In my opinion, it is ridiculous to sell $5 items on consignment, and equally ridiculous for Rick to take $5 items on consignment He is obviously either overworked or understaffed He needs to set a firm minimum value limit and establish a clear fee structure, I'm guessing that be will be doing both
BINGO, we have a winner.
If you don't like the interpretation, or lack of transparency with fees, PWCC is a 100% firm rate. It is a well documented percentage of the Auction Hammer Price, end of story. You absorb absolutely no extra cost other than what the website states.
<< <i>In my opinion, it is ridiculous to sell $5 items on consignment, and equally ridiculous for Rick to take $5 items on consignment
He is obviously either overworked or understaffed
He needs to set a firm minimum value limit and establish a clear fee structure, I'm guessing that be will be doing both >>
I will consign $5 items all day - it's worth it to not have to take the time to buy materials to ship, print labels, etc. They are a PITA (which is why i'm trying to dump mine).
Looking for rare Randy Moss rookies and autos, as well as '97 PMG Red Football cards for my set.
<< <i>In my opinion, it is ridiculous to sell $5 items on consignment, and equally ridiculous for Rick to take $5 items on consignment
He is obviously either overworked or understaffed
He needs to set a firm minimum value limit and establish a clear fee structure, I'm guessing that be will be doing both >>
For the record, the vast majority of the graded cards I sent that I wanted sold individually were PSA 10 HOFers. Granted, most of them were oddball issues or overproduced 80's/90's cards, but how was I to expect that they would sell for an average price of $6? I guess I didn't expect them all to be listed for a $.99 opening bid. As I've said from the start, I should have done more research on this before sending since the questions I did have the foresight to ask weren't clearly answered. Everything is 20/20 in hindsight. Hopefully by sharing my experiences, I've helped a few others on this board so they don't feel the same disappointment.
After all the back and forth, forth and back, you suck, he sucks, I suck, and on and on ...
I see an opportunity for someone who wants to get into, and slowly build a reputation in the consignment business. PWCC is awesome for $100+ cards and high end cards, and Rick is as well. I really like both services, but both have pro's and con's. IMO, PWCC is cost prohibitive for the lower end (under $40) due to the $8 + percentage, and it looks like Rick does the lower end just to provide the service to customers.
If you're starting out with a decent amount of feedback, and want to put in the work without making a whole lot in the beginning. you could probably get quite a bit of business from all the board members and build up your feedback very quickly and get the free advertising. I have no problem with someone adding "Accepting Consignments" to the bottom of a card listed for me. Personally, I'd be willing to send a mountain of crap ($5-$25) stuff.
It seems like almost every auction house in this hobby does something crooked. I'm not saying that PWCC and Probstein do anything wrong on purpose, but lets be honest, their business is driven by the fact that consignors can shill their own stuff. The record high prices because of that only adds to their reputation of good prices, when many aren't even legit. It messes up VCP and adds another black eye to the hobby.
their business is driven by the fact that consignors can shill their own stuff
Not a fair statement and it clearly the extreme exception, not the rule. When bidding on the higher priced PWCC/Probstein auctions, I typically check out the bidder history and rarely see anything that is a red flag. If you see 20%+ of a bidder history against one seller, that's a problem, but I do not see it.
<< <i>their business is driven by the fact that consignors can shill their own stuff
Not a fair statement and it clearly the extreme exception, not the rule. When bidding on the higher priced PWCC/Probstein auctions, I typically check out the bidder history and rarely see anything that is a red flag. If you see 20%+ of a bidder history against one seller, that's a problem, but I do not see it. >>
If your %20 rule is correct than I am having trouble finding any auction that has ended recently from (....) that has a bidder under that number who won or was the runner up.
If your %20 rule is correct than I am having trouble finding any auction that has ended recently from (....) that has a bidder under that number who won or was the runner up.
It's not a hard and fast rule, it was just my own example. What you see can happen and be legit. Let's say a seller lists a whole pile of modern HOF PSA 10 auctions starting at 9.99 and they $10-$20 cards. Someone very well might bid on, let's say 40 of them, and bid $11, on all of them. They win some, they lose some, but their percentage of bids are very high with that seller. I have 4-5 sellers that I check daily and most of my bidding activity will be with them. Who knows
<< <i>their business is driven by the fact that consignors can shill their own stuff
Not a fair statement and it clearly the extreme exception, not the rule. When bidding on the higher priced PWCC/Probstein auctions, I typically check out the bidder history and rarely see anything that is a red flag. If you see 20%+ of a bidder history against one seller, that's a problem, but I do not see it. >>
Not sure your statement is fair either, if they are average ebay Joes like most collectors that are buying from lots of different ebay sellers and bidding on even more so the couple bids they place on their own consigned cards would hardly show up. Just in the last month I have won items from 40 different sellers and no telling how many I have bid and lost on, I think I could easily bid up a number of lots and my percents would still be low. Vs the ebay seller who creates a second account to shill, they are going to have a much harder time when most of their bids and wins are their own. Just saying it makes it a ton easier to shill if the auctions are not yours, does not mean you will shill but the fact is its a lot easier.
Not sure your statement is fair either, if they are average ebay Joes like most collectors that are buying from lots of different ebay sellers and bidding on even more so the couple bids they place on their own consigned cards would hardly show up. Just in the last month I have won items from 40 different sellers and no telling how many I have bid and lost on, I think I could easily bid up a number of lots and my percents would still be low. Vs the ebay seller who creates a second account to shill, they are going to have a much harder time when most of their bids and wins are their own. Just saying it makes it a ton easier to shill if the auctions are not yours, does not mean you will shill but the fact is its a lot easier.
Completely agree with you. There is no perfect mathematical model to figure out what is going on. Sometimes it just seems obvious.
Any consignment business that's based on selling items on ebay via .99 starting bid auction is not maximizing profits. There are a handful of exceptions (Jordan inserts, low pop high grade vintage, etc...), but unless it's something that's likely to incite a bidding war between deep pocket bidders then BIN's and patience are the way to go. Any additional criticism as to not getting the most out of the listing really isn't relevant because the selling model is bunk to begin with.
Thou Shalt Not Diss the Probstein Thou Shalt Pay the Probstein Whatever Fees He Passes On To you (didja see what I did there?) Thou Shalt Give the Probstein Free Publicity Outside of the Buy/Sell/Trade Board Thou Shalt Not Expect the Probstein to Sully Himself By Replying To This Discussion
My 300-lot consignment finished around 11:30PM on May 3rd and I had Rick's check in my mailbox on May 7th. That was impressive.
I've been reading the good and bad experiences that have been posted in this thread so far. I may be able to offer a more unique perspective because I have actually been to Rick's work site and have seen his operation first-hand.
My impression is that Rick works with a tremendous volume of items each week. Based on what I saw I would think he's probably adding somewhere between 3000-5000 new listings each week PLUS he also has to deal with hundreds of other items that need to be graded, authenticated, etc. prior to being listed. At such volumes I am sure that mistakes can happen.
Rick has a small staff working with him, and though self-sufficient it seemed to me that often they would verify activities involving work with items of significant value directly with Rick. Some might call that micro-management that limits the scale, but I thought it was kind of reassuring to have the head of the whole operation personally aware of what happens with the significant items his business has taken responsibility for.
Given the volume of items he is working with I understand the approach of having a minimal description in the item listings. That probably also adds support for giving common ending time for groups of items from the same consignor (it allows bulk submission). At the same time, when I identified several items that had specific significant in my 300-lot group he took the time to note these details (e.g. low pop, higher value items, etc.) and the listings for those items reflected the notes I provided.
One of the things I found most impressive was the speed at which communication with Rick seems to happen. It seemed to me that it was never took more than a few hours to get a reply or follow-up from Rick when I made any inquiries. And he was also prompt about proactively messaging me if he needed additional information.
Look, I truly believe that the majority of people who deal with Rick have had similar experiences to my own. He's human too, so I am sure that some of the reports of problems are not without some merit. However, having met Rick personally and worked with him several times I'd say that reports of him being abrasive or non-responsive are highly out of character for him. And these reports about "low dollar items" being less welcome do not accurately reflect my experience. More than 1/2 of my lots in this last group sold for less than $15. Knowing Rick I would think that the way someone interpreted what he said about "low dollar items" was probably much harsher than the way it was explained by Rick.
My best advice to any of you who is considering using a consignment organization to seel items on your behalf is to call Rick directly and get to know the man. Ask him what his fee structure is. Ask him about some of the good experiences you've seen reported here. Ask him about some of the not so good experiences you've seen reported here. Then weigh what you've heard and make an informed decision.
I'd say the same about Brent at PWCC too. He's always been both responsive and customer-focused whenever I've contacted him about items I've purchased.
