Seemingly legit Ebay store sold and then relisted items using same pictures. 1 1

[William-James88]

Oh man, speaking of OCD

 

[Poekaymon]

Never once said that the books weren't accurately graded, so I have no idea what those links are adding to this discussion.  Just buyer bashing time?  Should I post some links to sellers trying to get double or triple FMV to even it out?  Let me know what the rules of this game are.

[BmoGreen]

2 hours ago, William-James88 said:

Oh man, speaking of OCD

 

Hey, thanks for posting my post over here. Would love some more discussion of that issue 221 pictures I posted. Would anyone on this thread be happy receiving that book? Would this receive a 9.8 if it were opened and regraded? 

Is this a bindry chip? Does it not matter that ever page in the book is dinged at the corner as you can clearly see from the photos?

I will admit that my second book I posted is reasonable, it wasn't what I was expecting, but after looking around I have tempered my expectations. However, I can not believe that anyone would be happy receiving the issue 221 I posted.  Like I said in the post though I am literally brand new to CGC books and came here looking for guidance and opinions. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

10 hours ago, BmoGreen said:

Would anyone on this thread be happy receiving that book?

I would be thrilled. It's a lovely book. Miswraps are common on this issue, and this one is wrapped fairly well.

10 hours ago, BmoGreen said:

Would this receive a 9.8 if it were opened and regraded? 

Without question.

10 hours ago, BmoGreen said:

Is this a bindry chip?

Yes, it's a bindery chip. Notice that the corner extends past both the "X" and "Y" axes of the cover edges. That's because the cutting blade wasn't precision calibrated. That's how you can tell it's a bindery chip, rather than post-production damage.

10 hours ago, BmoGreen said:

Does it not matter that ever page in the book is dinged at the corner as you can clearly see from the photos?

Every page has the same bindery chip, which is common for books of this era. The pages aren't ding'd.

10 hours ago, BmoGreen said:

However, I can not believe that anyone would be happy receiving the issue 221 I posted.

I would.  And I was when I did.

 

Edited February 5, 2020 by RockMyAmadeus

[theCapraAegagrus]

4 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

I would be thrilled. It's a lovely book. Miswraps are common on this issue, and this one is wrapped fairly well.

Without question.

Yes, it's a bindery chip. Notice that the corner extends past both the "X" and "Y" access of the cover edges. That's because the cutting blade wasn't precision calibrated. That's how you can tell it's a bindery chip, rather than post-production damage.

Every page has the same bindery chip, which is common for books of this era. The pages aren't ding'd.

I would.  And I was when I did.

axes*

[Poekaymon]

10 hours ago, BmoGreen said:

Hey, thanks for posting my post over here. Would love some more discussion of that issue 221 pictures I posted. Would anyone on this thread be happy receiving that book? 
 

I would not have bought that first one (the 221) if I saw that, and if the picture were at an angle so that I couldn't see that, I would not be happy upon receiving it.  Though I would probably just suck it up, and have in similar situations.  This is why I no longer buy from people who post pics at odd angles or with strange cropping.  

1.  I can't remember what it was now, but I bought a 9.8 a while back where the seller had posted a pic at an angle and, sure enough, after I received it I noticed that both corners that you couldn't see well in his pictures were blunted badly.  I doubt it'd get a 9.8 if regraded, and I am quite sure the seller crafted his post in such a way as to hide those corners, but I didn't try to return it because I felt it was my fault for not being careful enough.  I did feel cheated though, and I vowed to not let it happen again. 

2.  Another time I bought a 9.8 with perfect scans.  When it arrived it had a large discoloration at the bottom middle.  I'm sure it was a printing error and that it was still actually a 9.8, but I was quite unhappy.  I was ready to return it and went back to the post and, to my extreme surprise, that defect was right there in his pictures, totally visible and obvious.  I somehow just completely missed it when I was hyper focused on the corners and the spine.  I sucked that one up too because it was straight up my fault.

So, back to your books: your second book is fine, imo.  The first one I would probably just suck up, but I might ask for a return, even with a restock fee or something if necessary, because I just personally wouldn't want to own it.  If not, then I'd just resell it and buy another one, at a loss, no doubt, because unlike some sellers I wouldn't hide the flaw when I made my own post.

As an aside, I also recently bought a 221.  I don't remember any miswrap or bindery chips, but I didn't examine it closely.  Will take a look when I get home.

Edited February 5, 2020 by Poekaymon

[RockMyAmadeus]

3 hours ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

axes*

Yeah, it was late last night, and we had a hard freeze. Thanks for the correction...

3 hours ago, TT44ly said:

Autocorrect

Er, uh, yeah, that's the ticket! 

 

[MetalPSI]

Axis already

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 hour ago, Poekaymon said:

I would not have bought that first one (the 221) if I saw that, and if the picture were at an angle so that I couldn't see that, I would not be happy upon receiving it.  Though I would probably just suck it up, and have in similar situations.  This is why I no longer buy from people who post pics at odd angles or with strange cropping.  

