• 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.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

eBay flipper/swindler that rivals Comickeys & Robojo33...check this out!

Started by Inhuman Fiend,

144 posts in this topic

the blob

the blob

Posted
Posted

Well, I don't think it's a crime to come up with your own grade or even crack a non restored book out if you think CGC was vicious, but to ALWAYS do it and to sell books you don't even have in hand yet....

 

I've gotten some severely undegraded books here and even on ebay, I'm going to sell them with their real grade (in my opinion) and lower the grades on the ones I got burned on.

 

Heck, I just lowered some grades on books in my store when I took a look at them at 9 a.m. rather than when I listed them at 2 a.m.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gaz973

gaz973

Posted
Posted

There's no question that this guy is a mess. I don't see how anyone can defend him bumping the grade on a book that he hasn't even received for a profit. Fair enough if he received a book that was undergraded and sells it for a profit honestly but how many times is that gonna happen on ebay. meh

 

Not to mention the breaking out of PLOD's and selling them with no mention of it. :censored:

 

Like I said, the guys a mess. :mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
the blob

the blob

Posted
Posted

I don't see how anyone can defend him bumping the grade on a book that he hasn't even received for a profit.

---------------------

Who defended him? To post an auction for a book you haven't even seen yet and to assign it a grade higher than the person you're buying it from assigned it is practically fraudulent and I seriously doubt all these instances are "oh, I know that guy always undergrades"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
i certainly agree with that last part...........but if I bought this particular book and then got a gander at that Back Cover, he'd have a neg for sure..........folks are remarkably forgiving on Ebay.

 

Hey, i left ComicKeys positive feedback :o before i realized who/what he was....

 

I also agree. The reason steve1011 can get away with it and have decent feedback is the same reason most of the other overgrading sellers (albeit to a much lesser degree) on eBay have good feedback...it's because 95% of eBay buyers don't know how to grade either. Plus, they are too lazy (or too stupid) to really delve into a seller's buying and selling activities like we have! :sumo:

 

 

Is it that 95% of ebayers don't know how to grade or is it that folks here are super-critical graders and constantly searching for balrogs in the woodpile?

As far as our collective abilities to grade go,I'll call your attention to the various grading contests.How often were you spot on with CGCs grades? I was off quite a bit a few times. I recall showing Foolkiller a FF 50 I called a VF-,at a show,but he thought it was more of a Fine/Fine plus. We asked a dealer friend and he opined that it was a strong 5.5/weak 6.0.

Calling people stupid because they don't take the time to research where a seller got his book from is a bit elitist,in my opinion.If an ebayer buys a book at a price he thinks is fair,and doesn't complain,why should we care?

He's flipping books,and overgrading them. Not trimming them or color-touching them,as far as I can see. Not anywhere near a Dr Koos,which is my original point.

 

Why are you defending this mess? :makepoint:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
silverseeker

silverseeker

Posted
Posted

Based on his books' opening bids and BINs, I suspect buyers who win his auctions are gambling that he was spot-on with his grading...when they realize that they overpaid for a (much) lower-grade book, they chalk him up as another eBay seller who can't grade, but don't think it's bad enough to warrant a neg...

 

Just my 2c

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Old Fashion PB and J

Old Fashion PB and J

Posted
Posted

Hmm, this explains my oddball ebay buying. I can spend 6 hours on ebay and bid on 1-3 books. Generally it will be books, with no grade or if they are graded imagine its off by 2 pts. If the seller says 9.0 im guessing 7.5 maybe better. Always check the feedback, and see what they are buying/selling. If they are selling something they just bought there is something wrong.

 

This guy however is a crook. If he took these books to a show he wouldnt move anything (unless he took lowball offers). But my gues would be his reputation would go to hell after 5 people hit his table. And the plods as unrestored. Horrible....

