• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

snizzenfixit

Member
  • Posts

    572
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by snizzenfixit

  1. What is this? What's My Line? That is not an answer, as such I will go with the assumption that you are in fact notch top. This answers some questions. From what I have gathered in past threads, notch top and Meth have a history (not relating to book doctoring). This was not a storybook history either. This would be reason aplenty to continue a crusade against Meth. I have said in the past and I will say again, I have no knowledge as to Meths selling practices, but that is not what this is about. It is about wahoo turning every thread into an attack Meth thread. Well guess what wahoo, we are sick of it, we don't want to hear it any more. That is not what the forums are here for. You made your opinions clear a few thousand times, now lets move on. I do not want to pick you apart, but if you insist on continuing this attack Meth game then someone needs to play the attack wahoo game to keep some balance. Phil
  2. What is it about not understanding when a person states a fact, as can be viewed throughout many of the threads in these forume, THAT YOU DONT UNDERSTAND????? Are you notch top? You dont know me, nor do you know much of my actions in real life, and the Venom I spew just may be the truth you and others hide from, but then again, that is JUST an OPINION, one of which may just be based on more credible evidence than yours. I don't need to know you, I only need to know what you post in order to respond to what you post. You rail on and on about evidence, but when this topic was active there was ample opportunity to submit that evidence and you failed to do so. The mask is off, people have formed opinions about you, just as you have formed an opinion about Meth. I am not alone in thinking that you have a hidden agenda here. Do not advise me on anything, I will post, and advise as I see fit. Take that advice or don't, that is up to you, but don't think that you can tell me what to post. that it also a reality in which I will further no more in this thread. This one is a real puzzler. No matter how many times I read it I still have no idea what you are talking about here. Anyone who can decipher this pearl of wisdom, please jump in and enlighten me. Phil
  3. You know that last post of yours made absolutely no sense to me. . I didn't get it either, but he sure was on a roll Phil
  4. Then you are quite narrow-minded, as you do NOT know the FULL credibility of ANY messenger on these boards. Right, with FULL being the operative word. I have formed an opinion on your credibility on this subject however. Your opinion is tainted, which is obvious in the venom you spew. If I say the sky is blue, it has less credence than if someone else said it. Nope, but if you said Meth's house was blue I would believe others over you. If you have been reading correctly, such as others here who do NOT read things correctly. They remember what they want pertaining to a (deleted) discussion That discussion was deleted for a reason, remember? I think you would be well advised to steer clear of the topic. and people will always remember what they want to remember, that is reality. Phil
  5. Maybe it should be the MESSAGE you should FOCUS on instead of your perceptions concerning the messenger. We decide how much weight to give a message, based on the credibility of the messenger. Phil
  6. My post/ reply is JUST to point this out, as if nobody already knew it I think you are the LAST person who should be crusading for Meth's removal. Your opinion of him has been made clear, so I think it is unlikely that you would be impartial. Phil
  7. I saw the original listing, there was nothing slanderous about it. It's just you making a big deal out of it, Supa just wrote his opinion, that's all. Mmm, I saw the original listing too. I am not taking anyones side here, at all, but you definitely are wrong when you say he just wrote his opinion. Read all about him and his practices in my posts on the CGC forum That is not stating something as opinion, it is stating it as fact. I have no idea if it is enough for a lawsuit or not, but it is unfortunate that this whole mess has degenerated this far. Phil
  8. Hehe, he has some Red Sonjas I was looking at, I looked at his other auctions (and he has a LOT of other auctions) I saw the title for this and the words "Darth and Greggy" flashed before my eyes. Phil
  9. Here is an auction with Darth and Greggy's names written all over it Phil