Which certainly wasn't the case here. Reading through this thread, your expectations are unrealistic. Don't get me wrong: there's nothing wrong with being ultra-ultra-picky about high grade books. But, that comes at a cost, and hopefully you're prepared to pay that cost in paying higher prices for those "perfect" books and vigilance in researching prior to buying. You said earlier that there was no "baseline" for 9.8s, but that's not true. There certainly is, and it's derived by looking at thousands of 9.8s and getting a feel for what CGC calls a "9.8." 

It's also important to understand that, with CGC, the age of the book very much has an effect on what is and isn't allowed in a particular book. Printing standards for mass produced disposable entertainment in decades past weren't what they are (and aren't!) today. A 9.8 book from the 40s (and there are hundreds, if not thousands, of them) is going to allow more flaws than a book from the 60s, which will also be looser than a book from the 80s. Production flaws...like bindery chips, miswraps, miscuts, bindery tears, "gripper" holes, printer's creases, and the like...are common in the newsprint era, and everyone buying these types of books should understand that going in. And if a particular flaw bothers you...ask the seller. And if they respond positively, and say "this is an exceptional copy for the grade given"...then one should be prepared to pay the price they're asking, rather than trying to "get a discount."

And if a seller offers returns on graded books...take them up on it, but be prepared to eat the cost of shipping. It's not the seller's fault that the book didn't meet your expectations, after all, and if they delivered what was advertised, it's unreasonable to ask them to bear the cost of your (perfectly legitimate) pickiness. There are a LOT of buyers who abuse the eBay system by filing "not as described" cases on books they just don't like, as a means of forcing a seller to pay for their own unmet expectations. Remember: the amount of sellers who say "no returns on third party graded books!" outnumber those who take returns...by a LOT. So if a seller offers returns...again, be willing to pay a premium, and if it doesn't stack up (but is not obviously damaged post-grading), don't force the seller to eat the cost.

And if a book IS damaged post-grading...and you're absolutely sure about it...and the seller doesn't mention it, then yes, hold those sellers accountable. Mostly, it's those sellers who hide behind the "no returns on third party graded books!" That's your red flag.

Buyers with unrealistic expectations hurt the honest sellers out there. 

PS. I agree with you that sellers should NOT be posting stock images of graded books, especially books that are signed. Whether you have 1 or 100, each one should be individually scanned, and if you receive a different book than the one shown, and the seller didn't say "these are stock images", then you have just cause to return it.

[Poekaymon]

9 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

PS. I agree with you that sellers should NOT be posting stock images of graded books, especially books that are signed. Whether you have 1 or 100, each one should be individually scanned, and if you receive a different book than the one shown, and the seller didn't say "these are stock images", then you have just cause to return it.

And that's what this thread was about. I'm glad we are in agreement.

In terms of the broader debate that this has turned into: just like you have the right to set your prices at whatever you wish (tons of sellers have "unrealistic expectations" about what their books are worth, by the way), I have the right to be picky (or OCD, or unrealistic, or whatever else has been said here) in what I choose to buy.  I've never returned anything on the basis of my OCD/unrealistic expectations--I just didn't buy them in the first place. 

Edited February 5, 2020 by Poekaymon

[MetalPSI]

1 minute ago, Poekaymon said:

And that's what this thread was about. I'm glad we are in agreement.

In terms of the broader debate that this has turned into: just like you have the right to set your prices at whatever you wish (tons of sellers have "unrealistic expectations" about what their books are worth, by the way), I have the right to be picky (or OCD, or unrealistic, or whatever else has been said here) in what I choose to buy.  I've never returned anything on the basis of my OCD/unrealistic expectations--I just didn't buy them in the first place. 

RMA not only stated you had that right, they are standing up for it

[Kevlar]

On 2/3/2020 at 6:45 AM, Iconic1s said:

If it says qty 5 then that is a completely different story, just as I said I understand pre-orders of 9.8’s. 
 

Neither of these scenarios are what the OP asked though. If it is a listing for a single book the pic should be the one I am buying, and definitely not a book I already own shown in someone else’s listing.

I also don’t agree that modern collectors are OCD. Everyone has the right to be particular about what they buy. If that is so so terribly burdensome on CGC dealers then don’t sell moderns. 

 

But is it really a listing for a single book...that was my arguement. If I get 3 copies of a book and have a listing with Qty 3...then I change it to an auction to auction 1 off, the original listing changes to Qty 2, and there's another listing on auction. Same pic, same details, etc. I do that the following week and now the buy-it-now changes to 1, there's an active listing and a sold listing. All with the same picture and same details. We routinely do this. So just having "single book" listings doesn't warrant not using the same picture. But yes, stock photo or something else should be listed. I have NO issues with that and we do that.

 

I will disagree...there are LOTS of modern collectors who are too OCD. Believe me...if I collected what I sell I wouldn't sell to myself because I'd be too much of a pain in the butt buyer for me to deal with!

