Opinions on a transaction issue
 

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>Those cards are obscure and ugly. Also, nice to see the new year start in such a nice way--seller reneges, and buyer is called a rip-off artist.

Opinions on a transaction issue
 

Posted By: <b>Kyle</b><p>I'm not mad about him reselling them, they're his to resell. I am more disappointed in the run around of dishonesty. But again its over. Thankfully, as many have mentioned... I did get my money back (less paypal fees).<br /><br />And if theres any way for me to prove that I did not know the exact identity of the cards, please let me know. I had no idea what they were. I searched all over eBay and google for those cards. They're never on eBay, and I've continued to search for them for the past 3 months looking for them... to see if someone had received my package.<br /><br />They were advertised as 1930s, I looked everywhere for info on them. I figured the 60 or so commons were junk and the Ruth and Jones might be worth $100 or so each. Clearly, as from last week's auctions, I was wrong. And if I had known what they were, I would have offered more than enough to secure them, overnight them, etc. Obscure and ugly yes.... they don't even mention the athlete's name on them... which was one of the reasons I didn't know how much to offer in the first place. The likeliness of an athlete doesn't always mean its them.<br /><br />Being called a rip-off artist sure does stink, and I'd be upset if I was seriously being thought of that way. I wish I had more transaction experience with members of this board who could vouch for me.<br /><br />-Kyle-

Opinions on a transaction issue
 

Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>"seller reneges, and buyer is called a rip-off artist"<br /><br />Football player kills wife, and it ends up being an attack on a police detective. That's America.

Opinions on a transaction issue
 

Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>Dan, <br /><br />Much like you will never find a rule that a "tie goes to the runner," you will never find a law that actually says possession is 9/10s . . .<br /><br />Regardless, this does not involve a situation where s/o found something or simply had it in his/her possession and someone else claimed it as their own. This is a matter of contract. An agreement to sell something. Retaining what you agreed to sell is a breach of contract and you can be held liable for it. <br /><br />Now knowing more about the numbers in this case, I would submit that had Kyle actually won the cards for $1300, his damages would be $1140 (what he now has to pay less the original offer). You could even argue that his damages would be the amount it might cost him to replace them (I think someone above said they were worth about 3k) less the amount he should have gotten them for (160).

Opinions on a transaction issue
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p> it goes without saying that ending the auction early with/for an offer is the main culprit here. had the original auction ran its course who knows what the final outcome could have been. The seller would have had less of a discription and possibly some potential buyer/bidders would not have been in the picture.<br /><br />..............or the outcome we see tonite could have happened as well.<br /><br /><br />Steve

Opinions on a transaction issue
 

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Just out of curiosity... Kyle said earlier that he didn't want to publicize details because he didn't want to advertise an auction he was bidding on. Now that we can see it it appears that was good strategy, as there were only two bidders besides Kyle.<br /><br />I happen to thing most strip cards are pretty ghastly, so I wouldn't have given these cards a second blink and am not even sure if I saw them in my normal ebay crawl. But that's me. Anyone have any thoughts on the fact that these did seem to go unnoticed? And how that is? And were they oddly listed as to miss mainstream contact w/people here that obviously recognize the value now that they see them?<br /><br />I swear I pick through ebay with a fine-tooth comb, and still miss half the good stuff!<br /><br />Joann<br /><br />FWIW - I tend to believe you too Kyle. Maybe you thought they were worth more than $160, but not that much more, or maybe you thought you could catch lightening in a bottle and get lucky if a few significant cards ended up being included - but overall I have too much faith in human nature to think someone could offer 1/8 or whatever, in any good conscience. So I don't think you did. FWIW

Opinions on a transaction issue
 

Posted By: <b>Kyle</b><p>Thanks Joann.<br /><br />I had hoped to find out what they were and make a few bucks on them. $100 here and there can go a long way for me. I am being honest and I appreciate you believing it.<br /><br />-Kyle-

Opinions on a transaction issue
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>joanne.............these did seem to go unnoticed? And how that is?<br /><br />The seller had them in some funky categories. <br /><br />Steve<br /><br />edited to add I'm thinking a non sports category , a 30's baseball and maybe even 1 other would have been better, m or at least more discriptive of what he actually had.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

Opinions on a transaction issue
 

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Steve,<br /><br />Yeah - that's what I was wondering. Military, and pre-1950's lots. I don't know what categories people here routinely check. And even in those categories, aren't there advocates within those areas that comb daily listings just like people on this board scour the pre-1930's? I'm just surprised, that's all.<br /><br />I wasn't sure where else they could/should have been listed. Singles 1930-1939? Something else? Where they in the featured section, or whatever? (A bounce-off of the recent thread about who pays attention to ebay special features - did this lot use special features, and if it had would it have been more noticed, even in the oddball categories it appeared in.)<br /><br />J

Opinions on a transaction issue
 

Posted By: <b>fkw</b><p>Some collectors need to buy a 2006 Standard Catalog and thumb through it. You should know exactly what that set was, it is listed on page 130 in the 2006 Catalog at $4,000 NRMT for the "Beloved Baseball Idol of All Boys" card (Babe Ruth).<br /><br /> From the 1st time I ever saw these cards a few years back, they have stuck in my head because of the quoted value. I guess they do have the value as they all seem to sell for bigger $$ that Id ever expect from that issue. I have now seen 6 examples of the Ruth in auctions over the last 3 years. IMO...... totally Ugly cards, not too rare and way overpriced. Doesnt even say "Babe Ruth" on it, and made a couple years after Ruth hung them up. PS.Im repeating myself... We just had a message board post on these Donut Co. cards 1 week ago (last post Dec.27th). A Donut Co. Ruth just sold on eBay less than 2 weeks ago, and a golfer guy too. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />