I almost said that about buyers remorse myself. Most of us here if we buy something we regret later we either resell it, trade it or give it away in a contest. We don't turn it back on the seller unless we feel it was a fraud.
"You received every dollar you paid, you did NOT give me the 15% for the damage you caused as you promised you would, I guess the board did not know that. "
Just curious if he is telling the truth-
I respect CDNUTS a great deal from this board but this sounds odd and cant be right
** Working on the following sets-2013 Spectra Football Hall of Fame 50th Anniversary Autograph set, 2015 Spectra Football Illustrious Legends Autograph set, 2014-15 Hall of Fame Heroes autograph set. **
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Yes, I'm telling the truth, he sent the cards to me delivery confirmation and PAYPAL awarded him a FULL REFUND, which of course they would if he returned the items, it's their policy. They told me I could send them back delivery confirmation, but I didn't because he didn't want them. You can even ask Lee, I told him what PAYPAL said and he responded "if you do I wont' accept them." I asked him after the refund if he would send me the money for the damage caused by his faulty packaging and he said no. PAYPAL refunded me $150 after I complained and proved they were not resealed. I tried to take the high road every time I could with Lee. He did not give me any of the money he said he would for damaging the packs. I know you all trust and like Lee, and you may have every reason to he's likely a reputable guy, I'm not trying to tarnish him, perhaps my intensity in defending myself is coming across that way, wouldn't you feel that way if you were unfairly accused? He came across friendly and honest to me at first and as his posts say I came across that way to him, everything turned when the packs were returned to me damaged and I thought he should be responsible for that since he did not wrap them well at all. He said, "They are worthless anyway." How would you all feel if you found a new message board and bought a couple of things and then posted something to sell and got jumped all over. Then you find out people think you are selling resealed wax and are a crook? Would you just let your name be drug in the mud and people unfairly hammer you? You are all stating things about me that are not true, you do not know me, I'm honest and reputable and fair ALWAYS. I don't sell junk or fake stuff. My feedback on Ebay is over 3100 and it's at 99.9%, I've had problems on Ebay but very few. I had forgotten all of that stuff with Lee until someone linked a post from him. Lee and I have a difference of opinion on the validity of the wax I sold him, that's okay with me now. The other buyers of the wax agreed with me, and they were collector's not nubes with no idea of how to spot a resealed pack.
I like it when sellers/buyers are willing to openly defend their positions here.
In my experience, the "2-sides" theory is always used to obfuscate, and trick the court into creating a screwy version of reasonable doubt.
In this case, it is unfortunate that SH or PSA never had a chance to look at any of the packs. Folks here have a middling idea of CDs' ability to detect messed-with packs; no idea of mphil's skills, nor those of his advisors.
Since only the two parties to the transaction actually handled the packs, it makes it almost impossible for the unknow party to prevail with his argument to the hometown crowd.
One thing that I think most sellers here have learned is that when a buyer or prospective-buyer says there is or might be something not-legit about an item - listed or sold - the ONLY smart play is to get the item back into your hands ASAP and make a refund, or kill the listing. Absent a third-party opinion, the seller is ALWAYS in a no win situation.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
"...the packs were returned to me damaged and I thought he should be responsible for that since he did not wrap them well at all. He said, "They are worthless anyway..."
IF I knew/thought the packs were legit, I would be pist by that, too. IF I was the buyer and thought somebody was scamming me, I might have wanted to issue a similar comment; but, I would not have.
Safe and secure returns are all part of getting safely out of a bad deal. Such returns need to be packed well and insured against the kind of damage that is alleged to have been suffered.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
Wow, I go to the Indiana Jones movie and come back to this madness. I guess I opened a can of worms by bumping it up, but here it is in a nutshell- I bought the packs, I thought they were resealed but opened one to confirm and it was definitely tampered with. He said he'd give me a refund in full minus the pack that was opened, so I sent them back. When he got them back he only wanted to refund me about 70% of the total because some of the gum had broken because I had packed the packs very tightly in a box. Sorry, not paying $100 for broken gum in 70s packs, resealed or not. Broken gum is fairly irrelevant and only devalues the pack very minimally, if at all. I told him I was willing to eat the money for the pack I opened and shipping both ways, but nothing more. He declined, so I took it to paypal and they refunded me the full amount. He had his opportunity to minimize his losses, chose not to and lost the full amount. I'm supposed to then send him the 15% back after he puts me through this ordeal?
Mike (the seller), you clearly have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to unopened material. Here is what you just said: There were no hot roller packs on any of the packs.ALL Topps packs from the 50s-80s have roller marks. You can usually tell whether a pack has been resealed by looking at those roller marks. They tell the story. Steve Hart, Mark Murphy, Dave & Adam, and any other vintage pack seller will tell you this. Your lack of knowledge on the subject is obvious.
Also, let the record show that even though he left positive feedback after I had paid and I had no fear of a retalitory neg. I declined to leave a neg because I still felt somewhat bad for him for being taken on these packs. And this was even after the paypal refund was given and the seller tried to hit me with an unpaid item strike on ebay, which was quickly removed. Seemed like a last ditch effort to harm me in any way he could.
Well, that's my side, and I'm not sure how I could've handled it any better. Also, if I ever have buyers remorse about a $300 purchase, you can feel free to end my life right there because things have gotten bad to the point where I can't recover.
