Who Buys These Things???

[iggyman]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1933-GOUDEY-...-/150691901089

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1934-GOUDEY-...-/150691966282

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-TOPPS-2...-/170723884258

Wait a second, you mean I can buy a few high profile reprints, send them in to PSA so they can declare them reprints, and then I can list them on eBay and actually receive hard earn money for them. Sign me up, I want some free money!

"$25" total cost on purchasing (or creating) three high profile reprints.
"$45" total cost on sending three cards to PSA.
"$300+" profit margin after listing them on eBay!

This is not a shot at the seller, I have no real issues with them but what in the world are these bidders thinking! Are you kidding me!

charlie brown.jpg

gehrig reprint.JPG

ruth reprint.JPG

Mays reprint.jpg

Lovely Day...

[Piratedogcardshows]

I dont understand.The amount of bids on these is staggering.

[freakhappy]

You should be taking a shot at the seller. For one thing, PSA has already deemed them reprints...so why didn't he list them as reprints in his listings? He simply says that they are questionable authenticity, but still lists them as the original non-reprint issue date. I believe it is the seller's responsibility to make sure everyone knows what they are bidding on.

I'm not saying that this isn't the bidders fault as well. You have to be smart enough to know what you are bidding on, but in the long run we know what the seller is doing.

[thetruthisoutthere]

I want someone to convince me that this seller doesn't know exactly what he is doing:

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by freakhappy

You should be taking a shot at the seller. For one thing, PSA has already deemed them reprints...so why didn't he list them as reprints in his listings? He simply says that they are questionable authenticity, but still lists them as the original non-reprint issue date. I believe it is the seller's responsibility to make sure everyone knows what they are bidding on.

I'm not saying that this isn't the bidders fault as well. You have to be smart enough to know what you are bidding on, but in the long run we know what the seller is doing.

In my opinion, the majority of Ebay buyers of memorabilia, cards, autographs, etc., aren't the sharpest tools in the shed. They are easy pickings.

[freakhappy]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

In my opinion, the majority of Ebay buyers of memorabilia, cards, autographs, etc., aren't the sharpest tools in the shed. They are easy pickings.

You ain't a lyin'!

However, does that give sellers the right to take full advantage of bidders and list their product the way this seller did?

[fkw]

IMO the fault lies mostly with PSA, they are the ones that keep dreams alive by using the "?" in the flip.... it makes newbies think they couldnt tell for sure. I know PSA are idiots at times in IDing the issuer of oddball cards, and even make alot of bonehead errors because of low quality control standards...... but 99.98% of the time they can ID a reproduction form a well known set.

They need to change the flip to "NOT AUTHENTIC"

[joeadcock]

Hopefully, few more will bid(thinking they are getting what they are not).

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by freakhappy

You should be taking a shot at the seller. For one thing, PSA has already deemed them reprints...so why didn't he list them as reprints in his listings? He simply says that they are questionable authenticity, ...

Because PSA actually evaluated them as '? AUTHCTY' which I'm reading as meaning 'questionable authenticity'.

PSA is at fault. The bidders are idiots. The seller found the loophole (poor PSA label, idiot bidders) and is making out like a bandit...but is not an actual bandit.

Frank - thanks for posting. This is my entertainment for the evening.

[danmckee]

The seller is buying them, has to be, no one can be that stupid!

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by danmckee

The seller is buying them, has to be, no one can be that stupid!

Maybe one or more of the buyers intend to switch these with real cards in PSA/SGC cases??

[iggyman]

Originally Posted by itjclarke

Maybe one or more of the buyers intend to switch these with real cards in PSA/SGC cases??

I suppose that is possible, but someone should really tell them that a complete Goudey reprint set can be had for $40 bucks.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1933-Goudey-...-/360407044706

Lovely Day...

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by iggyman

I suppose that is possible, but someone should really tell them that a complete Goudey reprint set can be had for $40 bucks.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1933-Goudey-...-/360407044706

Lovely Day...

OK, VERY VERY stupid buyers then

[freakhappy]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Because PSA actually evaluated them as '? AUTHCTY' which I'm reading as meaning 'questionable authenticity'.

PSA is at fault. The bidders are idiots. The seller found the loophole (poor PSA label, idiot bidders) and is making out like a bandit...but is not an actual bandit.

Frank - thanks for posting. This is my entertainment for the evening.

Ultimately, the seller knows that these are not authentic and he IS listing them like this on purpose...unethically. The seller found a loophole and is using it to make money off of uneducated collectors. Sad situation.

[npa589]

The seller makes me sick. This crap makes me sick to my stomach. I keep on coming back to saying to myself: "These buyers and sellers are a match made in Heaven. They deserve each other.".......