Nobody in the world is perfect, but my experience with both Rick and Brent is that they are honest, hard-working and reasonable people who do an above- average job of servicing their customers. >>
<< <i>Thou Shalt Not Diss the Probstein Thou Shalt Pay the Probstein Whatever Fees He Passes On To you (didja see what I did there?) Thou Shalt Give the Probstein Free Publicity Outside of the Buy/Sell/Trade Board Thou Shalt Not Expect the Probstein to Sully Himself By Replying To This Discussion >>
A card sold by an Ebay store seller, started at $.99 selling at $5.00, with $3.50 shipping and 2.2% PayPal, results in a net sale price of $3.78. With 85% going to the consignor and 15% going to the auctioneer, that's $3.21 going to the consignor and $.57 to the auctioneer and Gumby wants all of the auctioneers non-Ebay and PayPal operating expenses to come out of that $.57.
Gumby also doesn't want the EBay and PayPal fees charged on the shipping portion deducted from the net sales price. This results in an increase to the net sales price of $.34 to $4.12. At the 85/15 split, $3.50 now goes to consignor and $.62 goes to the auctioneer who despite the sudden increase of wealth of $.05 now has his the $3.50 he collected for shipping reduced to $3.16 by the Ebay and PayPal fees. The real cost of shipping is far greater than what you see on the postage label.
But that's still not enough for Gumby. He also assumes that every multiple card buyer paid only a single shipping fee and single PayPal payment for all their combined purchases. So he doesn't want the $.30 per item PayPal transaction fee deducted from the net sale price. This results in an increase to the net sales price to $4.42, with $3.76 going to the consignor and $.66 to the auctioneer.
Gumby needs to be selling his cards himself. Then when he sells something for $5.00 he can complain all he wants about all the work in listing properly, scanning, answering questions, returns, buying envelopes and labels, going to the PO, and how bad Ebay and PayPal fees cut into him keeping 100% of the $5.00.
<< <i>A card sold by an Ebay store seller, started at $.99 selling at $5.00, with $3.50 shipping and 2.2% PayPal, results in a net sale price of $3.78. With 85% going to the consignor and 15% going to the auctioneer, that's $3.21 going to the consignor and $.57 to the auctioneer and Gumby wants all of the auctioneers non-Ebay and PayPal operating expenses to come out of that $.57.
Gumby also doesn't want the EBay and PayPal fees charged on the shipping portion deducted from the net sales price. This results in an increase to the net sales price of $.34 to $4.12. At the 85/15 split, $3.50 now goes to consignor and $.62 goes to the auctioneer who despite the sudden increase of wealth of $.05 now has his the $3.50 he collected for shipping reduced to $3.16 by the Ebay and PayPal fees. The real cost of shipping is far greater than what you see on the postage label.
But that's still not enough for Gumby. He also assumes that every multiple card buyer paid only a single shipping fee and single PayPal payment for all their combined purchases. So he doesn't want the $.30 per item PayPal transaction fee deducted from the net sale price. This results in an increase to the net sales price to $4.42, with $3.76 going to the consignor and $.66 to the auctioneer.
Gumby needs to be selling his cards himself. Then when he sells something for $5.00 he can complain all he wants about all the work in listing properly, scanning, answering questions, returns, buying envelopes and labels, going to the PO, and how bad Ebay and PayPal fees cut into him keeping 100% of the $5.00. >>
You do understand what consignment is, right. It's their JOB to do all that work. No one forces anyone to be a consignor. Just because you are a consignor doesn't give you the "right" to do a shoddy job and break your agreement with the consignee by taking more of a percentage than what was agreed upon. What the items sell for should be completely irrelevant. If a consignor doesn't want to do the work for lower price items, DON'T ACCEPT LOWER PRICE ITEMS.
<< <i>A card sold by an Ebay store seller, started at $.99 selling at $5.00, with $3.50 shipping and 2.2% PayPal, results in a net sale price of $3.78. With 85% going to the consignor and 15% going to the auctioneer, that's $3.21 going to the consignor and $.57 to the auctioneer and Gumby wants all of the auctioneers non-Ebay and PayPal operating expenses to come out of that $.57.
Gumby also doesn't want the EBay and PayPal fees charged on the shipping portion deducted from the net sales price. This results in an increase to the net sales price of $.34 to $4.12. At the 85/15 split, $3.50 now goes to consignor and $.62 goes to the auctioneer who despite the sudden increase of wealth of $.05 now has his the $3.50 he collected for shipping reduced to $3.16 by the Ebay and PayPal fees. The real cost of shipping is far greater than what you see on the postage label.
But that's still not enough for Gumby. He also assumes that every multiple card buyer paid only a single shipping fee and single PayPal payment for all their combined purchases. So he doesn't want the $.30 per item PayPal transaction fee deducted from the net sale price. This results in an increase to the net sales price to $4.42, with $3.76 going to the consignor and $.66 to the auctioneer.
Gumby needs to be selling his cards himself. Then when he sells something for $5.00 he can complain all he wants about all the work in listing properly, scanning, answering questions, returns, buying envelopes and labels, going to the PO, and how bad Ebay and PayPal fees cut into him keeping 100% of the $5.00. >>
You do understand what consignment is, right. It's their JOB to do all that work. No one forces anyone to be a consignor. Just because you are a consignor doesn't give you the "right" to do a shoddy job and break your agreement with the consignee by taking more of a percentage than what was agreed upon. What the items sell for should be completely irrelevant. If a consignor doesn't want to do the work for lower price items, DON'T ACCEPT LOWER PRICE ITEMS. >>
I think there's a big difference between a consignor and a consignee not being on the same page from the outset (which appears to be the situation with the gumby example) versus the consignor doing a shoddy job and/or breaking an agreement by taking more than was agreed upon. That seems to be a bit of a leap you've made.
<< <i>A card sold by an Ebay store seller, started at $.99 selling at $5.00, with $3.50 shipping and 2.2% PayPal, results in a net sale price of $3.78. With 85% going to the consignor and 15% going to the auctioneer, that's $3.21 going to the consignor and $.57 to the auctioneer and Gumby wants all of the auctioneers non-Ebay and PayPal operating expenses to come out of that $.57.
Gumby also doesn't want the EBay and PayPal fees charged on the shipping portion deducted from the net sales price. This results in an increase to the net sales price of $.34 to $4.12. At the 85/15 split, $3.50 now goes to consignor and $.62 goes to the auctioneer who despite the sudden increase of wealth of $.05 now has his the $3.50 he collected for shipping reduced to $3.16 by the Ebay and PayPal fees. The real cost of shipping is far greater than what you see on the postage label.
But that's still not enough for Gumby. He also assumes that every multiple card buyer paid only a single shipping fee and single PayPal payment for all their combined purchases. So he doesn't want the $.30 per item PayPal transaction fee deducted from the net sale price. This results in an increase to the net sales price to $4.42, with $3.76 going to the consignor and $.66 to the auctioneer.
Gumby needs to be selling his cards himself. Then when he sells something for $5.00 he can complain all he wants about all the work in listing properly, scanning, answering questions, returns, buying envelopes and labels, going to the PO, and how bad Ebay and PayPal fees cut into him keeping 100% of the $5.00. >>
You do understand what consignment is, right. It's their JOB to do all that work. No one forces anyone to be a consignor. Just because you are a consignor doesn't give you the "right" to do a shoddy job and break your agreement with the consignee by taking more of a percentage than what was agreed upon. What the items sell for should be completely irrelevant. If a consignor doesn't want to do the work for lower price items, DON'T ACCEPT LOWER PRICE ITEMS. >>
I think there's a big difference between a consignor and a consignee not being on the same page from the outset (which appears to be the situation with the gumby example) versus the consignor doing a shoddy job and/or breaking an agreement by taking more than was agreed upon. That seems to be a bit of a leap you've made. >>
If your agreement is for a certain percentage of the net proceeds and you are overcharged with hidden non-fees, you are being ripped off. You are not receiving the agreed upon percentage of NET PROCEEDS. The agreement was broken.
You can't play around with the term "net". It is finite. If a consignor sells an item for you that ends up a NET sale of $100, say their fees are, for example, 15% of net sale, you should get $85. If you only get $80 due to a $5 phantom charge, the consignor ripped you off $5. It's simple math.
Disagree on the shoddy listing as every person listing on Ebay, except of course for Gumby, will make minor errors in listing from time to time. Of of course the auction house is willing to do the work as they accepted and listed the low priced items knowing they would make very little. The auction house collected their 15%,or $.57, without complaint. The person complaining and wanting more is Gumby, and nitpicking what fees shouldn't factor into the net price means they'll be coming out of the auction house's pocket instead. There's no phantom fees in the calculations. They're all fees that Ebay and PayPal charges and Gumby would actually be paying slightly due to a higher PayPal rate if he were to sell the stuff himself. He's seeing the $5.00 sale price and doesn't want to understand the costs involved in selling.
<< <i>A card sold by an Ebay store seller, started at $.99 selling at $5.00, with $3.50 shipping and 2.2% PayPal, results in a net sale price of $3.78. With 85% going to the consignor and 15% going to the auctioneer, that's $3.21 going to the consignor and $.57 to the auctioneer and Gumby wants all of the auctioneers non-Ebay and PayPal operating expenses to come out of that $.57.