"Also, if I ever have buyers remorse about a $300 purchase, you can feel free to end my life right there because things have gotten bad to the point where I can't recover."
Like I said, the buyer's remorse argument totally breaks down when/if it is made against most of the folks on this board.
There is at least a 50/50 chance that the seller actually believes that the subject packs were good as gold. MANY fairly experienced EBAYers simply do not understand that MOST of that stuff is NG.
.......................
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
And no, paypal did not take any money back from me after refunding my money. I'm also curious to hear how he proved they were not resealed. I offered for him to send them to Steve Hart for his opinion on my dime and he kept declining. That would've been a pretty easy way for him to prove they were not tampered with.
storm- there's no doubt in my mind that the seller is 100% sure they were not resealed. The problem is he is wrong and I pointed out why the packs were almost definitely resealed. He would also offer no reasonable explanation as to why he thought they were legit other than he "knew" that they were. How much is the intuition of an unknowledgeable person worth?
He could have 10 ebay buyers line up and say the packs are legit and that still wouldn't change my mind. Ebayers routinely buy obvious 86-87 Fleer reseals for $100-$200 a piece every day, so are we supposed to take the advice of people selected from that pool?
I made it clear that if he didn't believe my opnion, then I'd pay for the packs to be shipped to Steve Hart so he could give his. Not sure what else I could do.
I buy lots of packs from the early 80s and broken gum is pretty common, some of those packs I ripped the other day had broken gum. The gum gets brittle over the years and will break with simple movement of the packs.
For what it's worth and it may not be much to some folks as they don't know me. But If I were to side with some one on this it would be Lee 100% not only is he trustworthy and a great Board member in my Book but He knows wax as well and Like mentioned Buyers remorse over 300.00? Not likely..Either the seller is trying to pull a Gary or got burnt on some bad wax and does not want to believe it..
As most know, I dabble a little buying and flipping 70's and 80's wax here on the boards.
In over 40 selling transactions here, I haven't had one complaint, concern, argument, dispute whatever.
But....I have had many, many complaints, concerns, arguments and disputes on the buying end. I've basically narrowed my list of trustworthy sellers down to less than a dozen, out of potentially hundreds out there. And like this situation, no matter how damning the evidence (wrong size gum, glue on the packs, etc.) most sellers just refuse to believe the packs are no good. It's an ego thing I think. If for any reason someone was skeptical about something I sold, immediate refund. That's the only way to play the wax game.
And to chime in on the "no roller marks on the packs" comment. Lee - did the packs have f'd up roller marks, or none at all? I purchased some 77 and 78 base wax a few months back. These came from a guy who bought them from the same guy that Steve mentioned on here that was selling bogus 79 hockey packs. The baseball packs (and aparently the hockey packs, according to Steve) did not have any roller marks at all. The packs were made with un-used wrappers. The looked absolutely mint all around, but were not sealed with a hot roller. Funny looking at the back of a pack and not seeing any dull roller area at all. Dead giveaway. And these packs also had narrow, late 80's gum instead of the short, fat late 70's stuff. Another dead giveaway.
It took many, many e-mails to the seller with this evidence to convince him his packs were bad. He said he has sold dozens of them with no complaints. Tons of buyers have no clue, so some of these sellers dont even know their stuff is bad.
" the seller tried to hit me with an unpaid item strike on ebay, which was quickly removed. Seemed like a last ditch effort to harm me in any way he could." this fact alone would keep me from dealing with the seller
USN 1977-1987 * ALL cards are commons unless auto'd. Buying Britneycards. NWO for life.
EXACTLY !!! If a buyer walks into a dealers store and that dealer has a mint price price on a ex-mt card, are you going to buy it. Same holds true for ebay. If you advertise mint to sell for a good price, it had better be close or expect it to be returned just like a no sale in a store.
Any team on any given Sunday, can beat any other team...unless they were playing the Miami Dolphins in 1972.
Dude! where did you get that picture of me sticking the butter knife in the electrical socket !
I remember that day as if it were only yesterday .
After I found out the energy in those little sockets , i graduated up to filling the tub with water and throwing Lamps and Tv's in the water and watching them explode .
After that I touched the 3rd rail of the LIRR with a 10 ft steel fence pole . . . well almost touched , I didn't get within 6 inches of the rail before the electricity jumped from the rail to the pole I was holding and blew up in my hands .
Anyway back to the thread, I highly doubt a $300 purchase is going to make or break Lee, the guy has damn near given away more than that .
It sucks the guy has to go through that bull crap , actually it sucks for both gentlemen .
Unopened wax packs is Lee's game , that is what he likes to do , he knows what he is looking at , I would have taken the offer to send them in to Steve Hart though, for the life of me I can not understand why one wouldn't have accepted that offer when it wouldn't have cost him a dime ?
Having said that , the guy who actually sold the packs does not seem like he even knew the packs were tampered with , as far as the gum situation , please everyone knows anything could have happened in transit , 30 some odd year 1/16 of an inch gum cracks when you look at it , I think that is bad business to play on that point .
If I were in his shoes I would do whatever I need to to make it right , my good name and my word are worth more than any amount of money, cards or trouble .
