Makes you further appreciate a truly honest guy like Steve Hart all the more.
Any idea who that "buyer" is on ebay selling wise?
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Posted below is a scan of the 1978 Topps pack I received from the late 70's early 80's rip compared to a pack I received from the current 1978 case break. The one on the left is from the 70's & 80's rip, the one on the right is from the 1978 case break. I'm not a pack expert, but the seals appear to be very different. In addition, the wrapper is much looser on the 70's & 80's rip than the 1978 case break pack. Again, I am not a pack expert so draw your own conclusions. I thought it would be interesting to see the packs side to side.
>>
Krems
This was brought up before - on the pack on the left - check the pattern of the gloss of the wrapper by holding it under a light.
The wrappers are very shiny - unless heated - then they get dull. The pattern for the heat roller is very precise - as in the pic below - if the entire surface of your pack is dull? The reseal was very sloppy. But, tell-tale - indicative of tampering IMO.
If those were supposed to have come from Steve Hart - send it back to him for verification. This is like the final nail in the coffin for me.
<< <i>I'm real sorry and I mourn in your suffering.
I apologize. >>
jgarci
When you joined here - you agreed to certain behavior - now everyone strays from it - no problem.
But, if the Mods are confronted with a complaint, they can decide that the behavior is egregious enough to expel that individual.
Part of the agreement:
The following rules of conduct are intended to make the experience of using our Forums more informative and enjoyable for all of our users:
1. As a general rule of conduct on the Forums, before posting a message on the Forums, you should ask yourself if the message is something that you would say to someone if you were speaking to them in person. In other words, you should be polite, treat others with respect, and avoid taking a confrontational or belligerent tone.
The last person that I registered a complaint about is long gone from here.
This is not a threat but rather a statement of fact.
Stone probably just didn't see that -- he's very fair and might not know the extensive history of you being cruely and unnecessarily provoked on here...
From what I've read, I doubt you'll need to apologize...
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
But, if jgarci feels like he's been treated badly - he still shouldn't say things like this:
<< <i>I am so glad you stupid sheep lost your money. Just proves to me that you guys are blinded by your vintage prejudice.
Hey 80'sjunkie, burn your stuff. It works and teh sheep on teh board here will like you more because they are into burning anythingmade of paper that they don't like.
Wow, though, I can't believe you were able to rip these guys off here.
Well, I mean they are SOOOOOOOOOOOO stupid for trusting anybody on a friggin' Internet forum board.
No wodner I argue with tehse stupid peope so much. It's because they are living in a box, living in a cardboard box! (figuratively speaking)
So thank you 80'sjunkie!! thank you with all my heart I support your scam 100%
BY the way you forgot to cange your personal info and banking account info before they caught wind. Trust me, Paypal's collection efforts are minimal at best.
Heck you should have just mailed them empty packages certified by USPS. Paypal would have sided with you!!!
Anyway, maybe next time!!
Thank you for humbling the sheep on this board.
You making them feel like they messed up makes me feel good!!!!
I mean I only feel this way because of the way they have treated me.
I never meant any harm to them.
But because I was different, they Amost all fought me.
Meanwhie they all got blidsided by your pathetic plan.
Thank you again!
PS: I, too am a huge 80's junkie
Gen-X to the fullest >>
I think he went over the line - this is a very sad situation and no one wants to be kicked and insulted when they're down IMO.
mike is 100 percent right. i am sure jmb wouldnt be defending jgarci11 either if he wasnt a customer of his. he needs that special someone to buy the refractors which dont make the grade after 3 attempts.
I like Boo (and his PSA McGwires) but that statement was ridiculous. I didnt want to get into it, but if i did here would have been the point:
If theres a raffle with 1 million tickets sold for $1 each, does it not sting if the guy walks with the 1 million and there never was a raffle? even though you're out only $1, you would tend to despise the difference between the $1 you still would have had, and the million he walked off with. In this instance, Gary must be in the thousands.
