I left a negative feedback and I believe it was warranted... wdyt?
TimeMachine
Posts: 261
Ok, so I end up paying a premium for a high-end card, the '96 SI For Kids Woods RC in PSA 10, winning the card the same day Tiger chips in to win the Masters in a playoff this past April. The seller assures the buyer in the auction that it is the "finest example he has ever seen" and that he has "seen many, many examples" of said card. The seller then goes on to make a point that the card is devoid of any "yellow bleed" along any of the edges, front or back --- an obvious sticking point that seperates gem mint examples from the FINEST examples discovered so far; it can mean a premium of 10 to 25% based on the demand but always commands a premium. The seller has provided decent scans of the card's front and back, but neither scan was the largest nor the crispest I'd ever seen, but seemed to be consistent with the grandiose description of the card...
Well, to make a long story just a bit shorter, I received the card in the mail two days ago and wouldn't you know it, on the back left edge of the card there IS yellow bleed, though minimal, yet easily visible to the naked eye of even the most casual observer,, though it is not obvious in the seller's original scan (though now I can see where an off-white/yellow sliver exists upon closer scrutiny of the scan).
I paid what I believe to be about $700-900 above what PSA 10's had been going for on EBAY and elsewhere, as the final price I paid was $3800.00 for the specimen... I was comfortable with it because I believed I was receiving a rare "no bleed" gem mint example of the finest golfer of our generation; needless to say, I was a bit dissappointed to see the flaw in the card I was trying to avoid.
Also, there is significant rippling in the plastic on the PSA slab, as if the slab has been subjected to extreme heat if only briefly, but the seller assured me that "that is how all PSA holders look, you must be new to collecting...". At least that part made me laugh... I will gladly pay the $5 for a reholdering, but it is the principle that bugs me behind the seller's either ignorant or deceptive claim. Did I mention that the transaction took well over a month to complete even after I sent him a Wachovia Cashier's check that he claims Wells Fargo held for 11 days before it cleared? Gimme a break...
Needless to say, I had no choice but to leave a negative feedback, and it was his 1st out of 130 positives... I think people that straight out lie about even graded cards need to be made an example of...
that's my story, and I hope it helps others in here who have been so helpful to me.
Well, to make a long story just a bit shorter, I received the card in the mail two days ago and wouldn't you know it, on the back left edge of the card there IS yellow bleed, though minimal, yet easily visible to the naked eye of even the most casual observer,, though it is not obvious in the seller's original scan (though now I can see where an off-white/yellow sliver exists upon closer scrutiny of the scan).
I paid what I believe to be about $700-900 above what PSA 10's had been going for on EBAY and elsewhere, as the final price I paid was $3800.00 for the specimen... I was comfortable with it because I believed I was receiving a rare "no bleed" gem mint example of the finest golfer of our generation; needless to say, I was a bit dissappointed to see the flaw in the card I was trying to avoid.
Also, there is significant rippling in the plastic on the PSA slab, as if the slab has been subjected to extreme heat if only briefly, but the seller assured me that "that is how all PSA holders look, you must be new to collecting...". At least that part made me laugh... I will gladly pay the $5 for a reholdering, but it is the principle that bugs me behind the seller's either ignorant or deceptive claim. Did I mention that the transaction took well over a month to complete even after I sent him a Wachovia Cashier's check that he claims Wells Fargo held for 11 days before it cleared? Gimme a break...
Needless to say, I had no choice but to leave a negative feedback, and it was his 1st out of 130 positives... I think people that straight out lie about even graded cards need to be made an example of...
that's my story, and I hope it helps others in here who have been so helpful to me.
0
Comments
So sorry this has happened to you.
"All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
Mike
Late 60's and early to mid 70's non-sports
I just hate it when someone makes a bold face lie to my face and then denies it. Too bad Ebay only allows 80 characters for a feedback, I had to be too general as to the deception that took place.
Does anyone else remember this particular auction back in April? Just curious...
I just ripped him again via e-mail reminding him of why I left him a negative and warning him of future deception on the e-waves as I will be sure to e-mail prospective bidders on his future auctions if he submits any more "grandiose" descriptions of items he intends to sell.
Regardless of the sales pitch, i dont think a neg was warranted.
Maybe i just have lowered expectation of ebay, But i am usually a happy camper if i get the card.
The seller provided scans, you could have also emailed him privately to make sure you knew exactly what you were getting.
Lots of big dealers will talk up their cards beyond belief ( mastronet anyone?)
they will also take scans of the cards and work with color saturation and different background colors to hide certain edge chipping and corners. They will call cards "rare" and low pop when they are neither and the list goes on.
I have seen scans that are so bright that it makes the card look like it has been bleached. Modern reprints have darker borders!
While i could see paying a premium for a particular strong grade, It would be do so with the card in hand.
$3800 its an enormous amount of money to me, i would have made sure that i knew exactly what i was getting, why would i trust a salesperson?
Maybe a trusted dealer, but a guy with just 130 feedbacks?
sadly ebay its not the place where you can trust blindly, everyone its doing everything they can to maximize profit.
