EC ed

Just received a few slabbed GA Mutt & Jeff books from Brock in a real pleasant transaction. Kudos all around....great communication from Brock, and books were shipped bomb-proof just like I like them in the 1092/1095 combo. Appreciate it. (thumbs u

are you ever going to put together a registry set Ed? As for the registry set...the reason I haven't done it is that most of my books are raw, and I want to leave them that way at this point (I also have a tendency to turn slabbed books into raw books, rather than the other way 'round). I suppose I could enter my slabs in there nonetheless...I probably have enough slabs to make it a worthwhile exercise.

No, no...you guys just keep going after the GFCs...that's where the action is. Leave the non-GFC pedigrees to me

Just bought a sweet set of Severin VoH silverprint proofs from Jon in an all-around smooooth transaction. Lightning fast shipping and great communication - KUDOS!

*OK, HERE WE GO....WALL OF TEXT WARNING!* I wouldn’t blame Arch at all if he indeed decided to ban auctions…after all, there are some parallels between the auction situation and the raffle situation that came up a short while back – the result of the raffle discussion was the banning of raffles, primarily due to the fact that there are many complexities in the laws regarding raffle licensure. Arch understandably wanted to steer clear of these legal complexities. It turns out that auctions also have complex, time-varying and state-varying licensure requirements. The discussions are in flux because online auctions don’t conveniently fit into traditional “auctioneer” structures that most current regulations were based upon. Also, most of the discussions are about people who auction property that belongs to someone else, but the discussion occasionally migrates into people who auction their own property. Here are just a couple of examples, but just Google something like “auction license regulations” and you’ll see a ton of this type of stuff: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/04/business/yourmoney/04ebay.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.tdlr.texas.gov/auc/pdf/OpenForumHB3038.pdf (see item #3) eBay seems to spend quite a bit of energy fighting the progression of auction regulations, and I’ve seen some discussion that eBay auctions should be exempt from certain requirements because of aspects of their technology (e.g., auctions automatically have a forced end point, rather than being ended by an auction “caller”). Given that the boards do not possess auction software, it could be the case that many of the issues eBay circumvents are in a more gray area here. As another illustration of potential concern using a random state as an example, here are a couple excerpts from North Carolina’s Auctioneers Law (Chapter 85B of the General Statutes - bold text is by me, for emphasis): “Auction Firm” means a sole proprietorship of which the owner is not a licensed auctioneer, or any partnership, association, or corporation, not otherwise exempt from this Chapter, that sells either directly or through agents, real or personal property at auction, or that arranges, sponsors, manages, conducts or advertises auctions, or that in the regular course of business uses or allows the use of its facilities for auctions. This definition applies whether or not an owner or officer of the business acts as an auctioneer.”…… “An auction firm must be licensed by the Board even though no owner or officer of the firm acts as an auctioneer. To be licensed an auction firm must make the contribution to the Fund as required by G.S. 85B-4.1 and must pay the proper fees as set out in G.S. 85B-6. Auction firms are covered by the provisions of G.S. 85B-8.” This is just for the sake of discussion. I'm not a lawyer, and I certainly don’t know all of the legal technicalities that Arch may (or may not) want to worry about with respect to allowing auctions. I’m just saying that I wouldn’t blame Arch at all if he wanted to steer clear of these legal complications, just as he did with raffles. Finally, I certainly don't want auction complexities to threaten the existence of the traditional marketplace here as it has always existed. Perhaps steering clear of auctions will help preserve the longevity of our traditional marketplace. P.S. I'm just guessing, but perhaps these issues are why marketplaces in other online forums often forbid auctions. For example, the first one I went to to check is rebelscum.com. Here's an excerpt from their "Trading and Selling Rules" (link http://www.rebelscum.com/forumselling.asp ): "*NEW: As this forum is Star Wars collecting focused, transactions are limited in type to the following: - Members may only offer to sell or trade Star Wars items they own. - Trade offers must include a Star Wars item on one side of the trade. - Members may also post want-to-buy messages, however, it must be for a Star Wars item. *No auctioning is permitted. That means you cannot make a post stating that you will take offers and sell the item to the highest bidder."

No. I should be able to choose my own starting price, no matter what. You can...on eBay. Or, I could here, too. Of course...you couldn't, under the hypothetical "no reserve" auction rules structure that most of us are proposing as part of a middle ground solution...which is what we're talking about. It would be perfectly fine with me if Arch straight-up banned auctions here...perhaps that's what he should do.

Thanks, Don. Yep, it's the only 9.4 (of course there are higher graded GFCs)... GPA analysis incorrectly shows the sale of this 9.4 back in '04 as a Gaines File Copy...as we now see, the 9.4 is the Church copy.

(posted this recent pickup a couple other places, but thought I'd bump this thread with it, as well - I'm pretty fond of it ) My first EC Church copy...seems like they don't turn up very often. An interesting note from the Heritage auction back when this book sold there in 2004: "This comic is something of a curiosity. It's is known that most of the EC comics from the Mile High collection were bought second-hand, and are not in as nice condition as the comics Edgar Church bought new. However, this particular EC comic looks fantastic - just like the comics he purchased as they reached the newsstands. Was this comic bought new, or was it simply a second hand comic that never accumulated any wear prior to being acquired by Mr. Church?"

