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.

[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.

[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).

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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?

[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...

[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.

[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.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

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.

This is why I check. That example, a buyer using materially misleading comps as a negotiation tactic, is completely different from the example in this thread where a seller is lying by omission and using a manufactured and materially misleading list of comps.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by G1911

This is why I check. That example, a buyer using materially misleading comps as a negotiation tactic, is completely different from the example in this thread where a seller is lying by omission and using a manufactured and materially misleading list of comps.

It's the same, whether a buyer or seller is using misleading comps.

Here's the thing about this place, 100 year old cardboard images are just a vehicle, it's how we treat each other that is the true test of character.

[uyu906]

I vote for opening it up. Comment board courtesy should be enforced in BST, but nothing more. I never understood the "everyone hands off" policy of the BST anyway.

[Rich Falvo]

I like the idea, up to a point. If someone makes a factual statement in a sale listing and is challenged with a factual rebuttal, that's probably good. But, I can see it devolving into people making generic comments like "you're way too high" or "what a ripoff".

[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

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

It's the same, whether a buyer or seller is using misleading comps.

Here's the thing about this place, 100 year old cardboard images are just a vehicle, it's how we treat each other that is the true test of character.

I get what you are saying, but it is the opposite of the situation; as written the original statement benefits greatly from your clarification that you are talking about a 180 reversal of the situation.

I don't think anyone would disagree that cardboard images are not a reflection of character, while personal conduct is. This is why it seems like a good idea to allow lies to be publicly observed.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Here's the thing about this place, 100 year old cardboard images are just a vehicle, it's how we treat each other that is the true test of character.

A test that is not always passed, and sometimes is failed spectacularly. But I don't recall any incivility on BST threads in the time I've been on here.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by G1911

I get what you are saying, but it is the opposite of the situation; as written the original statement benefits greatly from your clarification that you are talking about a 180 reversal of the situation.

I don't think anyone would disagree that cardboard images are not a reflection of character, while personal conduct is. This is why it seems like a good idea to allow lies to be publicly observed.

It's not a lie, it's an abuse of the truth and a bush league sales tactic that insults intelligent members here.
I would also caution that allowing members to comment on BST listings is a Pandora's box of personal opinions which have nothing to do with a transaction between a buyer and seller.

[steve B]

Considering how cranky some people are being lately, I'm not sure it's a good idea.

I don't often have a chance to deal with expensive collectibles either buying or selling. But on those occasions, I like to know the comps myself, relying on any seller for that info is just not something I do. Especially if the item is hundreds or thousands of dollars.
With my cheap stuff, I don't bother. If someone says "I want $2 because the ones I had at $1 sold almost instantly what matters more is if I want that particular card right then.

Another thing to consider is that comps aren't always accurate comps.
For example, how many threads do we have comparing two cards at a particular grade- "Which is better" "which one would you keep" Etc.
So are the three comps listed really similar in centering etc, and are the ones not mentioned examples with maybe better corners and lesser centering? Or some other differences?

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

A test that is not always passed, and sometimes is failed spectacularly. But I don't recall any incivility on BST threads in the time I've been on here.

Ask Leon how many times he's had to check members comments.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Ask Leon how many times he's had to check members comments.

On BST threads, you mean?

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

On BST threads, you mean?

100%. Kevin Mize is a perfect example, douchebag extraordinary but allowed to run his game as he should have until he ran too far.

[Eric72]

“The Nun’s Wagner” is an extreme example of a BST thread gone wild.

There are other, less bizarre cases. Point is, yes, it has happened before.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

100%. Kevin Mize is a perfect example, douchebag extraordinary but allowed to run his game as he should have until he ran too far.

I don't remember him but I found all his old posts. The internet is forever...

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Eric72

“The Nun’s Wagner” is an extreme example of a BST thread gone wild.

There are other, less bizarre cases. Point is, yes, it has happened before.

Nuns Wagner is a perfect example of crazy and what makes this sub fun, we need more freaks like that for entertainment value.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by Eric72

“The Nun’s Wagner” is an extreme example of a BST thread gone wild.

There are other, less bizarre cases. Point is, yes, it has happened before.

So THAT'S where that meme came from!

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

So THAT'S where that meme came from!

Classic thread.

