I thought PSA wasn't allowing ...

sixdart

... the Registry to be used for advertising sales? AUGUST 11, 2005 AUCTION MEMORY LANE INC.

Others have registered sets as a form of advertising, however, I feel this voilates the true spirit of the PSA Registry. It appears they do have other legitimate sets registered, but this goes a little far?

The one positive - Block Sportscards, Inc was bumped to 3rd place!

ajw

That's not too cool. I think it's ok if you have a set registered and then decide to sell it, but I'd rather not have sets registered only to sell them.

lostdart58

............................raises my hand in agreement !!!

Buccaneer

One cannot bite that hands that feeds them.

WinPitcher

certain dealers can get away with anything six

Mantlefan

Here's the policy. Let's see if they have the stones to enforce it:

Buying and Selling Policy

The PSA Set Registry is to be used to list collections of cards, tickets and autographs. By the sheer nature of the Registry, items listed are invariably bought and sold. However, using terminology such as "for sale or trade," "auction0205," or listing an item with a price is not permitted. The set registry is self-policing. Should you see an infraction of this policy, please report it to PSA.

Cubfan

Its interesting that they had an entire set at that quality that was unregistered to begin with.

gmoneystyles

I think its ok. After all, someones going to buy the entire set and someone will for at least some time have the second finest set. Whats the problem with that?

Vintagegolfcollector

I don't have a problem with it as long as Memory Lane removes "their" set from the Registry after the set has been sold. I'm working on a set where the three sets in front of are the same sets belonging to three different owners. At least the lastest owner has improved the set with a couple of upgrades over the past year.

Carew29

*POOF* here goes this thread

Griffins

Memory Lane, Mastro and Mile High all seem to be able to list sets without any threat of having them pulled. Mastro at least deletes the sets, but Memory Lane and Mile High still remain. Complaints to CU have fallen upon deaf ears.

zef204

There is a Memory Lane flyer sent back with every submission for crying out loud! I wonder if there is some type of relationship here, that being said, I don't think PSA will have a problem with them listing their set like this.

If the Cubs can scalp their own tickets, no type of agreement or "collusion" suprises me...

iamthegreatcornholio

<< <i> I wonder if there is some type of relationship here >>



look at the banner atop the message boards - they're a featured dealer

zef204

I was kind of being sarcastic

iamthegreatcornholio

i know - i just figured i'd state the obvious for those who can't connect the dots

gmoneystyles

I agree, if the set remains registered in the auction houses name after it has been sold and not deleted it is wrong and should be punishable by a set registry felony imposed by CU.




--edited for spelling but not the run on sentence.

Cubfan

I still dont understand what the problem is. Who cares if the set is titled Memory Lane or Joe Schmo?

If Im going to have a #2 set in Mastro's next auction, you can bet I will want them to mention that it is a #2 set. And, obviously, if it sells, then I retire my set and the new owner can call it whatever he or she wants.

onlychild

The golden rule...He who has the gold, makes the rules.

Welcome to Corporate America!

Kevin

Griffins

Keith- what about this scenario-

I have the number 2 set, registered to me. I consign it to Mile High, they register it, also as number 2. You buy it, now we have 3 sets tied for #2. 3 years down the line you decide you don't like the set that much, you consign it to Mastro- they put it up as #2. Now Kevin buys it, and he registers it.
The entire registry is bogged with the same set, in the top 6 slots. I know it's inevitable, but if the spam registry can be removed entirely it would make a lot more sense.

carew4me

I added "For Sale" to my 54 and 55 Bowman FB sets and was told to remove it.

Cubfan

Anthony,

If you take out the Memory Lane portion of the scenario, and have me selling my set to Bob, Bob sells to Ted and and Ted sells to Bill, there still would be 4 of the same set theorectically tied for #2 (assuming no changes).

Thats more of an issue of having retired sets taking off of the all time list. Thats a different issue than what I was talking about.

My issue was that I didnt have a problem with a set being named for a company. The title itself doesnt bother me.

rw2win

heh

thefootballcardstore

I reported the violation, along with others I'm guessing, and they emailed back that it's fixed.
Which it is. FYI

Cubfan

Now its just Memory Lane Inc..

kingraider75

subjective enforcement of forum policies is to be expected. Kinda like the ole Jordan rule with the NBA ref's. Not everyone is treated the same in this world.

Mantlefan

Well, at least they stood by their rules and did the right thing.