PDA

View Full Version : Banned In The USA, I Was Banned In The USA


Archive
12-04-2001, 08:03 PM
Posted By: <b>warshawlaw&nbsp; </b><p>Well, got myself thrown out of the Lipset auctions. Seems I challenged his majesty's grading on a lot that I returned for material errors and he didn't like it (Lot 388: The Johnson, described as ex-mt, had two badly “dinged” corners, two worn corners, and edge damage on the left side. The Marquard, also described as ex-mt, had four worn corners and a mark across the front where something, probably a rubber band, left a stain. The McGraw, described as vg-ex, had four major creases across the top and a bottom corner crease. The Bresnahan, described as ex, had four rounded corners, stains on back and front, and a severe indentation on the front.). <BR><BR>I was so polite about it, too, not my usual lawyer self. . . I gave notice within minutes of signing for the UPS package and respectfully requested a refund. I sent back the card Fed Ex in the original packaging. A week later, I got a check with a note that said "Please do not bid again". <BR><BR>All I ever want is a fair shake. I'm pretty forgiving about grading in auctions--I figure that you will see a half-grade of "optimism" in most descriptions--but when I open the package and say *$%^#$^!! after I look at the cards. . . <BR><BR>What irks me is that I complied in full with Lipset's auction return policy, he refunded the money on the cards, and then he banned me from future auctions. The man is as unprofessional as he is knowledgeable. Customers do have differences of opinion with their vendors; speaking as one in the service industry, when it happens, you deal with it professionally, not like a little kid telling you that he is taking his ball home. When I had a similar grading issue with Fritsch on an expensive card I bought, my return was accepted cheerfully with a little note accompanying my refund that said they were sorry I disagreed with them and they would like to serve me in the future. That's how a professional handles a situation like this. <BR><BR>So, be forewarned, don't challenge Mr. Lipset's description of a lot, no matter how materially it differs from the actual cards you get, or you may be banned from his auctions.

Archive
12-04-2001, 08:42 PM
Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>Now I'm stuck with a Bruce Springsteen tune in my head as I'm getting ready to crash.

Archive
12-04-2001, 10:11 PM
Posted By: <b>petecld</b><p>That MUST mean you've never won anything from a David Festberg auction.<BR><BR>The condition of the cards compared to the description in the auction flyer was so far off I called and asked them if they had sent me the wrong cards. <BR><BR>They didn't. Last $$$ I spent with him.<BR>

Archive
12-04-2001, 10:43 PM
Posted By: <b>Marc S.</b><p>Scott: Thank God that you were only thinking of the Bruce Springsteen song "Born in the USA". Some of us from the younger generation remember a song from about 11 years ago from the rap group "2 Live Crew" where the actual song was "Banned in the USA", sung to the Springsteen tune, with his permission -- a tribute to first amendment rights and a protest against the ban of their porn in rap songs. That is a bad memory of childhood, let me tell you!

Archive
12-05-2001, 04:23 AM
Posted By: <b>runscott</b><p>I remember pulling my first old judge card out of the tobacco pouch and cursing because I didn't get a "hot-looking" actress card - we didn't have Playboy back then...

Archive
12-05-2001, 11:10 AM
Posted By: <b>Lee Behrens</b><p>I guess there is a benefit to buying low grade cards. They can't screw up on the grading too bad.<BR><BR>As Far as Festberg, I won a T202 low grade lot with 7 HOFers including a Johnson. I was very pleased with the lot and will come out pretty good while adding to my collection. The grading on T202's is so tough I think the people buying them, including myself, go on presentation. The T202's can have so many manufacture flaws that downgrade them, but the card does not lose alot of there appeal.<BR><BR>It is good to hear the stories that people have with different dealers, but try not to finger point.<BR><BR>I picked up a E94 Wagner this weekend and kind of popped up about that!!<BR><BR>Lee

Archive
12-05-2001, 11:38 AM
Posted By: <b>mike mullins</b><p>2 Live Crew is still around, and still "as nasty as they wanna be". I saw them LIVE at spring break 2000 on South Padre Island, TX. They played all of my childhood favorites (none which have titles or lyrics repeatable here). A dream come true, and another item scratched off my life's "to-do" list. ;&gt;<BR><BR>mm

