Sad State of the Hobby

[ASF123]

On the flip side, I have had a number of occasions where I could have bought something at an extremely low price due to the seller not knowing the market and trusting me. On those occasions I am always honest with the buyer and will give them a fair price for what they are selling. This, too, is a matter of integrity for me.

I think this is a different situation than an anonymous eBay transaction between strangers, though. Right?

[GaryPassamonte]

Originally Posted by ASF123

I think this is a different situation than an anonymous eBay transaction between strangers, though. Right?

I don't really believe so. I may be old fashioned, but I don't think it's right to take advantage of anyone.

[ASF123]

Originally Posted by GaryPassamonte

I don't really believe so. I may be old fashioned, but I don't think it's right to take advantage of anyone.

So let's say I'm browsing around eBay one night, and I come across a card that I think has a market value of, say, $500 offered for $250 BIN. Your position is that, instead of just clicking BIN, I have a moral obligation to contact the seller and offer $500?

By the time the seller gets back to me, it's entirely possible (even likely) that someone else has gone ahead with the BIN. If the seller then cancels that transaction based on my offer, doesn't that make me similar to the person Ted describes in the post above? He would seem to have a viable claim for tortious interference there.

[GaryPassamonte]

Originally Posted by ASF123

So let's say I'm browsing around eBay one night, and I come across a card that I think has a market value of, say, $500 offered for $250 BIN. Your position is that, instead of just clicking BIN, I have a moral obligation to contact the seller and offer $500?

By the time the seller gets back to me, it's entirely possible (even likely) that someone else has gone ahead with the BIN. If the seller then cancels that transaction based on my offer, doesn't that make me similar to the person Ted describes in the post above? He would seem to have a viable claim for tortious interference there.

Paying 50% of the value of a card for resale is reasonable. I'm talking about transactions that are obviously unfair to one party or the other. I know when a transaction is wrong by my sense of right and wrong. What any other party to the transaction does is not relevant to what I do. Others may disagree in this world of gray, but I live in a black and white world.

[ASF123]

Originally Posted by GaryPassamonte

Paying 50% of the value of a card for resale is reasonable. I'm talking about transactions that are obviously unfair to one party or the other. I know when a transaction is wrong by my sense of right and wrong. What any other party to the transaction does is not relevant to what I do. Others may disagree in this world of gray, but I live in a black and white world.

If paying 50% of the value is reasonable, but some unspecified lesser percentage than that is wrong, that sounds a lot like a gray area to me .

[GaryPassamonte]

Originally Posted by ASF123

If paying 50% of the value is reasonable, but some unspecified lesser percentage than that is wrong, that sounds a lot like a gray area to me .

I'm not here to parse hairs. I know what I feel comfortable with. If others feel comfortable doing something else that is up to them.

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by GaryPassamonte

Paying 50% of the value of a card for resale is reasonable. I'm talking about transactions that are obviously unfair to one party or the other. I know when a transaction is wrong by my sense of right and wrong. What any other party to the transaction does is not relevant to what I do. Others may disagree in this world of gray, but I live in a black and white world.

You stated that "Paying 50% of the value of a card for resale is reasonable." However, wouldn't it depend on the card's value?

In the cited example, the card's market value was $500.00, and its buy-it-now prices was $250.00. Just $250.00 difference. No big deal.

However, would your answer and you 50% is reasonable rule change, if the card's market value was $100,000.00, and its buy-it-now price was $50,000.00? A $50,000.00 difference. That is a big deal.

Everything is relative.

[GaryPassamonte]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

You stated that "Paying 50% of the value of a card for resale is reasonable." However, wouldn't it depend on the card's value?

In the cited example, the card's market value was $500.00, and its buy-it-now prices was $250.00. Just $250.00 difference. No big deal.

However, would your answer and you 50% is reasonable rule change, if the card's market value was $100,000.00, and its buy-it-now price was $50,000.00? A $50,000.00 difference. That is a big deal.

Everything is relative.

See my previous post. We could go on and on with individual cases. I'm not going to litigate every case. Like I said, I know where I feel comfortable and where I don't. I guess we all can have our own tipping points.

[Snapolit1]

The silliest thing about all of this is it was posted as some sort of referendum on the state of hobby broadly, but then the OP's investigatory skills quickly uncovered that the dude hardly sells at all.

As far as some moral obligation to tell someone they priced something badly, well that is relative and probably the old case by case basis kind of thing. But if you go down to Florida and are going to buy some widow or widower's condo for $75,000, and you know full well from from searching Zillow that its worth at least $200,000 fair market value, and then a family member catches wind of what's going on and rips the contract up and tells you to stick it where the sun doesn't shine, . . . well, I'm certainly am not pulling my violin out and letting you cry on my shoulder about the sad state of the real estate game.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by GaryPassamonte

See my previous post. We could go on and on with individual cases. I'm not going to litigate every case. Like I said, I know where I feel comfortable and where I don't. I guess we all can have our own tipping points.

. . . . he says to the lawyer.

I am with you though. It is hard to say exactly where the line is in terms of making a fair deal vs being predatory. I think the OP is in the clear here, there is not much you can do on an ebay transaction, if an item is priced too low, somebody is going to snatch it, so if you are the lucky one, so be it.

To me though if there is a sad state of the hobby it is that most people see the OP as a victim here. I don't get the moral indignation. The buyer was hoping to grade and flip the cards and make a windfall profit, but the seller got educated and reneged.

OP didn't do anything to earn that profit, so he is not out anything. It is a shame from his standpoint that he didn't get free money but for chrissake move on.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by ASF123

I think this is a different situation than an anonymous eBay transaction between strangers, though. Right?

I found out a board member was fishing through my Ebay wins, and emailing sellers offering more money for completed auctions! The guy had the nerve to look me in the face and deny it, until ultimately, I put the cards on the table, or didnt.

In fact he had given me cards to grade, and I refused to return them until I was reimbursed for one of the cards. An Ebay seller specifically told me the name and the town of the person who had offered him more and told him to cancel the sale! Of course I had offered him a $200 direct paypal payment for this information, which he did not take.

Some call me an ass, I like to think I'm shrewd. After a handful of specific cards get " lost or misplaced, damaged by their daughter, etc" one has to open their eyes that something is amiss.

I'll say again, I've met some of the nicest, kindest people in the hobby, but also some of the worst!

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

That sucks, but how was he able to browse through your auction wins?

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

I found out a board member was fishing through my Ebay wins, and emailing sellers offering more money for completed auctions! The guy had the nerve to look me in the face and deny it, until ultimately, I put the cards on the table, or didnt.

In fact he had given me cards to grade, and I refused to return them until I was reimbursed for one of the cards. An Ebay seller specifically told me the name and the town of the person who had offered him more and told him to cancel the sale! Of course I had offered him a $200 direct paypal payment for this information, which he did not take.

Some call me an ass, I like to think I'm shrewd. After a handful of specific cards get " lost or misplaced, damaged by their daughter, etc" one has to open their eyes that something is amiss.

I'll say again, I've met some of the nicest, kindest people in the hobby, but also some of the worst!

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

That sucks, but how was he able to browse through your auction wins?

Was before the "masked bidder " IDs. You could search by bidder. Now it takes going through feedback left