Couple of recent Metro buys arrived today:

No. I should be able to choose my own starting price, no matter what. -slym You can...on eBay.

Actually, I prefer the one book per post format, as well. I was wondering about this by the time of my second or third sales thread, so I took an informal poll in the General Discussion thread...as others have stated, the overwhelming majority advised one book per post...so, I've been going that route ever since. SEPARATE AUCTION SUB-FORUM

Agreed. Also, auctions should have their own sub-forum

I'm a little concerned about the president this sets though. When a buyer pays me via PayPal I never actually open the payment e-mail I receive and read it. I just see the e-mail in my In Box, know that payment has been made, and begin preping the item for shipment. I would assume many sellers, if not most, do thee same. But the above makes it sounds like the seller, by accepting the PayPal payment, binds himself to whatever conditions the buyer stipulates in the comment section. In effect, the payment becomes part of the transaction negotiations. So is it incumbent on the seller to open and read those payment e-mail to make sure the buyer hasn't unilaterally changed the terms of the transaction? Not commenting on this specific situation so much as asking in a general sense. Interesting

Yep, Toast is awesome. On a general note, I find the asymmetry that permeates these sorts of situations interesting...buyers want refunds if grade is slightly lower than seller's estimate, but never pay the seller more if grade comes back higher than seller's estimate. If a seller says hey its a 9.8 and doesn't come back a 9.8 then they should be refunded. If the buyer gets a gift from cgc well that's great. Dre does 9.8 subbing all the time. If a book comes back 9.9 you pay for it. Is that what happened here not sure. HOWEVER if you want to put a number on it and can't stand behind it then you should refund. I like the way Dre does things with the policy on higher grades. But I would have no problem with a seller who said if it comes back 9.9 you have first refusal on it as long as you pay X% more. As long as they were up front, people could make their decision whether or not to buy. I'm sure many wouldn't, but I don't think having that as a policy would be shady at all. Yep...I guess I was saying that I find it interesting that more sellers don't put this symmetry into their policy odds of a 9.9 are like flipping a coin 100 times and its heads each and every time. just extra wording that doesn't need to be included. such as things like I won't take counterfeit or monopoly money as payment. I won't ship to an unnamed address in the middle of Nigeria to the prince. I hear you...I was also thinking more generally...not just moderns...like a "9.0" coming back 8.5 Vs. 9.2, Etc....getting off topic, though

Yep, Toast is awesome. On a general note, I find the asymmetry that permeates these sorts of situations interesting...buyers want refunds if grade is slightly lower than seller's estimate, but never pay the seller more if grade comes back higher than seller's estimate. If a seller says hey its a 9.8 and doesn't come back a 9.8 then they should be refunded. If the buyer gets a gift from cgc well that's great. Dre does 9.8 subbing all the time. If a book comes back 9.9 you pay for it. Is that what happened here not sure. HOWEVER if you want to put a number on it and can't stand behind it then you should refund. I like the way Dre does things with the policy on higher grades. But I would have no problem with a seller who said if it comes back 9.9 you have first refusal on it as long as you pay X% more. As long as they were up front, people could make their decision whether or not to buy. I'm sure many wouldn't, but I don't think having that as a policy would be shady at all. Yep...I guess I was saying that I find it interesting that more sellers don't put this symmetry into their policy

Yep, Toast is awesome. On a general note, I find the asymmetry that permeates these sorts of situations interesting...buyers want refunds if grade is slightly lower than seller's estimate, but never pay the seller more if grade comes back higher than seller's estimate. HOWEVER if you want to put a number on it and can't stand behind it then you should refund. Agreed

Yep, Toast is awesome. On a general note, I find the asymmetry that permeates these sorts of situations interesting...buyers want refunds if grade is slightly lower than seller's estimate, but never pay the seller more if grade comes back higher than seller's estimate.

(thumbs u Board vintage Feb '13...HOLLAAAA

I've tried to give this more serious thought...there must be some reason people do this, because we see it so often. Perhaps it's a passive/aggressive "parting shot"/kick in the crotch to all of us who didn't buy the books. Like..."I told you I was gon' close this thread, so here I go..it's closed...BOOM..you should have bought these books while you had the chance, you bunch'a lowballers" Or, perhaps it's indeed effectively a final sales thread bump, like they're hoping people will realize, 'mess' he's really closing it...I'd better PM him about that book before he takes it to eBay/Heritage/Clink, etc. And no...these thoughts have nothing to do with auctions

I believe what you are doing is called slander. Libel

I'm not aware of any way to tell the difference.

More discussions going on over in CG...linking to it here for continuity: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=8179049&fpart=1

Not much more to say? Some don't want auction at all. Some want auctions. Almost all of Both camps think auctions should be in their own sub-forum if we are going to allow them. Just up to the mods to create one for us and see how the cards fall. Yep...a couple weeks back Arch requested that we provide more thoughts on the subject. We've done that. Now, I think we're waiting to hear back from Arch regarding his thoughts.