Is the auction world the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

[E93]

If an item was misrepresented, including as "best known" in the auction description and I discovered after winning that that the information conveyed was patently untrue and the auction house should have known that it was untrue at the time of writing, I would expect a full refund if I asked for it.
JimB

[rainier2004]

Originally Posted by E93

If an item was misrepresented, including as "best known" in the auction description and I discovered after winning that that the information conveyed was patently untrue and the auction house should have known that it was untrue at the time of writing, I would expect a full refund if I asked for it.
JimB

I think Id want the same thing, innaccuracies may be a mistake at times but the AH would still be accountable for said information. Innaccuracies bother me as well...Ive always been accountable for my documentation professionally and legally...it makes you pay attention to say the least.

[Leon]

In their defense, in my case, there was almost no way they could have known. I do agree though, if it's a no-brainer and they made a gross mistake, I would expect a refund if I asked.

[murcerfan]

First ya'll get the FBI to slap our wrists when we shill bid...

....now you want honesty in advertising our lots???

unbelievable! I guess we'll just have to jack the buyers penalty up to 33%

and charge 5x the going rate for shipping.

(shakes fist at damn collectors)

[steve B]

Tough one, if all they did was check the population reports it would look like it's the only one. I have a common like that, SGC 80 shown as the best of its kind, but there's an 88 out there. (Which actually looks worse than mine)

While I think that would be forgivable on a cheap card- like maybe something around $20-100- I would like to think they'd spend a bit of time getting it right on a card that will sell for a few thousand. I'm sure the interns they can hire cheap could find the prior sales very quickly.

Ultimately the auction house would keep their own database to make that process quicker.

Obviously that's all just wishful thinking.

Steve B

[GregMitch34]

I imagine this has been covered many times but--what is the accepted version of WHEN PSA started keeping track for pop report of 1) all graded cards 2) breaking down t206 backs. Thanks.

[Matthew H]

They can lie all they want in the description, since I typically stop reading after chapter 3... They do however need to stop adjusting scan color and contrast. All I want is for the card that shows up to look like the catalog.

[glynparson]

screwing with the picture is more egregious then puffery in my opinion.

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by Matthew H

They can lie all they want in the description, since I typically stop reading after chapter 3... They do however need to stop adjusting scan color and contrast. All I want is for the card that shows up to look like the catalog.

Now that you mention it there is a Blue Old Mill in a current banner ad here that appears a bit bluer than the real McCoy from what I've heard.

[E93]

Originally Posted by GregMitch34

I imagine this has been covered many times but--what is the accepted version of WHEN PSA started keeping track for pop report of 1) all graded cards 2) breaking down t206 backs. Thanks.

Auction houses often attempt to mislead bidders with claims about #s of T206s in a certain grade by ignoring that 10,000s were graded before PSA distinguished back brands. For example if I say there is only one Joe Schmoe PSA 8 with a Piedmont back and forget to mention that there are 7 PSA 8s with unknown backs, I am misleading IMHO.
JimB

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by E93

Auction houses often attempt to mislead bidders with claims about #s of T206s in a certain grade by ignoring that 10,000s were graded before PSA distinguished back brands. For example if I say there is only one Joe Schmoe PSA 8 with a Piedmont back and forget to mention that there are 7 PSA 8s with unknown backs, I am misleading IMHO.
JimB

Jim- to take it a step further, some descriptions will note that, for example, a PSA 8 is the highest ever graded, and is a pop 1...when they are in fact aware that SGC graded one example a 9. Wouldn't that be useful information?

[tbob]

Originally Posted by E93

Auction houses often attempt to mislead bidders with claims about #s of T206s in a certain grade by ignoring that 10,000s were graded before PSA distinguished back brands. For example if I say there is only one Joe Schmoe PSA 8 with a Piedmont back and forget to mention that there are 7 PSA 8s with unknown backs, I am misleading IMHO.
JimB

+1

[3-2-count]

Originally Posted by E93

If an item was misrepresented, including as "best known" in the auction description and I discovered after winning that that the information conveyed was patently untrue and the auction house should have known that it was untrue at the time of writing, I would expect a full refund if I asked for it.
JimB

+1
There's a legal name for what this behavior is. It's called "Fraud". Look it up.

[Rob D.]

Not to detract from the OP's question, but this thread prompted me to look at all of the red Hindus in SCP's auction. All I can say is, wow! I can't imagine where some of these will end up as T206 back collectors try to cross off a tough one from their lists. Impressive offering.

(Not my cards, obviously.)