<< <i>Yeah...your guys observations on the packs are right on. I'll have to look throught the other packs again, but the 1977 looks legit. I'll have to examine the others. >>
Remember -- my '77 came back authenticated from PSA as legit (PSA 8 in fact).
I do believe at least a portion of the 77's are completely legit packs --- though that does not necessarily mean they did or didn't come from BBCE.
-t
- Building these sets: ------- 1960 Topps Baseball PSA 8+ ------- 1985 Topps Hockey PSA 9+
Sorry boo, but I have to agree with Steve here, too. Minimizing the damage (financially) through your formula just doesn't make sense in this situation. I recall that you came on here not long ago saying that you had never received a higher dollar purchase that was supposed to be shipped insured and everyone here chimed in to help by steering you in the right direction to file a Paypal claim if that was the case, so you ought to be more sympathetic to what's going on here.
This hobby of ours is predicated on trust and though there are many different collectors involved here, we all represent the community as a whole, and anyone who willfully violates that trust should be held accountable.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Sorry boo, but I have to agree with Steve here, too. Minimizing the damage (financially) through your formula just doesn't make sense in this situation. I recall that you came on here not long ago saying that you had never received a higher dollar purchase that was supposed to be shipped insured and everyone here chimed in to help by steering you in the right direction to file a Paypal claim if that was the case, so you ought to be more sympathetic to what's going on here. >>
I'm completely sympathetic to what's going on here. Getting jammed is a lousy feeling; I should know, since I am almost 100% positive that I have been stiffed by more people than anyone else on these boards. I'm still the proud owner of a 2" stack of IOU's from Denver gamblers that total well into the five digits. I used to own a small roofing business, and if I had back every air compressor, coil nailer and circular saw that was ever stolen from me I could fill a couple warehouses. I've had business partners jam me for thousands, and I've had 'friends' get over on me for near equal amounts. When it comes to getting bent there aren't many folks who've got more yarns to spin than I do.
Would it suck if the guy walked with the raffle money? Hell yes it would. Does it suck that Gary took honest guys on this board for an amount that in all likelihood is somewhere in the four figures? You bet it does. But the beat goes on, boys. And like I said, your expected loss on this fiasco--assuming you were going to rip the packs-- is probably somewhere around 1/4 of what you paid. That's ALL I ever said; I made no statements defending Gary, or any statements that suggested nobody should care about their losses. What I did try to do is put those losses into some kind of perspective, and I'm frankly at a loss as to why that observation has become the focus of any kind of debate.
Does it suck that Gary took honest guys on this board for an amount that in all likelihood is somewhere in the four figures? You bet it does. But the beat goes on, boys. And like I said, your expected loss on this fiasco--assuming you were going to rip the packs-- is probably somewhere around 1/4 of what you paid.
I understand your point, but to your statement that the expected loss is around 1/4 of what anyone paid is false. If the packs are truly unopened and authentic, the loss may be (and is most certainly) far greater than 1/4 of the cost of the packs (at least from what I've seen pulled so far on the '78 bust thread). But, again, that's not the key issue here. The issue is that a very large group of collectors believe, with good reason and backed by an overwhelming amount of evidence, that they got taken for a ride. Will we move on from here? Most certainly. The 1980 wax case is well underway. But that doesn't mean that we should all just say oh well and move on in light of what's been happening here. That's all I'm trying to say.
Edit: I see that you edited the last line of your post and I can agree with you there to some extent then, but the 1/4 cost is still not accurate.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Does it suck that Gary took honest guys on this board for an amount that in all likelihood is somewhere in the four figures? You bet it does. But the beat goes on, boys. And like I said, your expected loss on this fiasco--assuming you were going to rip the packs-- is probably somewhere around 1/4 of what you paid.