Gumby also doesn't want the EBay and PayPal fees charged on the shipping portion deducted from the net sales price. This results in an increase to the net sales price of $.34 to $4.12. At the 85/15 split, $3.50 now goes to consignor and $.62 goes to the auctioneer who despite the sudden increase of wealth of $.05 now has his the $3.50 he collected for shipping reduced to $3.16 by the Ebay and PayPal fees. The real cost of shipping is far greater than what you see on the postage label.
But that's still not enough for Gumby. He also assumes that every multiple card buyer paid only a single shipping fee and single PayPal payment for all their combined purchases. So he doesn't want the $.30 per item PayPal transaction fee deducted from the net sale price. This results in an increase to the net sales price to $4.42, with $3.76 going to the consignor and $.66 to the auctioneer.
Gumby needs to be selling his cards himself. Then when he sells something for $5.00 he can complain all he wants about all the work in listing properly, scanning, answering questions, returns, buying envelopes and labels, going to the PO, and how bad Ebay and PayPal fees cut into him keeping 100% of the $5.00. >>
KB needs to learn how to comprehend simple English. Here are my exact words:
"In the end, when a consignor tells you they “take 5% of net profit above $25 and 10% if it falls below the $25 mark…", be sure to ask what "net profit" means. Apparently "net profit" includes jacked up additional fees that the consignor takes from the net to pad their take. The net profit shouldn’t be determined after paying his people (or himself). If the 5-10% he claims to charge isn’t enough to pay his people, then he should raise his rates and be transparent about the process from the start."
My complaint is not that he charges fees, my complaint is that the fees he charged are not the fees he quoted. If he had been honest and fully transparent about his fee structure at the time of his quote, I would have likely gone ahead and sold the cards myself.
Your entire scenario is inaccurate and I'm sure you know that. But thanks for playing.
Also, I'm sorry, but "The real cost of shipping is far greater than what you see on the postage label" is nonsense. A first class package up to 3oz is $1.64, including delivery confirmation. That leaves $1.86 to pay the $.28 fee to ebay for the $3.50 shipping charge, the mailer, the label, the ink, the extra bubble wrap and, yes, the gas to drive to the post office. Someone selling in bulk like Rick doesn't take a separate trip to the post office per package, and if he's not having items picked up at his business, well that's an additional expense he's chosen to incur.
Again, like I've said from the start, he should charge whatever fees he needs to cover his expenses and make money. Just be honest and up front about what that amount is. I don't think that's asking for too much.
<< <i>Disagree on the shoddy listing as every person listing on Ebay, except of course for Gumby, will make minor errors in listing from time to time. Of of course the auction house is willing to do the work as they accepted and listed the low priced items knowing they would make very little. The auction house collected their 15%,or $.57, without complaint. The person complaining and wanting more is Gumby, and nitpicking what fees shouldn't factor into the net price means they'll be coming out of the auction house's pocket instead. There's no phantom fees in the calculations. They're all fees that Ebay and PayPal charges and Gumby would actually be paying slightly due to a higher PayPal rate if he were to sell the stuff himself. He's seeing the $5.00 sale price and doesn't want to understand the costs involved in selling. >>
Don't pretend to tell me what I see. I am well aware of the fees that eBay and Paypal charges.
There are no phantom fees here? Please explain how one person who bought 35 different individual listings that closed at the exact same moment didn't make one single payment for all of those items? If 35 different payments were made, then the $.30 transaction fee would have rightly been charged 35 times. However, I think most reasonable people (which I don't pretend to think of you as one) would assume that the buyer made 1 payment, so thus there was only a single $.30 charge. Why was I charged $10.50, then? That is a phantom fee.
Someone ought to grab your ears and give a tug, KB, you're gonna run out of oxygen with your head so far up someone's rear end.
I've read and followed the entire thread and here are my thoughts.
First, I agree that a contract with everything outlined in detail (fees, percentages, listing practices, etc....) is probably the way to go. That being said, does anyone here really care if he makes an extra 30 cents per listing if the same person buys multiple items? I know before hand that it's going to cost me 30 per item (or whatever the hell it is, lol), period. At that point why should I care if different people buy each item or if the same person buys every one of them?
I have now sent Rick 5 packages of stuff with nice results each time. He lets me pick exactly how I want each of my items listed, starting price, etc... I've had to contact him a couple of times, most recently on a '72 OPC partial set that includes a lot of stars. It was listed with several pictures, but none of them included the star cards. After contacting him, he pulled the listing and re-did it with the correct pictues. Not a big deal at all.
I've stated in the past that the reason my personal auctions commanded a premium was because I included a ton of high resolution pictures and detailed descriptions. I often included 50-100 scans and pictures on vintage sets. That and the fact that I'm also a top rated, powerseller with 100% perfect feedback. After consigning with Rick, I still feel that my listings look a ton better than his or 99.9% of any of the sellers on ebay. But guess what, listing stuff like that, especially high end sets, requires a TON of time and work, and his realized prices STILL beat mine even with his less than desirable pictures and descriptions. It's hard to argue with results, especially when you aren't doing any of the work.
I'll give a most glaring example. I consigned a really nice '72 Topps set, mostly NM to NM/MT with 109 graded cards. Fisk SGC 9, Rose 8, Aaron 8, Ryan 7, Yaz 9, Mays 9, etc.....After selling off lots and graded cards that didn't benefit the set, I ended up with around $1600 in the set. Any seller could get $2000 for it on ebay and I thought I could probably get $2400-$2500 with my listing. Not a bad profit, but a lot of work. Rick got $3250, so after fees my part was still almost $3000.
Another example. I bought a nice '73 set that was listed with crappy photos, pulled some nice graded cards, and ended up with around $300 in the set. Sent it to Rick with the description as avg. NM. When he listed it he put 45% NM, 45% EX/MT, 10% EX. I felt it was nicer but let it fly anyway. He got almost $800 for it!
It's always been 5% above $25, 10% below minus EBay and Paypal fees period.
There's never been well if you combine shipping then.... There's no gray area it's as simple as my first sentence. If shipping is combined then the consignor makes the extra cents. We are talking about cents.
Again...
It's always been 5% above $25, 10% below minus EBay and Paypal fees period.
<< <i>It's always been 5% above $25, 10% below minus EBay and Paypal fees period.
There's never been well if you combine shipping then.... There's no gray area it's as simple as my first sentence. If shipping is combined then the consignor makes the extra cents. We are talking about cents.
Again...
It's always been 5% above $25, 10% below minus EBay and Paypal fees period. >>
I will post what I was quoted again. I cannot make it any more clear than this.
"for cu board members I take 5% of the net profit above $25 and 10% if it falls below the $25 mark..."
Net profit, to me, means any money left after actual fees are taken out...not actual and perceived and made-up fees are taken out.
<< <i> If shipping is combined then the consignor makes the extra cents. We are talking about cents. >>
that may be, but if PayPal payments are combined, why is the consignor passing off nonexistent PP charges to the consignee? In that case, we are not talking about mere cents.
<< <i>does anyone here really care if he makes an extra 30 cents per listing if the same person buys multiple items? I know before hand that it's going to cost me 30 per item (or whatever the hell it is, lol), period. At that point why should I care if different people buy each item or if the same person buys every one of them?" >>
I am sure some people do mind and I can't argue with them... But I didn't... His service was worth EVERY penny to me! AND IF I did mind... I would consider it cheap lesson learned for me... BUT this is just my personal view. >>
my point was that the shipping fee is a PER item cost. I know going in that I'm gonna be a charged a small fee on each item. At that point, I don't care if it's 1 buyer or 100 buyers.
Another thing that people seem to be forgetting is the fact that the consignor didn't list Gumby's stuff as requested. Who knows how much money was lost due to this. It's not ONLY about being overcharged.
<< <i>Another thing that people seem to be forgetting is the fact that the consignor didn't list Gumby's stuff as requested. Who knows how much money was lost due to this. It's not ONLY about being overcharged. >>
I'd like for him to elaborate on how he wanted his stuff listed and what was done differently. Rick has always let me list my stuff how I want but there has to be parameters. I'd love to have 50-100 scans and pictures of each and every card on one of my vintage sets, but the work involved doesn't justify the small % that Rick charges. There is a trade off involved here. I'm giving up a percentage of my sales in return for not having to do any listing work, scans, pictures, packaging, shipping, dealing with buyers, etc.....
I also get the advantage of the much greater exposure Rick gets on his auctions. This exposure makes up for the difference in listing appearance. I'm not sure why that is, but it is. So, either I can take hours to take pictures, scan cards, enter listing details, etc....or I can let Rick do it for a small %.
Could he get even more for his auctions with better listings? Probably. Would it require more work/ie...more labor? Absolutely.
I send a spreadsheet, I list the item the way I want, I put line items, I label my packages with the line items, and they are listed. I've had maybe 10 mistakes out of several thousand items. I send a quick email with item number and what I's missing or needs to be fixed. And it's pulled and sent to auction that night.
