[raulus]

Originally Posted by G1911

I'm going to have a hard time buying an argument that taking advantage of a sellers bad offer and lack of knowledge for $100 is something people will do, but doing the same for $1,000,000 isn't.

In reality, it usually works the exact opposite way here. When I leave a $20 bill on the table at the diner as the tip, the odds it is stolen if the waitresses back is turned is pretty low. If I left $20,000 on the table, the odds it will be stolen is extremely high. A wrong act (we'll just assume accepting a low offer is a wrong act) is more likely to be performed the greater the reward for doing so. If one is happy to accept a bad offer from a seller for $99 profit, I find it extremely difficult to believe they will not do so for $1,000,000.

I get this argument has to be made after the previous claims because nobody can credibly claim to be a long time collector and have never taken advantage of a seller in a realistically sized deal, but it is a rather absurd argument.

We can virtue signal and wring our hands, but we all know damn well that almost everybody is handing over the $157 as fast as they can possibly get it out of the wallet and taking that Wagner, and that the $100 card I list will be gone in a flash. Many might feel bad about it, and some might come back and give the original seller a small slice of the profits, but we all know that card is being sold in seconds.

I see both sides to this argument. And I’d like to think that it’s possible to agree with both of you, without seeming like I’m completely full of inconsistencies.

If you want an example that cuts the opposite of Greg’s assumed outcome, I give you the example of my friend Fred McKie and the dice game find from last year.

https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...st-cards-find/