Bought a raw "unrestored" comic from a boardie and it's come back Qualified
1 1

253 posts in this topic

174 posts
On 2018-01-05 at 8:02 PM, gadzukes said:

Yeah, but the Green label is frowned upon by buyers like it was a PLOD

Would a Green Label be frowned upon on a rare GA mega key? Getting a copy in any grade is virtually next to impossible. I’d take a green label if there are no blues on the table.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30,742 posts
1 minute ago, BM Cruz said:

Would a Green Label be frowned upon on a rare GA mega key? Getting a copy in any grade is virtually next to impossible. I’d take a green label if there are no blues on the table.

 

I'd be happy to own a Green label Action #1 with a married cover. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,959 posts
14 hours ago, BM Cruz said:

Would a Green Label be frowned upon on a rare GA mega key? Getting a copy in any grade is virtually next to impossible. I’d take a green label if there are no blues on the table.

 

I agree.  And I own a WW1 3.0 & Flash 86 3.0 with a Green Labels (married cfs), and I own a Superman 1 & Cap 1 that both have married cf's and would get Green Labels if I sent them in to CGC.  I LOVE all 4 of those comics!

BUT, that has nothing to do with the premise of this thread.  I thought I was buying an unrestored raw comic from a boardie here on the boards and it turned out to have a married cover. Should he have any responsibility whatsoever to reach out to me or acknowledge my PMs to him?  I'm not making any demands or accusing him of anything (he most likely didn't know the cover was married).  

Part of why I PM'd him was just in case the comic he sold me came from a larger collection he had bought... it might mean that other comics in that collection were married or restored.

Edited by gadzukes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
174 posts
1 hour ago, gadzukes said:

I agree.  And I own a WW1 3.0 & Flash 86 3.0 with a Green Labels (married cfs), and I own a Superman 1 & Cap 1 that both have married cf's and would get Green Labels if I sent them in.  I LOVE all 3 of those comics!

BUT, that has nothing to do with the premise of this thread.  I thought I was buying an unrestored raw comic from a boardie here on the boards and it turned out to have a married cover. Should he have any responsibility whatsoever to reach out to me or acknowledge my PMs to him?  I'm not making any demands or accusing him of anything (he most likely didn't know).  

Part of why I PM'd him was just in case the comic he sold me came from a larger collection he had bought... it might mean that other comics in that collection were married or restored.

?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,720 posts
2 hours ago, gadzukes said:

I thought I was buying an unrestored raw comic from a boardie here on the boards and it turned out to have a married cover. Should he have any responsibility whatsoever to reach out to me or acknowledge my PMs to him?  I'm not making any demands or accusing him of anything (he most likely didn't know the cover was married).

Yes, he should contact you. He should at least acknowledge you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,064 posts

Lack of communication really grinds my gears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
374 posts

Did the seller state or imply that the book was un-restored? Was there any conversation on the subject at all? Is it possible that it just wasn't on the seller's radar?

Personally, I feel like a seller would not have to refund you unless assurances were made or implied. If it is that important of an issue, I would imagine it would be brought up in the original transaction.

Maybe my perspective is skewed because I collect comics and hardcovers from a more modern period where restoration isn't as common.

 

Regardless he should reply to your PMs telling you his stance. Even if his stance is "I'm not sure how I want to handle this situation yet."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28,678 posts
1 minute ago, ParamagicFF said:

Regardless he should reply to your PMs telling you his stance. Even if his stance is "I'm not sure how I want to handle this situation yet."

(thumbsu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,184 posts
29 minutes ago, ParamagicFF said:

Did the seller state or imply that the book was un-restored? Was there any conversation on the subject at all?

Isn't it always implied that a book is unrestored if sold without saying it is restored (or, in this case, married)? If it was missing a centerfold or pinup would you say the same thing? Since you didn't ask if the centerfold was there, why would you assume it was? Any seller that would knowingly not disclose restoration without being asked on every book is not a seller I would want to deal with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,033 posts
41 minutes ago, ParamagicFF said:

Did the seller state or imply that the book was un-restored? 

I do not get this at all.  Restoration needs to be disclosed for sure.  But lack of restoration?  Come on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
374 posts
59 minutes ago, Shrevvy said:

Isn't it always implied that a book is unrestored if sold without saying it is restored (or, in this case, married)? If it was missing a centerfold or pinup would you say the same thing? Since you didn't ask if the centerfold was there, why would you assume it was? Any seller that would knowingly not disclose restoration without being asked on every book is not a seller I would want to deal with.

I was simply asking if there was another perspective to approach this from. I stated that I am not someone who regularly deals with comics from an era where restoration is common. That being said, I don't know if this assumption is built into every transaction. 

That is quite different than "knowingly not disclosing restoration", if the seller isn't even aware it is a common issue. I was simply offering that it may be ignorance and not deception. 

