I just learned that grading terms are "subjective"

[Davenport]

So ya'll think there's zero chance this is a misunderstanding? Zero chance the seller is clueless on CGC hammering stains?

 

Even though he's pizzed he posts "So I get the book yesterday and there are two water stains on the back cover and about 8-9 color breaking stress marks on the spine with maybe another 6 or so non-color breaking,...not a bad book but nowhere near an 8.5,...I'd say 5.0-5.5,...not an ugly book mind you, but not one that I would pay $36.00 for"

 

Not everyone is up to par on CGC's unpublished grading criteria, so there may be room for giving benefit of the doubt. That's all I'm saying.

 

(anyone else remember the 1st time they had a pretty book slammed by CGC for staining/soiling? It can be quite the shock if you're a noob.)

[Flaming_Telepath]

Not everyone is up to par on CGC's unpublished grading criteria, so there may be room for giving benefit of the doubt. That's all I'm saying.

 

(anyone else remember the 1st time they had a pretty book slammed by CGC for staining/soiling? It can be quite the shock if you're a noob.)

 

I'm assuming then that outside of CGC's 'unpublished grading criteria', staining/soiling has always been acceptable in VF+?

[joe_collector]

Neg that seller!

 

And don't listen to the usual "you should be more careful about bidding" and "I would have never bid on it" ninnies (which are sure to come out of the woodwork), as that stupidity doesn't even address the question asked.

[nik]

Like I said the first time. Neg this dikhead and be done with it.

 

Sure grading is subjective but Christ almighty, a book advertized as a VF+ and turning out to be a VG/FN? nothing subjective about that.

 

What I fail to understand is the people defending the seller through all this.

What a total crock of .

[buttock]

Just to clarify here, not all aspects of grading are subjective. The finer points are subjective, but some of the major points are not. A NM can't have chunks off the book, and a VF+ can't have the amount of wear the Rocketeer is describing. When you're arguing a FN+ vs a VF-, sure there's some room for subjectivity. When you're arguing a VG/FN vs a VF+, there's no room for subjectivity and that becomes an excuse on behalf of the seller.

[Flaming_Telepath]

Just to clarify here, not all aspects of grading are subjective. The finer points are subjective, but some of the major points are not. A NM can't have chunks off the book, and a VF+ can't have the amount of wear the Rocketeer is describing. When you're arguing a FN+ vs a VF-, sure there's some room for subjectivity. When you're arguing a VG/FN vs a VF+, there's no room for subjectivity and that becomes an excuse on behalf of the seller.

 

In one. (thumbs u

[brasseye]

Ya the guy has gone to the trouble of listing 'some' of the faults of the book, in a understated way on cencealing the main fault of the water stains.

It's a feeble attempt to rationalise blatant misrepresentation, he's trying dance around this point with his whole 'grade is subjective' argument.

 

Fraud is fraud. Neg em! (thumbs u

[Davenport]

 

I'm assuming then that outside of CGC's 'unpublished grading criteria', staining/soiling has always been acceptable in VF+?

Did you look at the auction? Obviously the dumbazz seller made a huge mistake putting a technical term like "vf+" in the title. Huge mistake. A mistake he didn't repeat in the description:

 

"Howdy, I'm offering a very nice copy of Batman 149."

 

Dumbazz, yes. It just doesn't pass the scam smell-test imho.

 

He should've used "very nice" in his title too. Then we could have a thread on "eBay sellers who refuse to grade!" (thumbs u

 

[GAMBIT]

You bought something listed as VF+ - 8.5 and came to your door in VG 4.5, there is no excuse for that. A negative is deserved if the seller doesn't reimburse payment

[Davenport]

You bought something listed as VF+ - 8.5 and came to your door in VG 4.5, there is no excuse for that. A negative is deserved if the seller doesn't reimburse payment

So now it's a VG 4.5? I thought he posted:

"not a bad book but nowhere near an 8.5,...I'd say 5.0-5.5,...not an ugly book mind you"

 

BTW, you do know CGC dropped outdated terms like G, VG, VF, etc., right? That's the first clue the buyer and seller might be speaking different "condition" languages.

 

But it was probably was sinister intent. Best to punish him. Severely.

[Sal]

Davenport, surely you realise that you're bending over backwards to hold the seller blameless here.

 

 

I'd neg the dude, but I would hold off on the calls for public flogging.

 

 

 

Let it be a lesson to the seller to educate himself on the more "technical" aspects of the hobby rather than just throw descriptive grading terminology willy-nilly

[scottish]

Bottom line the seller stated VF in the title. The 'subjective' verbiage is just COA. I agree with the negative.

 

Had he not made mention of any specific grade then no issue, but I also doubt Rocketeer would have even posted.

[mica]

willy-nilly

[GAMBIT]

I could have sworn I saw somewhere he said it looked VG (which is 4.0/4.5), Which is irrelevant. a 8.0 and a 5.0 are VERY different and if a "seller" sells books that in his opinion are "VF" yet look to be in the 5.0 grade. people MUST be warned via feedback or this type of misunderstanding/problem will happen again

[GAMBIT]

Davenport, surely you realise that you're bending over backwards to hold the seller blameless here.