I understand your point, but to your statement that the expected loss is around 1/4 of what anyone paid is false. If the packs are truly unopened and authentic, the loss may be (and is most certainly) far greater than 1/4 of the cost of the packs (at least from what I've seen pulled so far on the '78 bust thread). But, again, that's not the key issue here. The issue is that a very large group of collectors believe, with good reason and backed by an overwhelming amount of evidence, that they got taken for a ride. Will we move on from here? Most certainly. The 1980 wax case is well underway. But that doesn't mean that we should all just say oh well and move on in light of what's been happening here. That's all I'm trying to say.
Edit: I see that you edited the last line of your post and I can agree with you there to some extent then, but the 1/4 cost is still not accurate. >>
grote-
I don't expect to "make back" more than 25% on any unopened stuff I buy. If I do, it's a plus. I enjoy the ripping experience but it is way unrealistic to think that you will be able to make money on packs/boxes/cases you open. As a generality, this stuff is worth way more unopened than opened. 75%? Maybe.
That's not to say that we should have been ripped off, but not getting the money card or great centering are risks of opening packs.
As for the 78 rip, If I put on eBay all 9 opened packs I doubt I would get 25% of what I paid for the 9 packs. If I grade the stars/high end commons, another crapshoot.
The busting wax model will not be profitable in the long run. Sure you will pull some great stuff and make some money on a few busts, but on the whole you will lose your a$$.
Again, that's not to say we shouldn't get untampered packs but there is a high percentage even an untampered pack will yield garbage.
I don't expect to "make back" more than 25% on any unopened stuff I buy. If I do, it's a plus. I enjoy the ripping experience but it is way unrealistic to think that you will be able to make money on packs/boxes/cases you open. As a generality, this stuff is worth way more unopened than opened. 75%? Maybe.
That's not to say that we should have been ripped off, but not getting the money card or great centering are risks of opening packs.
As for the 78 rip, If I put on eBay all 9 opened packs I doubt I would get 25% of what I paid for the 9 packs. If I grade the stars/high end commons, another crapshoot.
The busting wax model will not be profitable in the long run. Sure you will pull some great stuff and make some money on a few busts, but on the whole you will lose your a$$.
Again, that's not to say we shouldn't get untampered packs but there is a high percentage even an untampered pack will yield garbage.
I agree with you that opening packs is not always going to recoup cost, but I've opened enough packs over the years to know that for every few lots of packs that yield nothing, there's one or more that will yield a high grade high dollar card, too. The point is that when you're buying packs you ought to at least have a chance at pulling the mint card that will recoup your investment, and as CDsNuts and softparade will attest to, you can actually even break even or eke out a profit by busting genuine unopened product. My complaint (like everyone else's here) is that if all of us should at least have an opportunity to break even or better and if the deck is stacked, so to speak, well that's not good for anyone involved.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I agree with you that opening packs is not always going to recoup cost, but I've opened enough packs over the years to know that for every few lots of packs that yield nothing, there's one or more that will yield a high grade high dollar card, too. The point is that when you're buying packs you ought to at least have a chance at pulling the mint card that will recoup your investment, and as CDsNuts and softparade will attest to, you can actually even break even or eke out a profit by busting genuine unopened product. My complaint (like everyone else's here) is that if all of us should at least have an opportunity to break even or better and if the deck is stacked, so to speak, well that's not good for anyone involved. >>
Removing the key cards from the packs reminds me of what the Texas Lottery has been like - which was a national news story. Perhaps Gary will become a future Texas Lottery executive.
March 1, 2007, 8:18PM
Fat chance Texas Lottery should not sell scratch-off cards with zero chance of paying off.
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle
If a charity continued to sell raffle tickets long after the prizes had been awarded, it would constitute fraud. Yet this is exactly what the Texas Lottery does with some of its popular scratch-off games.
As a team from the Chronicle's Austin Bureau and the San Antonio Express-News documented, the lottery's Deal or No Deal game was still being sold after 96 percent of the prizes and 99 percent of the money had been claimed. The odds of winning big in the lottery are astronomical at the start of the game. Toward the end, the odds become impossible. Players might as well just send their money to the state treasury and skip scratching and tossing away the tickets.
