Selling Cards that you do not own

[bnorth]

I understand the OP's disgust in someone trying to sell his card. For me it is only bad if the card is not for sale by the OP.

I think it is pretty slimy myself but trying to profit on someone else's card(s) has become very common.

Example: Person A is selling a T206 Cobb for $200. Person B thinks wow I can get $300 for that card. Instead of taking the risk of buying the card they shop it around to others saying it is available at $300. Person B finds a buyer(person C) at $300 so they buy the card from Person A and then ship it to person C for a $100 -shipping profit. It takes all the risk out of selling cards because you never own them or have $ invested.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I understand the OP's disgust in someone trying to sell his card. For me it is only bad if the card is not for sale by the OP.

I think it is pretty slimy myself but trying to profit on someone else's card(s) has become very common.

Example: Person A is selling a T206 Cobb for $200. Person B thinks wow I can get $300 for that card. Instead of taking the risk of buying the card they shop it around to others saying it is available at $300. Person B finds a buyer(person C) at $300 so they buy the card from Person A and then ship it to person C for a $100 -shipping profit. It takes all the risk out of selling cards because you never own them or have $ invested.

Easier said that done. We all see potential buyers back out of deals....you could end up buying the card you did not own yet then think you are going to sell the card to that new buyer ..but the new buyer back out..and now you stuck with the card....not sure why someone would risk it...if that new buyer (person C in the example )was willing to pay more cash than most..that new buyer probably will already find the item on own since paying more than the norm anyway....I just don't see this happening often since the new buyer will find the card on their own and /or theres too much risk of the new buyer backing out for the middle buyer to purchase..

[D.P.Johnson]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

Easier said that done. We all see potential buyers back out of deals....you could end up buying the card you did not own yet then think you are going to sell the card to that new buyer ..but the new buyer back out..and now you stuck with the card....not sure why someone would risk it...if that new buyer (person C in the example )was willing to pay more cash than most..that new buyer probably will already find the item on own since paying more than the norm anyway....I just don't see this happening often since the new buyer will find the card on their own and /or theres too much risk of the new buyer backing out for the middle buyer to purchase..

That's one way of looking at it.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by D.P.Johnson

That's one way of looking at it.

right I not buying a 4000 card that I think is worth 3000 cause I have a 'locked in buyer' for 4500....he backs out..now im stuck with a card that I believe is worth 1000 under market

hard enough to find buyers straight up who don't back out....throwing another person into the deal good luck with doing that on a regular basis..



By the way, in the real world 'middle man' regularly find items from a seller and find a buyer in most things and don't own the item..so not so sure why its a big deal if it happens in the sportscard world......say selling apples......the life long search of all sellers is to find buyers straight without needing a 'middle man' the middle man doesn't own any of the items....in that Johnny Depp movie..johnny was the 'middle man' but then he lost out when the supplier found the customers direct..and no more 'middle man'..no more johnny depp...

[iwantitiwinit]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

Easier said that done. We all see potential buyers back out of deals....you could end up buying the card you did not own yet then think you are going to sell the card to that new buyer ..but the new buyer back out..and now you stuck with the card....not sure why someone would risk it...if that new buyer (person C in the example )was willing to pay more cash than most..that new buyer probably will already find the item on own since paying more than the norm anyway....I just don't see this happening often since the new buyer will find the card on their own and /or theres too much risk of the new buyer backing out for the middle buyer to purchase..

I think the real focus of this thread is the ethics of the practice, the mechanics of it has its obvious risks. I have bought a few cards from Chris. In each case I have tried to purchase them as cheaply as possible. In some cases I have tried to turn around and sell some of them for more later and at no point have I ever tried to use pricing leverage by stating I intended to keep them for my own collection. As much as I enjoy bartering with Chris if it is found to be true that cards are being offered for sale that are not owned by him it will be disappointing and I will have to rethink purchasing from him.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by iwantitiwinit

I think the real focus of this thread is the ethics of the practice, the mechanics of it has its obvious risks. I have bought a few cards from Chris. In each case I have tried to purchase them as cheaply as possible. In some cases I have tried to turn around and sell some of them for more later and at no point have I ever tried to use pricing leverage by stating I intended to keep them for my own collection. As much as I enjoy bartering with Chris if it is found to be true that cards are being offered for sale that are not owned by him it will be disappointing and I will have to rethink purchasing from him.

when I sell cards I don't care what the buyer intends to do with them....If I truly was basically giving a guy a good deal cause thought he really really loved the card and wanted to keep it...and then he turns and sells it in a week..yeah that sucks..but i look at it like giving a loan..i don't loan money unless i am prepared to not get paid back..no matter what the guy says 'ill get my tax refund in a month etc'

do we ever believe the buyers intentions? its just about price im willing to let it go

[iwantitiwinit]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

when I sell cards I don't care what the buyer intends to do with them....If I truly was basically giving a guy a good deal cause thought he really really loved the card and wanted to keep it...and then he turns and sells it in a week..yeah that sucks..but i look at it like giving a loan..i don't loan money unless i am prepared to not get paid back..no matter what the guy says 'ill get my tax refund in a month etc'

do we ever believe the buyers intentions? its just about price im willing to let it go

I agree.