 

 

This boards the best place to buy..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rodan57

rodan57

Posted
Posted

Yeah, he's just another jerk in the business to make some money off of the less discerning collectors in our hobby --- until he starts unslabbing restored books and markets them without disclosure. Now he's a fraud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bluechip

bluechip

Posted
Posted
Hmm, this explains my oddball ebay buying. I can spend 6 hours on ebay and bid on 1-3 books. Generally it will be books, with no grade or if they are graded imagine its off by 2 pts. If the seller says 9.0 im guessing 7.5 maybe better. Always check the feedback, and see what they are buying/selling. If they are selling something they just bought there is something wrong.

 

This guy however is a crook. If he took these books to a show he wouldnt move anything (unless he took lowball offers). But my gues would be his reputation would go to hell after 5 people hit his table. And the plods as unrestored. Horrible....

 

 

This boards the best place to buy..

 

The guy may be a spoon but he can only be a "crook" if he's doing something illegal, and grading something different (even wrongly) is a matter of opinion and reputation, not a matter of fraud because there is no legal standard for grades. If it was a CGC 5 and he said it was a CGC 7 it would be fraud. It would also be fraud if he said it was a PGX 7 when it hadn't been. And if it's a PLOD and he cracks it out more power to him -- so long as he discloses what work has been done. Why? Because the PLODs are not really informative and -- even more importantly -- not consistent. What gets a PLOD in one case will not necessary get a PLOD in another. And the PLOD supposedly labels a book "restored" when in many cases the book has not been improved but simply damaged. (I can't even begin to understand how some people can be so extreme and silly as to think a book missing a corner piece is worth more than one with an intact corner that has a dot of color touch -- so there is no way I would feel compelled to make that same argument or to support any call to force others to make it).

 

It would be fraud if somebody asked had this once been in a PLOD and he said no. And it is a seller's responsibility to point out any defects which might be hidden. But it is not a seller's responsibility to point out that a perfectly obvious color marking defect might (just might) be called restoration by you or someone else, and further to add that you think restoration is "bad" and that if you were there to talk to the buyer you'd tell him not to buy the book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted

But it is not a seller's responsibility to point out that a perfectly obvious color marking defect might (just might) be called restoration by you or someone else, and further to add that you think restoration is "bad" and that if you were there to talk to the buyer you'd tell him not to buy the book.

 

Huh?

 

The guy cracked a PLOD & listed it with no mention of resto. Are you suggesting that it's the buyers responsibility to spot the resto?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gaz973

gaz973

Posted
Posted
I don't see how anyone can defend him bumping the grade on a book that he hasn't even received for a profit.

---------------------

Who defended him? To post an auction for a book you haven't even seen yet and to assign it a grade higher than the person you're buying it from assigned it is practically fraudulent and I seriously doubt all these instances are "oh, I know that guy always undergrades"

 

It seems like Shadroch's defending him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bluechip

bluechip

Posted
Posted
But it is not a seller's responsibility to point out that a perfectly obvious color marking defect might (just might) be called restoration by you or someone else, and further to add that you think restoration is "bad" and that if you were there to talk to the buyer you'd tell him not to buy the book.

 

Huh?

 

The guy cracked a PLOD & listed it with no mention of resto. Are you suggesting that it's the buyers responsibility to spot the resto?

 

 

No. I am saying it depends on the "resto." If the book is actually a fair or good that has been to appear to be a VG or better, then it has been restored. If its apparent grade has not been altered, but it has a dot of glue or color touch that cannot be readily seen, it's the seller's job to point that out but he doesn't have to call it resto. If the glue or color touch is obvious and defaces the book in some way, then the seller's job is to treat it like a defect and grade accordingly, but it's not his responsibility to call it resto or to use any other term that makes no sense, regardless of what term a grading company might use (especially if he knows the grading company uses the term(s) inconsistently.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
But it is not a seller's responsibility to point out that a perfectly obvious color marking defect might (just might) be called restoration by you or someone else, and further to add that you think restoration is "bad" and that if you were there to talk to the buyer you'd tell him not to buy the book.

