Dr Chaos

Based upon some if the early feedback I have received, I have streamlined my Modern Sales thread. The earlier versions came up quickly for me but I heard it was slow to load on some computers. I also made further improvements to the hyper-links, Scans will be added soon but I am travelling next week so I may not have all of the scans up until I get back.

The Third (and final?) Version of my sales thread us up with over 1,500+ Modern and a few Copper Age books available! Not quite as big as the last one but the best one yet!

Version two of my thread has been killed by the moderators. I will have version three up soon.

I did the same. As promised hyper-links have been added to the top of the thread. You can now use them to jump ahead to whichever section you want. I think you will find the thread easier to navigate now. I have further modified the thread by organizing the gifs related to comic titles within spoiler tags to make the thread easier to browse.

I did the same. As promised hyper-links have been added to the top of the thread. You can now use them to jump ahead to whichever section you want. I think you will find the thread easier to navigate now.

My Modern Sales thread is back up bigger and better than ever! With over 1,500+ mostly high grade modern CGC books this thread has something for everyone! I would urge the moderators to contact me via PM if they have any issues. They will be fixed very quickly.

Oops wrong thread.

and probably contagious.

Why would someone want to return a book for a reason "other than restoration" 6 months later.? Please remember that most of us are not Macy's, Bloomingdale's or professional dealers;) Nor should they. Paypal (60 days?) should be plenty of time for the sale of an unrestored book). Edit - I forgot Paypal extended it, I meant the old time frame.

If the point of the probation list is to protect the members of this board from bad sellers I think we need to keep that in perspective. Sure if a buyer takes a year or two to look over their books maybe they were negligent in honoring their part of the deal and perhaps are unworthy of a refund even if the book they received had undisclosed flaws including those that could be considered restoration. Putting pressure on a seller to provide a refund or other forms of restitution (in order to be removed from the probation list) is only small part of what the probation list is about. The much, much, more important reason that the seller is on the list in the first place is not because we want him to do something nice for the buyer that was wronged but to keep him from screwing the rest of us over by blocking him or her from selling additional books. If a seller is selling books with color touch, trimming, and missing pieces on a regular basis without disclosing any of it I do not think that any of us wants to buy books from such a person. Sure on one book out of a hundred or a thousand perhaps they missed the restoration. If selling such books without disclosing the restoration is happening more frequently perhaps they are the ones doctoring the books in the first place. Forcing sellers to post a return policy in their threads is not the solution for this problem. If a seller intent on passing off restored book were to put up a thread with a 30 day return period and the seller had the skill to subtly restore the books so that the average buyer will not spot the restoration., the seller will be able to hide behind the return policy when the books all come back from CGC a few months later. A typical buyer seeing a return policy that states anything other than as is / no returns will still think that if they got a restored book that it would be such a big deal that the seller would have to make an exception. No one is arguing that a buyer lacks any responsibility to inspect their purchases in a timely manner (we could discuss what this entails). The real question is are we more concerned about making sure that lazy buyers do not get away with sitting on their books for a couple months before asking for a return or are we more concerned about dishonest / irresponsible sellers passing off restored books without disclosure and being free to continue doing so without being held accountable? Giving buyers on this forum six months to a year to nominate a seller for the PL if they sell a restored book without disclosure and either refuse to compensate the buyer for the loss or ignore them completely seems reasonable to me. In the absence of restoration I would think that we could use the same limit as Paypal unless the majority has other ideas.

I am still looking for the Vanna White Venom variant for that book.

Unlike shill bidding where a fake account can be used to prove it happened a book listed for sale could have been sold privately, in person, at any price. If you are skeptical about the amount it sold for you can rest assured that others will be as well but there is simply no way to prove that someone is lying about selling a book. Even if the seller were to list the same exact book for sale 60 days from now he could simply say that the buyer returned it for a refund.

Our rules are for sellers without a sense of honor.

Disclosed restoration is OK as far as I am concerned. I have bought a couple purple labels myself simply because the book was something special and the price was too good to refuse. What we are talking about is undisclosed restoration that only the seller knows whether or not the failure to disclose was unintentional.

I would never buy a "tainted" book oh wait you mean like restored? that's not what I thought you meant... Changed it to restored.

