Memory Lane Gehrig expectation vs reality

[Leon]

+1

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Last year I was contemplating bidding on a high end card in HA. I called and asked about the condition and a little while later Joe Orlando called back. He completely described the card to me and could not have been any nicer. If you have questions about a card ask before you bid and definitely don’t call out an auction house before you give them an opportunity to respond to your issue.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Leon

+1

It's one thing to call and ask for specifics about a card's condition when no description is given. I do that with at least some degree of regularity. But in this case, there was no reason to ask questions about this card because they gave specifics about the card's condition in the description ("Soiling and wear are evident on the front, but nothing takes away from the pinstriped Gehrig central image. Clear verso."). To call them up and ask if they omitted something else significant (like a half dozen giant creases) would have been to assume that they were lying.

As far as calling them out, I disagree. This sort of behavior is rampant in this hobby and it's completely inexcusable. They did what they did, and bidders should be made aware of it. And this wasn't the only card they did it with either. I have another, much more expensive card that had an even more in-depth description, but which also omitted the fact that there were multiple creases on it. In fact, I would say that the description of the other card was so precise that it could be effectively interpreted as "there are no creases on this card". Yet it arrived with multiple hidden creases as well.

They have an opportunity to make this right. If they do, then I will certainly be sharing that information. People make mistakes. But when auction houses do wrong by their customers, that information needs to be shared with the community.

[irv]

Originally Posted by Snowman

It's one thing to call and ask for specifics about a card's condition when no description is given. I do that with at least some degree of regularity. But in this case, there was no reason to ask questions about this card because they gave specifics about the card's condition in the description ("Soiling and wear are evident on the front, but nothing takes away from the pinstriped Gehrig central image. Clear verso."). To call them up and ask if they omitted something else significant (like a half dozen giant creases) would have been to assume that they were lying.

As far as calling them out, I disagree. This sort of behavior is rampant in this hobby and it's completely inexcusable. They did what they did, and bidders should be made aware of it. And this wasn't the only card they did it with either. I have another, much more expensive card that had an even more in-depth description, but which also omitted the fact that there were multiple creases on it. In fact, I would say that the description of the other card was so precise that it could be effectively interpreted as "there are no creases on this card". Yet it arrived with multiple hidden creases as well.

They have an opportunity to make this right. If they do, then I will certainly be sharing that information. People make mistakes. But when auction houses do wrong by their customers, that information needs to be shared with the community.

Exactly! This is on the AH to get right, not on the potential buyer that is using and trusting them to be upfront and honest.

[Casey2296]

TIL; Auction Houses use PSA pix for some of their listings. I honestly didn't know that.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

TIL; Auction Houses use PSA pix for some of their listings. I honestly didn't know that.

They didn't use PSA's scan. The image is from their own scanner.

[tjisonline]

I suggested posting more on social media (tag the auction house) and let a YouTube blog post about it. I have a few to recommend who actually helped users w/ Goldin.

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by Snowman

It's one thing to call and ask for specifics about a card's condition when no description is given. I do that with at least some degree of regularity. But in this case, there was no reason to ask questions about this card because they gave specifics about the card's condition in the description ("Soiling and wear are evident on the front, but nothing takes away from the pinstriped Gehrig central image. Clear verso."). To call them up and ask if they omitted something else significant (like a half dozen giant creases) would have been to assume that they were lying.

As far as calling them out, I disagree. This sort of behavior is rampant in this hobby and it's completely inexcusable. They did what they did, and bidders should be made aware of it. And this wasn't the only card they did it with either. I have another, much more expensive card that had an even more in-depth description, but which also omitted the fact that there were multiple creases on it. In fact, I would say that the description of the other card was so precise that it could be effectively interpreted as "there are no creases on this card". Yet it arrived with multiple hidden creases as well.

They have an opportunity to make this right. If they do, then I will certainly be sharing that information. People make mistakes. But when auction houses do wrong by their customers, that information needs to be shared with the community.

You reasonably relied on how the auction house advertised/described the card, and the scans that it provided. In my lay opinion, the description and scans do not reveal the card’s obvious and main patent defects. You have a valid complaint. Hopefully, you all can reach a compromise. Good luck, and keep us posted.

