Should Some Interference Be Allowed In The BST Areas?

[Leon]

I have been pm'ing with a member concerning the policy on members, other than the original thread creator, posting in BST threads under certain circumstances.

For instance, if someone is selling a T204 Brown. They give 3 historical prices, in the BST listing, of cards that went for more money and in the same condition. All the while leaving out sales from, say, the free PSA pricing histories that are accessible to anyone online, and most are lower.

Would it be ok to make a post saying?..

"As an FYI, in case you missed them, here are 3 other recent sales, with links, to help educate members." (or something to that effect)

An argument could be that, not allowing members to comment makes it a less healthy and safe environment. And when someone intentionally leaves out pertinent details i.e... lower sales histories, it is akin to fraud.

Your thoughts?

and a postcard

[bnorth]

I would be OK with the bold. It didn't say LAST 3 sales and as long as they are recent sales it was not a lie.

My favorite on here was when a seller messaged me to sell a card I hoard. There was one on eBay for $25 and one for $90. Guess what one he sent me a link to saying he could do a slightly better price on?

I like the current rule and could see letting people comment turning into a complete shit show.

[perezfan]

I am in favor of reasonable/legitimate forum member interjection on BST listings.

There must be over 100 instances throughout the years in which I've wanted to comment, but just bit my tongue instead. Didn't want to go against forum etiquette, but it's tough to stomach deceptive listings.

Since KM is now gone, it's gotten better, but still some bad listings out there.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by perezfan

I am in favor of reasonable/legitimate forum member interjection on BST listings.

There must be over 100 instances throughout the years in which I've wanted to comment, but just bit my tongue instead. Didn't want to go against forum etiquette, but it's tough to stomach deceptive listings.

Since KM is now gone, it's gotten better, but still some bad listings out there.

I must have missed this. Who is KM?

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

I must have missed this. Who is KM?

Mr. Mize.

[chalupacollects]

In favor of leaving as is... Unless it is a fraudulent item. Then maybe a note to the seller - who may not know its a bad item.

Personally, If I see something I want, I do the research on price vs. condition and go from there. If its graded I track back the cert number to see where it may have come from to avoid the "bad guys' items... caveat emptor....

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

I must have missed this. Who is KM?

Shares a first name with Mr. Youkilis

Shares a last name with "The Big Cat".

[Fred]

Getting back to the original post -

Why not just have the BST seller provide a brief description of the item and the price. No "historical" sales data allowed. If someone really wants to dig it up, then they'll do that.

No commenting by third parties on the BST threads except to ask questions about the item (condition? has it been to a TPG in the past? size?), say "I'll take it" or the occasional - "wow, that's a nice card" comment" that we see from time to time.

Very clear, no ambiguity and no drama.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Shares a first name with Mr. Youkilis

Shares a last name with "The Big Cat".

Kevin Galarraga

[Flintboy]

Not to stray too far from the topic but what about a few common sense rules for the BST forum? One would be everything listed must have a price. The “I’m taking offers” is complete nonsense.

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by Fred

Kevin Galarraga

That portrait of Honus Wagner never showed up in any auction I've seen. I recall over the course of 3-4 years there were repeated representations that it was off to auction and how we would all regret the staggering selling price it would score.

[Eric72]

If member A posted a card for sales and only highlighted selected comps, which were favorable to them, they painted an intentionally incomplete picture.

If member B followed with a, "here are the last six sales of that card in a PSA 4 on eBay" post, they gave a more complete picture.

I see nothing wrong with that. Member A opened the door by cherry picking comps in an effort to get more money.


###


If member A simply posted a card for sale with pictures and a price, that seems pretty straightforward. Member B probably shouldn't interfere.

[Jim65]

If a seller gives only comps that benefit him, he is purposely giving false information, I see no problem in calling that out.

[x2drich2000]

I think any time a member posts something that is not factual in their sale post, interfering to correct that fact is appropriate. IMO the person interfering should be able to prove what they are saying and not just post an opinion. I'm fine with your scenario. As another example I would be fine with a case where someone says something along the lines of this is the only copy and the person interfering can show another.