I am a small consignee, not even in the top 15 or 20, and I'm doing 10k plus a month. So there is no special treatment. I talked to Rick the other day for the first time in 3 weeks. I pack, ship, he lists, I get the best realized prices and I get paid a day or two later. Kind of a set and forget it.
I saw all of Gumby's labels and each card was in a separate baggie. Those couldn't be just scanned, had to be taken out or the label had to be removed. I don't know there are dozens and dozens on here not me the lapdance man/brown noser only, that have had time and time again great experiences. Gumby you had to have played a role in this. Rick doesn't need to combat this anal retentive crap. I'm not accusing but maybe Gumby you had to have played a role in this, otherwise this whole thread doesn't make sense, not at all.
How do dozens and dozens have great experiences, great results, great customer service, keep using the same consignor over and over again, yet you just got screwed? You had to maybe have been nitpicking or a PITA. I'm not accusing you of that I don't know the facts, nor does it change anything for me or many that use him. But again it doesn't make sense that this all occurred and it's all Ricks fault. Think about it logically.
<< <i> Gumby you had to have played a role in this. Rick doesn't need to combat this anal retentive crap. I'm not accusing but maybe Gumby you had to have played a role in this, otherwise this whole thread doesn't make sense, not at all.
How do dozens and dozens have great experiences, great results, great customer service, keep using the same consignor over and over again, yet you just got screwed? You had to maybe have been nitpicking or a PITA. I'm not accusing you of that I don't know the facts, nor does it change anything for me or many that use him. But again it doesn't make sense that this all occurred and it's all Ricks fault. Think about it logically. >>
Two of the most passive aggressive statements I have read. "Gumby you played a role but I'm not accusing you" and "you are a nitpicker and a PITA but I'm not accusing you". Mike you are a real piece of work. To say you aren't an arse kisser or a bootlicker on these boards is laughable. I have known Gumby for 10 years and would put his integrity up against anyone on here. Why is it so hard to believe that St. Rick F'ed this one up. Maybe Gumby didn't tug on his nuts as hard as some of the others around here. Plus the fact that he hasn't stepped forward to defend himself and answer Gumby's charges speaks volumes. Guess he is too busy having people guess what he is eating for lunch!
He wanted 24 SMR's listed individually on Ebay. If one managed to receive the opening $.99 bid then the net sale price after all Ebay and PayPal fees would be $.18. Gumby would collect $.15 and the auction house would collect $.03 for their service. Tragically the SMR's were listed in one lot and sold for $1.79. It wasn't clear if that was the hammer price or net sale price but it probably saved everybody money as many would not have gotten bids individually.
But SMR's are the industry standard. They may have sold for millions if listed individually. The info alone in the SMR's is worth a million dollars by itself.
<< <i>I saw all of Gumby's labels and each card was in a separate baggie. Those couldn't be just scanned, had to be taken out or the label had to be removed. I don't know there are dozens and dozens on here not me the lapdance man/brown noser only, that have had time and time again great experiences. Gumby you had to have played a role in this. Rick doesn't need to combat this anal retentive crap. I'm not accusing but maybe Gumby you had to have played a role in this, otherwise this whole thread doesn't make sense, not at all. >>
I don't see any of Rick's listings for raw cards where they were scanned in the top load. It looks like he scans the card only, so having to take each card out of the top load to scan it should not have been too much additional work. The ONLY reason I put a label on each team bag was because some of the inserts were obscure, so I wanted to make Rick's job easier. I didn't realize that he saw the time I spent to help him list my cards properly as "anal retentive crap." How did I "play a role in this" other than expecting to get the service that was freely advertised here by you and others, Mike?
<< <i>How do dozens and dozens have great experiences, great results, great customer service, keep using the same consignor over and over again, yet you just got screwed? You had to maybe have been nitpicking or a PITA. I'm not accusing you of that I don't know the facts, nor does it change anything for me or many that use him. But again it doesn't make sense that this all occurred and it's all Ricks fault. Think about it logically. >>
Who are these dozens and dozens? Maybe they're the vocal majority on this board. I've had PMs from people since making my initial comments last week thanking me for saying what I did because they, too, had issues, but didn't want to get run out of here on a rail by you and any of his other lackies. Some of them have also come forward to say something similar in this very thread. Just because before now nobody came forward to talk about a negative experience with Rick doesn't mean it wasn't happening.
If trying to get my items listed properly means I was "nitpicking" or being a PITA, then call it what you want.
3/26: I sent Rick a PM when I mailed the cards out. 3/26: Rick replied to thank me and to tell me he'd let me know when they'd arrive. 3/28: Rick sent me a PM to tell me that he received the cards and would start listing them that night. 3/28: I responded to Rick to thank him. 3/31: I sent Rick a PM to indicate that 3 of the cards he hadn't yet listed should not be included in lots and explained why. I was concerned that he may have been planning to include them in lots and wanted to avoid the issue. I ended my PM with, "Anyway, I hope I'm not out of line for sending this note, as I know you're the best at this...however I just wanted to give you a little background on these 3 cards in particular." 3/31: Rick replied to say they would be listed individually and also offered an apology because they were backed up. 3/31: I sent Rick a PM to tell him that no apologies were necessary and that I was certain he had a lot of items coming in every day. 4/3: I sent Rick the following PMs:
Hi Rick,
I see a bunch more of my items were put up for auction tonight. Thank you!
I did notice a couple of issues. The Jim Gantner 24 card lots have his name misspelled. Could you please correct them? The same misspelling was done on his 77 Topps rookie, but there were already a number of bids before I noticed it so I ignored it. If the 2 lots could be corrected, it would be appreciated.
Secondly, I was really hoping for the Brett Favre cards to be listed individually. Many of them are fairly valuable and don't show up on eBay often. When they do, they bring good money. Could you have the lots pulled and relist the cards as singles?
Thanks again, Craig
Sorry for a second message, I just noticed another issue.
One of the cards I noted in my note on Saturday that should have been listed by itself was included in the lot of 11 Yount graded cards. The 1994 Sentry Brewers Yount/Molitor/Gantner card should be pulled from that lot and listed individually.
Also, regarding the Favre singles, when the cards are scanned for being sold individually, I trust that the team bags will be removed. I put each card in a team bag with a label to assist with identifying them when being listed and wasn't expecting that those labels would be used in the scans.
Thanks, Craig
4/4: Rick replied thanking me for the message and asked me to give him a call. 4/4: I replied that I was unable to call that night because I was tied up at work, but found each of the item numbers for the requests made on 4/3 and spelled out the changes I requested, hoping that would help him so he wouldn't have to look through multiple listings. 4/4: Rick replied thanking me for the "great email" and said he would make the changes 4/5: Rick sent me a note to tell me the Favre were relisted and told me to check for typos 4/5: I replied to thank him, tell him the scans look great and to ask him to correct 3 of the 53 listings. One was the Favre/Peyton Manning where there was no reference to Peyton Manning that I previously mentioned. Another was a listing where only the back of the card was scanned. The third was where there was no scan at all.
If that's being a nitpicker or a PITA, then so be it.
It wasn't until after I reviewed the spreadsheet that Rick sent after my first batch of auctions closed that I questioned the additional fees. Had the fee side been accurate in comparison to the way the fees were quoted, I likely would've never said a word about the other issues I had. When my experience was so different from the experiences shared by some people here, I felt obligated to share so that anyone else in my situation would be smarter about it than I was.
I see Rick currently has 81 of your items listed. Only 45 of those are auctions and the rest are BIN's. It's easy to see how you would feel it's a "set it and forget it" issue, because your items are listed in a way to maximize return. Every one of my items was thrown up for a $.99 opening bid to get them off his desk.
<< <i>He wanted 24 SMR's listed individually on Ebay. If one managed to receive the opening $.99 bid then the net sale price after all Ebay and PayPal fees would be $.18. Gumby would collect $.15 and the auction house would collect $.03 for their service. Tragically the SMR's were listed in one lot and sold for $1.79. It wasn't clear if that was the hammer price or net sale price but it probably saved everybody money as many would not have gotten bids individually. >>
My main issue with the SMR listing was that he may as well have said, "24 magazine" and nothing else. The listing was crap. I think it's reasonable to be bothered that the lack of effort put into that listing alone is telling of my entire experience. Here's a link.
Tommy, if you're too lazy to read, I'll happy be too lazy to give you cliff notes. >>
English only at the tables sir.
What I meant to say was that I only skimmed what you wrote and got the general theme, but not all the specifics. What you post generally doesn't interest me, much like most of the ebay and paypal drivel. But, unlike most people on here, I simply skip over the threads and posts that I don't want to read. That's why you won't see me complaining about all of the junk threads in the main forum, simply because I don't open them if they don't interest me.
You, on the other hand, and some of the other internet butt rangers on here, open every thread I start and retort with some smart ass comment when it doesn't even interest you.
