Mastronet, I may be wrong here but let's here opinions??

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

FYI, Bob Luce, SGC Senior Grader, in his interview with SGC Magazine stated that the best a card with a pinhole or back writing will ever grade with them is a 30 (g). He was less clear on paper loss, which he said would vary in its effect depending on severity.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Doug- I've always felt that the prose style in your catalog is clumsy and much too busy. In most cases, many of the sentences are convoluted and difficult to understand. I taught college English for three years. If you handed in a paper written that way, you would be staying after school cleaning blackboard erasers. Ever thought about streamlining that writing style a little? Most lots don't need dozens of adjectives, especially when half the time they are not even used properly.

[Archive]

Posted By: gary nuchereno

Doug, The fact of the matter is that many collectors differentiate between cards that have been graded poor to fair because of multiple creases and rounded corners versus cards that have been graded poor to fair because of paper loss or writing on them. The fact that many collectors feel that way should be enough for auction houses to be more specific regarding poor to fair lots.
I was told recently by a different auction house that a card with writing on the back can still be graded very good. I guess it could but it should be listed as very good with writing on the back! All auction houses should try to be more accurate in there
descriptions. I also think that auction houses should refuse to
auction cards that have been badly misgraded by the grading companies. It is a cop out to say "we didn't grade it"

[Archive]

Posted By: Doug Allen

I would agree if the entire lot is fair to poor. In that case go to the Cobb, Mathewson, Johnson, HOF, rarities so you can picture and describe them. My example was a lot for which 72% of the lot and 95% of the value was VG or better. In that case I don't believe it is necessary to provide detailed images or descriptions of each card.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

that Doug comes on to respond. That's a stand up act.....

I think that MANY of the auction houses tend to get away from picturing any more of the LOWER quality stuff in their auctions because of the whole aesthetics issue of it. You don't want to picture low quality stuff because in a sense it drags down the rest. They also, I think incorrectly, assume that since it's lower condition that the buyer will be okay with whatever is wrong with the lot.

I would like to see what causes a G card to be G if possible but realize it's not really feasible to picture every card in a 200 card G/VG T206 lot. They are going to picture the higher $$ cards as Doug illustrated in his earlier post but it would also be nice to see the backs. Especially when the backs could call into question the reason for the downgrade in condition. Hopefully with the technical upgrades Doug has outlined, probably paid for by the increase in VIG (had to get that dig in....), we'll continue to see vast improvements in the images of items on their site, realizing it's not possible in the print format to picture as much as online.

In Doug's defense, if you CAN get to Chicago to view auction items, they provide A#1 hosting.....Selling a large lot of cards in 2002, I dropped by their offices and he spent over an hour just showing me around, talking about the lot and other items and was very generous with his time and would have spent more but I had to leave. I realize it's not always feasible to fly in to Chicago but for someone who's planning on ponying up a ton of cash in an auction, a couple hundred bucks for a roundtrip plane ride might be money well spent.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Clarke

I think all auction companies should be as detailed as possible. In the old days when they had to use catalogs, you could not always show photos of the entire lot both fronts and backs. Now with the internet around, they can show 100 photos per lot if they want to online. Maybe in a large group of lower grade items they could just take one photo of ALL the cards with their backs facing up. I know a buddy of mine did not bid on a postcard lot that recently closed in auction because it did not show a photo of the back (which has markings on it). Any blank back cards might not be as important to show unless there is damage. Plus auction companies should know how picky us collectors are...

