Quote:
Originally Posted by pbspelly
I'm not sure this is correct. Maybe I misread the article, but it seemed to me that the buyer was alleging that the photos Dan displayed of the card misrepresented the card's condition. The buyer never actually saw the card in person, and so was going by photos Dan had posted on eBay. I've seen complaints here all the time about eBay photos that are doctored to make a card's condition look better than it really is. I'm not saying that Dan did that. I don't know Dan, but everyone here seems to speak highly of him so I'm sure that isn't the case. I'm just saying that that seems to be what the dispute is about, whether the condition of the card is actually the same as it appeared in the photos.
|
Thank about that for a minute. There is only one card known. ONE. Why would Dan alter a scan to improve the condition of the ONLY card known in order to sell it to a guy who is allegedly begging to buy it? Why would he try to do that? That doesn't even make sense when the only question is if the card is real. Plus, I don't think Dan would do that even if he could. He has never been anything but honest and upfront in the dealings I've had with him. Just my opinion but if that's the allegation, I would believe Dan over the buyer based on the currently available facts.
Kenny