Tommy, if you're too lazy to read, I'll happy be too lazy to give you cliff notes. >>
English only at the tables sir.
What I meant to say was that I only skimmed what you wrote and got the general theme, but not all the specifics. What you post generally doesn't interest me, much like most of the ebay and paypal drivel. But, unlike most people on here, I simply skip over the threads and posts that I don't want to read. That's why you won't see me complaining about all of the junk threads in the main forum, simply because I don't open them if they don't interest me.
You, on the other hand, and some of the other internet butt rangers on here, open every thread I start and retort with some smart ass comment when it doesn't even interest you. >>
Why do you even have an opinion on something you didn't take the time to read? Seems utterly pointless.
Comments
BINGO, we have a winner.
If you don't like the interpretation, or lack of transparency with fees, PWCC is a 100% firm rate. It is a well documented percentage of the Auction Hammer Price, end of story.
You absorb absolutely no extra cost other than what the website states.
<< <i>
<< <i>Sean speaking for Rick...lol >>
Have you considered suing your brains for nonsupport? >>
You should have used the Jerk Store line. The awesomeness cannot be overstated.
<< <i>In my opinion, it is ridiculous to sell $5 items on consignment, and equally ridiculous for Rick to take $5 items on consignment
He is obviously either overworked or understaffed
He needs to set a firm minimum value limit and establish a clear fee structure, I'm guessing that be will be doing both >>
I will consign $5 items all day - it's worth it to not have to take the time to buy materials to ship, print labels, etc. They are a PITA (which is why i'm trying to dump mine).
<< <i>In my opinion, it is ridiculous to sell $5 items on consignment, and equally ridiculous for Rick to take $5 items on consignment
He is obviously either overworked or understaffed
He needs to set a firm minimum value limit and establish a clear fee structure, I'm guessing that be will be doing both >>
For the record, the vast majority of the graded cards I sent that I wanted sold individually were PSA 10 HOFers. Granted, most of them were oddball issues or overproduced 80's/90's cards, but how was I to expect that they would sell for an average price of $6? I guess I didn't expect them all to be listed for a $.99 opening bid. As I've said from the start, I should have done more research on this before sending since the questions I did have the foresight to ask weren't clearly answered. Everything is 20/20 in hindsight. Hopefully by sharing my experiences, I've helped a few others on this board so they don't feel the same disappointment.
After all the back and forth, forth and back, you suck, he sucks, I suck, and on and on ...
I see an opportunity for someone who wants to get into, and slowly build a reputation in the
consignment business. PWCC is awesome for $100+ cards and high end cards, and Rick is as well.
I really like both services, but both have pro's and con's. IMO, PWCC is cost prohibitive for the lower end (under $40)
due to the $8 + percentage, and it looks like Rick does the lower end just to provide the service to customers.
If you're starting out with a decent amount of feedback, and want to put in the work without making a whole lot in the beginning. you could probably get quite a
bit of business from all the board members and build up your feedback very quickly and get the free advertising. I have no problem with someone adding "Accepting Consignments" to the bottom of a card listed for me. Personally, I'd be willing to send a mountain of crap ($5-$25) stuff.
Not a fair statement and it clearly the extreme exception, not the rule. When bidding on the higher priced PWCC/Probstein auctions, I typically check
out the bidder history and rarely see anything that is a red flag. If you see 20%+ of a bidder history against one seller, that's a problem, but I do not see it.
<< <i>their business is driven by the fact that consignors can shill their own stuff
Not a fair statement and it clearly the extreme exception, not the rule. When bidding on the higher priced PWCC/Probstein auctions, I typically check
out the bidder history and rarely see anything that is a red flag. If you see 20%+ of a bidder history against one seller, that's a problem, but I do not see it. >>
If your %20 rule is correct than I am having trouble finding any auction that has ended recently from (....) that has a bidder under that number who won or was the runner up.
It's not a hard and fast rule, it was just my own example. What you see can happen and be legit. Let's say a seller lists a whole pile of modern HOF PSA 10 auctions starting at 9.99 and they $10-$20 cards. Someone very well might bid on, let's say 40 of them, and bid $11, on all of them. They win some, they lose some, but their percentage of bids are very high with that seller. I have 4-5 sellers that I check daily and most of my bidding activity will be with them. Who knows
<< <i>their business is driven by the fact that consignors can shill their own stuff
Not a fair statement and it clearly the extreme exception, not the rule. When bidding on the higher priced PWCC/Probstein auctions, I typically check
out the bidder history and rarely see anything that is a red flag. If you see 20%+ of a bidder history against one seller, that's a problem, but I do not see it. >>
Not sure your statement is fair either, if they are average ebay Joes like most collectors that are buying from lots of different ebay sellers and bidding on even more so the couple bids they place on their own consigned cards would hardly show up. Just in the last month I have won items from 40 different sellers and no telling how many I have bid and lost on, I think I could easily bid up a number of lots and my percents would still be low. Vs the ebay seller who creates a second account to shill, they are going to have a much harder time when most of their bids and wins are their own. Just saying it makes it a ton easier to shill if the auctions are not yours, does not mean you will shill but the fact is its a lot easier.
Completely agree with you. There is no perfect mathematical model to figure out what is going on. Sometimes it just seems obvious.
Lee
Thou Shalt Pay the Probstein Whatever Fees He Passes On To you (didja see what I did there?)
Thou Shalt Give the Probstein Free Publicity Outside of the Buy/Sell/Trade Board
Thou Shalt Not Expect the Probstein to Sully Himself By Replying To This Discussion
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
I even have one of our fine congregation members handing out some commandments! AMEN BROTHERS AND SISTERS!!!
<< <i>Follow-up on my Consignment Results.
My 300-lot consignment finished around 11:30PM on May 3rd and I had Rick's check in my mailbox on May 7th. That was
impressive.
I've been reading the good and bad experiences that have been posted in this thread so far. I may be able to offer a more
unique perspective because I have actually been to Rick's work site and have seen his operation first-hand.
My impression is that Rick works with a tremendous volume of items each week. Based on what I saw I would think he's probably
adding somewhere between 3000-5000 new listings each week PLUS he also has to deal with hundreds of other items that need to
be graded, authenticated, etc. prior to being listed. At such volumes I am sure that mistakes can happen.
Rick has a small staff working with him, and though self-sufficient it seemed to me that often they would verify activities involving work
with items of significant value directly with Rick. Some might call that micro-management that limits the scale, but I thought it was kind
of reassuring to have the head of the whole operation personally aware of what happens with the significant items his business has
taken responsibility for.
Given the volume of items he is working with I understand the approach of having a minimal description in the item listings. That probably also
adds support for giving common ending time for groups of items from the same consignor (it allows bulk submission). At the same time, when I
identified several items that had specific significant in my 300-lot group he took the time to note these details (e.g. low pop, higher value items,
etc.) and the listings for those items reflected the notes I provided.
One of the things I found most impressive was the speed at which communication with Rick seems to happen. It seemed to me that it was never
took more than a few hours to get a reply or follow-up from Rick when I made any inquiries. And he was also prompt about proactively messaging
me if he needed additional information.
Look, I truly believe that the majority of people who deal with Rick have had similar experiences to my own. He's human too, so I am sure that
some of the reports of problems are not without some merit. However, having met Rick personally and worked with him several times I'd say that
reports of him being abrasive or non-responsive are highly out of character for him. And these reports about "low dollar items" being less welcome
do not accurately reflect my experience. More than 1/2 of my lots in this last group sold for less than $15. Knowing Rick I would think that the way
someone interpreted what he said about "low dollar items" was probably much harsher than the way it was explained by Rick.
My best advice to any of you who is considering using a consignment organization to seel items on your behalf is to call Rick directly and get to know
the man. Ask him what his fee structure is. Ask him about some of the good experiences you've seen reported here. Ask him about some of the not
so good experiences you've seen reported here. Then weigh what you've heard and make an informed decision.
I'd say the same about Brent at PWCC too. He's always been both responsive and customer-focused whenever I've contacted him about items I've
purchased.
Nobody in the world is perfect, but my experience with both Rick and Brent is that they are honest, hard-working and reasonable people who do an above-
average job of servicing their customers. >>
New sig line was hard to miss. A third consignor has thrown his hat in the ring and makes the choice much tougher
Maybe he'll list all my raw as MINT
<< <i>Thou Shalt Not Diss the Probstein
Thou Shalt Pay the Probstein Whatever Fees He Passes On To you (didja see what I did there?)
Thou Shalt Give the Probstein Free Publicity Outside of the Buy/Sell/Trade Board
Thou Shalt Not Expect the Probstein to Sully Himself By Replying To This Discussion >>
Lol!
Gumby also doesn't want the EBay and PayPal fees charged on the shipping portion deducted from the net sales price. This results in an increase to the net sales price of $.34 to $4.12. At the 85/15 split, $3.50 now goes to consignor and $.62 goes to the auctioneer who despite the sudden increase of wealth of $.05 now has his the $3.50 he collected for shipping reduced to $3.16 by the Ebay and PayPal fees. The real cost of shipping is far greater than what you see on the postage label.
