EBAY card described as MINT....

craig19

Quick question - I purchased and received a 2001 Jake Peavey Topps Gold Rookie, which was described as MINT, in capitol letters. When i received it, it has one corner, which is noticeably bad to the eye, and through the loop is worse. It has a ding which has rubbed a part of the gold coloring away. My original intention was to get it graded, but now I am unsure what to do. I sent an email to the seller and he basically told me that I only paid $12 and should be happy with the condition. He did give me the option to return it, but I had to pay postage, etc...
What is the maximum grade PSA will give for a perfect card with one small corner problem?

mikeschmidt

it depends on the severerity of a corner problem. Anywhere from PSA 5 to PSA 7, depending on severity...

basestealer

It is standard practice to advertise every card on ebay as "MINT", regardless of the card's actual condition. Aside from the few large businesses that have gone internet, and the serious collectors out there that list some of their collections, the vast majority of ebay sellers are people new to the hobby, looking to make a quick buck, and they didn't bother learning how to accurately grade cards, and they certainly didn't have any lessons in ethics=just a huge number of pipedreams about to go bankrupt, and in the meantime lots of people get scammed or are seriously burned. One tiny ding--you got off lucky. Take a look at some of the pre 1980 crap advertised as mint--some of the sellers include scans of fair/poor cards for added humor.

cohocorp

what you paid for it shouldnt make any difference whatsoever. if he listed it as mint, it should be mint. item not as described.

onlyanumber

<< <i>Quick question - I purchased and received a 2001 Jake Peavey Topps Gold Rookie, which was described as MINT, in capitol letters. When i received it, it has one corner, which is noticeably bad to the eye, and through the loop is worse. It has a ding which has rubbed a part of the gold coloring away. My original intention was to get it graded, but now I am unsure what to do. I sent an email to the seller and he basically told me that I only paid $12 and should be happy with the condition. He did give me the option to return it, but I had to pay postage, etc...
What is the maximum grade PSA will give for a perfect card with one small corner problem? >>



I love the 'you should be happy with it for what you paid for it' line. What is this seller's id, if you don't mind me asking?

basestealer

<< <i>what you paid for it shouldnt make any difference whatsoever. if he listed it as mint, it should be mint. item not as described. >>


Yep. That's one of the most common excuses from unscrupulous ebay sellers "you got a good deal and you're complaining!" or, my favorite of all "I don't overgrade as much as most on ebay do!". I guess these people see other sellers lying, cheating, stealing and feel that they must also do this to compete, but they'll be the better man and not lie, cheat, and steal "quite as much". Pretty lame--these sellers need to get negatives from every buyer they do this to, whether they offer a refund or not. Drive them out of busiess or force them to do business right.

JustAl

When it comes to eBay sellers grading/selling their own raw cards, I generally follow these guidelines...


1) When they say it's mint, it's NEVER mint.
2) At best, the 'real grade' of the card is 1 grade below the posted grade (e.g. when they post NM, it's probably E-M at most).
3) If the scan of the card looks like a blurry polaroid taken from 10 feet away, leave it alone.
4) If the scan of the card 'just happens' to leave out an entire edge/a corner/etc, leave it alone.
5) If the scan of the card is pretty good but you want a bit more visual info, copy the image into Photoshop and play around with the contrast, brightness, etc. You might just find dings, stains, creases, spots that you wouldn't have seen otherwise.
6) If your first gut instinct gives you a funny feeling about a card, trust that feeling.


I'd be curious to hear others' advice/wisdom on how they try to avoid getting burned.

Carew29

I'm glad that i have not taken Al's gudielines to heart this year alone. Just got these back from ebay over the last two months.