[zljones]

Ok 1 year ago when I just started collecting again, I got involved in an auction for a 1952 Bowman Willie Mays, the seller said it could be real but he did not believe it to be real , but it was listed as unknown. I bid 10 bucks but would not go any higher. I got it and it was not real. I took a dumb risk, but only lost 10 bucks on it, I refused to bid any higher.
Even though it was dumb of me to bid without knowing the facts, I think it's a hell of a lot more stupid to bid in the hundreds of dollars! Right after it happened I got educated real fast, and stayed away from all "UNKNOWN" auctions too.
I don't always bash the sellers for selling fake items, because sometimes they think they have an authentic item when they really don't. It happened to me once when I bought a 54 Topps Hank Aaron from a guy in Canada, who claimed the card was authentic because he got it from his uncle in the 1980s. When I got the card it did not measure. He was confused on how something fake could come from his uncle, but hey, there were great looking reprints made in 1983. I got my money back accept for the $25 for the shipping costs. But that is the extent of how I ever got ripped off in return to collecting 1 year ago.

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by fkw

IMO the fault lies mostly with PSA, they are the ones that keep dreams alive by using the "?" in the flip.... it makes newbies think they couldnt tell for sure. I know PSA are idiots at times in IDing the issuer of oddball cards, and even make alot of bonehead errors because of low quality control standards...... but 99.98% of the time they can ID a reproduction form a well known set.

They need to change the flip to "NOT AUTHENTIC"

A few years ago my buddy picked up and '86 fleer Jordan on the bay for something like $40-50(I can't remember what he said exactly). I asked him why it was so cheap, and he said that the seller had it listed as returned as Questionable Authenticity... He was quite disappointed when I told him that meant it wasn't real.. He was apparently stuck on the use of the word "Questionable", and held hope that it was real..

[glchen]

I think another reason is that the seller offers a 7 day return policy. Therefore some buyers may be thinking that after they examine the card, they can determine whether they think it's real or not. If not, they can send it back for refund.

[iggyman]

I always chuckle at most eBays sellers return policy .

On eBay, it really doesn't matter if the return policy is 1/2 day......1 day.....3 days.....7 days....or "NO RETURNS accepted under any circumstances" days!!! At the end of the "day," you have 45 nights to return the item if it is not as described (which virtually any item can fall under). You also normally have 60 nights (or two billing cycles) to put a claim in with your credit card.

It's already funny enough, that you actually need those cards in-hand to determine authenticity. It would just be hilarious, if a buyer thought he only had 7 days to return the card. Oh, that is funny................stop it already, my side hurts......

Lovely Day...

[Ladder7]

At one time, we were able to save these schmucks from themselves... To increase profits, ebaY killed the end run.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Ladder7

At one time, we were able to save these schmucks from themselves... To increase profits, ebaY killed the end run.

Now that's a funny flip!! I have always thought they should put FAKE!! on the flip of these. I wonder if there is some legal liability in doing so? This isn't the first, second or third time this has happened or been discussed. Has anyone asked PSA to change their wording, I wonder?

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by Leon

Now that's a funny flip!! I have always thought they should put FAKE!! on the flip of these. I wonder if there is some legal liability in doing so? This isn't the first, second or third time this has happened or been discussed. Has anyone asked PSA to change their wording, I wonder?

I was always under the impression, that they were just legally covering their a$$e$ by using that terminology. Because, if that isn't the case, then I'd say their choice of wording is just plain negligent...

[rp12367]

Originally Posted by iggyman

I always chuckle at most eBays sellers return policy .

On eBay, it really doesn't matter if the return policy is 1/2 day......1 day.....3 days.....7 days....or "NO RETURNS accepted under any circumstances" days!!! At the end of the "day," you have 45 nights to return the item if it is not as described (which virtually any item can fall under). You also normally have 60 nights (or two billing cycles) to put a claim in with your credit card.

+1 You can return anything with 45 days, NO IF'S ANDS OR BUT'S E-bay will make you give a refund. I had a small issue awhile ago and seller said NO REFUNDS NO MATTER WHAT and I got back my money. Not saying I agree by any means as I see both sides, buying and selling. But there whole return question durning the listing process is a joke.

[iwantitiwinit]

See that bridge over there. I own it. It can be yours for only......
The purchase of those cards is ridiculous, there are gonna be thousands for sale now.

[iggyman]

Nah man! Fake cards in storage sheds are the next big thing!

storage sheds.jpg

Lovely Day...

[Leon]

I am probably going to contact Joe O about the wording on the fake cards flips.......I will let the board know. When I had my short, impromptu meeting with him he seemed willing to do anything to help the hobby, of course while keeping his company in mind (which no one could blame him for that)....kind regards

[ullmandds]

PSA is the source of the problem...I'd guess they're doing this for 1 reason...to increase their revenue...that's it!

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by rp12367

+1 You can return anything with 45 days, NO IF'S ANDS OR BUT'S E-bay will make you give a refund. I had a small issue awhile ago and seller said NO REFUNDS NO MATTER WHAT and I got back my money. Not saying I agree by any means as I see both sides, buying and selling. But there whole return question durning the listing process is a joke.

If this is true (which I'm not arguing), then why does eBay allow sellers the option to accept returns or not?