But that's still not enough for Gumby. He also assumes that every multiple card buyer paid only a single shipping fee and single PayPal payment for all their combined purchases. So he doesn't want the $.30 per item PayPal transaction fee deducted from the net sale price. This results in an increase to the net sales price to $4.42, with $3.76 going to the consignor and $.66 to the auctioneer.
Gumby needs to be selling his cards himself. Then when he sells something for $5.00 he can complain all he wants about all the work in listing properly, scanning, answering questions, returns, buying envelopes and labels, going to the PO, and how bad Ebay and PayPal fees cut into him keeping 100% of the $5.00.
<< <i>A card sold by an Ebay store seller, started at $.99 selling at $5.00, with $3.50 shipping and 2.2% PayPal, results in a net sale price of $3.78. With 85% going to the consignor and 15% going to the auctioneer, that's $3.21 going to the consignor and $.57 to the auctioneer and Gumby wants all of the auctioneers non-Ebay and PayPal operating expenses to come out of that $.57.
Gumby also doesn't want the EBay and PayPal fees charged on the shipping portion deducted from the net sales price. This results in an increase to the net sales price of $.34 to $4.12. At the 85/15 split, $3.50 now goes to consignor and $.62 goes to the auctioneer who despite the sudden increase of wealth of $.05 now has his the $3.50 he collected for shipping reduced to $3.16 by the Ebay and PayPal fees. The real cost of shipping is far greater than what you see on the postage label.
But that's still not enough for Gumby. He also assumes that every multiple card buyer paid only a single shipping fee and single PayPal payment for all their combined purchases. So he doesn't want the $.30 per item PayPal transaction fee deducted from the net sale price. This results in an increase to the net sales price to $4.42, with $3.76 going to the consignor and $.66 to the auctioneer.
Gumby needs to be selling his cards himself. Then when he sells something for $5.00 he can complain all he wants about all the work in listing properly, scanning, answering questions, returns, buying envelopes and labels, going to the PO, and how bad Ebay and PayPal fees cut into him keeping 100% of the $5.00. >>
You do understand what consignment is, right. It's their JOB to do all that work. No one forces anyone to be a consignor. Just because you are a consignor doesn't give you the "right" to do a shoddy job and break your agreement with the consignee by taking more of a percentage than what was agreed upon. What the items sell for should be completely irrelevant. If a consignor doesn't want to do the work for lower price items, DON'T ACCEPT LOWER PRICE ITEMS.
<< <i>
<< <i>A card sold by an Ebay store seller, started at $.99 selling at $5.00, with $3.50 shipping and 2.2% PayPal, results in a net sale price of $3.78. With 85% going to the consignor and 15% going to the auctioneer, that's $3.21 going to the consignor and $.57 to the auctioneer and Gumby wants all of the auctioneers non-Ebay and PayPal operating expenses to come out of that $.57.
Gumby also doesn't want the EBay and PayPal fees charged on the shipping portion deducted from the net sales price. This results in an increase to the net sales price of $.34 to $4.12. At the 85/15 split, $3.50 now goes to consignor and $.62 goes to the auctioneer who despite the sudden increase of wealth of $.05 now has his the $3.50 he collected for shipping reduced to $3.16 by the Ebay and PayPal fees. The real cost of shipping is far greater than what you see on the postage label.
But that's still not enough for Gumby. He also assumes that every multiple card buyer paid only a single shipping fee and single PayPal payment for all their combined purchases. So he doesn't want the $.30 per item PayPal transaction fee deducted from the net sale price. This results in an increase to the net sales price to $4.42, with $3.76 going to the consignor and $.66 to the auctioneer.
Gumby needs to be selling his cards himself. Then when he sells something for $5.00 he can complain all he wants about all the work in listing properly, scanning, answering questions, returns, buying envelopes and labels, going to the PO, and how bad Ebay and PayPal fees cut into him keeping 100% of the $5.00. >>
You do understand what consignment is, right. It's their JOB to do all that work. No one forces anyone to be a consignor. Just because you are a consignor doesn't give you the "right" to do a shoddy job and break your agreement with the consignee by taking more of a percentage than what was agreed upon. What the items sell for should be completely irrelevant. If a consignor doesn't want to do the work for lower price items, DON'T ACCEPT LOWER PRICE ITEMS. >>
I think there's a big difference between a consignor and a consignee not being on the same page from the outset (which appears to be the situation with the gumby
example) versus the consignor doing a shoddy job and/or breaking an agreement by taking more than was agreed upon. That seems to be a bit of a leap you've made.
Dave
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>A card sold by an Ebay store seller, started at $.99 selling at $5.00, with $3.50 shipping and 2.2% PayPal, results in a net sale price of $3.78. With 85% going to the consignor and 15% going to the auctioneer, that's $3.21 going to the consignor and $.57 to the auctioneer and Gumby wants all of the auctioneers non-Ebay and PayPal operating expenses to come out of that $.57.
Gumby also doesn't want the EBay and PayPal fees charged on the shipping portion deducted from the net sales price. This results in an increase to the net sales price of $.34 to $4.12. At the 85/15 split, $3.50 now goes to consignor and $.62 goes to the auctioneer who despite the sudden increase of wealth of $.05 now has his the $3.50 he collected for shipping reduced to $3.16 by the Ebay and PayPal fees. The real cost of shipping is far greater than what you see on the postage label.
But that's still not enough for Gumby. He also assumes that every multiple card buyer paid only a single shipping fee and single PayPal payment for all their combined purchases. So he doesn't want the $.30 per item PayPal transaction fee deducted from the net sale price. This results in an increase to the net sales price to $4.42, with $3.76 going to the consignor and $.66 to the auctioneer.
Gumby needs to be selling his cards himself. Then when he sells something for $5.00 he can complain all he wants about all the work in listing properly, scanning, answering questions, returns, buying envelopes and labels, going to the PO, and how bad Ebay and PayPal fees cut into him keeping 100% of the $5.00. >>
You do understand what consignment is, right. It's their JOB to do all that work. No one forces anyone to be a consignor. Just because you are a consignor doesn't give you the "right" to do a shoddy job and break your agreement with the consignee by taking more of a percentage than what was agreed upon. What the items sell for should be completely irrelevant. If a consignor doesn't want to do the work for lower price items, DON'T ACCEPT LOWER PRICE ITEMS. >>
I think there's a big difference between a consignor and a consignee not being on the same page from the outset (which appears to be the situation with the gumby
example) versus the consignor doing a shoddy job and/or breaking an agreement by taking more than was agreed upon. That seems to be a bit of a leap you've made. >>
If your agreement is for a certain percentage of the net proceeds and you are overcharged with hidden non-fees, you are being ripped off. You are not receiving the agreed upon percentage of NET PROCEEDS. The agreement was broken.
<< <i>A card sold by an Ebay store seller, started at $.99 selling at $5.00, with $3.50 shipping and 2.2% PayPal, results in a net sale price of $3.78. With 85% going to the consignor and 15% going to the auctioneer, that's $3.21 going to the consignor and $.57 to the auctioneer and Gumby wants all of the auctioneers non-Ebay and PayPal operating expenses to come out of that $.57.
Gumby also doesn't want the EBay and PayPal fees charged on the shipping portion deducted from the net sales price. This results in an increase to the net sales price of $.34 to $4.12. At the 85/15 split, $3.50 now goes to consignor and $.62 goes to the auctioneer who despite the sudden increase of wealth of $.05 now has his the $3.50 he collected for shipping reduced to $3.16 by the Ebay and PayPal fees. The real cost of shipping is far greater than what you see on the postage label.
But that's still not enough for Gumby. He also assumes that every multiple card buyer paid only a single shipping fee and single PayPal payment for all their combined purchases. So he doesn't want the $.30 per item PayPal transaction fee deducted from the net sale price. This results in an increase to the net sales price to $4.42, with $3.76 going to the consignor and $.66 to the auctioneer.
Gumby needs to be selling his cards himself. Then when he sells something for $5.00 he can complain all he wants about all the work in listing properly, scanning, answering questions, returns, buying envelopes and labels, going to the PO, and how bad Ebay and PayPal fees cut into him keeping 100% of the $5.00. >>
KB needs to learn how to comprehend simple English. Here are my exact words:
"In the end, when a consignor tells you they “take 5% of net profit above $25 and 10% if it falls below the $25 mark…", be sure to ask what "net profit" means. Apparently "net profit" includes jacked up additional fees that the consignor takes from the net to pad their take. The net profit shouldn’t be determined after paying his people (or himself). If the 5-10% he claims to charge isn’t enough to pay his people, then he should raise his rates and be transparent about the process from the start."
My complaint is not that he charges fees, my complaint is that the fees he charged are not the fees he quoted. If he had been honest and fully transparent about his fee structure at the time of his quote, I would have likely gone ahead and sold the cards myself.
Your entire scenario is inaccurate and I'm sure you know that. But thanks for playing.