[Brian]

That is one horrendous misrepresentation, and I agree that it should be overkill to ask for further details when a detailed description has been provided.

But then again, if it is over a certain price point, I will ask anyway, to be safe. This does not always work, however, as I found out with a pricey card a couple of years ago. In the end, the AH said they would take it back because they "missed" the wrinkle I asked about, but by then I was so fed up, I just kept the card. It was not nearly as egregious as this, however, or I would have demanded my money back for sure.....

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Snowman

As far as calling them out, I disagree. This sort of behavior is rampant in this hobby and it's completely inexcusable. They did what they did, and bidders should be made aware of it. And this wasn't the only card they did it with either. I have another, much more expensive card that had an even more in-depth description, but which also omitted the fact that there were multiple creases on it. In fact, I would say that the description of the other card was so precise that it could be effectively interpreted as "there are no creases on this card". Yet it arrived with multiple hidden creases as well.

They have an opportunity to make this right. If they do, then I will certainly be sharing that information. People make mistakes. But when auction houses do wrong by their customers, that information needs to be shared with the community.

I think there are often two competing concerns here.

One concern is that the auction house should have a chance to address this issue before it's made public. I think we can all agree that auction houses are generally great, but are also fallible, and sometimes will make mistakes. And when it happens, I suspect that the AH prefers not to be publicly embarrassed by a mistake. We all make mistakes, yet I suspect none of us is really excited about having those mistakes paraded around in public, even when they're true.

On the other side, if an AH makes a mistake, to what extent is it important for the broader collecting community to understand what happened so that we can be aware of the situation, and take appropriate precautions ourselves? Certainly we rightfully expect that AHs are experts on the pieces they are auctioning, the stuff is authentic, accurately represented and described. If the AH isn't meeting that standard, then it seems like the sort of thing that the full industry should care about, to make sure that we're able to protect ourselves against the same sort of situation in the future, but also as a means to help to police the AHs and keep them honest.

Not to make this about me, although I clearly can't help myself, but I had something similar happen to me a few years ago. I won an auction from a major AH (not ML) for a collection of items that all turned out to be fake. And not even good fakes, but very obvious and stupid fakes, as they were fantasy pieces with a number of the backs printed on kodak paper, with the kodak logo and everything. As luck would have it, the backs that were printed on kodak paper weren't shown in the pics on the AH listing.

Similar to Travis, I posted about it here, both because I thought the community should know, and because I wanted to push the AH to act on it. And the response to my post was somewhat similar: some thought I should have waited a while longer before posting to give the AH a chance to fix it before I went public, and others supported me and found the mistakes of the AH to be deeply troubling.

I'm not here to re-litigate my experience working through that process with that AH, although I'm happy to report that the AH addressed the issue and refunded my payment. I'm hopeful that Travis will have a similarly positive outcome.

[maniac_73]

Anyone who is backing the AH on this should be ashamed of themselves. This is clearly misrepresentation, and the fact that they doubled down after Travis contacted them is an absolute joke. Will be steering very clear of Memory Lane in the future

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by maniac_73

Anyone who is backing the AH on this should be ashamed of themselves. This is clearly misrepresentation, and the fact that they doubled down after Travis contacted them is an absolute joke. Will be steering very clear of Memory Lane in the future

They still have a chance to make it right though. They didn't tell me to pound sand. At least not yet. They asked me to send it back to them so they can review it.

[D. Bergin]

Whether it's PSA or the Auction House scans, the "Descreen" settings are jacked up, which tends to blur and smooth out the surface of the entire card.

This is sometimes useful for cards/items that have print dot patterns, as that can be overly distracting when an item is enlarged or shown with browser settings on the internet.

That should not really be an issue with 1933 Goudeys however, as these cards have more of a lithography process then a print dot process.

Bottom line, if the customer is unsatisfied, they should give a refund with a prompt return of the card. If they asked for the card back to "review", I'd be shocked if they don't refund once they have it back in hand.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Bottom line, if the customer is unsatisfied, they should give a refund with a prompt return of the card. If they asked for the card back to "review", I'd be shocked if they don't refund once they have it back in hand.