JC

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I have been told I probably shouldn't post in these kinds of threads with advertisers mentioned. I do a lot of things I am told I shouldn't do, none unethical (imo, ), and that's just my personality. I honestly try to call it the way I see it and let the chips fall where they may. Sometimes I am wrong but most times I don't think I am. First of all it takes some real gumption (is that a word?) for an auction house President to come on the board and post. Doug (hi Doug) is a stand up guy for that. Most wouldn't do it. No matter what you say he has come on the board when most others won't. I think he gets a lot of credit for that. When I said there was a board rule about posting emails on the board it was unwritten. Now it's written and a part of the Forum Rules. I can now take care of these things when I see them and point to the rules. I already mentioned I am hyper sensitive to the "thought of protecting" advertisers and I will try to work on that in the future. I still won't (can't) protect them but I will try to stick to the forum rules as they are a good baseline to go from. Here's a suggestion that could, potentially, appease a lot of folks. Maybe the auction houses, Mastro included, could have the dissertation about a card be in the first paragraph(s) of the description and the actual description of the card itself be in a 2-4 sentence paragraph right below, with a few spaces between it and the above flowery stuff? That way when I want to read the stuff that is sometimes superfluous I can, and when I don't want to, I can skip to the bottom and only read the pertinent details of the actual characterisitcs of the item(s). Barry asked me this morning if I ever read all that stuff in the descriptions and I told him that, if it's an item that interests me, I usually do. I believe this format would help everyone.....Thanks again to Doug for coming on the board when most others won't step up. best regards

edited grammar

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason L

and it is terribly relevant as I was perusing the Huggins & Scott catalog that I just got last night....alot of fun if you have time, but also alot of effort required to read the long paragraphs and find the single-card detailed info that I am looking for...

I really like Leon's idea of segregating the data from the commentary.

For example, a catalog/lot listing should look more like this:

Lot#: 2411
Title/Name: (24) 1950-1957 Baseball Cards - HOFers
List of Included Items:
1
2
3
(each line lists the Year, Mfr, Player, Grade for each card, or something similar if these were sets or subsets...something like this that makes it easier to read)

Description:
This is the finest grouping of 1950's baseball cards we've ever seen! You would be stupid not bid on this, because you'd be passing up a chance to own
the best players of the decade, etc. etc....

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

Right on, Dan.

Amen, Barry, Jim C, and Leon.

A more accurate description, even one that points out a lot's flaws, is preferable to fluffy, flowery language that is unhelpful and wastes space.

What if every lot was scanned, front and back, every time. When someone had a question, a scan package could be emailed.

Who wants to brave sub zero temps and double digit winds for thick nasty Yankee pizza and a peek at some cards?

[Archive]

Posted By: Chad

More and bigger scans.

That's my vote.

--Chad

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

You know, that box with the three catalogs in it is getting heavier and heavier to carry up the stairs. Less words means less pages.

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

Barry,

From "labors" perspective less words means less jobs:

Less trees to cuts (lumberjack union)
Less paper to pulp (millers union)
Less ink to make (some manufacturing union somewhere)
Less words to write (writers union)
Less postage/FedEx payments for shippng (lower stock prices for FedEx or less revenue for USPS)
Less chance of getting a hernia when lifting the box (physicians and physical therapist unions)
Less garbage to collect (trash collectors union)

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Yankee pizza would be thin crust. That goop in a pan in Chicago is White Sox pizza.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joann

Good call Leon. After reading your post I realized that on ebay I go right past the bs about how many hits a player had and look for the card description. I wonder if the auction houses would devote the page space to that kind of thing.

Joann

[Archive]

Posted By: Jack Richards

Apparently I'm in the minority, but I think the flowery language is great! I love it!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

well written flowery language can be a pleasure to read. Badly written flowery language is painful to read. Unfortunately, much of the fluff in auction catalogs is of the latter variety.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dylan

When i get an auction catalog id prefer to have just the relevent info. Card name, year, perhaps a mention of pop report. I think most who are flipping through these catalogs are familier with the material, atleast the cards. Put a pic of the back of the card on the page instead of that paragraph of fluff talk.

[Archive]

Posted By: Doug Allen

I have been reading and do appreciate your feedback. Let me comment.

Some of you may roll your eyes but to many our sale catalogs have become somewhat of a collectors item as well as a great reference tool. I would love to see a show of hands how many of you throw them away after a sale? I would dare say very few.