His original post, which did not include the photo (that came later):

"here it is guys.
been in the family for a long time, my grandfather picked it up when he was a kid from someone in georgia. We had it authenticated in 2008, he almost auctioned it off in 2010, however he was not satisfied with the price. I dont really like honus wagner, with this in mind Im willing to trade this for some other cards. Other cards Im interested in include 52 topps mantle 51 bowman mantle, 54 dan dee mantle, goudey babe ruth, cracker jack ty cobb, hank aaron rookie and other high end cards. I dont really know what to value this card at since it is so beat up, with that in mind if my trade is way to high let me know."

[sycks22]

Originally Posted by Eric72

Classic thread.

His original post, which did not include the photo (that came later):

"here it is guys.
been in the family for a long time, my grandfather picked it up when he was a kid from someone in georgia. We had it authenticated in 2008, he almost auctioned it off in 2010, however he was not satisfied with the price. I dont really like honus wagner, with this in mind Im willing to trade this for some other cards. Other cards Im interested in include 52 topps mantle 51 bowman mantle, 54 dan dee mantle, goudey babe ruth, cracker jack ty cobb, hank aaron rookie and other high end cards. I dont really know what to value this card at since it is so beat up, with that in mind if my trade is way to high let me know."

This was by far the best thread ever on here. The guy wasn't even hiding his paper towels and lotion

[BobbyStrawberry]

Wow...that description alone is ridiculous but along with the picture...I can see why the meme has lived on.

[JustinD]

Seems like a shit show waiting to happen and bad listings sitting at the top of the page due to constant bumps for correction or arguments.

I would rather have a rule that if comps are listed they must be the most recent 5 or 7 for the same card with same grade and sale date with grading service listed. If it’s not and selective comps are given the thread is locked.

Try using selective comps and not the newest most similar on a mortgage underwrite and you have a rejection from the investor. No pick and choose.

[Aaron Seefeldt]

Why is it that sellers show 2 or 3 recent sales of similar item BUT when their item sells they delete or don’t list the “sold” price. That would be the most recent comp, right?

[jfkheat]

I didn't read every post in this thread so this may have been mentioned. There have been several times that I saw someone list a card for sale here that they just bought from one of the auction houses. So, if someone lists a card for $2000 here and I see that they bought it a few weeks ago for $1400 can I post that info?

[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.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by sycks22

This was by far the best thread ever on here. The guy wasn't even hiding his paper towels and lotion

Don't forget that BST thread from RB where he tried to sell a Red Cobb/ Lenox for an entire year.

[wondo]

I vote against allowing comments. There will always be a grey area and the possibility it would degrade to a shitshow is too great.

[cubman1941]

I agree with Eric72 also but JollyElm's "hugh can of worms" is also valid. Like Pandora's Box, once it is open it can't be closed.

[Bridwell]

The buyer should do their own research. Sellers posting a "comparable" that has better centering or is a better-looking card is annoying, and unethical, but the buyer can look up the sale for themselves and compare before they make a large purchase.

[3-2-count]

Originally Posted by wondo

I vote against allowing comments. There will always be a grey area and the possibility it would degrade to a shitshow is too great.

Agree 100%.

[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

[carlsonjok]

For a number of reasons, I haven't ever bought or sold much on BST, and normally would err on the side of more information being better, but the downside of this seems to far exceed the upside. I am reminded of the old saying about behavior in academic departments: "The politics are so vicious, because the stakes are so small." There is a lot of petty behavior even on non-BST threads and even causal observers can identify long-standing animosity between specific members. If it was just egregious behavior being called out, I could understand. But, pettiness works on a much a finer increment and who gets to decide the difference between egregious behavior and a merely optimistic seller?

It is my observation that most members here are fairly astute when it comes to the value of cards and memorabilia and the concern, for me anyways, would be newcomers to the hobby and the board. To that end, wouldn't it make more sense to have (yet another) stickie thread at the top of each BST thread with a tutorial on the various ways to determine sales comps? And perhaps requiring new members to read, and acknowledging reading, the tutorial as a condition for approval?

[ullmandds]

personally I think calling out potential BST seller on BS should be perfectly allowed.

although in this day and age...where do we draw the line as to what real data/facts are?

A recent auction result could be an outlier...a fake sale? But in many cases this is just a guess...noone knows for sure?

I have bought/sold some incredible cards on the bst over the last 15-20 yrs...and I value it as a great place to transact.

And this board has a way of self regulating itself...but only if BS is called out!!!!

I just want it to stay that way.