Nightmare situation with eBayer / PGX 3 3

[mrwoogieman]

9 minutes ago, Lazyboy said:

22 minutes ago, mrwoogieman said:

2 hours ago, thehumantorch said:

3 hours ago, mrwoogieman said:

The buyer didn't need CGC to tell him two pages were missing. All he needed to do was take the book out of the PGX slab and inspect it. If the buyer can't tell two pages are missing after inspecting, the buyer shouldn't be dropping multi-thousands on such items.

Buyer didn't open the slab believing it was safer to ship the book in the PGX case.

The buyer could've thought or done a million different things, who cares? Bottom line is - buyer bought something and then didn't make sure he got what he paid for.

Of course he did. CGC didn't need to be involved, but they are at least as capable (to be very polite to the OP) of assessing the comic as is the OP.

The only reason I could see the seller not taking a return is due to the longer-than-usual time between the sale and the request to return the item. He didn't need CGC to tell him there were pages missing; that could've been accomplished ten minutes after he received the book and at that point the buyer should be able to return it for a full refund. Unless the seller agreed to extend the time on a possible return to include the weeks or months needed for CGC to become involved then it's tough luck on the buyer.

 

 

[mackenzie999]

3 hours ago, DavidTheDavid said:

People talk about comics like they're liquid assets. They are illiquid.

This is a bit of a generalization. Some books are extremely liquid, and slabbing ((or at least CGC slabbing) facilitates that.

Edited August 12, 2018 by mackenzie999

[ExNihilo]

49 minutes ago, mackenzie999 said:

This is a bit of a generalization. Some books are extremely liquid, and slabbing ((or at least CGC slabbing) facilitates that.

Some books are easier to sell than others, especially if you cut the price just to unload them for cash.  But comics as a whole are illiquid.  I would be hard pressed to find someone before the day is done to buy up my entire collection without having to heavily discount and take a huge loss on it OR sell below market value.

Investopedia

[Ottobord]

On 8/10/2018 at 4:35 PM, mattn792 said:

The more I push back, the more moronic you make this idea.  A re-lockable slab with a special key?  Yeah, great idea.  So how does that work?  One master key for all slabs?  One unique key per slab?  And lord help us once some nefarious entrepreneur out there figures out how to crack the lock undetected.  Fraud would be astronomical and third party grading would be rendered completely worthless were a re-usable slab ever implemented.

And conventions already offer a slab cracking service.  We call it find someone at the CGC booth that hopefully has a little time on their hands, and bring the rep along to the seller's booth.  This is assuming Mr. Seller doesn't tell you to go have relations with yourself if you ask to crack the book before purchasing.

Your responses have been unreasonable and flawed nothing you mentioned isn't solvable by technology.  And if you suggest the technology  would be too costly you'll be wrong about that too. 

[mattn792]

11 hours ago, Ottobord said:

Your responses have been unreasonable and flawed nothing you mentioned isn't solvable by technology.  And if you suggest the technology  would be too costly you'll be wrong about that too. 

"Technology".  Nice retort.  Way to go heavy on the details.

[miraclemet]

On 8/12/2018 at 4:04 PM, mackenzie999 said:

This is a bit of a generalization. Some books are extremely liquid, and slabbing ((or at least CGC slabbing) facilitates that.

I think in the technical sense (like if you asked an accountant) they are not considered liquid assets. But in the general understanding or popular conception they would be considered generally liquid since they are relatively easy to sell with no 3rd party (like a bank) or paperwork (as say opposed to a house or a car...). 

[slg343]

On ‎8‎/‎8‎/‎2018 at 11:35 AM, RockMyAmadeus said:

Those terms would NOT hold up in court, were it ever challenged, I imagine.

Let's see if I can argue it in legalese: It creates an undue expectation of perfection on the part of the third party grading service, who has no financial stake in the item, and removes responsibility from the title holder, thereby creating the potential for unjust enrichment due to human error.

Yes, set aside the fact that HA owns a chunk of the Certified Collectibles Group, for the sake of the argument.

In other words, Heritage sells a Detective #168 CGC 7.0 for $25,000. I crack it, and discover it's missing the centerfold. It's now only worth, say, $5,000.

Is CGC on the hook for the other $20,000?

No! Of course not! HERITAGE is! Heritage...or whomever they represented...got $25,000 for a book that was only worth $5,000. THEY were the ones "unjustly enriched", even if by good faith error. THEY are the ones on the hook...they don't get to "win the lottery" just because CGC missed something.

