PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[crassus]

It could be that CGC has some culpability in the fact that this sale is being disputed.

It doesn't appear that the stain is that big of a deal. But the wording of their notes makes it sound like a much bigger problem than it really is.

 

If that is the literal wording, "through the whole book", than it does appear a terrible exaggeration of the extent of the "stain", since only a liquid source can carry through a whole book, and that would mean something like water damage, which would be inconsistent with the grade.

 

My first reaction when I saw it was ink transfer of some kind, isolated to the bc.

 

I realize this is all academic, if the buyer was looking for an out already, but more relevant is whether the buyer was at any time shown the additional pre-submission pics of the inside, showing the real condition of the interior pages.

[Speedy-D]

Although, he is a close personal friend of Casey's. I suppose that should count as a Get Outta Jail Free card...

 

I certainly hope that's not the case. It shouldn't matter who he is or who he knows, from what we know he made a deal and backed out.

 

Sometimes things mean the opposite of what they say. We call this sarcasm, or facetiousness.

 

My apologies.

 

I have seen some post defending the buyer, and it appears to be because of who he is.

O, totally, you're right. I'm just not one of them.

[comix4fun]

The stain was mentioned in the original sales thread...

 

Anyway here are pre-slabbed pictures. Book is un-pressed. Not sure if a press will improve it or not. Nothing obvious in the pics

 

The only thing that stands out to me is the bottom spine corner, visible from the back cover only. Is that a bend, a stain, or just a trick of the light?

 

to which Dan responded...

Thanks everyone.

 

I think the bottom back corner is just an odd light

 

Later Bob bought the notes and they stated that it was in fact a stain and that it was across the entire book.

 

That would scare the snot out of me too.

 

 

+1 for sure.

 

If something was described to me as "an odd light" (which I don't know what that means) and after the deal was struck it came back from CGC as "Stain running through the entire book" that would be a pretty material issue and piece of information that wasn't available when the deal was struck.

 

That's a change to the basic description of the book in a material way that wasn't available at the time the agreement was reached.

[Logan510]

Although, he is a close personal friend of Casey's. I suppose that should count as a Get Outta Jail Free card...

 

That wasn't the point...but you know that.

 

 

Don't you have some two year overdue commissions to wrangle out of someone?

[Spider-Dan]

Dan said it himself. Two previous potential buyers had flaked on him (why aren't they up for probation) - Because both books were raw, and buyers disagreed with the grade upon closer inspection of pics. PL worthy... maybe, but it wasn't worth it. I let them off the hook because they would have just returned the books anyway

Does that mean that if it was a $5 book he wouldn't take the time to report? Probably. - Probably

 

But the lack of leeway for the note situation - I believe "stain" is buyers last resort to break the deal

Edited January 29, 2014 by Spider-Dan

[mikenyc]

Although, he is a close personal friend of Casey's. I suppose that should count as a Get Outta Jail Free card...

 

That wasn't the point...but you know that.

 

 

Don't you have some two year overdue commissions to wrangle out of someone?

 

::

 

Hey Speedy, remember when you went out of your way, dedicating free time to make a large number of boardies whole.

 

You are such a loser.

[comix4fun]

Man, he agreed to a deal, then tried to change it a couple times, then backed out and said "Do what you gotta do," then blamed it on graders' notes...that reeks of buyer's remorse. I don't think I've ever seen so much defense of this position before in a PL dispute where the defendant hasn't even spoken up yet. So what if it's expensive? If you're the nervous sort, caveat the and hope for the best. And if knowing that CGC gave it an 8.0 isn't enough for you, again, caveat the . :shrug:

 

 

You don't see an issue with something being called NOT a stain or "an odd light" and having that be part of the description of a book pre-sale and then CGC identifying it as a "stain running through the entire book"?

 

If the buyer is relying on that initial description of the stain as part of his decision to purchase I don't see how it can be ignored given CGC's designation.

 

And I read through Bob's requests to alter the deal. None of those attempts involved paying the seller less than 100% of his asking original asking price. Doesn't sound like buyer's remorse.

[Speedy-D]

Although, he is a close personal friend of Casey's. I suppose that should count as a Get Outta Jail Free card...

 

That wasn't the point...but you know that.

 

 

Don't you have some two year overdue commissions to wrangle out of someone?

 

::

 

Hey Speedy, remember when you went out of your way, dedicating free time to make a large number of boardies whole.

 

You are such a loser.

I'm still doing it!!

[comix4fun]

Well regarded seller and a well regarded buyer.

 

Unfortunate situation but the reputation of either participant should not matter in the least.

 

 

Agreed.

[Logan510]

Although, he is a close personal friend of Casey's. I suppose that should count as a Get Outta Jail Free card...

 

That wasn't the point...but you know that.

