I just learned that grading terms are "subjective"

[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

 

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.

Now that's using your head!!

[OldGuy]

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.

 

There you have it.

[OldGuy]

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.

 

[Rocketeer]

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.

 

There you have it.

 

...Bingo,..that's the rationalization I was looking for,...people beeyotch all the time about getting taken on bad e-bay transactions,...this sale past any lines of subjectivity and was the result of a product that was blatantly mis-labeled by a seller who is familiar enough with the industry to use specific jargon in the attempt to obtain a greater profit from an inferior product,...furthermore when confronted with the situation he tried to use an out clause that every comic book scammer has memorized when listing an under graded book,....kind of like a prostitute asking her john if he is a cop before she goes down on him,...

 

...If I don't neg him he has no incentive to change his habits and people will continue to get screwed,...

[cd4ever]

My thoughts:

 

1) Grading is subjective. No...really. It is.

2) Despite any allowances made for said subjectivity, the book was still clearly very overgraded.

3) The seller seemed to be politely asking for examples of where the book did not match the description.

4) Had the buyer answered his question he may have gotten the refund.

5) Had the seller refused to offer a refund, a neg was absolutley warranted. My only concern is that the buyer never really gave him a chance to make it right.

 

 

 

[mschmidt]

A few observations...

 

(1) If someone is going to use terminology recognised by the hobby/industry...VF+, or VG-...then they have to have a good grasp of what those terms mean and what is allowable in those grades. You can't have some halfway house of 'I have no idea, plus it's all subjective' along with 'book grades at VF+'.

 

(2) What was paid for the book is 100% irrelevant. It's an auction and the bidder is entitled to bid what he wants for what he thinks he's getting. If he wins it for 'cheap', then that is wholly a facet of the auction format. Also part of the self-same auction format is that the item must be as described. Thems the rules.

 

Imagine going to Circuit City and picking up a new 45" Plasma TV in their 50% off sale. You get it home and discover that there's no sound and the picture is in black & white. When complaining to the store, would you find it acceptable for Customer Service to point out that you shouldn't complain, as you only paid half price and that's what you get for trying to get something 'on the cheap'?

 

Like you would.

 

(3) When the seller asks for Rocketeer to 'point out what is incorrect in the description', leading him to think the book is not VF+, he's not being nice and asking for guidance. What he's doing, for the seventh time, is referring his buyer to the 'grading is subjective' opt-out clause. He's actually attempting to be clever.

 

(4) Having claimed that he gave a full description, he didn't. Staining has an important, and hugely detrimental, effect on grade...and he didn't reveal it.

 

All in all, a negative is the very least scum-bag deserves. A public flogging would be more appropriate. (thumbs u

 

Talk about over-reaction

 

So, in your mind, there's not a chance that the seller is just another clueless ebay merchant, who actually thought this book was "very fine +-" (and didn't see the water stain)? He's immediately an evil scumbag who's trying to put one over on poor ol' Rocketeer? I hate seller misrepresentation as much as the next guy, but that's just nuts, f_t - look at his other auctions, and his feedback in general; it's totally obvious that he's not a comic book guy ...

 

Also - it was asked earlier, but not answered by Rocketeer. Did the seller actually refuse a refund? Because it looks like there's an email missing from the thread o' replies I posted earlier ...

[comix4fun]

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.

 

 

Maybe everyone jumped to that conclusion because:

1) the facts supported it and

2) this isn't the first time a seller went to the "Gomer Pyle Defense" using terms that promise one grade, while failing to fully disclose defects, and when confronted recited the expected "Gollllllly I am sure am shocked, who'd a thunk there was such a difference of opinion on grades, it shore is a good thing I mentioned that subjectamative thingy about grading?"

 

How many seller's have to perpetuate this action before we start holding them accountable. The seller had his chance to make things right, instead he quoted his auction text as if it were some shield of legal boilerplate. It's a straight forward "gotcha" on the seller's part, when he did not offer to return/refund and instead hid behind his terms we all should have gotten the hint.