As in a post I saw before , anyone is allowed to post here and it is true nobody can stop you , but what good is it if your name or your word is worthless ?
Many people that post here post on multiple forums , things like this tend to follow a man around no matter where he goes I have noticed .
Bob- The packs had roller marks, but they were inconsistent from one flap to the other, meaning the lines did not go straight across. As you probably know, this means the pack had been opened and resealed. They all were like this.
For those that don't know, Topps used a hot roller that ran across the back to melt the wax and seal the packs. These rollers left faint lines that went from one side of the pack to the other. The roller lines should go straight across and not be broken from one flap to the other. Below is a diagram; on the left is what the back of the pack should resemble, the right pack is one that has inconsistent roller marks and is likely resealed:
This will be my last post in my defense in this issue. I did not say Paypal took money back from Lee I said they refunded money to me. It's obvious Lee is wonderful board member and trader/buyer/seller. Most of you seem to think Lee is a saint and expert in wax, which he very well may be, but this seems to qualify me as a thief and clueless about old wax. He may be a saint, but that is not a reflection on me. The problem I had with Lee is that gum was broken and packs were ripped, that is fact. Broken gum is not trivial at least to me it isn't, I also care about rips in the wax because of the broken gum. I responded to his concerns about the packs as best as I could, because he did not see that he wasn't satisfied with my response.
Before and during the Paypal dispute I contacted Lee to end this amicably, he then said he just wanted his full refund, I don't know what else to do about that or how to fix it any better. Paypal did refund him, as I and he said, he never returned the 15% for damaging my packs as he and I said. I did receive $153 from PAYPAL as an adjustment, as I said. The proof I provided to PAYPAL was HUGE scans and the comments from previous buyers and people that looked at the wax. Here are the lists from Paypal.
" Jun. 1, 2007 Transfer From PayPal Balance Adjustment Completed Details $78.00 USD -$32.00 USD Jun. 1, 2007 Transfer From PayPal Balance Adjustment Completed Details $75.00 USD -$110.00 USD May 13, 2007 Reversal To Lee Biars Completed Details -$200.00 USD -$185.00 USD "
Regarding the roller marks, Lee insisted they were not consistent with what Topps did. I know how wax packs got closed, I was commenting on his problem with the packs and his comments about the roller marks, not how they are sealed. He stated there were burns on the packs inconsistent with how Topps sealed them, there were no burns to anyone's eye but his, he said the cards showed the marks which were not consistent, I have the cards right in front of me nothing is out of the ordinary.
Trust Lee feel free I'm sure he deserves it, I would trust to deal with him again too. I'm not suggesting anything but that in my opinion and others his assessment was incorrect. Everything was fine until my packs were damaged and packaged without care back to me, I 100% stood behind them. That's my problem with Lee, I had no problem he didn't want them I stood behind them and offered a refund, but after they were damaged I wanted compensation, I sent them fully insured double wrapped in bubble wrap to him he sent them delivery confirmation and stuffed in a box to me. Lee is saying he'll take his word over the word over myself and 10 Ebayers and that is fine, he is lauded for his confidence and knowledge. Yet, when I am sure they were not reseals and trust the people who looked at them I am considered ridiculous or lying.
STorm you are right I would not decline if Lee offered to send the packs on his dime. Lee, you never said you would send those packs to Steve Hart, you suggested that I send them to him after you returned them to me, and I do not recall any mention of you paying for them to be looked at. You stated he may do it for free. Why didn't you send them to him when you had them?
TNTtompms said As in a post I saw before , anyone is allowed to post here and it is true nobody can stop you , but what good is it if your name or your word is worthless ? Does anyone find any confidence on my Ebay feedback and %age? For the record I did not say nobody can stop me, I said I wanted to post here someone responded saying that no one can stop me from posting here, that was not my comment. I believe posting is in vain unless there is some trust, which I have no problem establishing if I am given the chance.
TNT also said do what I could to make it good, right. I don't know what else I could have done. I had packs checked by me and two other sets of eyes prior to buying, and then after returned by Lee, I contacted Ebayers who purchased packs after Lee, no complaints. If something you sold was returned to you damaged wouldn't you want compensation? If wanting to be compensated for that is wrong, I will accept 100% blame for this problem. I do not believe what I was asking for was too much.
Lee or any other board member what can I do to make this right feel free to Email me or PM, I've already made a few purchases here and was occasionally going to list things to sell. I promise you all if I ever sell something knowingly unauthentic I will never post on this board again.
For the record Mphilking does have great ebay feedback and I don't think he was intentionally trying to pull one over on me. I think he feels the "damage" to the packs was greater than it actually was, but that's mainly where our disagreement lies. This whole part just doesn't make sense to me: Broken gum is not trivial at least to me it isn't, I also care about rips in the wax because of the broken gum. Like I said before, broken gum really doesn't devalue a 70s pack. It may mean something to you, but in the real world where the rest of us buy and sell, it is fairly insignificant and certainly not worth 50% of the pack's value. I have yet to see someone not buy a pack because the gum was broken. I have yet to see someone leave negative feedback because they bought some packs and the gum was broken. It just doesn't mean anything. I think you originally mentioned a small rip in one of the packs which is a legitimate claim if true. Still, I can not see broken gum and a small rip on one pack devaluing the entire lot by 50%. If paypal went into their pockets to give you some money back I'm happy for you.