Although we have tried to reduce the fluffy language in our catalogs on run of the mill material like 1956 Topps Mickey Mantle cards, providing a historical context for many of the items we feature is one element of our "secret sauce" that has led to our success.

Remember on this forum the majority of the contributors are advanced hobbyists. If not in the financial level of your collecting, most definitely in your experience. These detailed historical descriptions actually spur on a lot of the fresh blood in the hobby to take notice and pay more. The catalog and internet presentation is an inducement to buy. This being said our goal is to the present the material in the best light possible which includes high quality images, detailed descriptions and proper grades.

Thanks again for the feedback.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Doug- the historical background is extremely useful and I agree by saving the catalog you are, in that sense, preserving a great reference tool.

But the poorly constructed sentences, and the misuse of words, have nothing to do with it. Stick to the facts, and take out 75% of the fluff. A little puffery is good marketing, but we are talking simply about awkward writing.

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

What Doug just said makes sense.

Maybe what is needed is 4 things.

1. A good photo.

2. A descriptive section with a complete card description, including significance of the card type or set.

3. A section about who the player was, historical accomplishments, and the like.

4. A scan package of the item, detailed scans so that a bidder desiring them could email and get them. The package would be set up in advance, so there's no delay about getting that information into the hands of a bidder.

Wouldn't that be nice...

[Archive]

Posted By: Doug Allen

Barry,

Now I will get a bit defensive. You can say what you want about fluff but when it comes to sentence construction and grammar I will stack my guys up against anyone.

My writing staff is led by Brian Bigelow who has built what I believe to be a world class team. These aren't ex hobby guys that are trying to learn how to construct complete sentences. These are skilled writers that have also learned to appreciate and describe incredible material. Our customers have come to expect our writers to perform adequate due diligence and provide due attention to each and every item they catalog.

I would submit that errors do slip by but I also feel that the overall level of the writing is exceptional. I would appreciate if you would personally reveal specific lot descriptions that you find objectionable. I am not looking for an anomaly. Please e-mail me with a half a dozen lots from recent catalogs where you believe the writing of lots with as you call "fluff" include improper use of the English language. By the way sometimes in the writing crunch at the end of the cycle guys like Kevin Struss and Myself jump in and write vintage cards...please don't pick those out as I do admit if our proofers didn't see them in time some of those write-ups may be brutal (sorry Kev)!

Looking forward to your examples as at the end of this we are simply looking to put out a better product.

Sincerely,
Doug

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Okay- let me rephrase and give credit where it is due.

The research that goes into each catalog is second to none. I have been in the hobby 25 years and when I read some of the really meaty parts I learn something new every time. And I always love learning new things.

But my point has more to do with style and usage. I guess from my own training as a graduate student in English Lit, and subsequently as a teacher, I learned to write succinctly and to the point. I know a catalog is not a novel, and it is also not a term paper, but it still can implement an efficient writing style. Give me any long winded lot description from one of your catalogs, and let me rewrite it in about half the number of words. And I bet I can do it more clearly, maintain the historical context, and even throw in a little hype to let prospective bidders know what a great piece it is.

Edited to add I see you asked me to provide you with some examples. If I have time today, can I put one or two on the board and let others see if they agree with me? I'll go back to your last major auction catalog. Just let me know if the board is an acceptable venue.

[Archive]

Posted By: Doug Allen

Hey Barry,

Given your restated comments I don't believe it is necessary and I would prefer not to do it on a public forum.

I don't doubt you could find examples where write-ups could be shortened and it would be up to personal opinion as to whether or not the resulting product is better, clearer, etc. I took offense to the fact that you made what I believed to be a widespread comment that the sentance useage was improper.

By the way thanks for your kind comments regarding research etc. as we do take a tremendous amount of pride in that. Although learning is not what it is all about it is definitely part of the experience.