  10. the Steiner bros, and a few more big time wrestlers go to my gym. Hey, I went to school with those boys. Didn't know them very well though. Where they living now? California probably huh? Phil
  11. Scottish - on a side note and in a feeble attempt to hijack this thread Ahem, yes ... It seems you have indeed hijacked this thread. A pox on you Diesel, I shall exact my revenge. Phil
  12. I am willing to accept that it does happen if you are willing to accept that this is not always the case, and that it can go the other way too... It can ALWAYS go the other way. insufficiently_thoughtful_persons can leave Neg feedback anytime. Regardless of whether you wait or not. The only way to prevent it is to leave your feedback only after the other party leaves theirs. This would be just another form of feedback hostage. The seller should leave their feedback first ... Period. It should be left upon reciept of payment ... Period. If a seller does not leave feedback for me within whatever I consider a reasonable time, then I will not leave feedback for them ... Ever. If a seller does not leave feedback for me in what I consider a reasonable time, I will not bid on future auctions from that seller ... Period. I realize that this somewhat limits my purchasing power over time, but I don't really care. The principle is more important to me. Phil
  13. I have to disagree. That is fine, I have not and will not change my mind. Don't think for one minute that sellers do not hold feedback hostage. Phil
  14. That an ebay auction is not completed until all parties check in and only then should feedback be given. Here we go again. Once the buyer pays, the seller can expect nothing more from him. He has money, the amount he agreed to sell the item/items for. The seller should leave feedback at that time. Once the buyer recieves the item/items he inspects them and if they are satisfactory he should leave positive feedback. If unsatisfactory, he should contact the seller and try to resolve the issue. If resolved satisfactorily he should leave positive feedback. If not resolved satisfactorily he may then at his discretion leave neutral or negative feedback. If a seller is unwilling to leave feedback upon reciept of payment he either 1. Is doubtful about the quality of the product he auctioned off. 2. Is a crook. or 3. Is a coward. Your theory leaves waaay too much room for scamming sellers. For example - 1. A seller could collect the money and never send the item. The threat of negative feedback would be enough for some buyers to keep their mouths shut. 2. A seller could send a product of much lower quality than described. The buyer may keep his mouth shut for the reason above. Ebay already gives the seller too much power, your distorted version of a proper sale gives them even more. Phil
  15. THAT IS VERY INTERTESTING DEALERS CAN OVERGRADE BUT YOU CAN'T. You are very selective in what you reply to. The dealers you are referring to were not grading the books. They were quoting a price. The reason Rick said dealers overgrade is because there is a LITTLE leeway in grading. Everyone knows that it would not be reasonable to expect everyone to give a book the same grade. You have taken this to the extreme, you are calling books NM that could not make near mint in ANY reasonable persons mind. A dealer when selling, may look at a book and say Hmmm this could be a Fine but in a way it looks like a Fine+ so whenever there is wiggling room they will bump to the higher grade, when they are buying they will bump to the lower grade. You have taken this to new heights though. You can take a book that looks to me to be F- and say, hmmm looks like F-, could be FN, Maybe even F+, no money in that. WOW, Look how much for NM/MT, well NM/MT it is. You just bulldozed right through the VF grades and the NM- grade and went straight to the top. It makes you look crooked. Now, I am expecting my reply to say something like "The dealers are supposed to overgrade, but I am not? How is that fair? Just because I don't work for CGC? So let's just skip all that and please absorb some of the points in the above paragraphs. Phil
  16. SO YOU MEAN WHEN A CGC COMIC BOOK DEALER HAS A HOLE IN A COMIC BOOK AND YOU BRING IT UP TO THE COUNTER TO BUY IT AND HE WHIPS OUT TH OVERSTREET AND THE WIZARD AND QUOTES THE NM 9.4 PRICE FOR A COMIC WITH A HOLE IN IT THAT HE IS NOT WAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYY OVERGRADING? He is not grading at all. He is quoting the price he chooses to sell the book at. If I go to Kroger and buy a dozen eggs for 79 cents and they are 99 cents at A&P that does not mean A&P overgrades their eggs. It may mean A&P overcharged for the eggs but that is a different matter. You are not being questioned about your prices, you are being questioned over your GRADES. Phil