Unlike Lotto Texas, a game in which every set of six numbers has an equal, if implausible, chance of winning, the scratch-off games have a structural problem. If the big money is claimed early in the game, sufficient losers must purchase no-win tickets to pay the prizes and overhead.
If the state lottery and its contractor cannot devise a means in which scratch-off games will be discontinued when most of the prizes and money are gone, the games should be abandoned. State revenues might suffer, but the state should not be profiting from the outright fleecing of its residents. In this instance, the odds of winning are no better whether one buys a ticket or not.
A scratch-off player interviewed by the Chronicle had the best advice: "If you don't want to lose, keep your money."
To that can be added this corollary: If you buy a lottery scratch-off card long after the game has started, you will not be coming into the big money.
I say this as a completely independent observer but the current football rip seems to be legit. I have busted a ton of 70's and 80's fb wax and vending and many of the top cards have already been pulled and the conditions are generally very good (or at least consistent w/ conditions I have seen pulled from wax).
It is entirely possible that 80's Junkie (or whatever his name is) has been completely honest in this rip even though his ethics are questionable in other areas.
Once again, I'm not trying to defend him - I just want to caution the villagers to put away their pitchforks and torches before storming the castle.
Regards,
Greg M.
Collecting vintage auto'd fb cards and Dan Marino cards!!
<< <i>Does it suck that Gary took honest guys on this board for an amount that in all likelihood is somewhere in the four figures? You bet it does. But the beat goes on, boys. And like I said, your expected loss on this fiasco--assuming you were going to rip the packs-- is probably somewhere around 1/4 of what you paid.
I understand your point, but to your statement that the expected loss is around 1/4 of what anyone paid is false. If the packs are truly unopened and authentic, the loss may be (and is most certainly) far greater than 1/4 of the cost of the packs (at least from what I've seen pulled so far on the '78 bust thread). But, again, that's not the key issue here. The issue is that a very large group of collectors believe, with good reason and backed by an overwhelming amount of evidence, that they got taken for a ride. Will we move on from here? Most certainly. The 1980 wax case is well underway. But that doesn't mean that we should all just say oh well and move on in light of what's been happening here. That's all I'm trying to say.
Edit: I see that you edited the last line of your post and I can agree with you there to some extent then, but the 1/4 cost is still not accurate. >>
*sigh*. The 1/4 figure was derived using the parameters I set forth in the first post. If you change those then obviously you change the expected loss.
I received my 2 lots from the vintage basketball rip and here are my findings: I can say with a certain degree of certainty that my 78 Topps, 87 Fleer, and 88 Fleer have been tampered with. The 79 Topps and 81 Topps look legit.
I posted this in another thread, Thought it may be appropriate here as well-
"i have been thinking that maybe a group of us could get together, And Start a thread on Pack re-sealing;what to look for. We could all share our expertise, or lack of expertise on the subject. Maybe even ask a guest to come in like Steve Hart and give us a few "what to look for's." That way we could all have a point of reference to go back to on the subject."
<< <i>I received my 2 lots from the vintage basketball rip and here are my findings: I can say with a certain degree of certainty that my 78 Topps, 87 Fleer, and 88 Fleer have been tampered with. The 79 Topps and 81 Topps look legit.
Lee >>
I received my packs today as well and have posted scans of all the packs. They are wrapped tight, however I am no pack expert and have no idea if they have been tampered with. The folds on the packs don't look right, but I may be looking to hard to find something wrong.
If anyone wants to check please go to the basketball rip post.
My daughter was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at the age of 2 (2003). My son was diagnosed with Type 1 when he was 17 on December 31, 2009. We were stunned that another child of ours had been diagnosed. Please, if you don't have a favorite charity, consider giving to the JDRF (Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation)
Comments
Makes you further appreciate a truly honest guy like Steve Hart all the more.
Any idea who that "buyer" is on ebay selling wise?
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Just proves to me that you guys are blinded by your vintage prejudice.
<< <i>I am so glad you stupid sheep lost your money.