I think he might be right when he said that I did not offer to pay shipping to Steve Hart, but I did say Steve told me he would look at the packs for free if Mike sent them. I could've mis-remembered regarding the shipping on my dime part, but I definitely wasn't at Jose Canseco's pool party.
To be honest, I probably shouldn't have brought this back up. I guess I just saw his name and the memories came rushing back. I wouldn't recommend buying wax from Mphilking, but when it comes to singles you probably have nothing to worry about. I'm willing to let it die.
I guess I'm not the only one that thinks gum and rips are important on wax packs.
Global Grading Procedures for Un-Opened Items Wax Pack, Cello, Rack, Tray and Boxes
1. Authenticity. Verify the pack is a factory cello, pack, rack, or box. Verify the print quality and wrap match a factory issue. The Global Un-Opened Library helps identify and confirm this process. 2. Alterations. Verify the cello, pack, rack; boxes have not been resealed, re-colored, re-wrapped, or any other type of alteration. There must be clear and convincing evidence that can be articulated why an unopened item has been altered. 3. Surface Condition. Verify the front and back of the item for wrinkles, missing stock, tears, creases, and any other type of surface problems. 4. Gum Condition. Verify the gum to see if it is broken, if it is still in one piece, if it is stuck to the wrapper or card, if the gum is powder, or if it is broken numerous times. 5. Corner Wear. Verify for fraying, tears, bends, discoloration, missing stock or any other type of wear. 6. Edges. Verify for tears, fraying, wrinkles, discoloration or any other type of flaws. 7. Print Defects. Verify the pack for factory print defects. Determine if there are print flaws and whether the print defects impact the overall eye appeal. 8. Staining. Verify the item for any type of staining; look for water, gum, mildew or any other type of stain. 9. Un-opened Seal. Verify the type of factory seal. Check the item for complete seal, partial seal or no seal 10. Overall Eye Appeal. Verify the front and back of the item and determine if it superior eye appeal. Determine Final Grade.
Uh huh. You see? You were fifty feet away, you made a positive eyewitness identification and-and-and-and-and-and-and YET, you were not wearing your necessary, prescription eye glasses.
<< <i>I guess I'm not the only one that thinks gum and rips are important on wax packs.
Global Grading Procedures for Un-Opened Items Wax Pack, Cello, Rack, Tray and Boxes
1. Authenticity. Verify the pack is a factory cello, pack, rack, or box. Verify the print quality and wrap match a factory issue. The Global Un-Opened Library helps identify and confirm this process. 2. Alterations. Verify the cello, pack, rack; boxes have not been resealed, re-colored, re-wrapped, or any other type of alteration. There must be clear and convincing evidence that can be articulated why an unopened item has been altered. 3. Surface Condition. Verify the front and back of the item for wrinkles, missing stock, tears, creases, and any other type of surface problems. 4. Gum Condition. Verify the gum to see if it is broken, if it is still in one piece, if it is stuck to the wrapper or card, if the gum is powder, or if it is broken numerous times. 5. Corner Wear. Verify for fraying, tears, bends, discoloration, missing stock or any other type of wear. 6. Edges. Verify for tears, fraying, wrinkles, discoloration or any other type of flaws. 7. Print Defects. Verify the pack for factory print defects. Determine if there are print flaws and whether the print defects impact the overall eye appeal. 8. Staining. Verify the item for any type of staining; look for water, gum, mildew or any other type of stain. 9. Un-opened Seal. Verify the type of factory seal. Check the item for complete seal, partial seal or no seal 10. Overall Eye Appeal. Verify the front and back of the item and determine if it superior eye appeal. Determine Final Grade. >>
Unfortunately, from what I read here, you wouldn't make it past #2, nullifying any validity to #3-6.
<< <i>I guess I'm not the only one that thinks gum and rips are important on wax packs.
Global Grading Procedures for Un-Opened Items Wax Pack, Cello, Rack, Tray and Boxes
1. Authenticity. Verify the pack is a factory cello, pack, rack, or box. Verify the print quality and wrap match a factory issue. The Global Un-Opened Library helps identify and confirm this process. 2. Alterations. Verify the cello, pack, rack; boxes have not been resealed, re-colored, re-wrapped, or any other type of alteration. There must be clear and convincing evidence that can be articulated why an unopened item has been altered. 3. Surface Condition. Verify the front and back of the item for wrinkles, missing stock, tears, creases, and any other type of surface problems. 4. Gum Condition. Verify the gum to see if it is broken, if it is still in one piece, if it is stuck to the wrapper or card, if the gum is powder, or if it is broken numerous times. 5. Corner Wear. Verify for fraying, tears, bends, discoloration, missing stock or any other type of wear. 6. Edges. Verify for tears, fraying, wrinkles, discoloration or any other type of flaws. 7. Print Defects. Verify the pack for factory print defects. Determine if there are print flaws and whether the print defects impact the overall eye appeal. 8. Staining. Verify the item for any type of staining; look for water, gum, mildew or any other type of stain. 9. Un-opened Seal. Verify the type of factory seal. Check the item for complete seal, partial seal or no seal 10. Overall Eye Appeal. Verify the front and back of the item and determine if it superior eye appeal. Determine Final Grade. >>
FYI, many of us "pack collectors" have 1960 and 70's GAI 9 or better packs where the gum has ripped a hole in the pack. Although they use to downgrade if the gum was stuck to the top card in hindsight you're better off if it was as it won't move around when in transit.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
I have seen high grade packs from the 70s that have the gum broken and even sticking out of the wrapper to an extent. The gum DOES NOT devalue the packs, but being opened does.