Also, I'm sorry, but "The real cost of shipping is far greater than what you see on the postage label" is nonsense. A first class package up to 3oz is $1.64, including delivery confirmation. That leaves $1.86 to pay the $.28 fee to ebay for the $3.50 shipping charge, the mailer, the label, the ink, the extra bubble wrap and, yes, the gas to drive to the post office. Someone selling in bulk like Rick doesn't take a separate trip to the post office per package, and if he's not having items picked up at his business, well that's an additional expense he's chosen to incur.
Again, like I've said from the start, he should charge whatever fees he needs to cover his expenses and make money. Just be honest and up front about what that amount is. I don't think that's asking for too much.
<< <i>Disagree on the shoddy listing as every person listing on Ebay, except of course for Gumby, will make minor errors in listing from time to time. Of of course the auction house is willing to do the work as they accepted and listed the low priced items knowing they would make very little. The auction house collected their 15%,or $.57, without complaint. The person complaining and wanting more is Gumby, and nitpicking what fees shouldn't factor into the net price means they'll be coming out of the auction house's pocket instead. There's no phantom fees in the calculations. They're all fees that Ebay and PayPal charges and Gumby would actually be paying slightly due to a higher PayPal rate if he were to sell the stuff himself. He's seeing the $5.00 sale price and doesn't want to understand the costs involved in selling. >>
Don't pretend to tell me what I see. I am well aware of the fees that eBay and Paypal charges.
There are no phantom fees here? Please explain how one person who bought 35 different individual listings that closed at the exact same moment didn't make one single payment for all of those items? If 35 different payments were made, then the $.30 transaction fee would have rightly been charged 35 times. However, I think most reasonable people (which I don't pretend to think of you as one) would assume that the buyer made 1 payment, so thus there was only a single $.30 charge. Why was I charged $10.50, then? That is a phantom fee.
Someone ought to grab your ears and give a tug, KB, you're gonna run out of oxygen with your head so far up someone's rear end.
First, I agree that a contract with everything outlined in detail (fees, percentages, listing practices, etc....) is probably the way to go. That being said, does anyone here really care if he makes an extra 30 cents per listing if the same person buys multiple items? I know before hand that it's going to cost me 30 per item (or whatever the hell it is, lol), period. At that point why should I care if different people buy each item or if the same person buys every one of them?
I have now sent Rick 5 packages of stuff with nice results each time. He lets me pick exactly how I want each of my items listed, starting price, etc... I've had to contact him a couple of times, most recently on a '72 OPC partial set that includes a lot of stars. It was listed with several pictures, but none of them included the star cards. After contacting him, he pulled the listing and re-did it with the correct pictues. Not a big deal at all.
I've stated in the past that the reason my personal auctions commanded a premium was because I included a ton of high resolution pictures and detailed descriptions. I often included 50-100 scans and pictures on vintage sets. That and the fact that I'm also a top rated, powerseller with 100% perfect feedback. After consigning with Rick, I still feel that my listings look a ton better than his or 99.9% of any of the sellers on ebay. But guess what, listing stuff like that, especially high end sets, requires a TON of time and work, and his realized prices STILL beat mine even with his less than desirable pictures and descriptions. It's hard to argue with results, especially when you aren't doing any of the work.
I'll give a most glaring example. I consigned a really nice '72 Topps set, mostly NM to NM/MT with 109 graded cards. Fisk SGC 9, Rose 8, Aaron 8, Ryan 7, Yaz 9, Mays 9, etc.....After selling off lots and graded cards that didn't benefit the set, I ended up with around $1600 in the set. Any seller could get $2000 for it on ebay and I thought I could probably get $2400-$2500 with my listing. Not a bad profit, but a lot of work. Rick got $3250, so after fees my part was still almost $3000.
Another example. I bought a nice '73 set that was listed with crappy photos, pulled some nice graded cards, and ended up with around $300 in the set. Sent it to Rick with the description as avg. NM. When he listed it he put 45% NM, 45% EX/MT, 10% EX. I felt it was nicer but let it fly anyway. He got almost $800 for it!
So, like I said, hard to argue with results.
There's never been well if you combine shipping then.... There's no gray area it's as simple as my first sentence. If shipping is combined then the consignor makes the extra cents. We are talking about cents.
Again...
It's always been 5% above $25, 10% below minus EBay and Paypal fees period.
"Live everyday, don't throw it away"
<< <i>It's always been 5% above $25, 10% below minus EBay and Paypal fees period.
There's never been well if you combine shipping then.... There's no gray area it's as simple as my first sentence. If shipping is combined then the consignor makes the extra cents. We are talking about cents.
Again...
It's always been 5% above $25, 10% below minus EBay and Paypal fees period. >>
I will post what I was quoted again. I cannot make it any more clear than this.
"for cu board members I take 5% of the net profit above $25 and 10% if it falls below the $25 mark..."
Net profit, to me, means any money left after actual fees are taken out...not actual and perceived and made-up fees are taken out.
<< <i> If shipping is combined then the consignor makes the extra cents. We are talking about cents. >>
that may be, but if PayPal payments are combined, why is the consignor passing off nonexistent PP charges to the consignee? In that case, we are not talking about mere cents.
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
<< <i>
<< <i>does anyone here really care if he makes an extra 30 cents per listing if the same person buys multiple items? I know before hand that it's going to cost me 30 per item (or whatever the hell it is, lol), period. At that point why should I care if different people buy each item or if the same person buys every one of them?" >>
I am sure some people do mind and I can't argue with them... But I didn't... His service was worth EVERY penny to me! AND IF I did mind... I would consider it cheap lesson learned for me... BUT this is just my personal view. >>
my point was that the shipping fee is a PER item cost. I know going in that I'm gonna be a charged a small fee on each item. At that point, I don't care if it's 1 buyer or 100 buyers.
I had the same problem. I'm sure it affected the net result, but not enough to make much difference to me.
<< <i>Another thing that people seem to be forgetting is the fact that the consignor didn't list Gumby's stuff as requested. Who knows how much money was lost due to this. It's not ONLY about being overcharged. >>
I'd like for him to elaborate on how he wanted his stuff listed and what was done differently. Rick has always let me list my stuff how I want but there has to be parameters. I'd love to have 50-100 scans and pictures of each and every card on one of my vintage sets, but the work involved doesn't justify the small % that Rick charges. There is a trade off involved here. I'm giving up a percentage of my sales in return for not having to do any listing work, scans, pictures, packaging, shipping, dealing with buyers, etc.....
I also get the advantage of the much greater exposure Rick gets on his auctions. This exposure makes up for the difference in listing appearance. I'm not sure why that is, but it is. So, either I can take hours to take pictures, scan cards, enter listing details, etc....or I can let Rick do it for a small %.
Could he get even more for his auctions with better listings? Probably. Would it require more work/ie...more labor? Absolutely.
I am a small consignee, not even in the top 15 or 20, and I'm doing 10k plus a month. So there is no special treatment. I talked to Rick the other day for the first time in 3 weeks. I pack, ship, he lists, I get the best realized prices and I get paid a day or two later. Kind of a set and forget it.
I saw all of Gumby's labels and each card was in a separate baggie. Those couldn't be just scanned, had to be taken out or the label had to be removed. I don't know there are dozens and dozens on here not me the lapdance man/brown noser only, that have had time and time again great experiences. Gumby you had to have played a role in this. Rick doesn't need to combat this anal retentive crap. I'm not accusing but maybe Gumby you had to have played a role in this, otherwise this whole thread doesn't make sense, not at all.
How do dozens and dozens have great experiences, great results, great customer service, keep using the same consignor over and over again, yet you just got screwed? You had to maybe have been nitpicking or a PITA. I'm not accusing you of that I don't know the facts, nor does it change anything for me or many that use him. But again it doesn't make sense that this all occurred and it's all Ricks fault. Think about it logically.
"Live everyday, don't throw it away"
<< <i> Gumby you had to have played a role in this. Rick doesn't need to combat this anal retentive crap. I'm not accusing but maybe Gumby you had to have played a role in this, otherwise this whole thread doesn't make sense, not at all.
How do dozens and dozens have great experiences, great results, great customer service, keep using the same consignor over and over again, yet you just got screwed? You had to maybe have been nitpicking or a PITA. I'm not accusing you of that I don't know the facts, nor does it change anything for me or many that use him. But again it doesn't make sense that this all occurred and it's all Ricks fault. Think about it logically. >>
Two of the most passive aggressive statements I have read. "Gumby you played a role but I'm not accusing you" and "you are a nitpicker and a PITA but I'm not accusing you".
Mike you are a real piece of work. To say you aren't an arse kisser or a bootlicker on these boards is laughable. I have known Gumby for 10 years and would put his integrity up against anyone on here. Why is it so hard to believe that St. Rick F'ed this one up. Maybe Gumby didn't tug on his nuts as hard as some of the others around here. Plus the fact that he hasn't stepped forward to defend himself and answer Gumby's charges speaks volumes. Guess he is too busy having people guess what he is eating for lunch!