Just proves to me that you guys are blinded by your vintage prejudice. >>
ignorant pos.
<< <i>Posted below is a scan of the 1978 Topps pack I received from the late 70's early 80's rip compared to a pack I received from the current 1978 case break. The one on the left is from the 70's & 80's rip, the one on the right is from the 1978 case break. I'm not a pack expert, but the seals appear to be very different. In addition, the wrapper is much looser on the 70's & 80's rip than the 1978 case break pack. Again, I am not a pack expert so draw your own conclusions. I thought it would be interesting to see the packs side to side.
Krems
This was brought up before - on the pack on the left - check the pattern of the gloss of the wrapper by holding it under a light.
The wrappers are very shiny - unless heated - then they get dull. The pattern for the heat roller is very precise - as in the pic below - if the entire surface of your pack is dull? The reseal was very sloppy.
But, tell-tale - indicative of tampering IMO.
If those were supposed to have come from Steve Hart - send it back to him for verification. This is like the final nail in the coffin for me.
mike
<< <i>I am so glad you stupid sheep lost your money.
Just proves to me that you guys are blinded by your vintage prejudice. >>
Very bad.
He hates himself. He is a sad, sad little boy.
I apologize.
<< <i>I'm real sorry and I mourn in your suffering.
I apologize. >>
jgarci
When you joined here - you agreed to certain behavior - now everyone strays from it - no problem.
But, if the Mods are confronted with a complaint, they can decide that the behavior is egregious enough to expel that individual.
Part of the agreement:
The following rules of conduct are intended to make the experience of using our Forums more informative and enjoyable for all of our users:
1. As a general rule of conduct on the Forums, before posting a message on the Forums, you should ask yourself if the message is something that you would say to someone if you were speaking to them in person. In other words, you should be polite, treat others with respect, and avoid taking a confrontational or belligerent tone.
The last person that I registered a complaint about is long gone from here.
This is not a threat but rather a statement of fact.
Stone
<< <i>I just apologized. >>
Stone probably just didn't see that -- he's very fair and might not know the extensive history of you being cruely and unnecessarily provoked on here...
If it was meant in sincerity then my apologies.
From what I've read, I doubt you'll need to apologize...
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I doubt it also >>
Actually I think he was being sincere.
The refractor guys are feeling ganged up on.
But, if jgarci feels like he's been treated badly - he still shouldn't say things like this:
<< <i>I am so glad you stupid sheep lost your money.
Just proves to me that you guys are blinded by your vintage prejudice.
Hey 80'sjunkie, burn your stuff. It works and teh sheep on teh board here will like you more because they are into burning anythingmade of paper that they don't like.
Wow, though, I can't believe you were able to rip these guys off here.
Well, I mean they are SOOOOOOOOOOOO stupid for trusting anybody on a friggin' Internet forum board.
No wodner I argue with tehse stupid peope so much. It's because they are living in a box, living in a cardboard box! (figuratively speaking)
So thank you 80'sjunkie!! thank you with all my heart I support your scam 100%
BY the way you forgot to cange your personal info and banking account info before they caught wind. Trust me, Paypal's collection efforts are minimal at best.
Heck you should have just mailed them empty packages certified by USPS. Paypal would have sided with you!!!
Anyway, maybe next time!!
Thank you for humbling the sheep on this board.
You making them feel like they messed up makes me feel good!!!!
I mean I only feel this way because of the way they have treated me.
I never meant any harm to them.
But because I was different, they Amost all fought me.
Meanwhie they all got blidsided by your pathetic plan.
Thank you again!
PS: I, too am a huge 80's junkie
Gen-X to the fullest >>
I think he went over the line - this is a very sad situation and no one wants to be kicked and insulted when they're down IMO.
mike
As my mother would say...."You have the patience of a saint"
Rock on!
Not 32.00 each? <eyeroll>
Steve
<< <i>A compelling case for full-refunds is made through the findings detailed in this thread.