Archive
12-07-2001, 07:32 PM
Posted By: <b>Julie Vognar</b><p>It was several auctions ago; the card was a T207 Johnson. (I also won something much nicer--an Old Judge Dummy Hoy, perhaps). I called him, and said there was no gloss (the stuff that cracks all over the place on T207s) on the card, and the borders were almots dead white (instead of gray) and I wanted to return it, because i didn't think I'd ever be able to sell it. It was VERY late, maybe 10 days after i got the card, maybe more. I'd had Mark Macrae look at it, and he agreed I'd never get rid of the thing--it seemed to have been soaked in the bathtub. Lew growled, and said he'd ssen lots of cards (T207) like that, but if I really didn't want it, I could send it back. I've bid in all of his auctions since.<BR><BR>Oh yeah, I also withdrew a BID on a Lipset card: I discovered that his Scrapps Brouthers didn't have the half of his mustache that sticks out beyond the card (common failing in Scrapps). All he said was "You're kidding?!"<BR><BR>But the Dummy Hoy cost a bushel, and I sent him an e-mail the name night the Snakes beat the Yanks, and I always bid whatever I can. His Old Judge grading is O.K. so far, and I'm a good customer, if not a high ticket one.<BR><BR> julie<BR><BR>

Archive
12-07-2001, 09:20 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I won the Uncle Jack lot in Lew's auction recently. It stated everywhere that there were 11 cards plus the coupon. I only ever read 10 cards but did not question it. I WAS counting on 11 cards though as I went through the bidding. When I got them there were 10. I called and asked and he said he made a mistake. No offer for a refund of any kind. I did not push the issue. Probably should have.............In my opinion he grades like most dealers. ...best regards all

Archive
12-11-2001, 03:17 AM
Posted By: <b>vorthian</b><p>&lt;&lt; In my opinion he grades like most dealers. &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>This was called ex+/mt...<BR><BR><img src="http://members.aol.com/vorthian/maple.jpg">

Archive
12-11-2001, 03:20 AM
Posted By: <b>vorthian</b><p><BR>And Superior called this NM/MT prior to slabbing these. Recently graded at the last Rosemont, IL show...<BR><BR><img src="http://members.aol.com/vorthian/t202.jpg">

Archive
12-11-2001, 08:11 AM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>he grades like most dealers.....Ya'll don't even want to see what some of the major auction houses have graded my cards before I had them graded. This is not to put down Mastro by any means but I bought a '25 Gerhig Exhibit they said was in NMT-MT and it came back SGC70. As far as I know this is still the highest graded copy. If anyone knows of a higher one I would be interested in knowing of it. While I do not agree with SGC's grade I do believe that most auction houses and dealers sell their cards at 1/2 to 2 grades higher than what they are. I have many, many examples as I am sure most on this board do..........such as Steve's......best regards all...

Archive
12-11-2001, 12:56 PM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Obermeyer</b><p>While I will grant you that some dealers seem to grade higher than others (and I've had similar experiences with Lipset), we all need to remember something - grading is subjective!<BR><BR>Just because PSA or SGC or whoever has their own set grading standard, doesn't make it "right". For years most collectors based their grading on the descriptions that were found in either the Beckett or SCD annuals, and that was OK. It still left a little room for disagreement - I think it's VG+, you think it's EX. Now we've got all these "professional" graders telling us what grade our cards are... well, guess what? I don't always agree with their grades either.<BR><BR>There are 10 different grades (not counting qualifiers) that PSA will give a card, and 6 of those are for grades EX and above. Doesn't really seem to leave a lot of room for variance with anything that's not EX or better, does it? <BR><BR>I guess what I'm getting at here is that just because a dealer lists his card as EX doesn't necessarily mean that's the way PSA or SGC is going to see it. There is no grading "standard" in the hobby, regardless of what you may think. I'm not talking about blantantly overgraded cards here, just honest differences of opinion...<BR><BR>Jeff

Archive
12-11-2001, 03:49 PM
Posted By: <b>David</b><p>I tend to agree with Jeff. Most collectors here and everywhere complain about the innacuracy of the grading services, then, when convenient, use their grades as evidence to prove a personal point. Perhaps all the above pictures prove is that SGC are bad graders.

Archive
12-11-2001, 07:23 PM
Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>I'm not talking about a little overgrading. I have no expectation that everyone will agree on every card and I have some margin for disagreement when I look at a card. What I find objectionable is where a card plainly does not meet any reasonable criteria for the grade stated. I use the f---it standard: if I open the box and say "f--- it", the card goes back. Take the T207 Johnson in this lot as an example. To me and I think most everyone else with any experience in cards, saying that the card is ex-mt requires clean front and back with most of the original gloss intact and rules out creases of any type, corners that are any more than a bit blunted, edge notches from rubber bands and any other real damage to the card. When Lipset says ex-mt, I expect a clean card with four decent corners, clean borders and clean surfaces. What I got was far from it. Had I sent the card to SGC, I would have expected to get back a vg-ex at best, which is a long way from ex-mt. <BR><BR>Incidentally, Lipset responded to my post with a long and insulting email that I would just as soon not bother to post here. Suffice it to say that while he and I will never see eye to eye on this issue, this forum is providing feedback to dealers of his ilk and they are listening.