One year may be stretching things a bit but it is not as crazy as it sounds. I do agree that there does need to be a limit (even in these cases) but I think we need to consider how long a reasonable buyer with no major reason to distrust the seller would take to bring the book to a third party with the expertise to spot the restoration. Let's say the buyer buys three books for $250. One of them is $125 with undisclosed restoration. Time line looks something like this: Day 1 - Buyer agrees to buy restored book. Day 4 - Buyer finishes shopping and asks seller for an invoice Day 6 -Seller sends invoice Day 7 - Buyer pays Day 8 - Seller ship books Day 17 - Delivery attempt one Day 20 - Weekend is here buyer can finally get to the post office to sign for package (on initial inspection the books look OK to the buyer) Day 34 - Weekend is here buyer send a stack of books out for pressing (including tainted book Day 79 - Pressing completed Day 110 - Buyer brings pressed books to local con for signing and grading At this point we are talking about almost four months, slow track CGC could be another 3-4 months. Once the buyer is aware of the restoration I would hope their first move is to contact the seller and give them a chance to make things right before coming here. That could take at least a week or two if the buyer is reasonable. In this case the buyer bought a book that they felt would benefit from a press and waited a little over a month for an opportunity to get the book signed but really didn't drag their feet that much considering that they bought the book here in good faith and trusted that the seller was doing the right thing. Also in this case, even if the book is accepted for a refund the buyer is out pressing fees, CGC signature series fees, and may have also paid the artist to sign the seller's restored book so their loss has been compounded. Whether we are talking about six months, a year, or some other time frame I do think that undisclosed restoration should be something that the buyer should have more time to address with the seller. Some people buy books they want to get signed, some people have day jobs or families. Not all books are worth getting fast tracked. Let's not put all of the blame / burden on the victim.

Unlike other damage to comics let's not forget that restoration is something that is done intentionally. While it seems fair to give everyone the benefit of the doubt I think we need to be very careful about absolving the seller of a restored comic of responsibility for the harm inflicted on the buyer when the restoration has not been disclosed. Given what any of us would think of someone who intentionally failed to disclose restoration I think that an honest seller would be upset about unknowingly passing on a restored comic and would not want anyone to think otherwise. Anyone who finds out that they missed restoration on a book they sold and would tell their customer "sorry the limit on returns is 30 days as I said in my sales thread if only you had mentioned it yesterday I would have given you your money back but you are too late" is not a seller I would want to buy books from. Restoration and the damage it can do to this hobby and the reputation of those involved is not something that should be taken lightly. Look at what forged signatures have done to the sports collectible industry and consider if letting the seller dictate their return policy is more important than protecting buyers from fraudulent purchases. While this forum does not charge buyers or sellers for the opportunity to trade books here I would think that we should expect participants on this forum to a higher standard of behavior than other websites. A wide range of books are bought and sold here by participants that range from noobs to experts but that does not mean that we should accept the lowest common denominator and allow a window of opportunity for fraud. If you don't want to take any responsibility for what you are selling, just post "as is" in your listing or better yet have a garage sale to sell your crappy books. The idea that it is none of the buyer's business whether a book has been restored unless they ask the seller is ridiculous. It opens the door for sellers to treat buyers horribly and forces buyers to waste an inordinate amount of a seller's time just to make sure that they are getting anything close to what they are paying for. I think we can do better than that.

I thought we already went through this in the other thread. If the seller clearly states "sales are as is", "found these books in a dumpster" what you see is what you get", or otherwise makes it very clear to the buyer that they are making no promises about the grade, quality, or condition of the books the buyer is no position to complain about restoration or much of anything else. On the other hand if the seller puts a book in a sales thread and claims that the book is in good condition (etc.) without any mention of restoration, the seller has made a representation to the buyer about the quality of the book from which most buyers would imply that they are receiving a complete unrestored book. Unless the seller clearly states that the books are as is and that the grade is not a promise but should be considered a best guess the buyer should have every right to be upset if the book is restored.

When discussing this one, we need to keep in mind (at least) two separate situations: 1a) when the seller actually specifies a clear and specific return policy; 1b) when the seller does not specify a clear and specific return policy; I would say another distinction is the following: 1. An ordinary transaction where the buyer's only complaint is that the grade of the book is not quite what the seller claimed in their sales thread. 2. An out of the ordinary transaction where the buyer received and incomplete or restored book. Restoration has the following issues that an ordinary transaction does not have: A. A restored book is worth far less than an un-restored book in the same grade. B. Restoration can be difficult to detect. More time may be necessary for a buyer takes a closer look at the book (after an failing to see the problem the first time) or to involve a third party with more expertise. C. Disagreements about the grade of a raw book are common and the buyer takes some risk in buying a raw book. Unless restoration (or missing pages, stamps, centerfolds, staples, etc.) is disclosed it is implied that the buyer can expect the book to be both complete and without restoration. While a strict time limit may be reasonable in an ordinary transaction, a seller should be expected to go the extra mile if they failed to disclose restoration.

