Options
Ebayer Somersetvelvet? Is it just me or...
tribeman
Posts: 26
does anyone else think that many of the cards in these scans look trimmed? The mays, seaver, clemente, the aaron, the clemente all star, and the gibson world series card all have what appears to be atrocious trimming. Anyone else think that or am I losing it? Is this somersetvelvet a raw seller to stay away from?
Link for item 190289701906
Link for item 190289701906
0
Comments
mathew
drugs of choice
NHL hall of fame rookies
what he sent? IMO if someone was interested in this item questions should be asked.
Depending on how they are replied to is how a judgement should be made as to purchase.
As for trimming? I have no idea the scans are too small.
I'm don't like the 68 set but at his price it comes out to less then 3.00 per card.
Steve
If the item come and is not what the guy says one could file a SNAD.
Steve
IMO if what you say is true the seller should no better.
Consignment or no consignment he is the one selling the item.
I am speaking in general here not about this specific seller.
Steve
but he is not above doing a sour one.
Not a seller I'd give my money too.
Steve
He had a 1966 PSA 8 Clemente that looked pretty good, and I decided to do a search on Collectors Universe, and uncovered this thread.
1966 PSA 8 Clemente
Completed my Clemente Basic Registry (2007 - 2014)!
Positive transactions with oakesy25,jasoneggert,swartz1,MBMiller25,gregm13,kid4hof03,HoopGuru33,Reese3333,BPorter26,Davemri
While I personally have never dealt with the guy, his 15 less than Positive Feedbacks don't seem to have anything to do with graded cards.
I remember Rube did a lot of satisfactory business with the guy.
That '66 Clemente looks pretty nice to me. I wouldn't hesitate to buy graded cards from the guy.
PoppaJ
Tommy returned it, then this guy re listed it and made no mention of the trimmed cards?
I don't recall Rube standing up for this guy.
I could be wrong......
Steve
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
<< <i>Run, do not walk, away from this guy. I also know of others who bought some GAI stuff from him, cracked it out, and it was all hacked up. >>
You never answered the question posed in the other thread-- is the '66 Banks you were selling raw on Ebay as 'NM-MT' the same one that was rejected at least once by PSA as N1?
Steve
I didn't see the other thread but I'll be more than happy to answer it. Yes it's the same card and I do not for one second believe it to be trimmed. The card measured, it had no indication of being wavy, and had none of the characteristics of being altered. But it was not worth wasting another grading fee on it, particularly since I didn't need it nor do I engage in grading masturbation in some sort of quixotic quest to get a card into a holder.
If I think something has been messed with, I won't sell it but I will sell a card that I think is fine. And I'll refund anyone on Ebay, on this board, or in Libya if they send it in and it doesn't grade. Which is, by the way, common practice amongst most of the reputable sellers of ungraded cards.
Additionally, I find it interesting that this subject has been raised with regard to one card, when others who cannot be named on this forum continue to rape the hobby by getting altered cards into holders and very few people who frequent this board seem to give a flip.
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
Looking for 1970 MLB Photostamps
- uncut
Positive Transactions - tennesseebanker, Ahmanfan, Donruss, Colebear, CDsNuts, rbdjr1, Downtown1974, yankeeno7, drewsef, mnolan, mrbud60, msassin, RipublicaninMass, AkbarClone, rustywilly, lsutigers1973, julen23 and nam812, plus many others...
Steve
<< <i>"You never answered the question posed in the other thread-- is the '66 Banks you were selling raw on Ebay as 'NM-MT' the same one that was rejected at least once by PSA as N1?"
I didn't see the other thread but I'll be more than happy to answer it. Yes it's the same card and I do not for one second believe it to be trimmed. The card measured, it had no indication of being wavy, and had none of the characteristics of being altered. But it was not worth wasting another grading fee on it, particularly since I didn't need it nor do I engage in grading masturbation in some sort of quixotic quest to get a card into a holder.