 

53 minutes ago, lizards2 said:

I do not get this at all.  Restoration needs to be disclosed for sure.  But lack of restoration?  Come on.

That's not what I was suggesting at all. Again, this may have to do with my ignorance regarding comic restoration in general. Being someone who doesn't deal with these type of books, I believe if I was to begin to move into some older books, I would probably ask about restoration/completeness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,854 posts

The key thing here, as said by many already, is to communicate. Things happen, often innocently, and all you need to do is talk reasonably and sort it out. Hopefully that will happen here at some point.

Restoration can be a funny thing I find. I sold this ASM #1 Canadian annual on eBay many moons back:

5a53d178c0cdc_annual1can.thumb.jpg.671231294b1cbca3d47b1317656fd04f.jpg  

5a53d17d68b59_annual1canc.thumb.jpg.d55691421460ec319fc4a6f3ea5b3fba.jpg

I bought it as unrestored in good faith. I sold it as unrestored, in good faith. The buyer received it and was happy with it. Then they sent it to CGC and it came back a PLOD due to colour touch. Buyer was then unhappy. We agreed on a partial refund and he gave me a lecture on the importance of disclosing restoration. This really irked me as I didn't see it, the person I bought it from didn't see it and on first receipt the new owner didn't see it.

One dot of ink and everything is soured. 

Can you see it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,033 posts
12 minutes ago, Marwood & I said:

The key thing here, as said by many already, is to communicate. Things happen, often innocently, and all you need to do is talk reasonably and sort it out. Hopefully that will happen here at some point.

Restoration can be a funny thing I find. I sold this ASM #1 Canadian annual on eBay many moons back:

5a53d178c0cdc_annual1can.thumb.jpg.671231294b1cbca3d47b1317656fd04f.jpg  

5a53d17d68b59_annual1canc.thumb.jpg.d55691421460ec319fc4a6f3ea5b3fba.jpg

I bought it as unrestored in good faith. I sold it as unrestored, in good faith. The buyer received it and was happy with it. Then they sent it to CGC and it came back a PLOD due to colour touch. Buyer was then unhappy. We agreed on a partial refund and he gave me a lecture on the importance of disclosing restoration. This really irked me as I didn't see it, the person I bought it from didn't see it and on first receipt the new owner didn't see it.

One dot of ink and everything is soured. 

Can you see it?

hm I certainly see some areas of suspicion.  I do check my incoming and outgoing books anymore under good light.  I've been fed several CT books here and on eBay just this last year.  Not to mention the book with the page missing. :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,854 posts
1 minute ago, lizards2 said:

hm I certainly see some areas of suspicion.  

Point them out now  :sumo:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,033 posts
1 minute ago, Marwood & I said:
2 minutes ago, lizards2 said:

hm I certainly see some areas of suspicion.  

Point them out now  :sumo:

Any time there are deep bends on the spine, and there is no apparent colour break, that's a good place to check.  I would assume the dot at the logo box, from what I can see.  There may be more at center spine, but I can't tell for sure from the photos.  Another place for this book would be the red and black box at LRFC, but since you don't have an inside shot of that,  I don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,854 posts
1 minute ago, lizards2 said:

Any time there are deep bends on the spine, and there is no apparent colour break, that's a good place to check.  I would assume the dot at the logo box, from what I can see.  There may be more at center spine, but I can't tell for sure from the photos.  Another place for this book would be the red and black box at LRFC, but since you don't have an inside shot of that,  I don't know.

You should work for CGC liz. You've got a knack for bursting bubbles :wink:

Being a Canadian copy, I'm fairly sure any CT wasn't on the back:

5a53d844a4ac3_annual2canb.thumb.jpg.b87c539c5bd710d635b207ea416cfbd5.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,033 posts
2 minutes ago, Marwood & I said:

You should work for CGC liz. You've got a knack for bursting bubbles :wink:

Being a Canadian copy, I'm fairly sure any CT wasn't on the back:

 

I meant the inside FC.  That's a nice book - I wish I had it.

I don't know if you meant that I got it right, or if you even know where it was at.

The best I can say is that if apparent wear looks better than it should, then that area of the book needs a thorough examination, and the entire books needs a go through.  Any apparent non-colour breaking spine bends, hard creases, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,854 posts
3 minutes ago, lizards2 said:

I meant the inside FC.  That's a nice book - I wish I had it.

I don't know if you meant that I got it right, or if you even know where it was at.

The best I can say is that if apparent wear looks better than it should, then that area of the book needs a thorough examination, and the entire books needs a go through.  Any apparent non-colour breaking spine bends, hard creases, etc.

I know liz, I was being funny. Well, trying. Back cover is blank you see, no need for CT. 

Moving on!

Buyer didn't say where the CT was. They could have been lying for all I know. They had good feedback as I recall, so I had no reason to doubt them. All part of the learning experience 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
1 1