[Econteachert205]

Originally Posted by iwantitiwinit

I agree.

I agree too, except what is supposedly going on here is happening before the initial transaction takes place using scans of a card not yet the property of the second seller. As far as I'm concerned, as soon as I sell an item the buyer has the right to sell the item, but not before agreeing to the first transaction.

[iwantitiwinit]

Originally Posted by Econteachert205

I agree too, except what is supposedly going on here is happening before the initial transaction takes place using scans of a card not yet the property of the second seller. As far as I'm concerned, as soon as I sell an item the buyer has the right to sell the item, but not before agreeing to the first transaction.

Right. I posted this earlier.

If it's true and I hope it's not, it's unsavory. I don't mind someone making money by buying from one source and selling to another however, if it resulted in cancelled sales because the card could not be obtained from the original source that is inexcusable. Straight out non-performance of an agreed upon contract.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by iwantitiwinit

I think the real focus of this thread is the ethics of the practice, the mechanics of it has its obvious risks. I have bought a few cards from Chris. In each case I have tried to purchase them as cheaply as possible. In some cases I have tried to turn around and sell some of them for more later and at no point have I ever tried to use pricing leverage by stating I intended to keep them for my own collection. As much as I enjoy bartering with Chris if it is found to be true that cards are being offered for sale that are not owned by him it will be disappointing and I will have to rethink purchasing from him.

If you are talking about the focus of the thread it's important to know it's not a "Chris" but is a "Kevin" unless I am mistaking?

[iwantitiwinit]

Originally Posted by Leon

If you are talking about the focus of the thread it's important to know it's not a "Chris" but is a "Kevin" unless I am mistaking?

Sorry I meant Kevin.

[ullmandds]

personally I think this practice is cheesy and sleezy. Way too many ways for the deal to fall apart.

I may be prickly...but I am a man of my honor...when I make deals I follow through...and I expect the deals I make to as well. I realize there are exceptions...but when this becomes the norm...or a common occurrence I call Bullschlitz!

Someone named Adrian comes to mind.

[ezez420]

With all of this, Kevin has written me privately a few times but has not put any response to this post admitting or denying it. I will let him do that.

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I understand the OP's disgust in someone trying to sell his card. For me it is only bad if the card is not for sale by the OP.

I think it is pretty slimy myself but trying to profit on someone else's card(s) has become very common.

Example: Person A is selling a T206 Cobb for $200. Person B thinks wow I can get $300 for that card. Instead of taking the risk of buying the card they shop it around to others saying it is available at $300. Person B finds a buyer(person C) at $300 so they buy the card from Person A and then ship it to person C for a $100 -shipping profit. It takes all the risk out of selling cards because you never own them or have $ invested.

Ben- Please understand, this was not Ed's card. He bought the card from the same seller that I bought other T206s from...

[ezez420]

Did you or did you NOT offer to trade the card before having it? And if so why did you not buy the card? If you never owned the card how did you offer to trade to another member on this board? Don't you usually have to pay for an item before offering for sale/trade? You have yet to answer that question.

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by ezez420

Did you offer to trade the card before having it? Why did you not buy the card?

I answered already. This was a card from a guy that I bought other T206s from. I mentioned it in trade talks with just one person because of previous sales experience with the potential buyer and seller. The last card I bought from him took almost a month before I received it in the mail. Please stop trying to make something more out of this....

[ezez420]

I will leave it alone.

[ruth-gehrig]

Originally Posted by CMIZ5290

Ben- Please understand, this was not Ed's card. He bought the card from the same seller that I bought other T206s from...

This "was not Ed's card"? Does Ed currently have possession of the card? Is he not the lawful owner of the card currently?

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by ruth-gehrig

This "was not Ed's card"? Does Ed currently have possession of the card? Is he not the lawful owner of the card currently?

Ed evidently bought the card after I did not do a deal on the card with the original seller..

[arc2q]

I'm thoroughly confused.

[Econteachert205]

Originally Posted by arc2q

I'm thoroughly confused.

The sticking point now seems to be whether ed actually owned the card while Kevin was negotiating his trade or whether it was still in position of the third party both were considering buying the card from. Unless I'm wrong in which case I'm as confused as you.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Econteachert205

The sticking point now seems to be whether ed actually owned the card while Kevin was negotiating his trade or whether it was still in position of the third party both were considering buying the card from. Unless I'm wrong in which case I'm as confused as you.

That's my understanding too.