<< <i>I'd like for him to elaborate on how he wanted his stuff listed and what was done differently. >>
Tommy, I covered this in a previous post. I believe it's on page 4. I think I elaborated enough there.
<< <i>
<< <i>I'd like for him to elaborate on how he wanted his stuff listed and what was done differently. >>
Tommy, I covered this in a previous post. I believe it's on page 4. I think I elaborated enough there. >>
you may be right. I'll admit, I rarely read what you post especially if it's more than a few words. Cliff notes please.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I'd like for him to elaborate on how he wanted his stuff listed and what was done differently. >>
Tommy, I covered this in a previous post. I believe it's on page 4. I think I elaborated enough there. >>
you may be right. I'll admit, I rarely read what you post especially if it's more than a few words. Cliff notes please. >>
Tommy, Come on.....you are better than that arent you? At least I thought you were.
<< <i>I saw all of Gumby's labels and each card was in a separate baggie. Those couldn't be just scanned, had to be taken out or the label had to be removed. I don't know there are dozens and dozens on here not me the lapdance man/brown noser only, that have had time and time again great experiences. Gumby you had to have played a role in this. Rick doesn't need to combat this anal retentive crap. I'm not accusing but maybe Gumby you had to have played a role in this, otherwise this whole thread doesn't make sense, not at all. >>
I don't see any of Rick's listings for raw cards where they were scanned in the top load. It looks like he scans the card only, so having to take each card out of the top load to scan it should not have been too much additional work. The ONLY reason I put a label on each team bag was because some of the inserts were obscure, so I wanted to make Rick's job easier. I didn't realize that he saw the time I spent to help him list my cards properly as "anal retentive crap." How did I "play a role in this" other than expecting to get the service that was freely advertised here by you and others, Mike?
<< <i>How do dozens and dozens have great experiences, great results, great customer service, keep using the same consignor over and over again, yet you just got screwed? You had to maybe have been nitpicking or a PITA. I'm not accusing you of that I don't know the facts, nor does it change anything for me or many that use him. But again it doesn't make sense that this all occurred and it's all Ricks fault. Think about it logically. >>
Who are these dozens and dozens? Maybe they're the vocal majority on this board. I've had PMs from people since making my initial comments last week thanking me for saying what I did because they, too, had issues, but didn't want to get run out of here on a rail by you and any of his other lackies. Some of them have also come forward to say something similar in this very thread. Just because before now nobody came forward to talk about a negative experience with Rick doesn't mean it wasn't happening.
If trying to get my items listed properly means I was "nitpicking" or being a PITA, then call it what you want.
3/26: I sent Rick a PM when I mailed the cards out.
3/26: Rick replied to thank me and to tell me he'd let me know when they'd arrive.
3/28: Rick sent me a PM to tell me that he received the cards and would start listing them that night.
3/28: I responded to Rick to thank him.
3/31: I sent Rick a PM to indicate that 3 of the cards he hadn't yet listed should not be included in lots and explained why. I was concerned that he may have been planning to include them in lots and wanted to avoid the issue. I ended my PM with, "Anyway, I hope I'm not out of line for sending this note, as I know you're the best at this...however I just wanted to give you a little background on these 3 cards in particular."
3/31: Rick replied to say they would be listed individually and also offered an apology because they were backed up.
3/31: I sent Rick a PM to tell him that no apologies were necessary and that I was certain he had a lot of items coming in every day.
4/3: I sent Rick the following PMs:
Hi Rick,
I see a bunch more of my items were put up for auction tonight. Thank you!
I did notice a couple of issues. The Jim Gantner 24 card lots have his name misspelled. Could you please correct them? The same misspelling was done on his 77 Topps rookie, but there were already a number of bids before I noticed it so I ignored it. If the 2 lots could be corrected, it would be appreciated.
Secondly, I was really hoping for the Brett Favre cards to be listed individually. Many of them are fairly valuable and don't show up on eBay often. When they do, they bring good money. Could you have the lots pulled and relist the cards as singles?
Thanks again,
Craig
Sorry for a second message, I just noticed another issue.
One of the cards I noted in my note on Saturday that should have been listed by itself was included in the lot of 11 Yount graded cards. The 1994 Sentry Brewers Yount/Molitor/Gantner card should be pulled from that lot and listed individually.
Also, regarding the Favre singles, when the cards are scanned for being sold individually, I trust that the team bags will be removed. I put each card in a team bag with a label to assist with identifying them when being listed and wasn't expecting that those labels would be used in the scans.
Thanks,
Craig
4/4: Rick replied thanking me for the message and asked me to give him a call.
4/4: I replied that I was unable to call that night because I was tied up at work, but found each of the item numbers for the requests made on 4/3 and spelled out the changes I requested, hoping that would help him so he wouldn't have to look through multiple listings.
4/4: Rick replied thanking me for the "great email" and said he would make the changes
4/5: Rick sent me a note to tell me the Favre were relisted and told me to check for typos
4/5: I replied to thank him, tell him the scans look great and to ask him to correct 3 of the 53 listings. One was the Favre/Peyton Manning where there was no reference to Peyton Manning that I previously mentioned. Another was a listing where only the back of the card was scanned. The third was where there was no scan at all.
If that's being a nitpicker or a PITA, then so be it.
It wasn't until after I reviewed the spreadsheet that Rick sent after my first batch of auctions closed that I questioned the additional fees. Had the fee side been accurate in comparison to the way the fees were quoted, I likely would've never said a word about the other issues I had. When my experience was so different from the experiences shared by some people here, I felt obligated to share so that anyone else in my situation would be smarter about it than I was.
I see Rick currently has 81 of your items listed. Only 45 of those are auctions and the rest are BIN's. It's easy to see how you would feel it's a "set it and forget it" issue, because your items are listed in a way to maximize return. Every one of my items was thrown up for a $.99 opening bid to get them off his desk.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I'd like for him to elaborate on how he wanted his stuff listed and what was done differently. >>
Tommy, I covered this in a previous post. I believe it's on page 4. I think I elaborated enough there. >>
you may be right. I'll admit, I rarely read what you post especially if it's more than a few words. Cliff notes please. >>
Tommy, Come on.....you are better than that arent you? At least I thought you were. >>
I knew better all along.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I'd like for him to elaborate on how he wanted his stuff listed and what was done differently. >>
Tommy, I covered this in a previous post. I believe it's on page 4. I think I elaborated enough there. >>
you may be right. I'll admit, I rarely read what you post especially if it's more than a few words. Cliff notes please. >>
Tommy, Come on.....you are better than that arent you? At least I thought you were. >>
I knew better all along.
I guess those Dick & Jane books haven't gotten to the big words yet!
<< <i>He wanted 24 SMR's listed individually on Ebay. If one managed to receive the opening $.99 bid then the net sale price after all Ebay and PayPal fees would be $.18. Gumby would collect $.15 and the auction house would collect $.03 for their service. Tragically the SMR's were listed in one lot and sold for $1.79. It wasn't clear if that was the hammer price or net sale price but it probably saved everybody money as many would not have gotten bids individually. >>
My main issue with the SMR listing was that he may as well have said, "24 magazine" and nothing else. The listing was crap. I think it's reasonable to be bothered that the lack of effort put into that listing alone is telling of my entire experience. Here's a link.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I'd like for him to elaborate on how he wanted his stuff listed and what was done differently. >>
Tommy, I covered this in a previous post. I believe it's on page 4. I think I elaborated enough there. >>
you may be right. I'll admit, I rarely read what you post especially if it's more than a few words. Cliff notes please. >>
Tommy, if you're too lazy to read, I'll happy be too lazy to give you cliff notes.
<< <i>
Tommy, if you're too lazy to read, I'll happy be too lazy to give you cliff notes. >>
English only at the tables sir.
What I meant to say was that I only skimmed what you wrote and got the general theme, but not all the specifics. What you post generally doesn't interest me, much like most of the ebay and paypal drivel. But, unlike most people on here, I simply skip over the threads and posts that I don't want to read. That's why you won't see me complaining about all of the junk threads in the main forum, simply because I don't open them if they don't interest me.
You, on the other hand, and some of the other internet butt rangers on here, open every thread I start and retort with some smart ass comment when it doesn't even interest you.
<< <i>
<< <i>
Tommy, if you're too lazy to read, I'll happy be too lazy to give you cliff notes. >>
English only at the tables sir.
What I meant to say was that I only skimmed what you wrote and got the general theme, but not all the specifics. What you post generally doesn't interest me, much like most of the ebay and paypal drivel. But, unlike most people on here, I simply skip over the threads and posts that I don't want to read. That's why you won't see me complaining about all of the junk threads in the main forum, simply because I don't open them if they don't interest me.
You, on the other hand, and some of the other internet butt rangers on here, open every thread I start and retort with some smart ass comment when it doesn't even interest you. >>
Why do you even have an opinion on something you didn't take the time to read? Seems utterly pointless.