Ebay seller returned cracked out slab

[JollyElm]

I don't know the OP and have had no interaction with him that I am aware of, but come on!! The guy in question buys the card (obviously looking to flip it for a big profit) and fails in his come to God, crack-out moment and the OP is supposed to be responsible for the return?? The card isn't in the same state it was in when it was sold. Plus, everyone knows GAI isn't a very (if at all) viable grading company. The fact it's in that holder to begin with tells most of us all we need to know.

If I was the potential buyer, I would've asked the seller two things:
1. Why isn't the card in a PSA/SGC/BVG holder?
2. If I crack it out and it's found to be fake or altered, will you offer me a return?

The actual buyer, as far as we know, didn't hedge his bets at all. He probably just saw dollar signs and went for it, knowing he was able to do so because of ebay's SOP.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Plus, everyone knows GAI isn't a very (if at all) viable grading company.

So why is it supposedly such a huge loss to the seller, that his card is no longer in that GAI holder?

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by Mark17

So why is it supposedly such a huge loss to the seller, that his card is no longer in that GAI holder?

Because it was sold IN the holder. Now it's OUT of said holder. People can disagree about GAI all they want, but it's beside the point. The card status has changed between the sale and the return.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

So why is it supposedly such a huge loss to the seller, that his card is no longer in that GAI holder?

This is what I don't understand. If the holder is essentially worthless, because nobody values a GAI grade, why is no longer having the card in the worthless holder a great loss? It makes no logical sense.

[Marchillo]

Card is in an old PSA 7 slab but seller knows it’s over graded. Buyer cracks and submits to SGC and it comes back a 5. Is that worthy of a return? I still think if you crack it out you own it unless it comes to light that the seller altered the card or purposely enhanced the card.

In the PWCC example didn’t they accept consignments from known fraudsters and card doctors? To me this is apples and oranges.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

This is what I don't understand. If the holder is essentially worthless, because nobody values a GAI grade, why is no longer having the card in the worthless holder a great loss? It makes no logical sense.

The only value that GAI holder had was the misinformation on it, which could've been used to foist a doctored card onto the next unsuspecting buyer.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

The only value that GAI holder had was the misinformation on it, which could've been used to foist a doctored card onto the next unsuspecting buyer.

In other words, the only value it could have had in round 2 was to deceive. So the seller has now been deprived of any ability to overrepresent the card (not that he did the first time, I will assume he was innocent). I'm not sure I feel badly about that.

[Marchillo]

Originally Posted by Mark17

The only value that GAI holder had was the misinformation on it, which could've been used to foist a doctored card onto the next unsuspecting buyer.

A guy with over 11k feedback is unsuspecting?????


Wow just wow.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Marchillo

A guy with over 11k feedback is unsuspecting?????


Wow just wow.

You think a buyer who suspects the card is doctored is going to spend $5k on it?

Wow, just wow.

[Marchillo]

Originally Posted by Mark17

You think a buyer who suspects the card is doctored is going to spend $5k on it?

Wow, just wow.

He took a gamble on the card so he could triple his money. It didn’t work out in his favor. So did he suspect it? Maybe not. Did he think it was a gamble worth taking??? I vote yes.

[GasHouseGang]

Originally Posted by Mark17

The only value that GAI holder had was the misinformation on it, which could've been used to foist a doctored card onto the next unsuspecting buyer.

Actually, that holder had one other value. It positively identifies that as the same card originally sold. That's one possibility no one seems to mention. If it was my card, that would be my concern. If the buyer returns a trimmed 1933 Lou Gehrig, how can I be sure it's actually the card that was in the GAI slab? The buyer supposedly bought the card and got it regraded by PSA in one week. Many wondered how he was able to get such fast service. What if he didn't return the card he was sold, but a card he had submitted that was rejected by PSA? He didn't even return the GAI slab it was in. Why not?

[Stampsfan]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

Actually, that holder had one other value. It positively identifies that as the same card originally sold. That's one possibility no one seems to mention. If it was my card, that would be my concern. If the buyer returns a trimmed 1933 Lou Gehrig, how can I be sure it's actually the card that was in the GAI slab? The buyer supposedly bought the card and got it regraded by PSA in one week. Many wondered how he was able to get such fast service. What if he didn't return the card he was sold, but a card he had submitted that was rejected by PSA? He didn't even return the GAI slab it was in. Why not?

In the world of hypotheticals, maybe the buyer cracked it out, got a 7, took an altered one and returned it. Double dipped, in effect.

Seller is still screwed.

[nsaddict]

Originally Posted by nsaddict View Post
If the card would have crossed as a PSA 7, would the buyer have sent the seller 5K in appreciation? Certainly not, I’m in the camp you crack it out it’s yours! Nothing to lose only gain. Total 100% BS!

Same result if you open a wax pack? < Peter’s response ( not sure how to quote in blue box fashion)
__________________


So Peter, if I buy a 1961 Topps unopened pack and open it, I can send it back if I don’t pull a Mantle?

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

Actually, that holder had one other value. It positively identifies that as the same card originally sold. That's one possibility no one seems to mention. If it was my card, that would be my concern. If the buyer returns a trimmed 1933 Lou Gehrig, how can I be sure it's actually the card that was in the GAI slab? The buyer supposedly bought the card and got it regraded by PSA in one week. Many wondered how he was able to get such fast service. What if he didn't return the card he was sold, but a card he had submitted that was rejected by PSA? He didn't even return the GAI slab it was in. Why not?

There are plenty of pictures of the card that was sold on ebay, right on the listing itself. Comparing the card sold to the card returned would be simple.

[bobbyw8469]

In this case, the card can still be resold for what it truly is - the reason the seller is upset is that the card can not be resold for what it was pretending to be.

As much as you don't want to believe it, the GAI holder did have SOME value - if only for the sheer gamblers aspect of it as to why this buyer bought it in the first place. GAI IS (well.....was....at one time) a respected name. Mike Baker IS a good grader. The buyer who cracked it out was hoping to make a monetary score by getting it into a PSA holder. He knew he was not getting a fake card. The same can't be said for a PRO holder. So, yes, the GAI card DID have some value. But now the seller doesn't even have that. He is forced to refund, and is getting a card that doesn't even have the GAI stamp of approval anymore. His option is now, as much as I hate to say it, is to play the "grading" game!!! What if it eventually gets into a PSA 7 holder?? All of the sudden it is now deemed "acceptable". I, for one, am dismayed that this is what the baseball card collection has become.