 

 

I'd neg the dude, but I would hold off on the calls for public flogging.

 

 

 

Let it be a lesson to the seller to educate himself on the more "technical" aspects of the hobby rather than just throw descriptive grading terminology willy-nilly

 

I agree. and if you are selling comics, and use terms like "VF+" you have some kind of idea of grading, and to think a VF+(or 8.5) is similar to a VG (or 5.0), Its hard to believe, regardless, people should be warned so they can bid accordingly and not have this type of "misunderstanding" happen again

[Davenport]

Davenport, surely you realise that you're bending over backwards to hold the seller blameless here.

 

 

I'd neg the dude, but I would hold off on the calls for public flogging.

 

 

 

Let it be a lesson to the seller to educate himself on the more "technical" aspects of the hobby rather than just throw descriptive grading terminology willy-nilly

Yeah, I do. It just seemed like the mindreading tide immediately went to negative motivation on the seller's part. Who knows what he was thinking. I'm just mindreading in the other direction.

 

I think it's just easier to request large scans, and if the don't come... then move on. Strictly relying on "grade" can set you up to be forever offended. Go visit a grading contest thread and notice for folks inside the hobby it's still all over the map. Factor in used book sellers tossing around hobby-terms and, well, good luck with that means of communication.

[Shootydog]

You bought something listed as VF+ - 8.5 and came to your door in VG 4.5, there is no excuse for that. A negative is deserved if the seller doesn't reimburse payment

So now it's a VG 4.5? I thought he posted:

"not a bad book but nowhere near an 8.5,...I'd say 5.0-5.5,...not an ugly book mind you"

 

BTW, you do know CGC dropped outdated terms like G, VG, VF, etc., right? That's the first clue the buyer and seller might be speaking different "condition" languages.

 

But it was probably was sinister intent. Best to punish him. Severely.

 

Doest the CGC label itself state that the given grade on a slab is subjective? And these are professional graders. I would never boast on Ebay in an auction that a book was a particular grade. Description and photos please. Nor would I take at face value the grade indicated. I might take a chance if I thought it was worth it but I wouldn't expect anyone to know what VF+ actually meant.

 

This is the reason I hesitate sellng books on Ebay.....subjective grading and the possibiliyt of a misunderstanding or disagreements.

 

IMO the seller and buyer should meet halfway on this.

[Kenwho]

Is this guy a regular comic book seller or just a guy selling a comic book or 2? If he just has a couple of books to sell and is not familiar with the grading levels in the hobby then grades can definatly be from a 4.0 to a 8.5. I started collecting comic books 40 years ago. Stopped buying in the early 80's and a couple of years ago decided to see what my "really great" "mostly mint" comic books were worth. I bought the Overstreet grading guide and at first used that and found that to my surprise my books weren't quite as good as I thought but were still pretty nice. Imagine my good luck at finding this really great CGC forum where you could learn all about comic books from other collectors. Imagine my biggest surprise yet after a while at learning that my "really great" and "mostly mint" comic books were in fact, not so much and that the Overstreet grading guide to the untrained can be very misleading. It's a great guide if you already are familiar with grading and not so much if your not. It has taken me 1000's of hours on here watching and learning from all of you to even come close to being able to grade a book accuratly and I still see a difference of "opinion" many times in the grading forum being 2 full grades or even more. Being as anal as I am I am willing to spend the time to get it right or at least as close to right as can be. I still have a hard time knowing what the hell the difference is between a 9.0 and 9.8. I'm not so sure someone selling a couple of comic books is going to do that. Anyway that being said I am not trying to stick up for the guy only show that he may not know how to truly correctly grade a comic book and is not out to scam someone and I never saw anywhere in your posts that he refused to give you a refund and that he may truly have just wanted to know what was wrong with the book before doing so. If any of you here were born with the ability to grade to CGC's standards then I I have purchased a few books off E-bay that I felt were not graded correctly. Again from being on here I learned this about E-bay graders to almost always expect at least a 1-2 point grade difference and bid accordingly. I have had to return a few books and on some others was happy with the book for what I paid even though the book was not at the grade that the seller stated. In those instances I either gave the seller a Positive FB with a note stating in the feedback that the grade was not accurate or a neutral if the grade was really off again with a note stating to future buyers to beware of the grading. Sorry to have rambled on so long.

[joeypost]

Davenport, surely you realise that you're bending over backwards to hold the seller blameless here.

 

 

I'd neg the dude, but I would hold off on the calls for public flogging.

 

 

 

Let it be a lesson to the seller to educate himself on the more "technical" aspects of the hobby rather than just throw descriptive grading terminology willy-nilly

 

This is why I always pay for auction with my AMEX card. Once grading becomes "subjective" so does payment and I file a claim with AMEX. It all goes away after that.

[OldGuy]

So why didn't you use the same tone in your second message and told him what was wrong with the book?

 

Because he already told him what was wrong with the book in his first e-mail.