Archive
12-11-2001, 10:45 PM
Posted By: <b>Lee Behrens</b><p>After my experience with John Billingsley, I emailed the link, and he read the forum. Every thing was set right with me and John. John had many nice things to say about the people on the forum he has dealt with in the past. This gave me confidence in the people that frequent the forum.<BR><BR>I think all dealers that are mentioned in this froum should be notified of the discussion and give them an opportunity to respond.<BR><BR>It is always nice to know when someone is chastized by a dealer. There are enough out there that we don't have to deal with the bad ones. i certainly have a few on my list.<BR><BR>It's nice to know that these dealers are reading, because it obviuosly interests them to read and maybe they will learn something from us collector/sellers.

Archive
12-12-2001, 12:07 AM
Posted By: <b>David</b><p>Michael, I didn't say that SGC was a bad grader. I've owned perhaps two SGC graded cards in my life (Topps Tiffany cards to boot!), and they both seemed to be graded accurately. I was not commenting on the quality of the grading companies, but on the hypocritical uses of them as evidence. Many of the same people who complain that SGC grades way too hard (inacurately), will later turn around and use an SGC grade to prove that some auction house grades too liberally (though maybe the auction house does grade too liberally). The point being that one can't have it both ways. For the record, I've bought from MastroNet many times, and sometimes I think they've overgraded stuff and sometimes I think they've undergraded-- this only being my personal opinion on the items I've bought, and overall I've been satisfied.

Archive
12-12-2001, 12:28 AM
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>I believe that the title of my post located above should read, "That's a ridiculous conclusion" because that's exactly what it is.

Archive
12-12-2001, 12:38 AM
Posted By: <b>Elliot</b><p>The way it is, IS the way you wrote it. I only changed the "from" posting to reflect your subsequent post, and avoid confusion. BTW, I think your use of the word odd is better than ridiculous.

Archive
12-12-2001, 12:43 AM
Posted By: <b>David</b><p>Michael, perhaps you should read, rather than read into, what others write.

Archive
12-12-2001, 12:48 AM
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>David --<BR><BR>Today's special word is "understand."

Archive
12-12-2001, 12:59 AM
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>Elliot,<BR><BR>Actually, I'm glad I reread my original message and changed the title -- ridiculous is better than odd, but bizarre would probably be the best. Think about it -- the grading company with the toughest standards is synonymous with graders giving out "bad grades"????? For who -- dealers who are part of some special club or network??? I'm sorry, David, but your argument just doesn't fly with SGC.

Archive
12-12-2001, 01:02 AM
Posted By: <b>David</b><p>It's just like the old times on fullcount.

Archive
12-12-2001, 01:07 AM
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p><img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
12-12-2001, 01:14 AM
Posted By: <b>David</b><p>Michael, just to repeat, so perhaps you can undersand: I never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever said that SGC was a bad grader. I repeat once more: I did not say that SGC was a bad grader. Once more: I did not say that SGC was a bad grader. My original post was not a comment on the 'goodness' or 'badness' of SGC's grading. My post was a comment on a different subject, that you apparently aren't able to indentify and/or comprehend. Frankly, I don't know if your specific intent is to start fights, or you're simply that stupid ... For your benefit, I repeat once more, my original post had nothing to do with the quality of SGC's grading.

Archive
12-12-2001, 01:21 AM
Posted By: <b>Elliot</b><p>David has clarified his original post---MW it should be to your satisfaction. Additional posts carrying on this train of thought will be deleted.

Archive
12-12-2001, 01:35 AM
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p><img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
12-12-2001, 07:22 AM
Posted By: <b>runscott</b><p>I returned a card to John, but not for trimming - very friendly communicator and no problem whatsoever. Hate to touch this subject but Yes, I would have described the e94's differently;however, good service will usually rectify these situations.

Archive
12-12-2001, 11:09 AM
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>David --<BR><BR>Just because SGC grades are lower than those from Mastro or Superior does not mean that they are "bad" graders. It simply means they are more strict and (in my view) more consistent.

Archive
12-12-2001, 11:13 AM
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>I meant to type "MW" not "David"

Archive
12-12-2001, 11:23 AM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Hey Lee, I could not have said it better. regards....

Archive
12-19-2001, 12:35 PM
Posted By: <b>Plastic Dog</b><p>I have to say that I was extremely happy with 2 Mayos that I bought in Lipset's last auction (Robinson and Shindle) - they looked even better in person than they did in the catalogue. He was also generous with his time period for payment. First time I've bought from his auctions, and I was very pleased. Don Betz (VCBC editor) and I scrutinized the cards at length - both had great borders, clean backs, never retouched.<br><br>Can't say the same for some another dealer, who really Tikked me off. I had to get SGC to grade a Tango Weaver to prove that the card wasn't NM-MT (came back as an SGC 50, VG-EX). He wouldn't give me a refund without having it professionally graded. Won't deal with him again . . .