 

C

[Flaming_Telepath]

So, in your mind, there's not a chance that the seller is just another clueless ebay merchant, who actually thought this book was "very fine +-" (and didn't see the water stain)?

 

And that of course (a) makes it OK and (b) means he's undeserving of a negative?

 

If you don't mind me borrowing a play out of your own book?

 

[mschmidt]

The seller had his chance to make things right, instead he quoted his auction text as if it were some shield of legal boilerplate. It's a straight forward "gotcha" on the seller's part, when he did not offer to return/refund and instead hid behind his terms we all should have gotten the hint.

 

C

 

So, if you sold a book on ebay, and a buyer emailed you & said "this book I just bought is not a VF, it's a VF/G", you would immediately refund him without even asking why?

[Flaming_Telepath]

The seller had his chance to make things right, instead he quoted his auction text as if it were some shield of legal boilerplate. It's a straight forward "gotcha" on the seller's part, when he did not offer to return/refund and instead hid behind his terms we all should have gotten the hint.

 

C

 

So, if you sold a book on ebay, and a buyer emailed you & said "this book I just bought is not a VF, it's a VF/G", you would immediately refund him without even asking why?

 

(thumbs u

 

No questions asked refund policy...here and on eBay.

[mschmidt]

So, in your mind, there's not a chance that the seller is just another clueless ebay merchant, who actually thought this book was "very fine +-" (and didn't see the water stain)?

 

And that of course (a) makes it OK and (b) means he's undeserving of a negative?

 

If you don't mind me borrowing a play out of your own book?

 

 

Not at all - if the seller doesn't make it right by giving Rocketeer a full refund, he completely deserves the neg. But I'm still missing the part of the conversation where the seller actually refuses to refund Rocketeer his money

[comix4fun]

The seller had his chance to make things right, instead he quoted his auction text as if it were some shield of legal boilerplate. It's a straight forward "gotcha" on the seller's part, when he did not offer to return/refund and instead hid behind his terms we all should have gotten the hint.

 

C

 

So, if you sold a book on ebay, and a buyer emailed you & said "this book I just bought is not a VF, it's a VF/G", you would immediately refund him without even asking why?

 

 

In this case the buyer immediately and in detail described what was wrong with the book, what was not disclosed and why it was not in the grade described. The seller knew immediately, without having to ask why?

 

To which the seller referred back to his "subjective" term as a shield.

 

And if it were me, and I missed water stains and other flaws and had the seller describe them all to me in the same detail the cash would have already been refunded.

 

C

[mr_highgrade]

I think the Monkey should neg him instead of you.

[Rocketeer]

Also - it was asked earlier, but not answered by Rocketeer. Did the seller actually refuse a refund? Because it looks like there's an email missing from the thread o' replies I posted earlier ...

 

...there is no e-mail missing,..I e-mailed him a second time after he didn't respond to my last e-mail,..so stop looking for a conspiracy,...there is none,...the seller never offered me a refund,..only excuses and defenses,..if he was open to a refund he would have offered it on the first request,...at the very least the second request,..so I don't feel I jumped the gun ,...

[OldGuy]

The seller had his chance to make things right, instead he quoted his auction text as if it were some shield of legal boilerplate. It's a straight forward "gotcha" on the seller's part, when he did not offer to return/refund and instead hid behind his terms we all should have gotten the hint.

 

C

 

So, if you sold a book on ebay, and a buyer emailed you & said "this book I just bought is not a VF, it's a VF/G", you would immediately refund him without even asking why?

 

Yup, especially if he thought "VF/G" was an actual grade, then I would know I was dealing with a complete i d i o t and would want to be done with him ASAP.

 

Not to mention the fact that I have a no questions asked return policy.

[Shootydog]

So instead of arguing with the seller and trying to get your money back its posted here and now another huge he said she said grading argument is born.