[G1911]

+1 in favor.

BS being corrected will probably upset a lot of members. Facts should always come first.

[ChiefBeef]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

I think any time a member posts something that is not factual in their sale post, interfering to correct that fact is appropriate. IMO the person interfering should be able to prove what they are saying and not just post an opinion. I'm fine with your scenario. As another example I would be fine with a case where someone says something along the lines of this is the only copy and the person interfering can show another.

This makes perfect sense but can get out of hand. I would suppose the moderator would step in if that occurred.

On another note, if you are selling your house and the bank for the buyer says there are not enough comps to certify that your asking price is reasonable, wouldn't you either a) find all you could to support your asking price ahead of time, or b) request the opportunity to prove them wrong? Generally speaking, you are looking for what benefits you and not the buyer. The buyer has the option to back out (if the contract allows) if they do not like the results, or accept your hard work looking for comps and request a review or go to another bank.

It has been said "caveat emptor" and that is true so therefore buyers should do their homework and be sure of what they are buying. To allow a group of others to interject their "thoughts" when they disagree what the asking price is seems inappropriate and should not be the norm. Again, it is said, the value is what the one willing to purchase believes what the value is, or is willing to accept what is asked because they want it for reasons unknown.

[Fred]

After reading a lot of good comments, there is a strong/good reason to not allow comps:

Comp was based on a card of the same grade. However, as indicated in other threads, an 8 isn't an 8 isn't an 8. The comps used may be for stellar examples of the card while the card being sold may be one of those 8-ish cards that should probably be a 6 or 7. Maybe the centering on the comps were perfect which led to a higher overall sale price. Even if the comp was for a 4, there are nice 4s and some ugly 4s (and we've all seen that before).

Comp was based on a different time frame when the irrational exuberance was in abundance.

Not my call.

[JollyElm]

A lot of people are missing (purposely ignoring?) the basic question being asked. Should some INTERFERENCE be allowed? It has nothing to do with sc*mbags trying to screw over people. That is rightfully called out by everyone all the time, as it should always be. It's about people messing with someone's FT/FS posts just to be an ass. That's what opening this metaphorical door will lead to. Case in point, some contrarian will probably jump in to argue that my use of the word 'metaphorical' here was improper.

Can o' frickin' worms!!!

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by Eric72

If member A posted a card for sales and only highlighted selected comps, which were favorable to them, they painted an intentionally incomplete picture.

If member B followed with a, "here are the last six sales of that card in a PSA 4 on eBay" post, they gave a more complete picture.

I see nothing wrong with that. Member A opened the door by cherry picking comps in an effort to get more money.


###


If member A simply posted a card for sale with pictures and a price, that seems pretty straightforward. Member B probably shouldn't interfere.

I agree 100% with this.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Fine by me, just be careful defining what sorts of information is fair game.

[philliesfan]

First, as a dog lover, I love the Postcard!

Secondly, I am also fine with it and agree 100% with Eric72

Bob

[robw1959]

I agree with this policy and thought we were already allowed to do this, as I think I've seen some examples of interference in the past (I have a BIG personal example in mind).

[Fred]

The best way to "bring attention" to an "aggressive" selling tactic involving inflated price disclosures favorable to the seller would be to provide other pricing without any extra commentary. At some point, if the aggressive seller persists, then everyone will figure out that person may not be a community member worth dealing with.

Something to consider is that if someone doesn't include any past sales information but is obviously "high" in price, then refrain from commenting and just let it go. Else the BST will become a free for all.

[Casey2296]

No, disagree completely.

Caveat Emptor rules the day, if you're too lazy as a buyer to do your homework and educate yourself and then take the sellers word on value, then you deserve to pay a higher price. The numbers are out there for free, use them. I've had buyers use the same silly tactic to try and drive my asking price down, let's just say I won't deal with that buyer anymore because it's bad form whether a seller or buyer uses that tactic, it's not what BST is about.