Uh huh. You see? You were fifty feet away, you made a positive eyewitness identification and-and-and-and-and-and-and YET, you were not wearing your necessary, prescription eye glasses.
They are readin' glasses.
Collector of 1976 Topps baseball for some stupid reason. Collector of Pittsburgh Pirates cards for a slightly less stupid reason. My Pirates Collection
What I don't understand is if Mphilking got his product back and resold it did he lose 150 on the resell or is he trying to use the damage as a way of extorting more money out of Lee even though he was still able to resell the product? You mentioned you sold the packs and all the customers were happy with the packs, did you lose 150 on the resell?
Currently completing the following registry sets: Cardinal HOF's, 1961 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1972 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1980 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, Bill Mazeroski Master & Basic Sets, Roberto Clemente Master & Basic Sets, Willie Stargell Master & Basic Sets and Terry Bradshaw Basic Set
BUT, I still cannot figure out how/why PayPal "refunded" $150 to the seller. >>
I am having serious doubts about that part of the story myself. Notice in the numbers he presented from Paypal how nice and round they were. When have you ever seen that. If Paypal refunded that they would have taken it from Lees account. There is no way they would have simply eaten it. I believe they would have done a full not partial as well.
Based on all of the info I have, those coupons have ONLY gone to buyers.
Semi-Related: Yesterday, Donahoe told GS that EBAY was launching a BIG coupon scheme to regain "MIA" buyers. If a buyer was buying a few times a month, and then vanished for a few months, he will get some BIG coupons.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
nam- he's talking about the cards from the pack I opened. I sent them back so he could see the inconsistent corner wear and centering, which apparently is not obvious to him.
As most of you know, when you open an old wax pack, most of the cards in the pack will have similar centering and corner wear. It's very rare to find a pack with some cards having wear on the top right corner, some on the bottom left, some on the top left, etc.... This certainly isn't rock solid proof of tampering, but is certainly and indicator. That is why I chose to open one pack.
Comments
Just curious if he is telling the truth-
I respect CDNUTS a great deal from this board but this sounds odd and cant be right
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
I know you all trust and like Lee, and you may have every reason to he's likely a reputable guy, I'm not trying to tarnish him, perhaps my intensity in defending myself is coming across that way, wouldn't you feel that way if you were unfairly accused? He came across friendly and honest to me at first and as his posts say I came across that way to him, everything turned when the packs were returned to me damaged and I thought he should be responsible for that since he did not wrap them well at all. He said, "They are worthless anyway."
How would you all feel if you found a new message board and bought a couple of things and then posted something to sell and got jumped all over. Then you find out people think you are selling resealed wax and are a crook? Would you just let your name be drug in the mud and people unfairly hammer you? You are all stating things about me that are not true, you do not know me, I'm honest and reputable and fair ALWAYS. I don't sell junk or fake stuff. My feedback on Ebay is over 3100 and it's at 99.9%, I've had problems on Ebay but very few. I had forgotten all of that stuff with Lee until someone linked a post from him. Lee and I have a difference of opinion on the validity of the wax I sold him, that's okay with me now. The other buyers of the wax agreed with me, and they were collector's not nubes with no idea of how to spot a resealed pack.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I like it when sellers/buyers are willing to openly defend their positions here.
In my experience, the "2-sides" theory is always used to obfuscate, and trick
the court into creating a screwy version of reasonable doubt.
In this case, it is unfortunate that SH or PSA never had a chance to look at
any of the packs. Folks here have a middling idea of CDs' ability to detect
messed-with packs; no idea of mphil's skills, nor those of his advisors.
Since only the two parties to the transaction actually handled the packs, it
makes it almost impossible for the unknow party to prevail with his argument
to the hometown crowd.
One thing that I think most sellers here have learned is that when a buyer
or prospective-buyer says there is or might be something not-legit about
an item - listed or sold - the ONLY smart play is to get the item back into
your hands ASAP and make a refund, or kill the listing. Absent a third-party
opinion, the seller is ALWAYS in a no win situation.
////////////////////////////////
What are the details on this?
And, please don't PM the response; repeating the contents of a PM is not done here, thus
PMs don't serve to inform the group.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////
IF I knew/thought the packs were legit, I would be pist by that, too.
IF I was the buyer and thought somebody was scamming me, I might
have wanted to issue a similar comment; but, I would not have.
Safe and secure returns are all part of getting safely out of a bad deal.
Such returns need to be packed well and insured against the kind of
damage that is alleged to have been suffered.
<< <i>PAYPAL refunded me $150 after I complained and proved they were not resealed. >>
You proved to PayPal the packs weren't resealed? PayPal??? Was this irrefutable demonstration managed via email? What was the proof you provided?
