Seller sues dealer/buyer for a high flip

[Justus]

Interesting article. Has this ever happened in the card market?

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/fr...g-mask-2370870

[Peter_Spaeth]

Wut?

The couple also alleges that the antiques dealer conspired with their gardener, with whom he split the proceeds of the sale, to determine provenance information about the mask before approaching the auction houses.

[Gorditadogg]

It happens all the time. I remember a post on here from a member who got a box of 67T hi numbers at a flea market from a widow for $5.

She had no idea what the cards were really worth and was probably never the wiser. It's the way the world is.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[Snowman]

Something very similar came up here a couple years ago and I remember arguing with people about this. I was saying that the original owners should be able to seek damages and others were saying, "nope, a sale is a sale" and that the buyer has no responsibility to inform an ignorant seller of an item's value. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Something very similar came up here a couple years ago and I remember arguing with people about this. I was saying that the original owners should be able to seek damages and others were saying, "nope, a sale is a sale" and that the buyer has no responsibility to inform an ignorant seller of an item's value. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Travis,

I'm interested to see what you are referencing, in terms of the post. Was it a hypothetical situation, or a transaction that actually occurred, here on the board?

- James

[G1911]

One should not rip people off for ethical reasons, but I fail to see how a buyer should be required to inform the seller of market details. That it appears some here believe this should be a law and a criminal act to use what you know to make smart buys seems absurd. If I make an offer on an item, that offer is within market norms (or as best as I believe them to be - rare material is a guesstimate) but I fail to see how I am obligated to leverage my knowledge or expertise (as lacking as it is) to their gain instead of mine.

[drcy]

There is a difference between when the seller beforehand sets the price, and when an unethical expert buyer manipulates the seller and lies about the items to create the price.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by G1911

One should not rip people off for ethical reasons, but I fail to see how a buyer should be required to inform the seller of market details. That it appears some here believe this should be a law and a criminal act to use what you know to make smart buys seems absurd. If I make an offer on an item, that offer is within market norms (or as best as I believe them to be - rare material is a guesstimate) but I fail to see how I am obligated to leverage my knowledge or expertise (as lacking as it is) to their gain instead of mine.

Not sure there are many or anyone saying it should be a crime as opposed to a potential civil claim.

[Ima Pseudonym]

Originally Posted by G1911

I fail to see how I am obligated to leverage my knowledge or expertise (as lacking as it is) to their gain instead of mine.

Bingo.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Something very similar came up here a couple years ago and I remember arguing with people about this. I was saying that the original owners should be able to seek damages and others were saying, "nope, a sale is a sale" and that the buyer has no responsibility to inform an ignorant seller of an item's value. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Originally Posted by Seven

Travis,

I'm interested to see what you are referencing, in terms of the post. Was it a hypothetical situation, or a transaction that actually occurred, here on the board?

- James

I'm still interested to see what this was referencing, as it has gone unanswered. Was it a hypothetical scenario, or something that actually occurred here on the board?

I haven't been in the situation myself, but I would hope human decency would prevail. If a little old man/old lady was attempting to sell me a Cracker Jack Joe Jackson for $100, I would be honest with her. I would hope most of us would do the same.

[packs]

Is that what happened though?

It's more like if someone said I've got a baseball that might be signed by Christy Mathewson. You buy it for the price of a theoretically signed baseball rather than an authentic one, invest your own money to determine authenticity, and then sell it for max profit after you paid all the fees.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

It happens all the time. I remember a post on here from a member who got a box of 67T hi numbers at a flea market from a widow for $5.

She had no idea what the cards were really worth and was probably never the wiser. It's the way the world is.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

That's messed up.

[Eric72]

I seem to remember a story in which somebody got a Nolan Ryan rookie for $12 when it was supposed to be $1,200. One of the members here pointed to a law regarding purchases at significantly less than the value of the item. Can anyone link that thread or explain the law? If I remember correctly, the seller of the Ryan may have had some possible recourse.

[ALBB]

Yea, the Ryan rookie card story,..I recall young kid working behind the counter of a card shop misread the price $1200...as $12.00, the buyer an adult Im sure knew it should have been 1200..but didnt say anything.

I think a judge ruled in the case -

[Directly]

Topps recently announced they had doubled up some Superfractor 1/1 inserted cards by error.
A seller had sold one for $2,000 shipped USPS then Topps announced a buy back program of $25,000 bounty for that particular card --the seller contacted USPS and had the delivery stopped for return--(who owns the card??)

[jlehma13]

A huge story from my neighborhood card shop during the heyday of my childhood collecting (we were all jealous). It was a kid in the know who bought it and a woman filling in for the owner for a short time who had no clue. As far as I remember, the card ended up being signed by Nolan and auctioned off for charity. The card shop got publicity and a charity got the proceeds. We also got a kick out of it because it couldn't have happened to a nicer guy...

Originally Posted by ALBB

Yea, the Ryan rookie card story,..I recall young kid working behind the counter of a card shop misread the price $1200...as $12.00, the buyer an adult Im sure knew it should have been 1200..but didnt say anything.

I think a judge ruled in the case -

[Ima Pseudonym]

Originally Posted by Justus

Interesting article. Has this ever happened in the card market?

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/fr...g-mask-2370870

What a bunch of horse-bleep.

[bigfanNY]

I read this article a few days ago and I am interested in how it plays out. One of the arguments made by the original sellers family was that thr Buyer advertised that he gave appraisals. Well we all know that an appraisal is just an opinion. If it was his opinion that he could resell it it for three or four hundred dollars. Then he paid a fair price for the item. He reached out to a couple other guys who agreed with his opinion/ Appraisal. Looks above board and fine.
Then he contacts an auction house that specializes in these types of items. And they say he " may have something" so carbon dating is done buyer asks sellers gardner if he has any knowledge of how it was obtained. So after all testing is complete it turns out it is worth 300 to 400k acording to auction house estimate. Then at sale it reaches 4.4 Million dollars. Then original seller cries foul!!
But I dont see any fraud.Buyer acted on his opinion of what it was worth. So it's not like Buyer found a Wagner and paid $157 for it more like he saw a an obscure type card that he saw similar cards sell for 3-4 hundred and paid about 50%. Then he contacts an AH who realizes that the card is an unknown variation tied to a very popular set ...like 33 Goudey and .....you get the picture.
So I cannot see the fraud. Ethics... I dont see any problem with buyers Ethics.

[chalupacollects]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

I read this article a few days ago and I am interested in how it plays out. One of the arguments made by the original sellers family was that thr Buyer advertised that he gave appraisals. Well we all know that an appraisal is just an opinion. If it was his opinion that he could resell it it for three or four hundred dollars. Then he paid a fair price for the item. He reached out to a couple other guys who agreed with his opinion/ Appraisal. Looks above board and fine.
Then he contacts an auction house that specializes in these types of items. And they say he " may have something" so carbon dating is done buyer asks sellers gardner if he has any knowledge of how it was obtained. So after all testing is complete it turns out it is worth 300 to 400k acording to auction house estimate. Then at sale it reaches 4.4 Million dollars. Then original seller cries foul!!
But I dont see any fraud.Buyer acted on his opinion of what it was worth. So it's not like Buyer found a Wagner and paid $157 for it more like he saw a an obscure type card that he saw similar cards sell for 3-4 hundred and paid about 50%. Then he contacts an AH who realizes that the card is an unknown variation tied to a very popular set ...like 33 Goudey and .....you get the picture.
So I cannot see the fraud. Ethics... I dont see any problem with buyers Ethics.

Suspicious that he went back and asked the sellers gardener. Why did he not ask the sellers themselves???