If I think something has been messed with, I won't sell it but I will sell a card that I think is fine. And I'll refund anyone on Ebay, on this board, or in Libya if they send it in and it doesn't grade. Which is, by the way, common practice amongst most of the reputable sellers of ungraded cards.
Additionally, I find it interesting that this subject has been raised with regard to one card, when others who cannot be named on this forum continue to rape the hobby by getting altered cards into holders and very few people who frequent this board seem to give a flip. >>
I agree with all points. I also think that you should have disclosed in the auction description that the Banks was kicked back N1, and to not do was deceitful.
Regarding the behavior of the 'Double S Card Factory', I do agree that whatever he is doing is a far more pressing hobby issue than the occasional sale of a questionable raw card.
That said, I have no problem with you bringing it up. The relative infrequency of your cynical drivebys are bound to yield some misses as well as hits.
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
does not mean a seller has to say that in his/her description. If the card measures up
is not an obvious hack job and the seller has a no questions asked return/refund policy
I see no reason why a seller has to mention this. I expect sellers (myself included) to
describe any obvious flaws or problems though.
Now if a person believes the card has been trimmed that is another story.
How do the rest of you feel about this? If anything, I go out of my way describing problems
if a card I'm selling has one.
This situation with Ron came about when the forum piled on Phillip Golden after he admitted to
safety bidding AND listing a card without mentioning it was rejected by PSA. Someone then challenged
us to treat Ron the same way as Phillip was treated. The difference? Ron did not admit to shilling.
Steve
Quote from thread: "is it just me or does anyone else think that Somerset Velvet sounds like the name of a coked up 80s porn star?"
As for our name, SomersetVelvet. "SomersetVelvet" is a term given to high quality, expensive, water color paper. I run a print shop and cater to artists. I used to sell art work, bumper stickers and other artwork on Ebay years ago. The name Somersetvelvet was created to let people know I was in the printing business. Later I stated selling cards out of my collection and then soon we grew and stopped listing "artwork" that was not selling. I kept the name SomersetVelvet because we built a reputation on Ebay and I did not want to start over with a new id nobody recognized.
As for the 1968 Set I had for sale that this thread was created over, none of the cards were trimmed. The set sold and all the cards that were sent in for grading received a numerical grade.
Quote from thread:"Ahhh yeah I remember this guy, yeah stay away. He may do some good deals
but he is not above doing a sour one."
I have never, never, knowingly done a sour deal. I pride myself on accuracy and honesty. That is how I have kept a 100% feedback rating. If you look at my negatives over the years they all are bs. I do not know what Steve is talking about, but if you would like to contact me, feel free. My email, bucklercards@yahoo.com
Quote from thread: " i bought a few cards from him; a couple were definitely trimmed, but they were junk commons. maybe 3 out of a lot of 20."
I used to break a lot of sets and buy bulk lots from auctions and Ebay. I no longer do this. Commons were fun to buy and sell but they quickly overtook my office and the work seemed endless. I primarily now sell strictly star cards with the occasional common. I never deliberately sold any trimmed cards, and I am very sorry if one or more slipped by. I feel, since I have narrowed my inventory down to primarily star cards, any errors are extremely rare.
Quote from thread: "Isn't this the same guy that sold Corvette the 65 set that turned out to have many trimmed cards? Tommy returned it, then this guy re listed it and made no mention of the trimmed cards? I don't recall Rube standing up for this guy. I could be wrong...... "
I have sold thousands of items over the past year. You are wrong. I checked my records and show no sale of a returned 1965 Topps Set. You are confusing SomersetVelvet with another seller.
Quote from thread: "Run, do not walk, away from this guy. I also know of others who bought some GAI stuff from him, cracked it out, and it was all hacked up"
GAI stinks, enough said. I along with many other people have been totally screwed with GAI graded cards. I don't know what else to say, except I no longer sell GAI graded cards and will never buy another one, w/o PSA, SGC or BVG seeing it first.
