I would not have been shocked to see the buyer be inexperienced, the seller does a good job misleading people with the description. They mention 1990 three times throughout the whole listing. A quick 2010 cmt 97 slipped in to cover themselves. I am sure there are plenty who would miss that or not even know what "cmt" meant.
No sympathy for the buyer. There are many telltale signs in the the scan if you know what you're looking for when buying the No-Name card.
NOBODY should be spending money without knowing what they're buying. This is one of the biggest causes of people coming into and leaving the hobby. Too many think it is easy money and that you don't have to know anything and they dive in tossing good money after bad. After they've dropped hundreds or thousands of dollars and can't sell anything they bought, they complain about the hobby, the dealers, Beckett or whatever other excuse they can find to camouflage their greed and reckless abandon and then just as suddenly, they disappear. Or worse yet, figure out that they can scam other idiots like themselves.
It happens far too often. When these people come and go, we're not losing a hobbyist, we ridding the hobby of another quick money scumbag. Again, it happens far too often and there are too many of them still lingering.
I agree with you 100%. It's just that the guys you are talking about are usually those that have recently "jumped in" and you can tell by their low feedback numbers. In this case, these are experienced buyers who flat out missed the many obvious signs that this was not an original Thomas NNOF. It makes no sense.
<< <i>I agree with you 100%. It's just that the guys you are talking about are usually those that have recently "jumped in" and you can tell by their low feedback numbers. In this case, these are experienced buyers who flat out missed the many obvious signs that this was not an original Thomas NNOF. It makes no sense. >>
Educate this newbie. What are the characteristics that make this obvious it is a reprint? Only thing that I saw was perhaps the "Topps" that is on the lower right on top of the name box
Isn't this a fraudulent auction and couldn't you file an SNAD based on the title alone?
What does CMT97 mean? I've been in this hobby a long time, haven't paid much attention to modern so I'm clueless too.
What I do know about the card is that by inspecting the photo closely its clearly a reprint because of the solid black board lines going all around the card. In a real one isn't part of the black boarder missing?
Collecting Topps, Philadelphia and Kellogg's from 1964-1989
<< <i>I agree with you 100%. It's just that the guys you are talking about are usually those that have recently "jumped in" and you can tell by their low feedback numbers. In this case, these are experienced buyers who flat out missed the many obvious signs that this was not an original Thomas NNOF. It makes no sense. >>
Educate this newbie. What are the characteristics that make this obvious it is a reprint? Only thing that I saw was perhaps the "Topps" that is on the lower right on top of the name box >>
Yes, the Topps logo still on the card is one sign, the black borders intact is another, and most obvious is the year "2010" in the description.
Are you certain they would win the SNAD claim? In the description the seller states the year and card #. So, is that really SIGNIFICANTLY not as described?
<< <i>Are you certain they would win the SNAD claim? In the description the seller states the year and card #. So, is that really SIGNIFICANTLY not as described? >>
He states the year as 1990 in the title and also again in the item specific section along with original instead of reprint. He does not list it as a reprint in the title or description.
I love it when people laugh at others who were scammed just because they are not as savvy at spotting fakes as others. To me that is what is wrong with the hobby. These people who think they are God's gift to card collecting saying that they have no sympathy and they deserve it when they buy fakes because they should automatically know what to look for before spending their money. The selller listed 1990 TOpps No mame in the title and did not call it a reprint. The people who laugh at others because of their misfortune are the ones I wish would leave the hobby, not the ones who were scammed and called scumbags for no reason at all.
i think the hobby would do so much better with out all the cutthroat, too bad that money rules.
<< <i>Winning bidder has a FB score of over 6500. If he/she wasn't smart enough to read the listing description, then he/she gets what he/she deserves. >>
How do you know the winning bidder was a transexual?
<< <i>Winning bidder has a FB score of over 6500. If he/she wasn't smart enough to read the listing description, then he/she gets what he/she deserves. >>
How do you know the winning bidder was a transexual? >>
Neil
Actually Collect Non Sport, but am just so full of myself I post all over the place !!!!!!!
<< <i>Winning bidder has a FB score of over 6500. If he/she wasn't smart enough to read the listing description, then he/she gets what he/she deserves. >>
How do you know the winning bidder was a transexual? >>
Comments
NOBODY should be spending money without knowing what they're buying. This is one of the biggest causes of people coming into and leaving the hobby. Too many think it is easy money and that you don't have to know anything and they dive in tossing good money after bad. After they've dropped hundreds or thousands of dollars and can't sell anything they bought, they complain about the hobby, the dealers, Beckett or whatever other excuse they can find to camouflage their greed and reckless abandon and then just as suddenly, they disappear. Or worse yet, figure out that they can scam other idiots like themselves.
It happens far too often. When these people come and go, we're not losing a hobbyist, we ridding the hobby of another quick money scumbag. Again, it happens far too often and there are too many of them still lingering.
<< <i>I agree with you 100%. It's just that the guys you are talking about are usually those that have recently "jumped in" and you can tell by their low feedback numbers. In this case, these are experienced buyers who flat out missed the many obvious signs that this was not an original Thomas NNOF. It makes no sense. >>
Educate this newbie.
What are the characteristics that make this obvious it is a reprint?
Only thing that I saw was perhaps the "Topps" that is on the lower right on top of the name box
What does CMT97 mean? I've been in this hobby a long time, haven't paid much attention to modern so I'm clueless too.
What I do know about the card is that by inspecting the photo closely its clearly a reprint because of the solid black board lines going all around the card. In a real one isn't part of the black boarder missing?
<< <i>
<< <i>I agree with you 100%. It's just that the guys you are talking about are usually those that have recently "jumped in" and you can tell by their low feedback numbers. In this case, these are experienced buyers who flat out missed the many obvious signs that this was not an original Thomas NNOF. It makes no sense. >>
Educate this newbie.
What are the characteristics that make this obvious it is a reprint?
Only thing that I saw was perhaps the "Topps" that is on the lower right on top of the name box >>
Yes, the Topps logo still on the card is one sign, the black borders intact is another, and most obvious is the year "2010" in the description.
<< <i>Are you certain they would win the SNAD claim? In the description the seller states the year and card #. So, is that really SIGNIFICANTLY not as described? >>
He states the year as 1990 in the title and also again in the item specific section along with original instead of reprint. He does not list it as a reprint in the title or description.
<< <i>What does CMT97 mean?
>>
Cards Mom Threw (Out)
i think the hobby would do so much better with out all the cutthroat, too bad that money rules.
<< <i>Winning bidder has a FB score of over 6500. If he/she wasn't smart enough to read the listing description, then he/she gets what he/she deserves. >>
How do you know the winning bidder was a transexual?
<< <i>
<< <i>Winning bidder has a FB score of over 6500. If he/she wasn't smart enough to read the listing description, then he/she gets what he/she deserves. >>
How do you know the winning bidder was a transexual? >>
Neil
<< <i>
<< <i>Winning bidder has a FB score of over 6500. If he/she wasn't smart enough to read the listing description, then he/she gets what he/she deserves. >>
How do you know the winning bidder was a transexual? >>
I recognized Nick's eBay ID.