Not 32.00 each? <eyeroll>
Steve >>
Why do you do this, Steve? You know it's stupid, you know it's wrong, and you know it ticks me off. So what's the point?
<< <i> Not 32.00 each? <eyeroll>
Steve >>
I like Boo (and his PSA McGwires) but that statement was ridiculous. I didnt want to get into it, but if i did here would have been the point:
If theres a raffle with 1 million tickets sold for $1 each, does it not sting if the guy walks with the 1 million and there never was a raffle? even though you're out only $1, you would tend to despise the difference between the $1 you still would have had, and the million he walked off with. In this instance, Gary must be in the thousands.
edited for grammar
<< <i>Yeah...your guys observations on the packs are right on. I'll have to look throught the other packs again, but the 1977 looks legit. I'll have to examine the others. >>
Remember -- my '77 came back authenticated from PSA as legit (PSA 8 in fact).
I do believe at least a portion of the 77's are completely legit packs --- though that does not necessarily mean they did or didn't come from BBCE.
-t
------- 1960 Topps Baseball PSA 8+
------- 1985 Topps Hockey PSA 9+
This hobby of ours is predicated on trust and though there are many different collectors involved here, we all represent the community as a whole, and anyone who willfully violates that trust should be held accountable.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Sorry boo, but I have to agree with Steve here, too. Minimizing the damage (financially) through your formula just doesn't make sense in this situation. I recall that you came on here not long ago saying that you had never received a higher dollar purchase that was supposed to be shipped insured and everyone here chimed in to help by steering you in the right direction to file a Paypal claim if that was the case, so you ought to be more sympathetic to what's going on here. >>
I'm completely sympathetic to what's going on here. Getting jammed is a lousy feeling; I should know, since I am almost 100% positive that I have been stiffed by more people than anyone else on these boards. I'm still the proud owner of a 2" stack of IOU's from Denver gamblers that total well into the five digits. I used to own a small roofing business, and if I had back every air compressor, coil nailer and circular saw that was ever stolen from me I could fill a couple warehouses. I've had business partners jam me for thousands, and I've had 'friends' get over on me for near equal amounts. When it comes to getting bent there aren't many folks who've got more yarns to spin than I do.
Would it suck if the guy walked with the raffle money? Hell yes it would. Does it suck that Gary took honest guys on this board for an amount that in all likelihood is somewhere in the four figures? You bet it does. But the beat goes on, boys. And like I said, your expected loss on this fiasco--assuming you were going to rip the packs-- is probably somewhere around 1/4 of what you paid. That's ALL I ever said; I made no statements defending Gary, or any statements that suggested nobody should care about their losses. What I did try to do is put those losses into some kind of perspective, and I'm frankly at a loss as to why that observation has become the focus of any kind of debate.
I understand your point, but to your statement that the expected loss is around 1/4 of what anyone paid is false. If the packs are truly unopened and authentic, the loss may be (and is most certainly) far greater than 1/4 of the cost of the packs (at least from what I've seen pulled so far on the '78 bust thread). But, again, that's not the key issue here. The issue is that a very large group of collectors believe, with good reason and backed by an overwhelming amount of evidence, that they got taken for a ride. Will we move on from here? Most certainly. The 1980 wax case is well underway. But that doesn't mean that we should all just say oh well and move on in light of what's been happening here. That's all I'm trying to say.
Edit: I see that you edited the last line of your post and I can agree with you there to some extent then, but the 1/4 cost is still not accurate.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Does it suck that Gary took honest guys on this board for an amount that in all likelihood is somewhere in the four figures? You bet it does. But the beat goes on, boys. And like I said, your expected loss on this fiasco--assuming you were going to rip the packs-- is probably somewhere around 1/4 of what you paid.
I understand your point, but to your statement that the expected loss is around 1/4 of what anyone paid is false. If the packs are truly unopened and authentic, the loss may be (and is most certainly) far greater than 1/4 of the cost of the packs (at least from what I've seen pulled so far on the '78 bust thread). But, again, that's not the key issue here. The issue is that a very large group of collectors believe, with good reason and backed by an overwhelming amount of evidence, that they got taken for a ride. Will we move on from here? Most certainly. The 1980 wax case is well underway. But that doesn't mean that we should all just say oh well and move on in light of what's been happening here. That's all I'm trying to say.
