New CGC collector with a few questions about some purchases and damage 3 3

[Domo Arigato]

10 minutes ago, BmoGreen said:

Again, no worries, If you can read through this post and think I am at fault and deserve to be blocked. That is fine with me. 

The seller offered to refund you but didn't want to deal with you after that......so you give them a negative out of spite.

You're damn right you're at fault.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Offer to return the book still stands, by the way.

[BmoGreen]

1 minute ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

It's not about whether or not you "deserve" to be blocked; it's basic protection. You have outed yourself as:

1. Someone who shades the truth, and even outright lies, for personal gain.

2. Someone who, with the very first slab you purchased, decided that your grading abilities trumped both a seller who has submitted thousands and thousands of books to CGC AND CGC itself.

3. Someone who, despite all efforts to patiently explain, refused to accept that your expectations were simply unrealistic, and that you had received a perfectly typical 9.8 condition book in a 9.8 slab.

4. Someone who leaves negative feedback out of spite...damaging a seller's account...because they (wisely) put you on their blocked bidder list.

It's just basic common sense. 

1. Please explain to me how I "shaded the truth" would love to hear this one.
2. I did not decide my grading abilities trumped anyone, which is why I came here and asked. I was informed by multiple people that this book was not a 9.8. I do agree that after looking at your evidence about chipping that CGC probably did intend to grade this a 9.8. Does not mean that your scan did not obscure that damage, intentionally or not. 

3. Perfectly typical 9.8. How many other 9.8 books do you have listed right now that have this perfectly typical flaw? If it doesn't merit mentioning at the minimum a clear photo would be good. I have learned though that in the future I will be asking for higher res images
4. The feedback was not left out of spite. The feedback was more than earned, you have been nothing but condescending despite my initial contact with you basically offering to split the costs of the problem with you. Then after dropping the claim you continued to be rude simply because I didn't flat out say that the way you do things is perfect. 

I went out of my way not to get to this point and you went out of your way to get here....

[RockMyAmadeus]

18 minutes ago, BmoGreen said:

1. Please explain to me how I "shaded the truth" would love to hear this one.
2. I did not decide my grading abilities trumped anyone, which is why I came here and asked. I was informed by multiple people that this book was not a 9.8. I do agree that after looking at your evidence about chipping that CGC probably did intend to grade this a 9.8. Does not mean that your scan did not obscure that damage, intentionally or not. 

3. Perfectly typical 9.8. How many other 9.8 books do you have listed right now that have this perfectly typical flaw? If it doesn't merit mentioning at the minimum a clear photo would be good. I have learned though that in the future I will be asking for higher res images
4. The feedback was not left out of spite. The feedback was more than earned, you have been nothing but condescending despite my initial contact with you basically offering to split the costs of the problem with you. Then after dropping the claim you continued to be rude simply because I didn't flat out say that the way you do things is perfect. 

I went out of my way not to get to this point and you went out of your way to get here....

This post does not jive with the rest of this thread, or the claim. I have already explained where and how you shaded the truth. You claim the picture was "bad", yet made an offer on the book anyway. You did not "basically offer" to "split the costs", you wanted me to bear the entire burden of the shipping costs of the first book to and from you. That's not "splitting the costs." You refused to contact me directly about the problem. You were informed by multiple people who were, themselves, uninformed, who had little to no expertise in this area, that this book was not a 9.8. My scan does not obscure that damage...because it is very small, it is not easy to see, as I have already explained.

Leaving someone a negative because they placed you on their blocked bidder list is the very definition of spite.

You refuse to take any responsibility for your unrealistic expectations, and refused to drop it, insisting on relentlessly insinuating, over and over, that my listing practices...and doing it again in your negative feedback...are deceptive.

You have operated in bad faith this entire transaction. You take zero responsibility, for anything.

 

Edited February 10, 2020 by RockMyAmadeus

[RockMyAmadeus]

15 minutes ago, BmoGreen said:

3. Perfectly typical 9.8. How many other 9.8 books do you have listed right now that have this perfectly typical flaw?

Several. I even listed one in my first reply in this thread.

Here's another:

Bottom right corner AND upper left

Edited February 10, 2020 by RockMyAmadeus

[RockMyAmadeus]

Here's another:

Upper left corner.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Here's another:

Upper left corner.

Shall I continue @BmoGreen...?

[Domo Arigato]

29 minutes ago, BmoGreen said:

Again, no worries, If you can read through this post and think I am at fault and deserve to be blocked. That is fine with me. 

Just an FYI for those wanting to block this buyer so he can't leave you a negative out of spite.

His eBay handle is bmogreena.......which is slightly different than his forum name.

 

 

[Number 6]

The OP may want to think twice about purchasing high-grade CGC copies of Incredible Hulk #271 as those also seem to be prone to corner bindery chipping. 
 

And also avoid Batman #404 as most copies seem to have some degree of bindery tears along the top edge of the front cover. 
 

And also avoid Saga of the Swamp Thing #21 with it’s tendency to have bindery wear around the top staple holes. 
 

And....well, as RMA already pointed out, there’s a number of comics from that era that have printing defects that are allowed in high-grade up to 9.8. 
 

It’s ok to disagree with CGC’s grading of course, but maybe to be consistent he should avoid 3rd party graded books altogether. Though I have a hard time imagining he’ll find raw copies he’d be happy with either.  May be best to just buy books in person. 

[Number 6]

19 minutes ago, BmoGreen said:

1. Please explain to me how I "shaded the truth" would love to hear this one.
2. I did not decide my grading abilities trumped anyone, which is why I came here and asked. I was informed by multiple people that this book was not a 9.8. I do agree that after looking at your evidence about chipping that CGC probably did intend to grade this a 9.8. Does not mean that your scan did not obscure that damage, intentionally or not. 

3. Perfectly typical 9.8. How many other 9.8 books do you have listed right now that have this perfectly typical flaw? If it doesn't merit mentioning at the minimum a clear photo would be good. I have learned though that in the future I will be asking for higher res images
4. The feedback was not left out of spite. The feedback was more than earned, you have been nothing but condescending despite my initial contact with you basically offering to split the costs of the problem with you. Then after dropping the claim you continued to be rude simply because I didn't flat out say that the way you do things is perfect. 

I went out of my way not to get to this point and you went out of your way to get here....

Wrong. 
 

You were offered to return the book for a refund. 
 

That’s where it should have ended. 

[Domo Arigato]

Also need to mention that bmogreena sells on eBay as well.  During the last 12 months he received the following Neutral Feedback (Link):

"Samsung Water Filter is old stock. Product does not match image on listing."

You might want to move out of that glass house before you start throwing boulders.

 

 

Edited February 10, 2020 by Domo Arigato

[Semicentennial]

28 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Offer to return the book still stands, by the way.

Classy move considering the pettiness of the OP.

[RockMyAmadeus]

48 minutes ago, 50 Fiddy said:

Classy move considering the pettiness of the OP.

Appreciate that. As I said in the EBAY Blocked Bidder thread, ultimately, it doesn't matter what I think about the book. It only matters what the buyer thinks. And if he doesn't think it's a 9.8, that's his right and privilege to think that. That's where his "you think you're right!" and "you've been nothing but rude and condescending!" claims fail. It is my job to try to persuade a buyer, sure....but at the end of it, if the buyer doesn't like it, he has every right to return it. My opinion on the book is ultimately entirely irrelevant. After all...its not my money at stake, here.

I could say "eff that guy! He left me a neg! Screw him!"...but that wouldn't make me any better than most typical "Comic Book Guys" and my goal is to BE better than those guys.

And that means taking a return if the buyer doesn't like it, no matter what I think.

BUT....there's a caveat here...if this buyer refuses to return it, then he is accepting that the book is, in fact, what it is: a 9.8 book in a 9.8 slab.

Ball is (again) in his court.

Edited February 10, 2020 by RockMyAmadeus

[BmoGreen]

13 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

 

I could say "eff that guy! He left me a neg! Screw him!"...but that wouldn't make me any better than most typical "Comic Book Guys" and my goal is to BE better than those guys.

 

LOL

[Domo Arigato]

1 minute ago, BmoGreen said:

LOL

Did this thread go how you intended?

LOL

[RockMyAmadeus]

3 minutes ago, BmoGreen said:

17 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

 

I could say "eff that guy! He left me a neg! Screw him!"...but that wouldn't make me any better than most typical "Comic Book Guys" and my goal is to BE better than those guys.

 

LOL

Here's a question I have for you: why did you ding my "ship cost" Detailed Seller Rating...? The ship charge to you was $14.95, and you know, as a seller, eBay takes roughly 12% of that in fees (meaning I got about $13.22 for it) and the actual cost to ship it to you in Michigan was $15.55, plus the cost of the materials I used to ship.

Just because you could...?

[Domo Arigato]

2 hours ago, BmoGreen said:

Only left the neg after RMA added me to his blocked buyer list. 

 

1 hour ago, BmoGreen said:

The feedback was not left out of spite. 

 

[BmoGreen]

25 minutes ago, Domo Arigato said:

Did this thread go how you intended?

LOL

Lol, no.... I didn't really have any expectations. Came here asking about 2 books. Everyone said one of the books I shouldn't worry about and the other I should. So I didn't worry about the book everyone said I shouldn't worry about and did worry about the one they said I should. RMA told me to come here and ask about it after I opened my dispute. Well I already had...that is exactly why I opened my dispute. I really can't believe RMA simply didn't split the cost with me to trade me one of his other copies of this book and call it a day as I requested. He would of been out like 18 bucks and would of never had to hear another word about it. Not only that, but he would have had the profit from the other book I offered to buy from him. 
 