That's neither just, ethical, nor probably legal. And yet, that's precisely what CGC has done...taken responsibility, often at significant cost (though there are ways to mitigate that, of course.)

Seems it would be fairly difficult to prove it was the same book removed in court so their policy would while not fail proof would likely hold because the new owner would have a very hard time proving the book they are holding was the same book removed from the holder.

[slg343]

On ‎8‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 1:14 PM, VintageComics said:

That's why I stated that what both the seller and buyer know (or rather knew) about PGX should be weighed.

Ultimately, the market tries to get as much as they can for a product and the buyer wants the best deal possible. Capitalism doesn't have any goodwill.

And we come back to buyer beware.

Also you are now putting all sellers in the position of trusting all buyers that open slabs that it is the same book

[1Cool]

1 hour ago, slg343 said:

Seems it would be fairly difficult to prove it was the same book removed in court so their policy would while not fail proof would likely hold because the new owner would have a very hard time proving the book they are holding was the same book removed from the holder.

 

[slg343]

2 hours ago, slg343 said:

Also you are now putting all sellers in the position of trusting all buyers that open slabs that it is the same book

This already happens and is the point of slabs to begin with.  They are graded and sealed by a third party.

 

Once it is opened chain of custody is completely gone and it could be any book.

[Lazyboy]

2 hours ago, slg343 said:

Seems it would be fairly difficult to prove it was the same book removed in court so their policy would while not fail proof would likely hold because the new owner would have a very hard time proving the book they are holding was the same book removed from the holder.

"Blind justice" is only an expression. People can still see, even in court.

[Domo Arigato]

On ‎8‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 12:37 PM, Ottobord said:

CGC could create a slab that could only be opened by a CGC representative. Perhaps with a special key.  The raw comic can then be inspected and returned to the undamaged but locked slab all under the supervision of the representative.  They could roll out the service at the conventions they attend. 

 

 

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

23 hours ago, slg343 said:

Seems it would be fairly difficult to prove it was the same book removed in court so their policy would while not fail proof would likely hold because the new owner would have a very hard time proving the book they are holding was the same book removed from the holder.

It's not difficult to prove it's the same book. Auction houses and other entities do it all the time, for identification purposes of pedigrees and/or previous auction appearances of specific books. All that is needed are pictures showing production markers (cut, centering, squareness, for example) and wear markers (visible creases, stains, etc.)

With an X-Men in the lower mid-range, it wouldn't be difficult to prove it's the same book at all. Provided this is the book in question:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1963-MARVEL-X-MEN-1-1ST-APPEARANCE-MAGNETO-CYCLOPS-BEAST-PGX-4-5-CBCS-CGC-IT-/173375280518?hash=item285df8d586%3Ag%3ALG0AAOSw-UBbLFK9&_nkw=x+men+pgx+4.5&_sacat=0&_from=R40&LH_Complete=1&rt=nc&LH_Sold=1&nma=true&si=GseEzKa0y59iFEUrdbdG00hKrJw%3D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

...then it would be rather easy to demonstrate that this is the same book.

 

 

 

[Bomber-Bob]

I think this thread has lost it's mojo . The OP has never returned or commented. The audience is now thin with those remaining arguing tangential details. SOmeone post some porn and maybe we can get this thread shut down ! 

[Sal]

this book was basically a hand grenade, being passed from person to person.  the last one to pass it before it "went off" is culpable for repair of damages.  at least that's how i see it, anyways

[RockMyAmadeus]

21 hours ago, slg343 said:

23 hours ago, slg343 said:

Also you are now putting all sellers in the position of trusting all buyers that open slabs that it is the same book

This already happens and is the point of slabs to begin with.  They are graded and sealed by a third party.

 

Once it is opened chain of custody is completely gone and it could be any book.

Are you referring to Signature Series books? Because chain of custody has no meaning to slabbed books outside of that.

That's not the point of slabs. The point of slabs is to provide a tamper resistant case which makes it more difficult to alter/change the grading opinion of a third party grader. 

As mentioned above, and in previous posts...proving it's the same book is fairly easy, especially with a well worn copy.

[KPR Comics]

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

It's not difficult to prove it's the same book. Auction houses and other entities do it all the time, for identification purposes of pedigrees and/or previous auction appearances of specific books. All that is needed are pictures showing production markers (cut, centering, squareness, for example) and wear markers (visible creases, stains, etc.)