Anyway, sorry for the long rant. I just wanted to defend myself since I am new here. I don't want to say I have never made a mistake because I have. I am learning more every day about cards. I, like most of you, eat, sleep, and sh*t baseball cards. I am totally addicted. I really only even sell cards to make a little money to buy the cards I want for my collection. I hope if there is problem with me in any way you will contact me directly rather than bashing me on any forum. I will give any of you guys a return on any purchase. The only reason I do not offer returns on Ebay is the usual reasons, people switching out cards, from sets, lots or even individual cards. I have been screwed many times, I am only trying to protect myself. Feel free to contact me at bucklercards@yahoo.com with any questions, complaints or concerns.
Thanks,
Chris
SomersetVelvet
Sorry, thanks for clarifying, and welcome to the boards.
Steve
<< <i>Fail. Your accusation of deceit implies intent to deceive, of which there was none. I believe I made that clear in the prior post.
That said, I have no problem with you bringing it up. The relative infrequency of your cynical drivebys are bound to yield some misses as well as hits. >>
Here's a litmus test- before you list an auction, is there any information about the card that you haven't revealed that you would want to know if you were the prospective buyer? If the answer is yes, then in my opinion that information should be included in the auction description.
For example: I'm sitting on a pile of '80 RC's that have been kicked back N1 from PSA. Elways, Marinos, Clemens/McGwires, and so on. I probably have about thirty of them, and I have no idea why these cards have been kicked back. Still, I think it would be sleazy to list them as 'mint' without revealing what I know about their history.
That is not to say that I haven't had my share of 'hobby missteps', or that I haven't made a few moves that I wouldn't like to have back. I'm not squeaky clean, and I won't pretend to be. But, as I alluded to in this thread and via PM, sometimes a guy needs to get called to the mat, and this seems to me like one of those times.
Edit to add: As I also alluded to via PM, Ron, this isn't really about the '66 Banks. It's about the horde of beta males on these boards will will call out one guy for a questionable auction description, and then don't apply the same standard to another guy. My problem with the Banks sale is minor-- but I do have a major problem with the uneven application of standards.
It is after all only an opinion. His opinion (in this case) is that they were wrong. We, can certainly grade as well
as PSA. Last week I received some cards back from PSA and one had something on the cards back. It was not ink or pencil
not sure what it was, anyway I mentioned that in the description.
Maybe I'm off base here I dunno.
Steve
<< <i>I, like most of you, eat, sleep, and sh*t baseball cards. >>
Wouldnt Phillips MOM or Metamucil be cheaper?
1) No problem with someone raising an issue. No one's perfect, and it'll make me think about how to get better in the future.
2) That said, I stick to my position WRT that particular card and in general. In fact, given the issues discussed in the other threads about the questionable cards residing in holders makes me less confident about placing so much weight on the grading opinion. One could own a stack of presentation cards that will never see holders, and yet at the same time have never been altered. And so forth.
3) I suppose one thing I could do is reconsider my policy against conducting Grading JO's, and just adopt a rule that if three grading hanje's don't yield success, then burn the card at the stake. Probably less hassle than selling the card online and offering a simple refund if it doesn't work out.
4) And last, I had to chuckle at the stated rationale for the original comment - concern for the less "respected" board member. That "concern" would be easier to believe if the "more respected" board member hadn't been used as a whipping boy to illustrate the (supposed) difference. Philip Golden, you have a lot to look forward to...............stop shilling your auctions and just join the fun every day, try to contribute to the hobby, try to do things right, be an active member of the boards, then you can become "more respected" and eventually be used as a tool against some other poor sap who's being led to the gallows for the first time. It's an awesome experience, I highly recommend it.
That - and the public calling out rather than a private PM to express the "outrage" over the auction - reveals the motivations for those involved.
Y'all stay classy.
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items