![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Genaro
This was in the pre 19030 singles on e bay |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)
The shipping charge is reasonable. Insurance may be a bit high at $12 but there's a full 100% satisfaction guarantee so if the kid doesn't poop and pee correctly you can ship her back for a full refund minus the shipping charges. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: DJ
DON'T BID! THAT'S MY DAUGHTER! HE DOESN'T OWN WHAT HE IS SELLING BUT HI-JACKED MY SCAN FROM WHEN I TRIED TO SELL MY DAUGHTER LAST WEEK, BUT THE RESERVE WAS NOT MET! GRRR.. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: pete
isnt she obligated to sell the item (daughter)? hmmm, .99 cents. was there a reserve? do i get the walker with the baby or is it baby only? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Genaro
I think its very deceptive on his part meaning the dad. I dont think she is vintage so how can she be listed in the pre 1930s she looks like a singles 2005 to me. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Brian E.
all kidding aside....this auction was for a 1920's Caramel Ty Cobb however the individual had listed it as an E-90. I dropped them a note making them aware of the mistake to which they replied requesting more information. I suspect they temporarly modified the auction with their daughter as a place holder rather than cancelling it or leaving it incorrectly listed. The individual also stated the card didn't belong to them and that they were playing middle man. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Genaro
I knew that I was just having a little fun with it thats all. I wonder how many people have put this on items to watch. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Zach Smith
With the $1,000,000 shipping charge I'm scared to look at that one much less put it in my watch list. I guess shipping precious cargo has it's price! |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Andrew Parks
She definitely looks a little short - send her to PRO. |
![]() |
|
|