 

Huh?

 

The guy cracked a PLOD & listed it with no mention of resto. Are you suggesting that it's the buyers responsibility to spot the resto?

 

 

No. I am saying it depends on the "resto." If the book is actually a fair or good that has been to appear to be a VG or better, then it has been restored. If its apparent grade has not been altered, but it has a dot of glue or color touch that cannot be readily seen, it's the seller's job to point that out but he doesn't have to call it resto. If the glue or color touch is obvious and defaces the book in some way, then the seller's job is to treat it like a defect and grade accordingly, but it's not his responsibility to call it resto or to use any other term that makes no sense, regardless of what term a grading company might use (especially if he knows the grading company uses the term(s) inconsistently.

 

 

Did the seller mention anything in his auction? (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
burntboy

burntboy

Posted
Posted
But it is not a seller's responsibility to point out that a perfectly obvious color marking defect might (just might) be called restoration by you or someone else, and further to add that you think restoration is "bad" and that if you were there to talk to the buyer you'd tell him not to buy the book.

 

Huh?

 

The guy cracked a PLOD & listed it with no mention of resto. Are you suggesting that it's the buyers responsibility to spot the resto?

 

 

If the glue or color touch is obvious and defaces the book in some way, then the seller's job is to treat it like a defect and grade accordingly, but it's not his responsibility to call it resto or to use any other term that makes no sense, regardless of what term a grading company might use (especially if he knows the grading company uses the term(s) inconsistently.

 

 

I hate to say this, but this is some of the biggest bunch of wildly_fanciful_statement i've ever heard on these boards....... :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites
arexcrooke

arexcrooke

Posted
Posted
But it is not a seller's responsibility to point out that a perfectly obvious color marking defect might (just might) be called restoration by you or someone else, and further to add that you think restoration is "bad" and that if you were there to talk to the buyer you'd tell him not to buy the book.

 

Huh?

 

The guy cracked a PLOD & listed it with no mention of resto. Are you suggesting that it's the buyers responsibility to spot the resto?

 

 

If the glue or color touch is obvious and defaces the book in some way, then the seller's job is to treat it like a defect and grade accordingly, but it's not his responsibility to call it resto or to use any other term that makes no sense, regardless of what term a grading company might use (especially if he knows the grading company uses the term(s) inconsistently.

 

 

I hate to say this, but this is some of the biggest bunch of wildly_fanciful_statement i've ever heard on these boards....... :o

And that is saying something with the amount of stuff you and us have had to wade through

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gaz973

gaz973

Posted
Posted
From being compared to Comic Keys and Dupak. Not his selling practices.

 

I would agree that he's not on their high levels of fraudulent activity. But I think that we all agree that this seller is a dirtbag. (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gaz973

gaz973

Posted
Posted
But it is not a seller's responsibility to point out that a perfectly obvious color marking defect might (just might) be called restoration by you or someone else, and further to add that you think restoration is "bad" and that if you were there to talk to the buyer you'd tell him not to buy the book.

 

Huh?

 

The guy cracked a PLOD & listed it with no mention of resto. Are you suggesting that it's the buyers responsibility to spot the resto?

 

 

If the glue or color touch is obvious and defaces the book in some way, then the seller's job is to treat it like a defect and grade accordingly, but it's not his responsibility to call it resto or to use any other term that makes no sense, regardless of what term a grading company might use (especially if he knows the grading company uses the term(s) inconsistently.

 

 

I hate to say this, but this is some of the biggest bunch of wildly_fanciful_statement i've ever heard on these boards....... :o

 

I agree. :o :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Old Fashion PB and J

Old Fashion PB and J

Posted
Posted
Hmm, this explains my oddball ebay buying. I can spend 6 hours on ebay and bid on 1-3 books. Generally it will be books, with no grade or if they are graded imagine its off by 2 pts. If the seller says 9.0 im guessing 7.5 maybe better. Always check the feedback, and see what they are buying/selling. If they are selling something they just bought there is something wrong.