[Domo Arigato]

34 minutes ago, BmoGreen said:

I really can't believe RMA simply didn't split the cost with me to trade me one of his other copies of this book and call it a day as I requested. He would of been out like 18 bucks and would of never had to hear another word about it. Not only that, but he would have had the profit from the other book I offered to buy from him. 

Because he was under no obligation to spend more money to do what you wanted simply because you wanted it.  If something was wrong with your purchase that was RMA's fault, I can guarantee you that he would have bent over backwards to make it right for you at his expense.  No need to open a dispute....he would have simply taken care of you one hundred percent, because that's the kind of seller he is.  With many sellers on eBay, it's like pulling teeth to get them to do the right thing.

You didn't like the defect that was on your book.....even after RMA showed you that it's a pretty common defect for that grade by posting numerous example of it.  Fine.  You have a right to your opinion.......so RMA offered to take it back and give you a refund.....even though he shipped you what you had purchased.  However, he (wisely in my opinion) decided to block you from further purchases to avoid this scenario with you in the future.....which was his right.  So you left him a negative out of spite for it.  You can deny it.  But that's exactly what you did.  I know it.  You know it.  And everyone else in here knows it.  And yet, even after you left your negative, RMA has still offered to take the book back and give you a refund.  So, who do you think has the moral high ground in this situation?  Here's a hint.....it's not you.

But, whatever.  You left him a negative.  You got your bit of satisfaction now, but perhaps you should have thought that through a bit more.  You negative will fall off of his feedback page in 12 months.  You being on the EBAY: BLOCKED BIDDER list in here is forever.  That thread is not going anywhere.  And your cavalier attitude about it suggests to me that you really don't realize how many big eBay sellers there are in here and how many of them use that thread to keep from dealing with the d-bags that infest eBay.  And, as new sellers come into the market and visit this forum, they too will see that thread and who they shouldn't be dealing with.

So, the next time you find a book you really want at a price that you really like, don't be surprised when you get a message that the seller has you blocked.

I hope it was worth it.

 

 

Edited February 10, 2020 by Domo Arigato

[RockMyAmadeus]

41 minutes ago, BmoGreen said:

Lol, no.... I didn't really have any expectations. Came here asking about 2 books. Everyone said one of the books I shouldn't worry about and the other I should. So I didn't worry about the book everyone said I shouldn't worry about and did worry about the one they said I should. RMA told me to come here and ask about it after I opened my dispute. Well I already had...that is exactly why I opened my dispute. I really can't believe RMA simply didn't split the cost with me to trade me one of his other copies of this book and call it a day as I requested. He would of been out like 18 bucks and would of never had to hear another word about it. Not only that, but he would have had the profit from the other book I offered to buy from him. 
 

Because:

1. I have no guarantee, and every expectation, if I send you a different copy that you will find some other flaw that is perfectly acceptable in a CGC 9.8, but not to you.

2. No, everyone did NOT say you should "worry about the other one." The opinions you got here...all 4 of them...were varied.

3. You framed the the situation to get opinions that would agree with yours.

4. You failed to contact me before opening a "Not As Described" claim on a book that is exactly as described.

5. You failed to tell me in your dispute, after I suggested you come here to get opinions, that you had already done that (deceptive concealment.)

6. You refuse to answer simple questions, like "if you claim the picture was "bad" from the outset...why did you even bother making an offer?" Because the answer to that is "the picture was just fine UNTIL the book showed up and had a flaw you didn't like." Then, and ONLY then, did the picture become "bad."

7. The "other books" you offered to buy were far less than I was willing to consider. You expect perfection, but aren't willing to pay for it.

8. Your math is STILL off. If I pay the return shipping of the slab you have, after ORIGINALLY paying the cost to get the book to you, would not be "split" if you then bought another book and I "piggybacked" a replacement with it. I'm still paying $35 to get the original book to and from you, while you're only paying the additional cost for a second slab ($5-$7 or so.)

How is that "splitting the cost"? But mostly it's the fact that I'm not going to be out "18 bucks" just because the book didn't suit your tastes, and you didn't bother to find out what your tastes were ahead of time. "I don't like this flaw that this book has that is perfectly acceptable in the grade it was given!" is NOT a valid reason to open a "Not As Described" claim.

As @MR SigS said, your learning curve shouldn't be at the expense of a seller or their inventory.

You bought the book at a good price, and are now trying to leverage an even better (in your eyes) outcome at my expense. 

Your actions here are the very essence of bad faith.

Edited February 10, 2020 by RockMyAmadeus