Edit: I see that you edited the last line of your post and I can agree with you there to some extent then, but the 1/4 cost is still not accurate. >>
grote-
I don't expect to "make back" more than 25% on any unopened stuff I buy. If I do, it's a plus. I enjoy the ripping experience but it is way unrealistic to think that you will be able to make money on packs/boxes/cases you open. As a generality, this stuff is worth way more unopened than opened. 75%? Maybe.
That's not to say that we should have been ripped off, but not getting the money card or great centering are risks of opening packs.
As for the 78 rip, If I put on eBay all 9 opened packs I doubt I would get 25% of what I paid for the 9 packs. If I grade the stars/high end commons, another crapshoot.
The busting wax model will not be profitable in the long run. Sure you will pull some great stuff and make some money on a few busts, but on the whole you will lose your a$$.
Again, that's not to say we shouldn't get untampered packs but there is a high percentage even an untampered pack will yield garbage.
My Auctions
I don't expect to "make back" more than 25% on any unopened stuff I buy. If I do, it's a plus. I enjoy the ripping experience but it is way unrealistic to think that you will be able to make money on packs/boxes/cases you open. As a generality, this stuff is worth way more unopened than opened. 75%? Maybe.
That's not to say that we should have been ripped off, but not getting the money card or great centering are risks of opening packs.
As for the 78 rip, If I put on eBay all 9 opened packs I doubt I would get 25% of what I paid for the 9 packs. If I grade the stars/high end commons, another crapshoot.
The busting wax model will not be profitable in the long run. Sure you will pull some great stuff and make some money on a few busts, but on the whole you will lose your a$$.
Again, that's not to say we shouldn't get untampered packs but there is a high percentage even an untampered pack will yield garbage.
I agree with you that opening packs is not always going to recoup cost, but I've opened enough packs over the years to know that for every few lots of packs that yield nothing, there's one or more that will yield a high grade high dollar card, too. The point is that when you're buying packs you ought to at least have a chance at pulling the mint card that will recoup your investment, and as CDsNuts and softparade will attest to, you can actually even break even or eke out a profit by busting genuine unopened product. My complaint (like everyone else's here) is that if all of us should at least have an opportunity to break even or better and if the deck is stacked, so to speak, well that's not good for anyone involved.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I agree with you that opening packs is not always going to recoup cost, but I've opened enough packs over the years to know that for every few lots of packs that yield nothing, there's one or more that will yield a high grade high dollar card, too. The point is that when you're buying packs you ought to at least have a chance at pulling the mint card that will recoup your investment, and as CDsNuts and softparade will attest to, you can actually even break even or eke out a profit by busting genuine unopened product. My complaint (like everyone else's here) is that if all of us should at least have an opportunity to break even or better and if the deck is stacked, so to speak, well that's not good for anyone involved. >>
I agree.
My Auctions
March 1, 2007, 8:18PM
Fat chance
Texas Lottery should not sell scratch-off cards with zero chance of paying off.
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle
If a charity continued to sell raffle tickets long after the prizes had been awarded, it would constitute fraud. Yet this is exactly what the Texas Lottery does with some of its popular scratch-off games.
As a team from the Chronicle's Austin Bureau and the San Antonio Express-News documented, the lottery's Deal or No Deal game was still being sold after 96 percent of the prizes and 99 percent of the money had been claimed. The odds of winning big in the lottery are astronomical at the start of the game. Toward the end, the odds become impossible. Players might as well just send their money to the state treasury and skip scratching and tossing away the tickets.
Unlike Lotto Texas, a game in which every set of six numbers has an equal, if implausible, chance of winning, the scratch-off games have a structural problem. If the big money is claimed early in the game, sufficient losers must purchase no-win tickets to pay the prizes and overhead.