You were negligent in your inspection of the card and now you have an average PSA 10 for which you paid 4X the going rate.
There were scans of the card, You got the card he was selling.
Did you ask questions? Did you ask for larger detailed scans?
wether he was deceptive or just using some "creative marketing", you should take some responsibility as well.
Groucho Marx
Bottom line, the seller was dishonest and unfortunately I was trusting enuff to take a shot on what IS actually a perfect example of the card, save for the sliver of yellow bleed that is not completely obvious on the scans the seller provided. I had only 2 1/2 hours to act on the auction, and based on how long the transaction took to complete, there was no guarantee I'd get a response or a larger scan... sometimes you just have to take a shot, but since $4k is a lot to you, I do not expect you to understand this. The seller said "NO YELLOW BLEED". Obviously, he was lying and provided an inconclusive scan, period.
I am glad I could be the first to tarnish this clown's feedback rating, it was bound to happen sooner or later anyway.
I remember how proud you were when you first purchased this card, after Tiger won at the Masters. Don't let something minor like "yellow bleeding" affect how you feel about your purchase.
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
In the last 20 minutes, the seller has e-mailed me and admitted that he copied and pasted the description of the card, explaining that it came from the auction that he'd won and that he paid $4500 for the card originally. So I was correct that he took a bath, and I was correct that not only was the description dishonest, but it is the same one (that sucked him in, my words) and he used it AGAIN! He did not change one word. How freakin' lazy are people for heaven's sake...?
It is sounding more and more like the seller is just lazy, stupid, or both... either way, vezzboochie deserved a negative and that is what vezzboochie received. Live and learn.
T206's are always being bought.
aloof1003@comcast.net
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
Listen, I am sorry that you feel that you were cheated. It is never a good thing when collectors walk away from a deal with a sour taste in their mouths.
I personally think you were just suckered in by his lame Hype and that you should take some responsibility for not asking more questions and paying a premium for a card with mediocre scans and from a seller you never dealt with before.
But hey i guess money its not a big deal to you. I have no idea how it feels to make 4 figure deals on cards.
Maybe it requires less common sense.
Also, i hardly sell online, and besides i am just a poor collector of mid grade cards and i wouldnt have any over priced, speculative modern cards to hype anyways.
Groucho Marx
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
I am not seeking a refund because I AM accepting responsibility for my decision to buy the card, the whole "buyer beware" thing. I am not convinced I will never beable to recoup my investment and then some, as only a handful of examples as nice as mine exist. I thought I was buying one thing, per the recycled description, and received another.
And the seller received the appropriate feedback imo... I appreciate all the opinions and comments, I had no idea this thread would develop like this...
Maybe the seller will not be dishonest or lazy next time...
<< <i>Have to agree Calleocho on this one >>
me too..
Anyone have a pic? Does "some" bleed still keep it in the 10 arena?
mike
<< <i>It's my feeling that a seller shouldn't have to give his/her opinion on the strength of the grade assigned by Psa. The grade is the grade. >>
I agree with that statement. BUT, the seller did not just say "this is a PSA 10"; he said that there was no bleeding of the yellow ink, front or back. When he said that, IMO, he took over responsibility for the buyer's satisfaction from PSA, at least with regard to that particular defect. While I agree that buying the card took something of a leap of faith, that in no way excuses the seller for telling a lie. A well-deserved negative.
solution to the problem: State "PSA 10 GEM MINT, please see scans" end of story. If your going to go into explicit detail than you better be dead on accurate in your description.
The negative in this case was fully warranted IMO, I would have done the same only after being denied a refund.
As for the card doubling and selling for 8 grand after he passes Jack... Well, it is possible (like anything else) but once cards dip, they just don't come back. Didn't one of these sell for 100,000 or something stupid?
Anyway, the card is still very nice i'm sure, and since you have play money its no biggie to you. Enjoy the card, and we'll all see what lies ahead.
GG
Didn't I say before that anyone who brings God into the picture should have red flags flying up? Another fine example!! The only reason people say this is to get your guard down (even if you don't realize it).
"We've got a bleeder!"
Jery
I'm guessing the negative and the "retaliation" could have been avoided with better communication before and after the auction. A partial refund certainly could have been an option.
How would you react to such stupidity or arrogance...?
Only after all this did he fess up to cutting and pasting the description from the very auction he won for $4500.00, after I confronted him, after I called his bluff. In my book, that clearly shows his deceit, end of story; this clown EARNED his neg. imo.
This is the first negative I've ever given anyone, and I hope I never have to give another.
on a lighter note...
Personally, I think Tiger will win 8-10 Green Jackets and 18-24 majors when he's done, and after he does that, there will certainly be a shortage of his earliest cards in gem mint condition... I will just have to sit back and root for Tiger week in, week out, and pop the cork on the day he surpasses the Golden Bear... I've got time.
1) Feedback is overrated. Unless you have a BUNCH of negs, knowone cares.
2) It's a 10 . Will always be a 10, and will sell as a 10.
3) It sounds like you put too much emphasis/pride on a retal neg.
4) Give me 4k and you can neg me all day.
Stingray