Is the auction world the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

[wonkaticket]

Should auction houses be held accountable for false claims? And how would you hold them accountable in a situation like the below? I’m not picking on anyone in particular here and this is not a bash anyone thread as most all are guilty of this.

For example when you make comments like...

“The finest known and only example in any condition, either Red or Brown Hindu ad back, ever graded by PSA.”

https://catalog.scpauctions.com/LotD...px?lotid=20917

And within seconds another can be found that sold in a major auction house or by searching eBay shouldn’t that be frowned upon just a bit?

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/.../2012/157.html

Or should it be on the collectors to research each lot they are bidding on and put no trust into the auctioneer’s descriptions?

Just curious if this stuff bothers you guys or not? I know I would be a bit upset to spend pretty penny on something I thought was one of a kind and have 4 guys say “oh I have that card too, only nicer etc.” I know the above will be explained that PSA didn’t start labeling the brands until recently therefore it was missed in the reports.

But really how hard is a Google search or checking the other major auction houses past results before you make bold claims?

https://catalog.scpauctions.com/LotD...px?lotid=20919

http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedi...c-40-219220882

Cheers,

John

[EvilKing00]

totally agree john its not cool, if the seller is truly trying to lie of fake out a buyer. But I always do my own reasearch online, if the card is a bit sketchy i still may buy it if its cheep enuff. Sometimes it works out. But if the price is to high i would never

[MVSNYC]

Hi John, this very subject is my biggest pet peeve in the hobby. i don't put too much stock in auction descriptions when they claim "1/2, none higher", or the dreaded "scarce for the grade", etc...very annoying, yet people eat it up and bid like it's the only one on the planet.

and yes, the biggest reason for all of these inaccuracies is the PSA pop reports are all out of whack, as you pointed out there are tens of thousands of cards (T206 specifically) that are not broken down by brands. very misleading.

when are you up in NYC again?

[Leon]

John- It's always Caveat Emptor in our hobby. As a collector of scarce cards I see this stuff happen daily. Friday I picked up some things at an auction house that were supposed to all be one of one. On the way over I stopped at 1 man card show and saw another one of the one-of-ones .

[barrysloate]

An auction house should be held accountable for their lot descriptions, especially when it may impact how high a bidder may go. But it also doesn't hurt for the bidder to do his due diligence before sinking big money into a piece.

As a bidder I would contact an auction house that makes a material error and ask them to make the necessary change. I know that when I ran auctions I had to correct some things that were pointed out to me by the bidders. It's really not a big deal, as mistakes will happen.

[19cbb]

John, not sure if auction houses can be held accountable for false claims, but as Leon said, it's always Caveat Emptor in our hobby.

Due diligence!

[E93]

If an item was misrepresented, including as "best known" in the auction description and I discovered after winning that that the information conveyed was patently untrue and the auction house should have known that it was untrue at the time of writing, I would expect a full refund if I asked for it.
JimB

[rainier2004]

Originally Posted by E93

If an item was misrepresented, including as "best known" in the auction description and I discovered after winning that that the information conveyed was patently untrue and the auction house should have known that it was untrue at the time of writing, I would expect a full refund if I asked for it.
JimB

I think Id want the same thing, innaccuracies may be a mistake at times but the AH would still be accountable for said information. Innaccuracies bother me as well...Ive always been accountable for my documentation professionally and legally...it makes you pay attention to say the least.

[Leon]

In their defense, in my case, there was almost no way they could have known. I do agree though, if it's a no-brainer and they made a gross mistake, I would expect a refund if I asked.

[murcerfan]

First ya'll get the FBI to slap our wrists when we shill bid...

....now you want honesty in advertising our lots???

unbelievable! I guess we'll just have to jack the buyers penalty up to 33%

and charge 5x the going rate for shipping.

(shakes fist at damn collectors)

[3-2-count]

Originally Posted by E93

If an item was misrepresented, including as "best known" in the auction description and I discovered after winning that that the information conveyed was patently untrue and the auction house should have known that it was untrue at the time of writing, I would expect a full refund if I asked for it.
JimB

+1
There's a legal name for what this behavior is. It's called "Fraud". Look it up.

[Rob D.]

Not to detract from the OP's question, but this thread prompted me to look at all of the red Hindus in SCP's auction. All I can say is, wow! I can't imagine where some of these will end up as T206 back collectors try to cross off a tough one from their lists. Impressive offering.

(Not my cards, obviously.)

[atx840]

They are not even searching the registries. Another Crandall PSA 4 sold 2 months ago.

http://www.goodwinandco.com/LotDetail.aspx?lotid=24743

Jeff owns a PSA 5 Chase Hindu, they list their 4 as possibly the finest example.

[D. Bergin]

I don't really understand people who would bid extra based on an auction description like that. If you're going to drop a chunk of change on something, wouldn't you do a little research beforehand yourself?

It seems like nothing but blather to me anyways.

Do you like the card for the grade, and what would you pay for it? Period!

[wonkaticket]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

I don't really understand people who would bid extra based on an auction description like that. If you're going to drop a chunk of change on something, wouldn't you do a little research beforehand yourself?

It seems like nothing but blather to me anyways.

Do you like the card for the grade, and what would you pay for it? Period!

I think we have to remember that not every collector or buyer is a hardcore collector. Some are here that are new or here for investment based etc.

Some of those folks will bid very much on claims and that's why they should be careful when making claims such as the above.

Also the reason these claims are typed in the first place is for the very reason that people will bid more. If these write ups had no effect on bidding patterns you wouldn't see them.

Cheers,

John

[E93]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

I don't really understand people who would bid extra based on an auction description like that.

You don't have to understand it, but bidders DO have a right to not have fraudulent misrepresentations in auction descriptions on items on which they are bidding .

It is not only those who do not do their own research that are affected. Every time one gets bid up by another bidder because they believed the lies, that person is affected too.
JimB

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by E93

You don't have to understand it, but bidders DO have a right to not have fraudulent misrepresentations in auction descriptions on items on which they are bidding .

It is not only those who do not do their own research that are affected. Every time one gets bid up by another bidder because they believed the lies, that person is affected too.
JimB

I never defended the practice. Just stated I didn't understand the psychology of bidders who would spend a good deal of money on something without doing very simple research on it.

I also don't quite understand the psychology of flowery descriptions affecting someones bid. I don't get how people are that easily swayed.

When I do my own auctions on Ebay I try to keep my descriptions as simple as possible. This is what it is, this is the general condition, If there's any important or relevant details I add them, if it's an obscure figure I might throw in a short history of one or two sentences at most, here's a big picture of the item, if you like it, bid on it.

Closest thing to flowery I get is: "Great Image", "Wonderful Pose", "Nice Shot". I try to keep the meaningless exposition at 5 words or less.

Also, not being a graded card collector or dealer, I lack the understanding of the "none graded higher" importance. Even if there is "none graded higher" today, there could easily be 6 graded higher by tomorrow (unless it's a 10 of course), and yes I know what I just said is an exaggeration for effect.

[novakjr]

Speaking of misleading...

http://www.prweb.com/releases/roy-ha...web9482131.htm

Last time I checked Halladay had MLB licensed cards in '97, so why would a '98 minor league issue even draw RC consideration?