All the best,
Doug

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Fair enough. I just wrote something, saw your comment, and per your request deleted it.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Doug, I think the final point is that Mastro has the best cards at auction. No question in my mind. And I can't criticize some of the marketing you do as I'm sure you have an idea what works and what doesn't to bring in dollars. But for the buyers of the high end cards in your auctions, the cards pretty much sell themselves. I'd appreciate a catalogue with less flowery praise (maybe a limit of 9 adjectives and adverbs per entry) and a website with scans of the cards that can be blown up and reviewed carefully. Huggins & Scott's current auction has the best scans I have ever seen on an auction site. Mastro's are vastly improved as well.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Let's start with lot 1 of the most recent auction. The description reads in part:

"In this intriguing portrayal, the subject is depicted in the uniform of the St. Louis Browns, with the highly desirable caption, "Browns - Champions 1886," placed below the card's well-resolved sepia likeness. Here's an extremely presentable Old Judge specimen that displays quite favorably. It has a strong, clearly focused image and exhibits relatively moderate evidence of wear at the corners."

The first sentence awkwardly uses passive voice and makes the mistake of using "this" in reference to something that should be named in the sentence but really isn't. The second sentence, although using two phrases to say the same thing, actually is a topic sentence and would be better at the start of the listing. The third sentence is wordy; less is better if the meaning is the same. "Relatively moderate" is awkward; you do not need to qualify words like "moderate" or "presentable" as they are themselves qualifying terms. A better piece of writing would be:

"This attractive card depicts Nat Hudson, a memnber of the St. Louis Browns champions team, with the desirable caption "Browns - Champions 1886" below his well resolved picture. With a strong, clearly focused sepia image and moderate corner wear, the card displays quite favorably for its grade."

Moving on to lot 2:

"Goodwin & Co.'s very scarce "Gypsy Queen" advertising arches over the sepia-toned portrayal of Hall of Famer Pud Galvin on the face of this sought-after collectible. The visually compelling 19th Century insert retains full integrity in its obverse presentation and carries a minimum of standard peripheral wear; a vintage collector stamping appears on the back."

My eye tended to skip over the "crud" at the start of the sentence searching for its subject. And "obverse presentation"? Yechh! If you mean "front of the card", then say it. The best selling points of the card are that it is an uncatalogued pose of a HOFer, it is a rare N175, and it has a nice front image for the grade. The description doesn't mention the uncatalogued status of the pose, doesn't say whether it is a small or large N175, and loses the idea of rarity of N175 (I know it is rare but if you are trying for the less experienced collector and/or creating a reference tool, the listing should highlight the key concepts). Here is a better description:

"Hall of Fame pitcher Pud Galvin appears in an uncatalogued pose under the rare Gypsy Queen advertising banner on this [large or small] format N175 insert card. Although the card has been assigned a technical grade of fair by SGC due to a vintage collector's stamp on the back, the all-important image is clear and visually compelling."

I could go on all day but I will spare everyone the boredom. My point is that the catalog could use some copy editing while still retaining its selling language and content.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Adam- I emailed Doug a similar example as he asked me to take this off the board. Hopefully, he will look at them and at least address the issue with the writing staff.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

Is it really expected that the description of a GD card needs much more than that.


yes, especially if it has paper loss and or creases. IMO

cards in 'Good' condition can be found w/o those problems. How would you (or anyone) like to buy a Cobb graded 'Good' and when it arrived it had paper loss, was marked and had a crease?
All you saw from the scan was 4 rounded corners. And from the scan the card looked like a naturally worn and honest wear example? For the premiums they charge to both buyer and seller that info is vital.


Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: JK

Re Adam's Rewrites:

I would want to buy the cards as described by Adam. The original descriptions may say the same thing, but it requires peeling away a layer of crud first.

[Archive]

Posted By: E, Daniel

It's true.
Adam's re-write is succint. Perhaps better. Likely more informative.
Its just not Masto's style, and they do indeed have one.
Picture a puffy shirt. Add brocade chairs, the smell of fine tobacco burning in a meerchaum pipe, and lilting music. She is classy, non?
Just as much of Mastro's material is absolutely first rate, rare, and the stories associated often whimsical, so similarly they cultivate an image and style that matches it.
It's not plain and simple and impersonal. It attempts to be very personal, and colorful - and overtly sophisticated.
I think what's being asked is to change their very image not simply their word usage.
Not happening I wouldn't think.