 

(By the way...why can't we type @SS...is that too much of cuss word these days?)

Edited February 5, 2020 by Kevlar

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 minutes ago, Poekaymon said:

(tons of sellers have "unrealistic expectations" about what their books are worth, by the way),

No doubt about it.

3 minutes ago, Poekaymon said:

 I've never returned anything on the basis of my OCD/unrealistic expectations--I just didn't buy them in the first place. 

That's the way to do it!

 

[Poekaymon]

7 minutes ago, IkewithMike said:

RMA not only stated you had that right, they are standing up for it

Never said he didn't say that.  That's why I specifically addressed it to the broader debate going on--"you" meant sellers in general, not your friend RMA specifically and individually.  Sorry for the confusion.

[RockMyAmadeus]

5 minutes ago, Poekaymon said:

I have the right to be picky (or OCD, or unrealistic, or whatever else has been said here)

That said, let me qualify: you (and everyone) has the right to be as absolutely picky as you want to be...we need picky people to keep everyone honest (raises hand.)

But...no one has the right to have unrealistic expectations. There's a difference. Sometimes the line is very fine, but there is a difference. Saying "this book doesn't meet my personal standards" is one thing, and perfectly acceptable...but saying "this book is improperly graded" or "this book was damaged after grading" or "this book is not as described"...especially if it's the first slab you've ever bought, and the book is a perfectly typical example of the grade given...those are unrealistic expectations, and adjusting expectations to fit reality is necessary to avoid endless frustration.

[MetalPSI]

1 minute ago, Poekaymon said:

Never said he didn't say that.  That's why I specifically addressed it to the broader debate going on--"you" meant sellers in general, not your friend RMA specifically and individually.  Sorry for the confusion.

Sorry I made you point that out to me. RMA is someone I have bought books from, thought perhaps my 2 cents would be warranted, since it's a public forum and online.

[Poekaymon]

1 minute ago, IkewithMike said:

Sorry I made you point that out to me. RMA is someone I have bought books from, thought perhaps my 2 cents would be warranted, since it's a public forum and online.

Party on.

[Poekaymon]

22 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

That said, let me qualify: you (and everyone) has the right to be as absolutely picky as you want to be...we need picky people to keep everyone honest (raises hand.)

But...no one has the right to have unrealistic expectations. There's a difference. Sometimes the line is very fine, but there is a difference. Saying "this book doesn't meet my personal standards" is one thing, and perfectly acceptable...but saying "this book is improperly graded" or "this book was damaged after grading" or "this book is not as described"...especially if it's the first slab you've ever bought, and the book is a perfectly typical example of the grade given...those are unrealistic expectations, and adjusting expectations to fit reality is necessary to avoid endless frustration.

Now you just need everyone to agree on whether they are simply being picky or if they are actually being unrealistic. A semantic quagmire!  I'm still having trouble understanding just how I am being unrealistic--so maybe you can give me some examples.  I've purchased hundreds of books and only returned two of them.  I've been happy with the majority of my purchases--I simply pass on a lot of stuff.

In terms of expectations, all I expect is that the book arrives as pictured.  If I missed something in their pics that otherwise would have stopped me from purchasing it ordinarily, well, that's on me.  As I said, I've only returned two books so far.  Both had extreme SCS.  I don't know if they sent it like that or if it happened in shipping, but I took pictures of them immediately upon arrival, showed the sellers, and both sellers took them back without a struggle.  So far so good.

Edited February 5, 2020 by Poekaymon

[RockMyAmadeus]

20 minutes ago, Poekaymon said:

36 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

That said, let me qualify: you (and everyone) has the right to be as absolutely picky as you want to be...we need picky people to keep everyone honest (raises hand.)

But...no one has the right to have unrealistic expectations. There's a difference. Sometimes the line is very fine, but there is a difference. Saying "this book doesn't meet my personal standards" is one thing, and perfectly acceptable...but saying "this book is improperly graded" or "this book was damaged after grading" or "this book is not as described"...especially if it's the first slab you've ever bought, and the book is a perfectly typical example of the grade given...those are unrealistic expectations, and adjusting expectations to fit reality is necessary to avoid endless frustration.

Now you just need everyone to agree on whether they are simply being picky or if they are actually being unrealistic. I'm still having trouble understanding just how I am being unrealistic

As I said above: telling a seller "this book is improperly graded" or "this book was damaged after grading" or "this book is not as described" when the book doesn't exhibit any of those things and is a typical book for the grade on the label. Becoming familiar with what is, and what is not, allowed in a particular grade, which someone who has only ever bought a single slab is not...as I'm sure you would agree...in the position to do.

My comment, as yours, was a comment about the topic in general, not directed at you personally (as the qualifier of the "first slab" made clear.) We all need to have realistic expectations, all the time.

[Poekaymon]

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Reading through this thread, your expectations are unrealistic

I was referring to this, which came after you quoted me.