See the example below. The first two items are not returnable while the second two are.

[iggyman]

David,

As long as you are returning the item because it's "not as advertised", Buyer Protection trumps anything else you put in your listing(s).

Lovely Day...

[glchen]

I don't think that SNAD's on ebay's are always wins. I've "lost" 2 cases myself. The first was a reprint of a W517 Ruth for ~$300. The photo on ebay was a bit blurry so I did not see the W517 in the bottom corner that indicates the card was a reprint. I asked seller for return, and they said no. I filed a SNAD case with ebay, and showed them scans from the Standard Catalog that indicated the card was a reprint and that the ebay listing said the card was authentic. Somehow, the seller called ebay and managed to convince the ebay rep to rule in favor of the seller. Then I got this long message from an ebay supervisor basically telling me to be more careful in the future. I was fairly shocked obviously, and called ebay the next day, and got the case reviewed and ruled in my favor. Therefore, I still got my refund. However, because ebay initially ruled for the seller, they still got to keep their money, and the refund came out of ebay's pockets.

For the other case, I bought a factory set for 1981 Donruss that the seller said was unopened. I got the set, and I opened the box, and it seemed like it was opened and culled. Therefore, again, seller refused return. I filed a SNAD with ebay. However, because they said I could have been the one who had gone through the set, not the seller, so they ruled in favor of the seller. And the ebay supervisor gave me a bunch of other stories of all of these other SNAD's they refused for various items like antique dolls. The set only cost me ~$20, so I just negged the seller and moved on. I have never tried to use my credit card to generate a refund.

[iggyman]

Gary,

Those two cases are interesting and thanks for sharing. Obviously, eBay got it wrong with the W517 Ruth. I can see both sides of the Donruss dispute, but that sorts of blows-up the entire "not as advertised dispute will always trump sellers return policy" mombo jumbo.

A grey area will always exist when you have human beings making snap decisions, but here is what I learned from both your cases. When opening a dispute against a seller that does not accept returns, give eBay as little information as possible AND always always always stick with the "item not as advertised" mantra.


Thus...eBay rep: why do you want to return the Donruss 1981 unopened box??? They were not as advertised.

eBay rep: What was wrong with them??? The cards were not the same as advertised in the auction - both in the description and the pic.

eBay rep: Can you give me more detail??? Auction advertised a Donruss 1981 unopened, box but when the package arrived it was not a Donruss 1981 unopened box.

eBay rep: How can you be so sure, did you open the box??? Oh, I'm 100% sure! I've been collecting baseball cards since 1972 and it's a fine American hobby. You can say, here is the opportunity and the Youth of America says, 'How much are you going to pay me?' It's like going to the university--they want the biggest, the best, the most. If necessary, we'll pay the bonuses. But they should earn it.

Lovely Day...

[steve B]

Stamp certificates will state things like that with no problems. such as-

"US # 163P4 fraudlently perforated to appear as #163 it is genuine"

I actually own that exact item, but have not sent it in for a certificate. If I did, that's pretty much exactly what the cert would say. They also list faults like short perforations, minor creases etc. The stamp IS a genuine 163P4, and is collectable as a proof.

163P4 is a plate proof on india paper, Catalog value $20 #163 is the issued stamp catalog value $2750.

Outright forgeries are identified as such on the certs too.
Only on rare cases do you see a cert stating something like "we render no opinion at this time" Meaning 3 or more experts in that specialty have all seen it and either can't agree or aren't certain as to just what the item is.
(And those items can be VERY exciting. A bit of research to prove what it is can turn a bit of junk into a lot of money) ....Someday, someday.....

Steve B

Originally Posted by Leon

Now that's a funny flip!! I have always thought they should put FAKE!! on the flip of these. I wonder if there is some legal liability in doing so? This isn't the first, second or third time this has happened or been discussed. Has anyone asked PSA to change their wording, I wonder?

[glchen]

Exactly. To win a SNAD case, you have to be laser focused on "Item is not as described." I purchased a 1920 Heading Home Babe Ruth that was not holdered and the seller had pictured a PSA flip that said "Authentic / Altered" which is very similar to the "Questionable Authenticity" flip in the ebay auction from the OP. So I purchased the card figuring the seller just didn't put "Please holder Authentic cards" on the submission form. So I sent the card to PSA figuring they'd encapsulate the card with Authentic/Altered. The card came back "Questionable Authenticity." I looked on this forum, and saw that the card was 100% reprint. I emailed PSA and basically asked them if they ever graded a card authentic one time, but didn't holder it, and then later on, gave questionable authenticity, and explained this case before. Of course, PSA said, no, we never do that. The seller must have switched the card with the flip. Internally, I figured PSA screwed up because basically if they don't holder the card, they can put anything they dang well please on the flip on why the card wasn't holdered. So, I messaged the seller asking for a return. Of course, it was refused. I accused them on switching the card like PSA said. They said they didn't do it. I filed a SNAD case, and just completely stuck to the story that the seller switched cards with the flip pictured, and won the case.