It wasn't too far in the past that you would admonish any member commenting on a BST listing with anything but positive comments.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

No, disagree completely.

Caveat Emptor rules the day, if you're too lazy as a buyer to do your homework and educate yourself and then take the sellers word on value, then you deserve to pay a higher price. The numbers are out there for free, use them. I've had buyers use the same silly tactic to try and drive my asking price down, let's just say I won't deal with that buyer anymore because it's bad form whether a seller or buyer uses that tactic, it's not what BST is about.

It wasn't too far in the past that you would admonish any member commenting on a BST listing with anything but positive comments.

I disagree a bit although I respect the POV. To me, that a buyer could discover the truth does not excuse a seller giving out misinformation, and the seller should be called on it.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

I've had buyers use the same silly tactic to try and drive my asking price down, let's just say I won't deal with that buyer anymore because it's bad form whether a seller or buyer uses that tactic, it's not what BST is about.

Just clarifying if you mean this as it was written. The "same silly tactic" refers to the example in the OP? You are saying if you gave a buyer a materially misleading list of sales, excising sales that didn't aid your narrative, and that the potential buyer noticed this, you would block them from doing any deals? And that this did indeed happen? It is inappropriate and bad form to observe a lie, not the lie itself?

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by G1911

Just clarifying if you mean this as it was written. The "same silly tactic" refers to the example in the OP? You are saying if you gave a buyer a materially misleading list of sales, excising sales that didn't aid your narrative, and that the potential buyer noticed this, you would block them from doing any deals? And that this did indeed happen? It is inappropriate and bad form to observe a lie, not the lie itself?

I'll clarify, I always list my cards at a fair price based on comps because that is, in my understanding, the nature of BST, a group of collectors that treat each other with respect, integrity, and fairness. In my particular case the buyer, who has a substantial collection comped a recent Cobb Exhibit at a much lower grade to make his offer, pretty much insulting my intelligence thinking I was a Rube (no insult to the Waddell family intended), showed me who he was as a human and I decided I don't want to do business with folks like that

The great part is there are numerous members here who will interact with those same somewhat rare by today's standard principles, those are the folks that make this sub great.

[JollyElm]

And who, pray tell, decides what the limits are for this type of interference?? It's a huge can of worms. There is nothing more annoying than someone bringing their BS into someone else's FS/FT thread, as it's happened to me and plenty of others before. It'll start with some sort of casual, "You missed a few pertinent comps, old boy" and then dissolve into a sh*tshow as people start throwing their opinions into people's threads just for a laugh.

Caveat emptor. Everyone around here knows what the deal is, so each should do their own research and fact finding. If it ain't broke...

[Snapolit1]

Maybe a middle ground is you can out someone for what you think is a misleading BST post but should as a courtesy raise it with them privately first and see if it's promptly acted upon. What might be obvious to some might not be obvious to another person.

[Vintagecatcher]

I have been on this site from the very beginning. Most often as a buyer... rarely as a seller.

Since my focus is strictly pre-war catchers, I have a very good idea of the "going rate" for most items after 30 plus years of experience.

I have bought many items over the years from the B/S/ T thread.

Sellers post the item with a price, and then I decide whether the price is fair. If it is, then I'll attempt to buy it. Never remember seeing any threads with "comps".... just the sale price.

As others have stated already, opening the door for others to comment is a slippery slope.

Working with the public, I always hope for the best, but see the worst in people far too often.

Patrick

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

And who, pray tell, decides what the limits are for this type of interference?? It's a huge can of worms. There is nothing more annoying than someone bringing their BS into someone else's FS/FT thread, as it's happened to me and plenty of others before. It'll start with some sort of casual, "You missed a few pertinent comps, old boy" and then dissolve into a sh*tshow as people start throwing their opinions into people's threads just for a laugh.

Caveat emptor. Everyone around here knows what the deal is, so each should do their own research and fact finding. If it ain't broke...

+1

This is a classic slippery slope and will degenerate fast if allowed.