Mike (the seller), you clearly have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to unopened material. Here is what you just said: There were no hot roller packs on any of the packs. ALL Topps packs from the 50s-80s have roller marks. You can usually tell whether a pack has been resealed by looking at those roller marks. They tell the story. Steve Hart, Mark Murphy, Dave & Adam, and any other vintage pack seller will tell you this. Your lack of knowledge on the subject is obvious.
Also, let the record show that even though he left positive feedback after I had paid and I had no fear of a retalitory neg. I declined to leave a neg because I still felt somewhat bad for him for being taken on these packs. And this was even after the paypal refund was given and the seller tried to hit me with an unpaid item strike on ebay, which was quickly removed. Seemed like a last ditch effort to harm me in any way he could.
Well, that's my side, and I'm not sure how I could've handled it any better. Also, if I ever have buyers remorse about a $300 purchase, you can feel free to end my life right there because things have gotten bad to the point where I can't recover.
Lee
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Like I said, the buyer's remorse argument totally breaks down
when/if it is made against most of the folks on this board.
There is at least a 50/50 chance that the seller actually believes
that the subject packs were good as gold. MANY fairly experienced
EBAYers simply do not understand that MOST of that stuff is NG.
.......................
<< <i>No comment, don't want to ruin it for anybody. I see a lot of bad press in the future though. >>
I saw it earlier today myself and while maybe not bad press, I do think they carried the legend of the skulls too far.
He could have 10 ebay buyers line up and say the packs are legit and that still wouldn't change my mind. Ebayers routinely buy obvious 86-87 Fleer reseals for $100-$200 a piece every day, so are we supposed to take the advice of people selected from that pool?
I made it clear that if he didn't believe my opnion, then I'd pay for the packs to be shipped to Steve Hart so he could give his. Not sure what else I could do.
//////////////////////////////////////
I cannot come up with a good-faith reason to decline such an offer.
I feel your pain.
As most know, I dabble a little buying and flipping 70's and 80's wax here on the boards.
In over 40 selling transactions here, I haven't had one complaint, concern, argument, dispute whatever.
But....I have had many, many complaints, concerns, arguments and disputes on the buying end. I've basically narrowed my list of trustworthy sellers down to less than a dozen, out of potentially hundreds out there. And like this situation, no matter how damning the evidence (wrong size gum, glue on the packs, etc.) most sellers just refuse to believe the packs are no good. It's an ego thing I think. If for any reason someone was skeptical about something I sold, immediate refund. That's the only way to play the wax game.
And to chime in on the "no roller marks on the packs" comment. Lee - did the packs have f'd up roller marks, or none at all? I purchased some 77 and 78 base wax a few months back. These came from a guy who bought them from the same guy that Steve mentioned on here that was selling bogus 79 hockey packs. The baseball packs (and aparently the hockey packs, according to Steve) did not have any roller marks at all. The packs were made with un-used wrappers. The looked absolutely mint all around, but were not sealed with a hot roller. Funny looking at the back of a pack and not seeing any dull roller area at all. Dead giveaway. And these packs also had narrow, late 80's gum instead of the short, fat late 70's stuff. Another dead giveaway.
It took many, many e-mails to the seller with this evidence to convince him his packs were bad. He said he has sold dozens of them with no complaints. Tons of buyers have no clue, so some of these sellers dont even know their stuff is bad.
this fact alone would keep me from dealing with the seller
I remember that day as if it were only yesterday .
After I found out the energy in those little sockets , i graduated up to filling the tub with water and throwing Lamps and Tv's in the water and watching them explode .
After that I touched the 3rd rail of the LIRR with a 10 ft steel fence pole . . . well almost touched , I didn't get within 6 inches of the rail before the electricity jumped from the rail to the pole I was holding and blew up in my hands .
Anyway back to the thread, I highly doubt a $300 purchase is going to make or break Lee, the guy has damn near given away more than that .
It sucks the guy has to go through that bull crap , actually it sucks for both gentlemen .
Unopened wax packs is Lee's game , that is what he likes to do , he knows what he is looking at , I would have taken the offer to send them in to Steve Hart though, for the life of me I can not understand why one wouldn't have accepted that offer when it wouldn't have cost him a dime ?
Having said that , the guy who actually sold the packs does not seem like he even knew the packs were tampered with , as far as the gum situation , please everyone knows anything could have happened in transit , 30 some odd year 1/16 of an inch gum cracks when you look at it , I think that is bad business to play on that point .
If I were in his shoes I would do whatever I need to to make it right , my good name and my word are worth more than any amount of money, cards or trouble .
As in a post I saw before , anyone is allowed to post here and it is true nobody can stop you , but what good is it if your name or your word is worthless ?
Many people that post here post on multiple forums , things like this tend to follow a man around no matter where he goes I have noticed .
For those that don't know, Topps used a hot roller that ran across the back to melt the wax and seal the packs. These rollers left faint lines that went from one side of the pack to the other. The roller lines should go straight across and not be broken from one flap to the other. Below is a diagram; on the left is what the back of the pack should resemble, the right pack is one that has inconsistent roller marks and is likely resealed:
Thank you for the illustration .