They can't just offer refunds every time a customer complains though. Too many people would take advantage of that. I think it's important for sales to be final in general. But when an item is misrepresented they need to make it right. I believe they will. It's hard to argue that this card was not misrepresented when holding it in hand and comparing it to the listing.

[Johnny630]

What’s more acceptable to Major Auction House Bidder, Shill Bidding or Doctoring Scans? This is sad but until buying behavior and bidding in excess stops there’s no reason for the auction house to change its practices.


I’m sorry Travis this does blow...hopefully they refund you your purchase.

[joshleon]

This is outrageous. I would absolutely be calling them out here. And they HAVE responded and it's one hell of a cold/limp handshake of a response! That creasing isn't minor.

[Powell]

I believe Memory Lane is reputable and will do the right thing.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Powell

I believe Memory Lane is reputable and will do the right thing.

Reading comprehension, Powell?

(They already did.)

.

[Yoda]

If the AH doesn't do right to Travis due to their blatant misrepresentation, then they truly need to get blasted by those who condemn such an obvious injustice. Whoever did the description and omitted the obvious creases should get the sack.

[4815162342]

Originally Posted by Yoda

If the AH doesn't do right to Travis due to their blatant misrepresentation, then they truly need to get blasted by those who condemn such an obvious injustice. Whoever did the description and omitted the obvious creases should get the sack.

You might’ve missed a post or two. They refunded him and relisted the card with an accurate description and then posted representative photos.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[campersmd]

If this issue isn't resolved with a complete refund, I will lose all respect and trust regarding their future auctions. Their initial response to this obvious injustice has already done great damage to their reputation, and their future losses by reduced bidding from Net54 readers will far exceed the cost of this card. Very short sighted!

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by maniac_73

Anyone who is backing the AH on this should be ashamed of themselves. This is clearly misrepresentation, and the fact that they doubled down after Travis contacted them is an absolute joke. Will be steering very clear of Memory Lane in the future

100 percent. I have seen this mischaracterization of cards more and more in the last few years.

And calling out AHs on here is truly the only way to get resolution. Trust me, they are all reading this forums.

[packs]

Something like this happened to me as well. I will not name the AH but here is the original card and scan that I purchased:



Here is the same card after I had it reholdered:



Ironically, getting the card reholdered increased the grade.

[mainemule]

Is it me or does the PSA label look very different?

Left/ML's scan- bold font/writing and bar code looks more "dense"

Right/in hand scan- thinner font/writing

[joshleon]

Originally Posted by maniac_73

Anyone who is backing the AH on this should be ashamed of themselves. This is clearly misrepresentation, and the fact that they doubled down after Travis contacted them is an absolute joke. Will be steering very clear of Memory Lane in the future

I agree. Their response only solidifies my initial feeling.

[Directly]

PF-1 for the grade is the question I would ask because the card looks better than the grade--asking what's the issue with the card--

I'm SURE any AH would correct the problem to ones satisfaction, when AH post hundreds of items, rarely, there could a unintentional mistake with a listing--

[Johnny T]

A gross misrepresentation in my book. Not that my business matters that much to them, but I just removed them from my favorites and will no longer bid in their auctions. No room for this sh*t from a "higher" end AH.

[T205 GB]

Originally Posted by maniac_73

Anyone who is backing the AH on this should be ashamed of themselves. This is clearly misrepresentation, and the fact that they doubled down after Travis contacted them is an absolute joke. Will be steering very clear of Memory Lane in the future

That is just the beauty of this board. So many people with different opinions. Some support card restoration and some call it alteration.



TJ I am sorry to hear about your issues with the Gehrig. I know you have a great collection and eye for detail. I agree the pics are made to look better than what you got. Glad things were made whole.

[jsfriedm]

The card is up again in their new action: https://memorylaneinc.com/site//bids...rities-auction

[raulus]

Originally Posted by jsfriedm

The card is up again in their new action: https://memorylaneinc.com/site//bids...rities-auction

Looks like they're using the same scan as last time.