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

No, disagree completely.

Caveat Emptor rules the day, if you're too lazy as a buyer to do your homework and educate yourself and then take the sellers word on value, then you deserve to pay a higher price. The numbers are out there for free, use them.

It wasn't too far in the past that you would admonish any member commenting on a BST listing with anything but positive comments.

+1. I agree with this completely

Also, inviting 3rd party comments will serve to bump the thread again and again, thus making everyone look at the darn thing over and over and pushing down other listings. Further, When would it be proper to post comp info? Only when the seller has posted incomplete or incorrect info? How about when a card that literally just sold in a major auction for $X is now listed on BST for $X+25%? While it annoys me, the fellow listing the just-sold-card now for 25% has every right to do so and I see no reason to jack the guy’s thread with a post, letting the world know that the exact card just sold at auction for 25% less. I think this rule is dangerous and could make a circus out of certain BST listings and also open a major can of worms/slippery slope as to proper scope. Plus, it’s unneeded considering rule #1 of BST is and always has been, caveat emptor..

That said, it’s a different story for anyone who is clearly scamming/committing fraud. Also, as we have learned over the years, the BST has a way of self-policing/correcting the generally undesirables.

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

+1. I agree with this completely

Also, inviting 3rd party comments will serve to bump the thread again and again, thus making everyone look at the darn thing over and over and pushing down other listings. Further, When would it be proper to post comp info? Only when the seller has posted incomplete or incorrect info? How about when a card that literally just sold in a major auction for $X is now listed on BST for $X+25%? While it annoys me, the fellow listing the just-sold-card now for 25% has every right to do so and I see no reason to jack the guy’s thread with a post, letting the world know that the exact card just sold at auction for 25% less. I think this rule is dangerous and could make a circus out of certain BST listings and also open a major can of worms/slippery slope as to proper scope. Plus, it’s unneeded considering rule #1 of BST is and always has been, caveat emptor..

That said, it’s a different story for anyone who is clearly scamming/committing fraud. Also, as we have learned over the years, the BST has a way of self-policing/correcting the generally undesirables.

+1 Agree

However if the buyer posts a "PM SENT" and you feel strongly on something then just Message him direct with your observations

[cammb]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

No, disagree completely.

Caveat Emptor rules the day, if you're too lazy as a buyer to do your homework and educate yourself and then take the sellers word on value, then you deserve to pay a higher price. The numbers are out there for free, use them. I've had buyers use the same silly tactic to try and drive my asking price down, let's just say I won't deal with that buyer anymore because it's bad form whether a seller or buyer uses that tactic, it's not what BST is about.

It wasn't too far in the past that you would admonish any member commenting on a BST listing with anything but positive comments.

Agree 100%. The buyer should do their homework.

[icurnmedic]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

No, disagree completely.

Caveat Emptor rules the day, if you're too lazy as a buyer to do your homework and educate yourself and then take the sellers word on value, then you deserve to pay a higher price. The numbers are out there for free, use them. I've had buyers use the same silly tactic to try and drive my asking price down, let's just say I won't deal with that buyer anymore because it's bad form whether a seller or buyer uses that tactic, it's not what BST is about.

It wasn't too far in the past that you would admonish any member commenting on a BST listing with anything but positive comments.

As someone who has never sold anything on this website I agree with this 100%

[Bestdj777]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

I agree 100% with this.

Same here. It’s incumbent on us as fellow members to call out any inaccuracies or misleading statements and to protect our fellow board members. Not our job to critique pricing absent anything misleading though.

[Lucas00]

I'll play devil's advocate here with an example and say, Members need to be doing their own pricing research and not only relying on the sellers word. If a seller posts something rare on the bst and I can find 3 sales in the past few months, $1000, $1200 and $2000. And the seller is asking $2500 and only references the $2000 sale. I don't see the problem with that.

Now I think this is heavily dependent on what is being sold and the time period others have sold. If you're listing Mike trout rookies for $2000 only showing sales from last year that's a definite issue. And should be called out.