Sellers who guarantee an item to pass but won't refund authentication fees

[packs]

This bothers me. If you put in your listing that you guarantee the item to pass authentication, why wouldn't you also agree to refund the authentication fees if it fails? I'm not understanding the logic. I want to buy a high dollar item that is not yet authenticated. Seller guarantees the item to pass. But will not agree to refund the authentication fee if it fails.

[Sean1125]

Personally, I only guarantee autographs I've had someone who is experienced with the player or a long time hobby member (or 2... or 3) say is good.

I would not refund authentication fees but would refund the item+ shipping.

It is your risk, there are 100% good items denied by both PSA and JSA, I know Jeter is one of the big ones.


My thoughts,

Sean

[Lordstan]

From a functional standpoint, what a seller is really offering in this instance, is a money back guarantee based on authenticity. They use the wording "guaranteed to pass PSA/JSA" because currently they are the most popular choices for authentication.

Ultimately, the choice to send it to PSA or JSA is the buyers not the sellers. Why should the seller pay for the opinion itself, when he/she didn't ask for it? The buyer is likely doing it because they either want to feel more comfortable or they want to resell the item. Neither is the responsibility of the seller, as they have already offered a money back guarantee.

Additionally, for an average seller, not someone who is a known dealer like Jim Stinson, Richard Simon, or Kevin Keating, the price you will likely pay for an uncerted item is less. If the seller got the cert beforehand the price would've been higher to offset the cost of the cert.

[travrosty]

before you bid, ask if they will refund authentication fee, if they wont, then bid or dont bid accordingly. but why anyone would play the authentication game and guarantee that the guessers will pass anything or not is beyond me.


we have seen time and time again they will pass what they want and fail what they want.

[Paulanthony]

This is a loaded question Due to high error rates by PSA/DNA, JSA and GAI, their opinions don't include to prove or serve to prove the authenticity. In other words the opinion of the examiner is a belief which may be considered a strong impression and less stronger than positive knowledge. If this wasn't true all certificates of authenticity would read, unconditionaly guaranteed authentic or your money back. Most of the time they get it right. I like autographs and I would have no problem with the services of Richard Simon or JSA. Here is my experience with JSA and why they might make mistakes. I attended a card show and submitted a baseball to Spence. The ball had eighteen signatures, Babe Ruth, Lefty Gomez was my big concern. I paid him $200.00 up front. I came back One Hour and twenty minutes. The ball was done and they said it was good. Does any one think that ball went through a vigorous examination. How long should it take a professional person or persons to authenticate eighteen faded signatures. I believe much longer then JSA did.

[packs]

I understand what you guys are saying but I think we're talking about different things. If you put in your description that the item is guaranteed to pass authentication, then why wouldn't you also guarantee the authentication fee? What exactly are you saying when you say the item will pass authentication but you aren't going to be liable for the authentication fee should it fail?

Otherwise don't offer the guarantee.

[Sean1125]

I understand what you guys are saying but I think we're talking about different things. If you put in your description that the item is guaranteed to pass authentication, then why wouldn't you also guarantee the authentication fee? What exactly are you saying when you say the item will pass authentication but you aren't going to be liable for the authentication fee should it fail?

Otherwise don't offer the guarantee.

Being objective, my items that are sold without authentication typically sell for 1/4-1/2 of the item authenticated, if I cared to pay PSA for their opinion I would - but I don't, so I don't.

In most cases I would say you are getting the item cheaper than if it came authenticated, and still cheaper than an authenticated one (if) it does pass.

[packs]

In almost every case you will get an unauthenticated item cheaper than you would an authenticated item. I will only buy an unauthenticated item if I belive it to be good. And I will take the chance should it fail.

However, if a seller is going to guarantee an item will pass, I don't understand why they wouldn't guarantee the fee. You are offering a guarantee on the authenticity and saying you guarantee it to pass. Why then would a buyer have to be the one going out on a limb on the fee if you're the one who guarantees it will pass?

To be clear, I'm not talking about offering a refund if an item fails. I'm talking about a seller explicitly using the words "guaranteed to pass authentication."

[prewarsports]

I bet dealers will consent to refund your authentication fees if it fails if you guarantee to give them the 30% bump in price if it passes!

No dealer in the World I know of (in any area of collectibles, not just cards/autographs) will give you fees back based on a choice of who you want to look at the item after you buy it, and they shouldn't. A guarantee of the item itself and purchase price is all that should be expected of a dealer. I have been dealing in autographs for a LONG time, sold literally thousands of signatures and do not refund authentication fees and never will. Mostly because I believe I know more than they do to begin with, but it is just a bad business practice to guarantee the quality of your item on the opinion of anothers and refund the "other guy" for his opinion about your piece.

Third party authentication is a choice, not a right. Maybe some dealers do that, but I cant think of a single one in my time in the hobby.

