Card conundrum

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

Actually, there is a very easy way to know that. You could ask. Of course, that runs the risk that he may be deceptive in his communications and that would complicate getting to the desired outcome.

Based on your posts, it is clear that you do not agree with the fact that I am keeping this card, which is perfectly fair. To help me understand where you are coming from, please share your parameters as to when a buyer should contact a seller in regard to an unexpected card found in a lot.

[carlsonjok]

Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes

Based on your posts, it is clear that you do not agree with the fact that I am keeping this card, which is perfectly fair. To help me understand where you are coming from, please share your parameters as to when a buyer should contact a seller in regard to an unexpected card found in a lot.

Let me put it this way. I am nobody to you, so whether I agree or disagree shouldn't matter to you. And apparently it doesn't, so all good. But, let me explain how I think about it. First off, I am a post-war, mid grade, raw set builder. I am not made of money and I am always looking for good deals. Acquiring the big ticket cards for sets necessarily means other hobby activity have to stop for an extended period of time. It takes me years to complete sets.

If I go to a show and a dealer has a box labeled “100 miscellaneous 1955 Topps - $500” it is natural (for me anyways) to assume that it is a box of commons. It may have some minor stars, but it's mostly commons. 1955 commons may be selling in other contexts for $6 or more each, and it is possible that he mistakenly underpriced them. But, It is more likely that he is just pricing them to move, so looks like an deal to me. Now, say I get home and find a 1955 Jackie Robinson mixed into that lot. I’m presented with one of two conclusions:

1. I can assume he meant it to be there because that ’55 Jackie *is* technically a miscellaneous card, feel relieved that I don’t have spend 4 months of hobby budget to get a copy, and keep my windfall on the down low. Or…
2. He made a mistake by including it, because if he had so intended and has at least two functioning neurons inside his melon, he would have noted that on the box’s label that it included one of the keystone cards in the set and possibly priced it appropriately.

Of course, it may be a cognitive failure on my part, but I can’t get to the first option without mental gymnastics and the lawyerly parsing of words. YMMV

[steve B]

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

Let me put it this way. I am nobody to you, so whether I agree or disagree shouldn't matter to you. And apparently it doesn't, so all good. But, let me explain how I think about it. First off, I am a post-war, mid grade, raw set builder. I am not made of money and I am always looking for good deals. Acquiring the big ticket cards for sets necessarily means other hobby activity have to stop for an extended period of time. It takes me years to complete sets.

If I go to a show and a dealer has a box labeled “100 miscellaneous 1955 Topps - $500” it is natural (for me anyways) to assume that it is a box of commons. It may have some minor stars, but it's mostly commons. 1955 commons may be selling in other contexts for $6 or more each, and it is possible that he mistakenly underpriced them. But, It is more likely that he is just pricing them to move, so looks like an deal to me. Now, say I get home and find a 1955 Jackie Robinson mixed into that lot. I’m presented with one of two conclusions:

1. I can assume he meant it to be there because that ’55 Jackie *is* technically a miscellaneous card, feel relieved that I don’t have spend 4 months of hobby budget to get a copy, and keep my windfall on the down low. Or…
2. He made a mistake by including it, because if he had so intended and has at least two functioning neurons inside his melon, he would have noted that on the box’s label that it included one of the keystone cards in the set and possibly priced it appropriately.

Of course, it may be a cognitive failure on my part, but I can’t get to the first option without mental gymnastics and the lawyerly parsing of words. YMMV

I've bought lots like that.
Some were things that were not much at the time but ended up being good. Like a monster box of hockey that included an entire Gretzky rookie year Topps set. At the time the $50 was very reasonable, but not an absolute steal.


Another was in a different hobby where small differences matter. (actually I've had a number of things like this in that hobby)
I was looking at a lot on ebay, and one stamp looked like a really expensive one. Did everything I could to be sure of it, and decided I wasn't crazy or seeing what I wanted to see.
Got it in, and that one was in its own little envelope that stated the catalog number and that it needed a certificate.
A few years later I did actually send it off and it got a certificate as genuine (all they did at the time)
So several hundered dollars of catalog value in a $30 lot. And the dealer knew for sure it was there. My dealer friend said sometimes they just don't care, like if the seller usually did stuff that was much more expensive their time to send it off might not be worth it!