If the state lottery and its contractor cannot devise a means in which scratch-off games will be discontinued when most of the prizes and money are gone, the games should be abandoned. State revenues might suffer, but the state should not be profiting from the outright fleecing of its residents. In this instance, the odds of winning are no better whether one buys a ticket or not.
A scratch-off player interviewed by the Chronicle had the best advice: "If you don't want to lose, keep your money."
To that can be added this corollary: If you buy a lottery scratch-off card long after the game has started, you will not be coming into the big money.
<< <i>I'm real sorry and I mourn in your suffering.
I apologize. >>
Garci, this is serious stuff, we dont need you spoiling this thread.....
please refrain from posting...
It is entirely possible that 80's Junkie (or whatever his name is) has been completely honest in this rip even though his ethics are questionable in other areas.
Once again, I'm not trying to defend him - I just want to caution the villagers to put away their pitchforks and torches before storming the castle.
Regards,
Greg M.
References:
Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
<< <i>Does it suck that Gary took honest guys on this board for an amount that in all likelihood is somewhere in the four figures? You bet it does. But the beat goes on, boys. And like I said, your expected loss on this fiasco--assuming you were going to rip the packs-- is probably somewhere around 1/4 of what you paid.
I understand your point, but to your statement that the expected loss is around 1/4 of what anyone paid is false. If the packs are truly unopened and authentic, the loss may be (and is most certainly) far greater than 1/4 of the cost of the packs (at least from what I've seen pulled so far on the '78 bust thread). But, again, that's not the key issue here. The issue is that a very large group of collectors believe, with good reason and backed by an overwhelming amount of evidence, that they got taken for a ride. Will we move on from here? Most certainly. The 1980 wax case is well underway. But that doesn't mean that we should all just say oh well and move on in light of what's been happening here. That's all I'm trying to say.
Edit: I see that you edited the last line of your post and I can agree with you there to some extent then, but the 1/4 cost is still not accurate. >>
*sigh*. The 1/4 figure was derived using the parameters I set forth in the first post. If you change those then obviously you change the expected loss.
Lee
But I would like to say something about the loss...
The accountants here can try to quantify the loss - that's OK - but there's a bigger loss - for now.
For a brief moment we lived in Camelot.
There was sharing without reservation. There was excitement about all the events forthcoming.
Now, in a blink of an eye, Camelot is gone.
I'm hoping we return there some day.
mike
"i have been thinking that maybe a group of us could get together, And Start a thread on Pack re-sealing;what to look for.
We could all share our expertise, or lack of expertise on the subject. Maybe even ask a guest to come in like Steve Hart and give us a few "what to look for's." That way we could all have a point of reference to go back to on the subject."
<< <i>I received my 2 lots from the vintage basketball rip and here are my findings: I can say with a certain degree of certainty that my 78 Topps, 87 Fleer, and 88 Fleer have been tampered with. The 79 Topps and 81 Topps look legit.
Lee >>
I received my packs today as well and have posted scans of all the packs. They are wrapped tight, however I am no pack expert and have no idea if they have been tampered with. The folds on the packs don't look right, but I may be looking to hard to find something wrong.
If anyone wants to check please go to the basketball rip post.
My daughter was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at the age of 2 (2003). My son was diagnosed with Type 1 when he was 17 on December 31, 2009. We were stunned that another child of ours had been diagnosed. Please, if you don't have a favorite charity, consider giving to the JDRF (Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation)
JDRF Donation
<< <i>I don't think this can go much further - people have pretty much made up their collective minds.
But I would like to say something about the loss...
The accountants here can try to quantify the loss - that's OK - but there's a bigger loss - for now.
For a brief moment we lived in Camelot.
There was sharing without reservation. There was excitement about all the events forthcoming.
Now, in a blink of an eye, Camelot is gone.
I'm hoping we return there some day.
mike >>
I harken back to the days of Message Board Haiku.
Daggett on Naxcom