  17. REALLY THEN YOU AGREE THEY OVER GRADE AND THEY ARE THE DEALERS AND THE EXPERTS OH AND THEY ARE THE CGC DEALERS AS WELL! ARE YOU SAYING ITS OK FOR THEM TO DO THIS BUT NOT YOU? AND WHY IS IT OK FOR THEM TO DO IT? Look, the complaint here is not that you overgrade. The complaint is that you waaaaaaaaaayyyyyy overgrade. Grading is subjective to a point, but at some point it changes from subjective to deceptive. You are not just crossing that line, you are LEAPING over it. Phil
  18. GRADING IS ALWAYS SUBJECTIVE Yeah, to a degree. The book in that auction though ... There is nothing subjective about that. Rainman would know the difference between that and NM/Mt. I don't know why you are getting so worked up, you are obviously a lousy grader. I am a lousy grader as well, admittedly not as lousy as you but I am pretty bad. I tend to be overly conservative in my grading, you tend to grade just about anything as Near Mint. If you had an actual NM/MT book it would probably grade a 13.8 on your scale - no biggie. If you just admit you can't grade you will probably get less hassle than defending such blatantly poor grading. Phil
  19. Hmmm, it is hard enough to believe the guy sets up his auctions like this, and grades like he does. Then he comes in here and DEFENDS it. I mean I am lousy at grading, Scottish could outgrade me on one of his bad days, but even I can see the difference between F- and NM/Mint. I understand that grading is subjective, but my God, it's not THAT subjective. The huge majority of his negative feedback is because he can't grade, so I don't know why he would bother to come here and try to defend THAT. This is honestly the absolute worst grading I have EVER seen. Phil
  20. Thus, it appears I will satisfy all the reasonable collectors simply by sticking with my 16+ year old 7 day return without the added CGC bit. AND, it appears this will also satisfy most of those who think the CGC bit is trying to pull something over on them since they wont have that to focus on and will instead only see the part about my way above average return policy. THAT sounds like sour grapes. "Everyone who liked my idea is reasonable, and everyone who didn't is not" I know the many friends and collectors I have dealt with over the years will be happy, as they currently are, and only those paranoid folks who seem to constantly look at things from the worst point of view will still have something to complain about. Did it at any moment occur to you, that the people who saw the possibilities of a scam, have been scammed one too many times? What do you think they should do? Sit quietly and not tell you that they see a POTENTIAL for abuse in this? You asked for opinions, but maybe you should have just said "Please reply to this thread ONLY if your opinion is in line with mine" Phil
  21. OK, I am just thinking that there are many scenarios that are not being looked at in this thread. For example 1. Mr. Cage shows his collection to a friend who is very much "into" comics. 2. This friend says hmmmm about two hundred (or whatever number) appear to be restored, but you should get a professional opinion. 3. Mr. Cage separates this (200?) books and selects just a few to submit with all of the ones that the "friend" states are unrestored. 4. The supposed "restored" books start coming back and they are indeed restored 5. Would he now submit the other books, or would he ask his financial advisor if these books may become more valuable... say ... 20 years in the future even though they are restored? Phil
  22. Also, how can this be true? Read Matt Nelson's summary of the runs on sale. They are nearly complete. Clearly, there were not large chunks (50%) of these runs that were screened as restored and held back by Cage. OK, I read Matt's summary. I can't see anywhere that he says "I have seen every comic that Mr. Cage owns" nor do I see where he says "I have seen every comic that Mr. Cage had screened for restoration" He says he has seen all of the comics that were submitted to Heritage. This certainly does not disprove what Crusty said.I am not saying Crusty is right or wrong, I have no idea but I am glad he posted. It certainly has made for a verrrrrry looooong thread. Phil
  23. I want a piece of that action. I could overgrade all of my books by a point or two and get them all slabbed for about 5 bucks in postage. Phil