Before and during the Paypal dispute I contacted Lee to end this amicably, he then said he just wanted his full refund, I don't know what else to do about that or how to fix it any better. Paypal did refund him, as I and he said, he never returned the 15% for damaging my packs as he and I said. I did receive $153 from PAYPAL as an adjustment, as I said. The proof I provided to PAYPAL was HUGE scans and the comments from previous buyers and people that looked at the wax. Here are the lists from Paypal.
" Jun. 1, 2007 Transfer From PayPal Balance Adjustment Completed Details $78.00 USD -$32.00 USD
Jun. 1, 2007 Transfer From PayPal Balance Adjustment Completed Details $75.00 USD -$110.00 USD
May 13, 2007 Reversal To Lee Biars Completed Details -$200.00 USD -$185.00 USD "
Regarding the roller marks, Lee insisted they were not consistent with what Topps did. I know how wax packs got closed, I was commenting on his problem with the packs and his comments about the roller marks, not how they are sealed. He stated there were burns on the packs inconsistent with how Topps sealed them, there were no burns to anyone's eye but his, he said the cards showed the marks which were not consistent, I have the cards right in front of me nothing is out of the ordinary.
Trust Lee feel free I'm sure he deserves it, I would trust to deal with him again too. I'm not suggesting anything but that in my opinion and others his assessment was incorrect. Everything was fine until my packs were damaged and packaged without care back to me, I 100% stood behind them. That's my problem with Lee, I had no problem he didn't want them I stood behind them and offered a refund, but after they were damaged I wanted compensation, I sent them fully insured double wrapped in bubble wrap to him he sent them delivery confirmation and stuffed in a box to me. Lee is saying he'll take his word over the word over myself and 10 Ebayers and that is fine, he is lauded for his confidence and knowledge. Yet, when I am sure they were not reseals and trust the people who looked at them I am considered ridiculous or lying.
STorm you are right I would not decline if Lee offered to send the packs on his dime. Lee, you never said you would send those packs to Steve Hart, you suggested that I send them to him after you returned them to me, and I do not recall any mention of you paying for them to be looked at. You stated he may do it for free. Why didn't you send them to him when you had them?
TNTtompms said As in a post I saw before , anyone is allowed to post here and it is true nobody can stop you , but what good is it if your name or your word is worthless ?
Does anyone find any confidence on my Ebay feedback and %age? For the record I did not say nobody can stop me, I said I wanted to post here someone responded saying that no one can stop me from posting here, that was not my comment. I believe posting is in vain unless there is some trust, which I have no problem establishing if I am given the chance.
TNT also said do what I could to make it good, right. I don't know what else I could have done. I had packs checked by me and two other sets of eyes prior to buying, and then after returned by Lee, I contacted Ebayers who purchased packs after Lee, no complaints. If something you sold was returned to you damaged wouldn't you want compensation? If wanting to be compensated for that is wrong, I will accept 100% blame for this problem. I do not believe what I was asking for was too much.
Lee or any other board member what can I do to make this right feel free to Email me or PM, I've already made a few purchases here and was occasionally going to list things to sell. I promise you all if I ever sell something knowingly unauthentic I will never post on this board again.
<< <i>No problem. I'm glad you like my drawrings. >>
cheeky monkey
I think he might be right when he said that I did not offer to pay shipping to Steve Hart, but I did say Steve told me he would look at the packs for free if Mike sent them. I could've mis-remembered regarding the shipping on my dime part, but I definitely wasn't at Jose Canseco's pool party.
To be honest, I probably shouldn't have brought this back up. I guess I just saw his name and the memories came rushing back. I wouldn't recommend buying wax from Mphilking, but when it comes to singles you probably have nothing to worry about. I'm willing to let it die.
Lee
Global Grading Procedures for Un-Opened Items
Wax Pack, Cello, Rack, Tray and Boxes
1. Authenticity. Verify the pack is a factory cello, pack, rack, or box. Verify the print quality and wrap match a factory issue. The Global Un-Opened Library helps identify and confirm this process.
2. Alterations. Verify the cello, pack, rack; boxes have not been resealed, re-colored, re-wrapped, or any other type of alteration. There must be clear and convincing evidence that can be articulated why an unopened item has been altered.
3. Surface Condition. Verify the front and back of the item for wrinkles, missing stock, tears, creases, and any other type of surface problems.
4. Gum Condition. Verify the gum to see if it is broken, if it is still in one piece, if it is stuck to the wrapper or card, if the gum is powder, or if it is broken numerous times.
5. Corner Wear. Verify for fraying, tears, bends, discoloration, missing stock or any other type of wear.
6. Edges. Verify for tears, fraying, wrinkles, discoloration or any other type of flaws.
7. Print Defects. Verify the pack for factory print defects. Determine if there are print flaws and whether the print defects impact the overall eye appeal.
8. Staining. Verify the item for any type of staining; look for water, gum, mildew or any other type of stain.
9. Un-opened Seal. Verify the type of factory seal. Check the item for complete seal, partial seal or no seal
10. Overall Eye Appeal. Verify the front and back of the item and determine if it superior eye appeal. Determine Final Grade.
<< <i>I guess I'm not the only one that thinks gum and rips are important on wax packs.
Global Grading Procedures for Un-Opened Items
Wax Pack, Cello, Rack, Tray and Boxes
1. Authenticity. Verify the pack is a factory cello, pack, rack, or box. Verify the print quality and wrap match a factory issue. The Global Un-Opened Library helps identify and confirm this process.