Two equal terms. If the former can't reasonably be discovered within the time frame of the latter then returns are deemed closed for all reasons but for resto discovered within a reasonable time frame (given that the 30 day window is not reasonable). While such a policy would provide a red flag to the buyer it would open the door to sellers knowingly selling restored books in hopes that the 30 day window will get them off the hook.

If the seller states "as is" or specifies how cases of incomplete books or restoration will be handled (example - "as far as I know these books are complete and are not restored but will take returns for up to 30 days in the case of restoration") the buyer knows what they are walking into. Otherwise we are talking about what a reasonable buyer could expect which means that the books are assumed to be unrestored and complete since the seller has not made any disclosure. In this case the return policy (one week, 30 days, etc.) would not apply to these books as they seller failed to make notice of the impairments or disclaim responsibility beyond a certain time-frame.

I think we are on the same page. Buyer should get one year to notify the seller about the problem. Buyer should then give the seller a chance to make things right and be able to nominate for PL if they can't work it out. If seller is willing to work with the buyer there is no need for the buyer to run to the PL to beat the deadline. If the seller was notified within a year and stalls the buyer "check is in the mail", etc.) they should not be able to avoid PL because the buyer took 13 months to nominate them.

Well stated. On this point I agree completely. Sounds reasonable.

You all continue to convolute two separate issues. We should not be discussing a mandatory return/refund period...that should be left to each individual seller in his/her individual sales threads. If I want to start a sales thread with an "as-is no return" policy, I should be free to do so, and you should be free to not buy the books in that thread if you don't like it. What we need to stay focused on is the PL statute of limitations discussion...i.e., how long does someone have to initiate a PL claim on a failed transaction. That's a different question, and (I thought) that's the issue that's on the table. I think it is really two flavors of the same ice cream. What we are talking about is how long a seller should be held accountable for a transaction made on these boards. An as is policy involving low priced books may be the one case where the seller is not accountable for restored books (or not). Any other listing with any other policy implies that the books are not restored unless explicitly stated otherwise by the seller. If the seller has passed a restored book (intentionally or not) to a buyer unaware of the restoration the buyer should be able to seek restitution from the seller (return period / policy is only one type of restitution). Clearly the restored book is not what was advertised and is worth far less than a similar unrestored copy of the same book in the same condition (apart from the restoration). The time limit for the buyer to contact the seller and seek restitution is directly related to the time it would take for the buyer (or a third party if necessary) to inspect the book, identify the problem, and contact the seller about it. If a third party is needed to identify the problem and the most commonly used third party (CGC) can take 3-4 months to return a submission, even six months seems like a tight window in these cases. After a buyer has inspected a book and decides that they want to keep it it may take a couple months before they decide to also put together a CGC submission including that book to send it in. The seller is no less wrong 6-12 months later for failing to disclose the restoration. Providing restitution to a buyer 6-12 months after a transaction may be inconvenient but it does not seem to be a huge imposition on the seller considering the harm that the buyer would suffer having to settle for goods worth roughly one third of what the seller promised, A seller ignoring a buyer or telling them to pound sand under these circumstances would be a good candidate for PL.

On ebay sellers say their return policy is a week or 10 days all the time but Paypal buyer protection still gives buyers roughly 60 days to initiate a return / refund. If the board decides that 90 days or even a year is reasonable (especially for undisclosed restoration even if we give the seller benefit of the doubt that it is unintentional) then 90 days would be the limit even if the sales thread states otherwise. If the board decides that it is 90 days or less (should the seller expressly warn buyers that the deadline is absolute) then the seller could dictate the deadline by posting it in the thread. The board could decide to give sellers the loophole to post the deadline in the thread but if the buyers need CGC to help them detect color touch it would be reasonable to give them three months (maybe four) to get the books back from CGC on top of the time to recieve, inspect, and organize their purchases for submission. At the end of the day the Paypal limit (60 days?) seems more than fair if we believe that buyers can be expected to inspect a book and identify problems for themselves (damage, missing pages, color touch, etc.). If we do not believe that the average buyer on these boards can be expected to spot subtle restoration there should be more time allowed for these issues to surface (usually when the books is resubmitted to CGC or resold). While a short deadline (30 days or less) would encourage dishonest sellers to dump their restored books here while feigning ignorance when the restoration is pointed out, a longer deadline (let's say one year) would give the buyer ample time to inspect the book and have it looked over by a third party without leaving the seller to be blindsided by a return on a book they sold years ago due to color touch or some other restoration so subtle that they were unaware of it themselves.