Inappropriate request during Hunt's auction today?
 

Presented without comment is this screen shot from today's auction.

I'll be standing right over here nekkid while you fix you problems. Thanks for the heads up. :eek:

Definately.

Companies that make small mistakes always make me think that they are not paying attention to the bigger issues. I mean, seriously, no one proof-reads anymore or do they just depend on spell-check?

This homophone has kicked my ass countless times over the years.

You mean defiantly.

Grammar like that makes you wonder how these people ever made it through life with enough wherewithal to buy and/or sell trinkets like that. But I get it, they didn't make it. Mommy and daddy left it to them. Either that, or they sold a modest home in California. Folks in the everyday struggle ain't bidding on signed Home Run Baker, or anything else in this so-called hobby these days.

Cut them a brake already. :):D:)

If this is the only fault you can find then it is an auction well done.

Its true.

I could care less.

While the bare thing was funny, how about this listing? Southern leaguers?

https://huntauctions.com/live/imagev...=190&lot_qual=

I’ll paste the text for posterity, in case they correct the listing (which I assume they will soon). The lot number is 190.

“Description: Lot of (13) 1909-11 T206 Southern Leaguers. Includes Abbott, Blackburne, Butler, Chappelle, Clancy, Cross, Delehanty, Dessau, Dorner, Ganzel, Revelle (Old Mill), Rudolph, and Slagle. General condition range runs GD-VG with two or three that may dip below: Avg. GD”

After further review, they botched the description on lot 189, too. Maybe they didn’t look at the names of the cities on the card fronts. Or perhaps they don’t know their north from south.

“Description: Lot of (14) 1909-11 T206 Southern Leaguers. Cards have very sharp average EX or better appearance (some a touch lesser) however the (5) which have been examined by SGC were placed in "Authentic" holders rather than assigned a numerical grade (presumably due to suspected alteration). Includes Blackburne, Clymer (SGC), Delehanty, Ganzel (SGC), Hannifan (SGC), King, Kruger, McGann (SGC), McGinley, Moran, O'Brien, Sharpe, Shaw (SGC), and White: see description”

https://www.huntauctions.com/live/im...=189&lot_qual=

I think your being two harsh. I'm sure they tried there best. :D

I see what you did their.

#metoo

'Bare with them'. Sorry, I am not into that group stuff.

A preferred pickup line is

"Bare with me"

No, Scott.

He means definately. Trust me.:);):D

I wasn't looking to find fault; I was looking to find humor. As a former English major, I read things literally, and the "Please bare with us" conjured up an amusing image..... they were having technical issues, so naturally they had to get naked, and they were inviting all of us on-line participants to do likewise.

For the record, I've won items from 10 different AH in the past 12 months, plus ebay, direct purchases, etc., and I've spent more in Hunt's last 3 live auctions than all my other purchases combined. The day before the auction I called Hunt with a couple questions and they were very available and courteous. I ended up winning one of the two items I was seriously after today.

I love Hunt Auctions. I just won't get naked for them. That is where I draw the line.
:)

You want bare? You got it! :eek:

https://s.hdnux.com/photos/07/16/10/...5/rawImage.jpg

Scary very scary

And oh oh oh

So wrong

This is the one that irks me the most.... simply because people use it incorrectly far more often than the correct way.

Who is next to Joe D?

BS
 

Our best chance to bring Barry Sloate out of retirement. See of it bares fruit.

Appears to me that the water is really, really cold?

Now I see what Ms. Monroe saw (most of) in 'Jolting Joe'.