Poll Should GA disclose that the PSA 6.5 and SGC MIN SIZE Dimaggios are same card?

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Nor do they disclose the countless cards they accept from known card doctors.

Nor do they focus on the flaws, even for unmodified cards.

Instead the marketing is focused on: "pack fresh", "looks nicer than the grade", "creamy white borders", "shiny gloss", "razor sharp corners", etc.

And that's the way it should be. Whether we as buyers pay attention to the puffery or not is entirely up to us. But representing the seller, they're going to do their level best to whip up interest from bidders.

Or as Leon likes to say: caveat emptor.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by raulus

Or as Leon likes to say: caveat emptor.

It's not just Leon.

And PT Barnum said things too, but he forgot his password so he can't post.

People who buy f'd up cards based on a puffy auction descriptions or a slabbed opinion, get exactly what they deserve.

I have no sympathy for any of them, it actually kind of makes me chuckle.

Doug

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

It's not just Leon.

And PT Barnum said things too, but he forgot his password so he can't post.

People who buy f'd up cards based on a puffy auction descriptions or a slabbed opinion, get exactly what they deserve.

I have no sympathy for any of them, it actually kind of makes me chuckle.

Doug

Exactly. My thoughts as well. If you can't be bothered to spend even just a few minutes educating yourself on how grading works and why it is that some PSA "9" doesn't actually look any better than a PSA 7, or how a card from 1910 could have razor-sharp corners and pearl white borders, then you mostly deserve whatever you get.

Don't buy stupid cards.

And don't compete on the registry because that is a surefire way to end up with stupid cards.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by raulus

Nor do they focus on the flaws, even for unmodified cards.

Instead the marketing is focused on: "pack fresh", "looks nicer than the grade", "creamy white borders", "shiny gloss", "razor sharp corners", etc.

And that's the way it should be. Whether we as buyers pay attention to the puffery or not is entirely up to us. But representing the seller, they're going to do their level best to whip up interest from bidders.

Or as Leon likes to say: caveat emptor.

Caveat emptor ain't the law though. The law says you can't conceal known material facts. Caveat emptor feels like yet another variation of the endless efforts people make to excuse fraud.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Caveat emptor ain't the law though. The law says you can't conceal known material facts. Caveat emptor feels like yet another variation of the endless efforts people make to excuse fraud.

Good point.

I guess the question then will always boil down to who knows what, and whether that thing is material.

In the context of a bump in grade, is that material? It seems like you don't think it is if you're moving from one number grade to another higher grade.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by raulus

Good point.

I guess the question then will always boil down to who knows what, and whether that thing is material.

In the context of a bump in grade, is that material? It seems like you don't think it is if you're moving from one number grade to another higher grade.

Generally, I would say no. In the specific context we've been discussing, I think yes, I would err on the side of disclosing. I mean if you were selling the PSA 6.5 to a close friend, and knew it had been MIN SIZED by SGC, would you really not tell him? Hard to believe. To be clear, I view this as a judgment call in light of all the points made here and in the other thread. I think it should be disclosed, not that it must be. Thus the framing of the question.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Generally, I would say no. In the specific context we've been discussing, I think yes, I would err on the side of disclosing. I mean if you were selling the PSA 6.5 to a close friend, and knew it had been MIN SIZED by SGC, would you really not tell him? Hard to believe. To be clear, I view this as a judgment call in light of all the points made here. I think it should be disclosed, not that it must be.

But you wouldn't tell him if it got bumped from a 6 to an 8?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by raulus

But you wouldn't tell him if it got bumped from a 6 to an 8?

I probably would, but that's a personal choice to be completely transparent. I would feel obligated on the MIN SIZE.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I probably would, but that's a personal choice to be completely transparent. I would feel obligated on the MIN SIZE.

A bump from a 6 to an 8 is not material but a Min Size to a grade at another TPG is? The difference in value from a 6 to 8 is significant on cards from all eras.

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by raulus

Nor do they focus on the flaws, even for unmodified cards.

Instead the marketing is focused on: "pack fresh", "looks nicer than the grade", "creamy white borders", "shiny gloss", "razor sharp corners", etc.

And that's the way it should be...

My general observation is that isn't always true:
Collector Connection does the best job of pointing out flaws and zero puffery.
Brockelman is great at pointing out flaws, minimal puffery (a sentence or two)
LOTG also does well pointing out flaws, though it is mixed in with maybe a paragraph of puffery.

Some larger houses are on the other end of the spectrum, like Goldin - if they give a description, it's 95% puffery.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

My general observation is that isn't always true:
Collector Connection does the best job of pointing out flaws and zero puffery.
Brockelman is great at pointing out flaws, minimal puffery (a sentence or two)
LOTG also does well pointing out flaws, though it is mixed in with maybe a paragraph of puffery.

Some larger houses are on the other end of the spectrum, like Goldin - if they give a description, it's 95% puffery.

Sell the sizzle, not the steak!

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by conor912

Sell the sizzle, not the steak!

Well to be fair a lot of time we're selling the chopped meat, but at least we call it hamburger and not filet.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Well to be fair a lot of time we're selling the chopped meat, but at least we call it hamburger and not filet.

Wait, wait, wait... Chopped meat AND medium potatoes? Are you working on a cookbook over there?

[Snowman]

Fun fact. When a poll is neck and neck the entire way, and then suddenly breaks 10+ straight votes in one direction after a sample size of 160 votes, it usually means those votes were recruited. Not that it matters, but that would be pretty funny to me if someone here is taking the results so seriously that they felt the urge to recruit. Lol

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Fun fact. When a poll is neck and neck the entire way, and then suddenly breaks 10+ straight votes in one direction after a sample size of 160 votes, it usually means those votes were recruited. Not that it matters, but that would be pretty funny to me if someone here is taking the results so seriously that they felt the urge to recruit. Lol

Haha, that would indeed be pathetic. And yet is seems somewhat plausible.

I remember from stats class that a sample size of 160 in statistics is generally considered a good, medium-sized sample for most research studies. Funny that as soon as we got to that number, something went haywire.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Fun fact. When a poll is neck and neck the entire way, and then suddenly breaks 10+ straight votes in one direction after a sample size of 160 votes, it usually means those votes were recruited. Not that it matters, but that would be pretty funny to me if someone here is taking the results so seriously that they felt the urge to recruit. Lol

If you're suggesting I recruited votes, that's absolutely false. I can't believe anyone else would bother to either. I frankly expected the poll to be about 60-40 no.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Fun fact. When a poll is neck and neck the entire way, and then suddenly breaks 10+ straight votes in one direction after a sample size of 160 votes, it usually means those votes were recruited. Not that it matters, but that would be pretty funny to me if someone here is taking the results so seriously that they felt the urge to recruit. Lol

They is very little that would surprise me on here. The one thing I am not surprised about is how 95 people have votes yes. Yet not a single one has contacted the AH and gave us their response. At least they cared enough to post/vote in this so ever important thread.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Wait, wait, wait... Chopped meat AND medium potatoes? Are you working on a cookbook over there?

lol