Rhys

[packs]

I'm sorry but I think we're still talking about different things. I'm not talking about a seller's guarantee on authenticity. I'm talking about putting the following line directly into the text of your auction:

Guaranteed to pass authentication.

What does that mean if you are not willing to refund the fee as well? Again, I'm not talking about a guaranteed refund if the item fails. I'm talking about a seller choosing to say they guarantee it will pass authentication.

That is the sellers choice of words NOT the buyers.

[earlywynnfan]

I have the term in my ebay items, and in no way feel I should be on the hook for authentication fees. Couldn't a buyer then want me to pay for the authentication fees if it passes?

If I put in "displays beautifully," do I need to provide for the display case? After all, a nice case would definitely make it display beautifully!

Ken

[chaddurbin]

is this about abbeychimay? i take "guaranteed to pass authentication" as meaning "the signature is real". i don't see why he has to refund the tpg fees. if he was to do that he might as well send his ruth/cobb/johnson etc in himself and get the premiums from those certs.

[packs]

I guess I am alone on this point. That's okay. I just think saying you will offer a refund if the item fails is much different from a guarantee that it will pass authentication.

[chaddurbin]

i would use "guaranteed to pass...", it's common language. better than "i promise this signature is authentic but if psa or jsa says it's not i will send you your money back".

[MooseDog]

FWIW this is the wording I use in my autograph listings.

"All autographs are sold with a 100% guarantee of authenticity, for life (yours, mine or the autograph). If any autograph we sell fails to pass authentication by reputable 3rd party authenticators we will be happy to refund your purchase price."

[JimStinson]

When Joe Namath said We're going to win Sunday. I guarantee it. what would have happened if the Jets had lost ?

[packs]

They would have lost and his guarantee would have meant nothing, which is exactly my point.

Maybe I'm just being thick or getting caught up in semantics. I'm sorry if I'm being obtuse. I would just like a seller to be clear. Full refund on purchase price should it fail authentication is clear. Guaranteed to pass authentication says nothing about who the fees should fall on if that guarantee is not met.

[JimStinson]

But the Jets Won ! Actually this is my favorite Joe Namath quote

"When we won the league championship, all the married guys on the club had to thank their wives for putting up with all the stress and strain all season. I had to thank all the single broads in New York"

[packs]

I would buy a win from Joe Namath.

[thenavarro]

I routinely give a guarantee on most items that I sell that they will pass PSA/DNA or JSA, or I will refund both the purchase price AND the authentication fees. I say "most" items because there are some names that I've found them to be bad with including but not exclusive to be Pujols, Manning, and Woods. On those names, I will offer a money back guarantee on the purchase price only. I'm not afraid of their opinion or of their skill (or lack thereof on occasion), and if I'm selling an item, I will have done my own homework to ascertain what I believe the probability of them passing the item to be before I offer the guarantee to pay the authentication fees if it were to fail.

I've had one item returned due to failing JSA and I promptly made good on my guarantee to refund the authentication fees as well. It was a Muhammad Ali autographed glove, Unlike most here that say they don't get an explanation, I asked Jimmy why it failed and they spent some time with me showing me some exemplars and explaining why in his opinion my Ali was not real. Then again, I don't make an issue out of their errors, nor do I routinely slam them on the Internet, nor do I ask countless rhetorical questions to rub their nose in their errors, so my experience with them might be different then the experience of those that do those things.

As with other things in life, your mileage may vary.

Mike

[packs]

I would buy from you any day.

The point I'm trying to make is that I would feel better about buying an unauthenticated item from someone who says they guarantee the item to pass authentication than I would buying from someone who says they'll offer a refund on the purchase price if it fails. To me, a guarantee the item will pass authentication says something different than I will refund your purchase price IF it fails.

However, it seems like the two phrases mean the same thing to most people when they mean different things to me.

[Exhibitman]

As long as the rule of the refund is disclosed up front there is nothing to whine about. If the buyer wants to play the TPG game he can, if not he can just keep the item as is.

[packs]

A seller isn't under any obligation to guarantee any outcome of a third party grader's inspection. If you do, then that has nothing to do with the buyer deciding to play the TPG game.

Buyers are free to play the gamble game on auctions that state a refund of the purchase price will be given if the item fails authenticaton. But a guarantee isn't a gamble or an if. And if you are going to guarantee something, then I don't see what the issue is with putting your money where your mouth is.

[drc]

Not strictly talking about autographs, but when I was selling it I allowed the buyer to return it within specified reasonable amount of time for refund, with no questions asked. The buyer had time to look it over, show it to a friend or whatever. If he didn't return it (any reason allowed), he didn't return it.

[travrosty]

I'm sorry but I think we're still talking about different things. I'm not talking about a seller's guarantee on authenticity. I'm talking about putting the following line directly into the text of your auction:

Guaranteed to pass authentication.