 

Why not just deal with the seller, neg him as you think is required, post his name for others to watch for, and leave it at that?

 

Or are we just looking for validation to our own indignation at having been "gotten over on?"

 

 

Grading is subjective. Buyer beware. I got crappy books on Ebay that were overgraded. I tossed them in a box and decided never to buy from that seller again.

 

Forgive my rant, I just dont understand the extremes sometimes.

[nik]

The seller had his chance to make things right, instead he quoted his auction text as if it were some shield of legal boilerplate. It's a straight forward "gotcha" on the seller's part, when he did not offer to return/refund and instead hid behind his terms we all should have gotten the hint.

 

C

 

So, if you sold a book on ebay, and a buyer emailed you & said "this book I just bought is not a VF, it's a VF/G", you would immediately refund him without even asking why?

 

If it was me, absolutely, without a doubt (thumbs u

[Rocketeer]

Why not just deal with the seller, neg him as you think is required, post his name for others to watch for, and leave it at that?

 

Why?..cause this is a public forum,...and matters like this should be discussed especially in light of E-bay's new feedback system that I feel just emancipated the buyer who was always in fear of getting a retaliatory neg in the past ,..even when he had every right to neg the seller....it's relevant to the changes in our hobby.

 

Or are we just looking for validation to our own indignation at having been "gotten over on?"

 

...nope,..I'm not that deep,...

 

 

Grading is subjective. Buyer beware. I got crappy books on Ebay that were over graded. I tossed them in a box and decided never to buy from that seller again.

 

...But that doesn't help the next buyer much does it?...sometimes you have to think past yourself and do something for the greater good,...

[maxstuf]

How about a full size scan of the book?

 

Might help clear up how far off the seller was (thumbs u

[Guest]

Didn't read all of the preceeding posts but I get the "jist" of the situation.

 

Yes, grading is in fact, subjective. However it should be "close". Too much of a disparity of the accepted practices, is lying. Sometimes people tend to grade a copy they own better than it actually is, without trying to commit a fraud. They just see dollar signs and it blinds them to an extent. But more often than not, it is an attempt to get "extra" money for an item that deserves to be purchased for less.

 

I do not understand an honest seller REFUSING a refund for a raw comic book, IF the unsatisfied buyer ASKS for one. However, if the unsatisfied buyer just rants and raves about the poor grading, without actually ASKING for a refund, then that can be construed as an oversight on his (buyers) part as well.

 

If a seller on Ebay (not here, but Ebay where average people are selling whatever they come across and they can not be expected to be "up" on the ins and outs of every thing or subject), states in the title "VF+", but then goes into some length to describe the various flaws with the book and states the code words of "grading is subjective" (which many many sellers do on a regular basis, such as "popscomics"), then a buyer that is comic book "savvy" should understand the detailed description given and the red flags that are written and alluded too.

 

Bottom line. I would ask for a refund minus shipping charges, and if not given, then a negative would be given. Then it is done. You do not deal with that seller again.

 

Titles of items for sale/auction, are many times exagerated or down right lies. Take for instance how many are titled "Action Comics #1" and then it is a modern reprint for BIN of $4.95) when you actually click on the item link. Is that the same as "VF+" in the title? Is that fraud? Titles are attention getters, but surely someone who actually knows a VF+ from a VG- would not fall for that title, once they read the description. Would they?

 

Simply notify the seller that unless a refund is given, then a negative will be given. You can do no more than that. That is how Ebay works. Unless of course you paid via PayPal or credit card, then you have other recourses to get your money back.

 

P.S. Another "red flag" is a seller that will not accept PayPal. Yes, I know they charge a fee and some just don't want to give up their few dollars more, but mostly it is because they know that if there is a problem with their item living up to expectations, the money can be "grabbed back" from them by PayPal. Whatever excuse is given for them not accepting PayPal, be wary of those sellers.