2. Alterations. Verify the cello, pack, rack; boxes have not been resealed, re-colored, re-wrapped, or any other type of alteration. There must be clear and convincing evidence that can be articulated why an unopened item has been altered.
3. Surface Condition. Verify the front and back of the item for wrinkles, missing stock, tears, creases, and any other type of surface problems.
4. Gum Condition. Verify the gum to see if it is broken, if it is still in one piece, if it is stuck to the wrapper or card, if the gum is powder, or if it is broken numerous times.
5. Corner Wear. Verify for fraying, tears, bends, discoloration, missing stock or any other type of wear.
6. Edges. Verify for tears, fraying, wrinkles, discoloration or any other type of flaws.
7. Print Defects. Verify the pack for factory print defects. Determine if there are print flaws and whether the print defects impact the overall eye appeal.
8. Staining. Verify the item for any type of staining; look for water, gum, mildew or any other type of stain.
9. Un-opened Seal. Verify the type of factory seal. Check the item for complete seal, partial seal or no seal
10. Overall Eye Appeal. Verify the front and back of the item and determine if it superior eye appeal. Determine Final Grade. >>
Unfortunately, from what I read here, you wouldn't make it past #2, nullifying any validity to #3-6.
<< <i>There must be clear and convincing evidence that can be articulated why an unopened item has been altered. >>
BINGO!!
<< <i>I guess I'm not the only one that thinks gum and rips are important on wax packs.
Global Grading Procedures for Un-Opened Items
Wax Pack, Cello, Rack, Tray and Boxes
1. Authenticity. Verify the pack is a factory cello, pack, rack, or box. Verify the print quality and wrap match a factory issue. The Global Un-Opened Library helps identify and confirm this process.
2. Alterations. Verify the cello, pack, rack; boxes have not been resealed, re-colored, re-wrapped, or any other type of alteration. There must be clear and convincing evidence that can be articulated why an unopened item has been altered.
3. Surface Condition. Verify the front and back of the item for wrinkles, missing stock, tears, creases, and any other type of surface problems.
4. Gum Condition. Verify the gum to see if it is broken, if it is still in one piece, if it is stuck to the wrapper or card, if the gum is powder, or if it is broken numerous times.
5. Corner Wear. Verify for fraying, tears, bends, discoloration, missing stock or any other type of wear.
6. Edges. Verify for tears, fraying, wrinkles, discoloration or any other type of flaws.
7. Print Defects. Verify the pack for factory print defects. Determine if there are print flaws and whether the print defects impact the overall eye appeal.
8. Staining. Verify the item for any type of staining; look for water, gum, mildew or any other type of stain.
9. Un-opened Seal. Verify the type of factory seal. Check the item for complete seal, partial seal or no seal
10. Overall Eye Appeal. Verify the front and back of the item and determine if it superior eye appeal. Determine Final Grade. >>
FYI, many of us "pack collectors" have 1960 and 70's GAI 9 or better packs where the gum has ripped a hole in the pack. Although they use to downgrade if the gum was stuck to the top card in hindsight you're better off if it was as it won't move around when in transit.
P.S. Game, set and match, CDSNUTS!!
Current obsession, all things Topps 1969 - 1972
<< <i>mis-remembered >>
2008 word of the year.
They are readin' glasses.
Collector of Pittsburgh Pirates cards for a slightly less stupid reason.
My Pirates Collection
BUT, I still cannot figure out how/why PayPal "refunded" $150 to the seller.
<< <i>I am just modestly stupid.
BUT, I still cannot figure out how/why PayPal "refunded" $150 to the seller. >>
storm, come now...PayPal is very generous!
/sarcasm
I can't figure it out either
<< <i>I am just modestly stupid.
BUT, I still cannot figure out how/why PayPal "refunded" $150 to the seller. >>
I am having serious doubts about that part of the story myself. Notice in the numbers he presented from Paypal how nice and round they were. When have you ever seen that. If Paypal refunded that they would have taken it from Lees account. There is no way they would have simply eaten it. I believe they would have done a full not partial as well.
Maybe that has something to do with it? Probably a pretty good way to get a tax write-off while keeping customers happy.
<< <i>There was a period where paypal started sending out some ebay coupons for people who lost out on ebay disputes: Link
Maybe that has something to do with it? Probably a pretty good way to get a tax write-off while keeping customers happy. >>
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Based on all of the info I have, those coupons have ONLY gone to buyers.
Semi-Related: Yesterday, Donahoe told GS that EBAY was launching a BIG coupon
scheme to regain "MIA" buyers. If a buyer was buying a few times a month,
and then vanished for a few months, he will get some BIG coupons.
<< <i>.......he said the cards showed the marks which were not consistent, I have the cards right in front of me nothing is out of the ordinary. >>
If you sold all the packs you got back from Lee, how do you have the cards right there in front of you?
As most of you know, when you open an old wax pack, most of the cards in the pack will have similar centering and corner wear. It's very rare to find a pack with some cards having wear on the top right corner, some on the bottom left, some on the top left, etc.... This certainly isn't rock solid proof of tampering, but is certainly and indicator. That is why I chose to open one pack.
Steve