5 31859642 1962 TOPPS 28 MINNIE MINOSO N/A 7 --Listed as NM+++
6 31859643 1962 TOPPS 68 KEN L. HUNT N/A 7 --listed as NM/MT
7 31859644 1962 TOPPS 92 SAM JONES N/A 8 --listed as "MINTY FRESH"
8 31859645 1962 TOPPS 422 STEVE BILKO N/A 8 --listed as NM
9 31859646 1963 TOPPS 156 ROY McMILLAN N/A 8 listed as "excellent condition"
10 31859647 1963 TOPPS 196 DOUG CAMILLI N/A 8 --listed as NM++
11 31859648 1963 TOPPS 378 BILL HENRY N/A 8--Listed as Mint
12 31859649 1964 TOPPS 394 BOB MILLER N/A 8 --listed as Mint

Date Received: 05/31/2007
Date of Grades Posted: 06/11/2007
Date Shipped: 06/12/2007

Estil

IMO, NRMT-MT is the highest grade a raw card can get. No card should be called Mint or Gem Mint w/o being slabbed as such. After all, even if you THINK the card is flawless, you never know if it turned out to have something that you missed that dropped it to an 8 or more.

cravetopps

I rarely buy raw "single" cards but I am sure there are always going to be the exceptions (e.g. Carew29's cards) but based on the majority of threads relating to this subject, most will not meet expectations.

Without a detailed scan, you're taking a chance. Sounds like the seller in this case did not provide a scan. Fortunately for you, it was an inexpensive lesson.

If you post a scan, you will get a more accurate response as to what the grade of the card might be.

JustAl

Carew29-
I'm fascinated by your successes, since you imply that you don't follow any "guidelines" yourself. You must have bought a lot of crap this year alone to come up with those eight nice cards. Or maybe, just maybe, you've completely missed the point of my post.

TheVon

I don't even search for raw cards with the word "mint" in the title. I do, however, conduct searches for cards with "NM-MT" or "Near Mint" and then I look for sellers that seem to be grading their cards by the same standard that I/we would use. I don't think there's a lot of sellers who accurately grade their cards, but when you find the ones that do, you should add them to your list of favorite sellers and stick with those sellers that you trust.

Skinpinch

BUyers have to remember that PSA guidlines are not law. In fact, even cards that are often seen as overgraded can be within the written guidliness of PSA. It is all a matter of how much wear is wear.

THe PSA guidlines are the industry standard for just a small percentage of the hobby. Many collectors still adhere to the 'old' definitions of Mint, Near Mint, Excellent, Good, Poor.

Of course many people will adhere to the old standards of grading, while hinting that they are within the PSA standards. If somebody wants a PSA standard card, then bid on a PSA slabbed card. It is that simple.

Buyers often bid on cards hoping that the seller is unaware of PSA standards, and thus can get a bargain. Yet when it is they who are not getting a bargain, they huff and puff. If you are willing/hoping to take advantage of a seller, then don't be so upset when you don't strike gold!

Again, if you want that card to be Near Mint per PSA standards, then don't go looking for bargains! Buy the darn PSA 7 to begin with.

Leiascards

If you paid with Paypal file a SNAD with them, they will require you to return it with DC at your cost, but will refund the full amount you paid for the card.

Ichiro51fan

Yeah, this is definately a problem. I came across an auction a few days back in which the seller described his non-graded card (can't remember which one at the moment) as a "possible PSA 10". But further down in the description, he said that the centering on the front of the card was 65/35. The scan revealed it may have been that at best. Trouble is, even if it was no worse than 65/35, the best PSA grade it could possibly get would be a 9. To me, this is out&out false advertising and could be proved as such. There is a published minimum standard for getting a 10, and by this seller's own words, the card was below that standard, yet he tries to fool buyers into thinking they can get a 10 on this card. I actually sent the guy a message about it... not like he's likely to care though

JustAl

The PSA guidlines are the industry standard for just a small percentage of the hobby. Many collectors still adhere to the 'old' definitions of Mint, Near Mint, Excellent, Good, Poor.


Skinpinch has a great point. I would agree that the old standards, though more imprecise, are still valid and are used often.

Carew29

Sorry Al--you are O FER again. I just know who to buy from over the years. Bought all the crap stuff years ago though......

Leiascards

On the flip side my old PSA9 1973 Rod Carew was listed on Bidville as excellent.

I never list a card as mint if I think it is mint I go with near mint unless it is graded by PSA,BGS or SGC.

JustAl

Hey Carew29 - I tell ya, I have a nice collection of major turkeys that I've acquired. I'm very proud of a "Mint" 1976 Topps Baseball set I bought about 10-15 years ago, later finding out that it had been hand-collated to remove all the star & minor star cards and replace them with misprinted, blurry, diamond-cut, rough-edged, gum-stained versions. Gum stains in a factory set. I should have at least got the gum.