 

This guy however is a crook. If he took these books to a show he wouldnt move anything (unless he took lowball offers). But my gues would be his reputation would go to hell after 5 people hit his table. And the plods as unrestored. Horrible....

 

 

This boards the best place to buy..

 

The guy may be a spoon but he can only be a "crook" if he's doing something illegal, and grading something different (even wrongly) is a matter of opinion and reputation, not a matter of fraud because there is no legal standard for grades. If it was a CGC 5 and he said it was a CGC 7 it would be fraud. It would also be fraud if he said it was a PGX 7 when it hadn't been. And if it's a PLOD and he cracks it out more power to him -- so long as he discloses what work has been done. Why? Because the PLODs are not really informative and -- even more importantly -- not consistent. What gets a PLOD in one case will not necessary get a PLOD in another. And the PLOD supposedly labels a book "restored" when in many cases the book has not been improved but simply damaged. (I can't even begin to understand how some people can be so extreme and silly as to think a book missing a corner piece is worth more than one with an intact corner that has a dot of color touch -- so there is no way I would feel compelled to make that same argument or to support any call to force others to make it).

 

It would be fraud if somebody asked had this once been in a PLOD and he said no. And it is a seller's responsibility to point out any defects which might be hidden. But it is not a seller's responsibility to point out that a perfectly obvious color marking defect might (just might) be called restoration by you or someone else, and further to add that you think restoration is "bad" and that if you were there to talk to the buyer you'd tell him not to buy the book.

 

My opinion stands the guys shady. You take a book with restoration (and you KNOW it) . Then you take the same book out and sell it as unrestored. If I buy a book unslabbed I Expect It to get a blue label if I submit it. IF I buy a book with resto it had better be disclosed before any deal is reached. And am I reading this as its my job to spot resto from a scan ???? I just cant keep talking about this. I really dont care who wants to stand up for the guy or defend shady characters. I think what hes doing is total , if you agree or not thats up to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bluechip

bluechip

Posted
Posted
But it is not a seller's responsibility to point out that a perfectly obvious color marking defect might (just might) be called restoration by you or someone else, and further to add that you think restoration is "bad" and that if you were there to talk to the buyer you'd tell him not to buy the book.

 

Huh?

 

The guy cracked a PLOD & listed it with no mention of resto. Are you suggesting that it's the buyers responsibility to spot the resto?

 

 

If the glue or color touch is obvious and defaces the book in some way, then the seller's job is to treat it like a defect and grade accordingly, but it's not his responsibility to call it resto or to use any other term that makes no sense, regardless of what term a grading company might use (especially if he knows the grading company uses the term(s) inconsistently.

 

 

I hate to say this, but this is some of the biggest bunch of wildly_fanciful_statement i've ever heard on these boards....... :o

 

 

Just how is that? Explain how it's wildly_fanciful_statement, because namecalling achieves nothing. And it seems to me the points in the post you're quoting have been made by many others on this board. So unless what they said is wildly_fanciful_statement, and I don't think it is, it appears to me that you're not really refuting what I said, you're just saying it's wildly_fanciful_statement because you don't like it being said.

 

I can post scans of books in slabs with labels that describe what was done to the book in precisely identical terms (re: glue, color touch, etc.) and yet some of the books have blue labels and some have purple labels.

 

I can also post scans of restored purple books that look only slightly different from their original state and get exactly the same label as books which have been massively altered and look nothing whatever like the book did in the original state.

 

As many have pointed out on these boards, "slight" resto can easily be removed, so what does it mean, then? Others on this board openly advocate buying slight restored books and removing the resto to sell them as unrestored. Should they be forced to disclose that it once had something on it that has now been removed, and that it's therefore been restored two times over?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing