IMHO, of course.

John

Is the OP really asking is it fair that the seller is only going to loose $300.00 from the sale of his item from what he bought it for new?

Lets put this in perspective. If you bought your house in 1965 for $22,000 and want to sell it now, would you put it on the market for $20,000 or would you put it on the market for current value?

For me, I don't really care what the seller puts in his ad for the original price. It's only worth what the seller gets for it.

Yeah, both the price at the time of purchase and current one should be mentioned.
Some people do confuse the issue in their ads and also sometimes inflate the retail prices but not necessarily intentionally.