What does that mean if you are not willing to refund the fee as well? Again, I'm not talking about a guaranteed refund if the item fails. I'm talking about a seller choosing to say they guarantee it will pass authentication.

That is the sellers choice of words NOT the buyers.




because the authentication could cost 1000 dollars. who's to control the costs of the authentication, guaranteeing authentication fees is crazy.


plus if it is a real item and you DO put your money where your mouth is and guarantee authentication fees, and the jack wagons at abc and xyz dont know what they are doing, why should you refund authentication fees on a bad authentication?

[prewarsports]

I understand what you are saying but here is the difference in my opinion

Scenario 1. "I guarantee this item to be authentic". It fails, you go to get your money back and you have to get into the whole "Woo are they to say my autograph is not real etc." and then you have to get into the whole "I say its real, they say its not, you cant prove anything" situation of he said she said.

Scenario 2. "I Guarantee this item to be authentic and to pass any third party grader you choose, PSA, JSA whatever". It fails, refund end of story!

I think that is why you put that in an auction description, peace of mind knowing that you will stand behind the item based on the opinion of another person. It is the same guarantee (at least from well respected dealers) but some people might be left arguing over the grey area in Scenario 1.

Rhys

[prewarsports]

As a side note, I always have and always will refund Baseball Card Grading fees if a card is fake or timmed, so I see your point, but there its like $10 and it is a good will gesture more than anything. Some autograph authentications can run more than the item is worth. I see people with slabbed encapsulated Monte Irvin Index Cards all the time. If I sell a Monte Irvin for $5 and some guy overnights it to PSA to get it slabbed for a show or something and it fails, he is out 10X more than he paid for the signature and I would end up owing him back $55 on his $5 purchase (and it might not be fake anyways). With cards at least if it is deemed "counterfeit" or recolored or rebacked there is concrete evidence to show it and in that case, yes I think it would ethical.

As another sidenote, if an autograph seller is forging signatures than I think part of the restitution would be to refund any and all authentication fees but that is a different can of worms (IE: Coaches Corner).

Rhys

[thecatspajamas]

A seller isn't under any obligation to guarantee any outcome of a third party grader's inspection. If you do, then that has nothing to do with the buyer deciding to play the TPG game.

Buyers are free to play the gamble game on auctions that state a refund of the purchase price will be given if the item fails authenticaton. But a guarantee isn't a gamble or an if. And if you are going to guarantee something, then I don't see what the issue is with putting your money where your mouth is.

You said it earlier in that it's a matter of semantics, and more importantly, unstated assumptions as to the extent of the "guarantee." If the seller is okay with being on the hook for whatever authentication you choose to submit the item to, and tells you that he is okay with that, then obviously that's a favorable situation for you as the buyer. Plenty have given reasons here why it doesn't make business sense for the seller to subject themselves to that hook, but if the seller wants to knowingly leave themselves open to whatever authentication fees you may choose to throw on top of the deal, that's their right.

More important though is that you get those semantic gray areas cleared up BEFORE completing the transaction. Too often deals go bad because someone made an incorrect assumption and then wants to hold the other party to that assumption. If you don't ask for clarification, you don't have any right to hold a seller to anything more than was stated in their listing, and if you're working from a different definition of the extent of "guaranteed to pass xyz" than most sellers (and you are, judging by the previous posts), you owe it to them as a responsible buyer to clear that up beforehand. It's fine if you want to argue semantics, but do so before money has changed hands.

[drc]

One reason a seller wouldn't blindly guarantee to refund 'authentication fees' is he has no idea what (if any) authentication the buyer will have the autograph go through. For all the seller knows, a buyer could send a Bob Feller ball to JSA then PSA then Richard Simon then Chris Morales then PSA a second time and 5 monthrs later the seller could end up with a $500 authentication fee refund on a $17 ball.

[Sean1125]

I'm guaranteeing the item with my research and the opinions of others. I know the item is good, even if TPG thinks it's bad - I truly believe the item is real.

So I am willing to protect your purchase price on the item plus shipping + shipping back.

It was your decision to send it to a TPG, if that hologram before putting iton a wall meant $50 to you, but they said no - you can still put it on a wall it knowing at any time (in the somewhat near future) you could return it for a full refund.

[packs]

I'm not disagreeing with you guys. I think it's fine if a seller will refund only the purchase price if an item fails. I have no problem with that. But we're not talking about the same thing. Sometimes I feel like I know what I mean but I have trouble expressing it. I'm letting it go. We're all in agreement that a seller doesn't have an obligation to cover fees because they sold an unauthenticated item that failed. I'm with you on that.

[shelly]

Most of the time there praying you don not send it to a tpa because he knows it is bad. If come back big deal only cost him freight.
I have never seen anyone that says if it is bad I will refund the fee for having it looked at. If he thought it was authentic then he would get it done and make more money selling it. All he is saying it will pass tpa's