Daniel

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

I'm so happy with my first grade education - I see the pictures - I know what the front of the card is.... I know what the back of the card is... Pictures.... pictures.... and nothing more than 2 syllables in the description please.... I realize that dictionary dot com is only a key stroke away but please don't make me use it...

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian

My bottom line:
I don't need to read lines such as "the unimprovable image will leave even the most seasoned collector speechless, gasping for air, and s------- in his pants." Just tell me: does the card have any of the following defects, including paper loss, writing, erasures, wrinkles, etc. Why is this so difficult?

One should not have to work that hard to know everything about a product one is bidding on, especially given the outrageous BPs/consignment fees.
Just my opinion.
Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

But I don't wanna be a pirate!

[Archive]

Posted By: Jack Richards

As I mentioned earlier, I love the flowery language. It's interesting; it's not hurting anyone; and it's Mastronet's catalogue, not ours.

I also find it a bit ironic in a post entitled "I may be wrong but let's 'here' opinions," that we're critiquing Mastronet's use of the English language. Come on... let's give them a little slack. It ain't a novel.

In the final analysis, it seems to me, the verbiage used to describe an auction item is always beside the point. Get a front and back scan and reach your own conclusion.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I agree different mediums will employ different styles; an auction catalog does not have to be written the way one might write a Master's thesis. Nevertheless, it still needs to be clear, especially when there is a lot of money at stake. A bidder wouldn't want to regret a purchase because he had trouble understanding the lot description.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian

I disagree that a scan is all you need. How many times have you obtained a card that had defects not obvious in a scan (I know I have)? Let's face it, it's pretty easy to hide things depending upon how you scan the card. That forces the potential buyer to ask lots of questions usually.....which could all be avoided if some of the flowery language were replaced with an unvarnished description.
Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

It is all figured in. They (sellers) figure a certain pct. will slide through. That buyers will just accept the item and live with the flaw(s) that were not mentioned. Those that dare to attempt a refund or reduction in cost will jump through a few hoops first. My statement is regarding sellers in general and no auction house in particular.

JMO

Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

My number one rule for auction descriptions is if the description is accurate, it's accurate. If what you say is true and what you believe, there's no need to apologize.

[Archive]

Posted By: Al C.risafulli

I have absolutely no problem whatosever with detailed, and even flowery auction descriptions. Even if sometimes that means that the description is slightly grammatically incorrect, in its effort to be flowery.

It's the auction house's job to make every lot as attractive as possible to potential buyers. That means big scans, lengthy descriptions, multiple photos on the website. That's life.

If I'm a consignor, I don't want to hand over my cards to an auction company only to open the catalog six months later and read "1981 Fleer Complete Set." and nothing else. I want to read that this is the most beautiful 1981 Fleer Complete Set. I want to read "you'd be CRAZY to pass up on the opportunity to buy this set. The Willie Stargell is practically three dimensional with the crispness of the image. The centering on the Stan Papi is the best we've ever seen! The corners on the Tito Fuentes could cut glass. One of our writers actually went blind from the reflection on the gloss of these cards, and is now collecting long-term disability due to the beauty of these cards. Protective eyewear is highly recommended."

It also helps them disclose flaws without having to say "1981 Fleer set with glop of spaghetti sauce on Rickey Henderson card." They can use language to explain that the set is still beautiful, despite the sauce.

Last year there was an auction house that put out a catalog with one photo, and one line descriptions on all their lots. So the entire description would have read "1981 Fleer Complete Set." That's it.

There were about 20 lots I didn't bid on because they were so poorly described. There were two lots I bought - and one in particular - that I got for bargain prices because the descriptions were sorely lacking.

The catalog for this company's next auction? LENGTHY descriptions. FLOWERY language.

That tells me that the descriptions work.

-Al