With an X-Men in the lower mid-range, it wouldn't be difficult to prove it's the same book at all. Provided this is the book in question:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1963-MARVEL-X-MEN-1-1ST-APPEARANCE-MAGNETO-CYCLOPS-BEAST-PGX-4-5-CBCS-CGC-IT-/173375280518?hash=item285df8d586%3Ag%3ALG0AAOSw-UBbLFK9&_nkw=x+men+pgx+4.5&_sacat=0&_from=R40&LH_Complete=1&rt=nc&LH_Sold=1&nma=true&si=GseEzKa0y59iFEUrdbdG00hKrJw%3D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

...then it would be rather easy to demonstrate that this is the same book.

 

 

 

4.5 

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 8/11/2018 at 11:39 AM, wombat said:

On 8/11/2018 at 11:35 AM, RockMyAmadeus said:

The seller is a shady company...? Because the buyer didn't buy the slab from PGX.

However you want to parse words. He bought a shady product. 

There's no parsing on my part. That's a dodge on yours.

Here's what you said:

Quote

I also disagree with your assessment that the buyer exercised due diligence. They paid a lot of money to a shady company to begin with and then didn't document the aftermath.  

The buyer didn't pay a lot of money to a shady company. If you're going to hold me to absolute perfection on what I say and what I mean...and I respect anyone who does that, and encourage it, even if it's not always my favorite thing in the universe...then let's all have the same standards, right?

Whether the buyer bought a "shady product" is only opinion, obviously. PGX doesn't think it's shady, of course, and the seller doesn't have a problem with PGX' reputation, regardless of what they think of it....and the same holds true for many others. There have been 2,156 sales in the last couple of months of comics with the letters "PGX" in the title. Clearly, there are people who disagree with your opinion, to whatever degree.

Now...*I* share the opinion that PGX is shady, and there is no doubt in my mind, which is why I openly declare them fraudulent. But...still....until it is adjudicated in a court of law, that is just my opinion. And no buyer can ever be held responsible for other people's opinions. "Too bad! You should have known better!" is not a valid defense, unless you can prove that the buyer actually DID know better...and it's STILL not a defense against the commission, or the conspiracy to commit, fraud.

[Artboy99]

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

There's no parsing on my part. That's a dodge on yours.

Here's what you said:

The buyer didn't pay a lot of money to a shady company. If you're going to hold me to absolute perfection on what I say and what I mean...and I respect anyone who does that, and encourage it, even if it's not always my favorite thing in the universe...then let's all have the same standards, right?

Whether the buyer bought a "shady product" is only opinion, obviously. PGX doesn't think it's shady, of course, and the seller doesn't have a problem with PGX' reputation, regardless of what they think of it....and the same holds true for many others. There have been 2,156 sales in the last couple of months of comics with the letters "PGX" in the title. Clearly, there are people who disagree with your opinion, to whatever degree.

Now...*I* share the opinion that PGX is shady, and there is no doubt in my mind, which is why I openly declare them fraudulent. But...still....until it is adjudicated in a court of law, that is just my opinion. And no buyer can ever be held responsible for other people's opinions. "Too bad! You should have known better!" is not a valid defense, unless you can prove that the buyer actually DID know better...and it's STILL not a defense against the commission, or the conspiracy to commit, fraud.

My argument:

the certification is in place to provide the buyer the knowledge of knowing what they are actually buying and that the buyer did actually know better. It is the basis for the encapsulation model.

[Old Fashion PB and J]

3 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

It's not difficult to prove it's the same book. Auction houses and other entities do it all the time, for identification purposes of pedigrees and/or previous auction appearances of specific books. All that is needed are pictures showing production markers (cut, centering, squareness, for example) and wear markers (visible creases, stains, etc.)

With an X-Men in the lower mid-range, it wouldn't be difficult to prove it's the same book at all. Provided this is the book in question:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1963-MARVEL-X-MEN-1-1ST-APPEARANCE-MAGNETO-CYCLOPS-BEAST-PGX-4-5-CBCS-CGC-IT-/173375280518?hash=item285df8d586%3Ag%3ALG0AAOSw-UBbLFK9&_nkw=x+men+pgx+4.5&_sacat=0&_from=R40&LH_Complete=1&rt=nc&LH_Sold=1&nma=true&si=GseEzKa0y59iFEUrdbdG00hKrJw%3D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

...then it would be rather easy to demonstrate that this is the same book.

 

 

 

Prove you didn't do something to the book