 

 

Don't you have some two year overdue commissions to wrangle out of someone?

 

::

 

Hey Speedy, remember when you went out of your way, dedicating free time to make a large number of boardies whole.

 

You are such a loser.

 

 

Haven't I embarrassed you enough publicly? Please keep quiet while the adults are talking.

 

 

Thank you

[Speedy-D]

Man, he agreed to a deal, then tried to change it a couple times, then backed out and said "Do what you gotta do," then blamed it on graders' notes...that reeks of buyer's remorse. I don't think I've ever seen so much defense of this position before in a PL dispute where the defendant hasn't even spoken up yet. So what if it's expensive? If you're the nervous sort, caveat the and hope for the best. And if knowing that CGC gave it an 8.0 isn't enough for you, again, caveat the . :shrug:

 

 

You don't see an issue with something being called NOT a stain or "an odd light" and having that be part of the description of a book pre-sale and then CGC identifying it as a "stain running through the entire book"?

 

If the buyer is relying on that initial description of the stain as part of his decision to purchase I don't see how it can be ignored given CGC's designation.

 

And I read through Bob's requests to alter the deal. None of those attempts involved paying the seller less than 100% of his asking original asking price. Doesn't sound like buyer's remorse.

he didn't say it wasn't a stain. He said he thought it was an odd light. And all of the attempts to change the deal seems sketchy to me. Not like it's a scam, but also not like someone who's fully committed to the deal. Finally, I personally wouldn't bring him up for the PL, if I felt like he honestly didn't want the book and I could still resell it for the same amount. But this isn't about me.

[VintageComics]

Knowing both people reasonably well I can see both sides of the situation here.

 

Bob definitely is one of those picky collectors (and I mean that in a nice way) where he only purchases books that he is happy with in spite of what the number in the top left says or the price. He does pay good money for books he likes.

 

Also, as an aside that I feel is relevant, even after the question was asked in the thread (and answered by Dan) and the seller stated that he didn't think it was a stain, I still felt it was a stain. I was interested in the book myself and didn't engage because I couldn't get away what my eyes saw.

 

The bottom line is that in a case like this where there is any ambiguity the seller needs to proceed with caution as nobody knows what his pet peeves are going to be except for him. It looks like according to the black and white of the agreement, Bob is on the hook for the book.

 

As I said, technically according to the way the story is currently presented, he's in breach at this point.

 

Having said that, I have had plenty of board members in very good standing (upstanding members of the community) either not ship books or just forget about deals and not pay for them. I've given them a free pass at least the first time around because I realize that in those specific cases their intention wasn't to reneg. and in this case, I am not so sure it was Bob's intention to reneg on a deal.

 

To each their own.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[comix4fun]

Man, he agreed to a deal, then tried to change it a couple times, then backed out and said "Do what you gotta do," then blamed it on graders' notes...that reeks of buyer's remorse. I don't think I've ever seen so much defense of this position before in a PL dispute where the defendant hasn't even spoken up yet. So what if it's expensive? If you're the nervous sort, caveat the and hope for the best. And if knowing that CGC gave it an 8.0 isn't enough for you, again, caveat the . :shrug:

 

 

You don't see an issue with something being called NOT a stain or "an odd light" and having that be part of the description of a book pre-sale and then CGC identifying it as a "stain running through the entire book"?

 

If the buyer is relying on that initial description of the stain as part of his decision to purchase I don't see how it can be ignored given CGC's designation.

 

And I read through Bob's requests to alter the deal. None of those attempts involved paying the seller less than 100% of his asking original asking price. Doesn't sound like buyer's remorse.

he didn't say it wasn't a stain. He said he thought it was an odd light. And all of the attempts to change the deal seems sketchy to me. Not like it's a scam, but also not like someone who's fully committed to the deal. Finally, I personally wouldn't bring him up for the PL, if I felt like he honestly didn't want the book and I could still resell it for the same amount. But this isn't about me.

 

 

What's "an odd light"?

[Speedy-D]

Knowing both people reasonably well I can see both sides of the situation here.

ROY SEES BOTH SIDES OF ARGUMENT!!!

[mikenyc]

Although, he is a close personal friend of Casey's. I suppose that should count as a Get Outta Jail Free card...

 

That wasn't the point...but you know that.

 

 

Don't you have some two year overdue commissions to wrangle out of someone?

 

::

 

Hey Speedy, remember when you went out of your way, dedicating free time to make a large number of boardies whole.

 

You are such a loser.

 

 

Haven't I embarrassed you enough publicly? Please keep quiet while the adults are talking.

 

 

Thank you

 

::

 

Hey Shia Lebouf I'm not sure if you're going for irony by reposting what I say to you, but if you are you are about as funny as usual.

 

You should realize mocking someone for being a good member and helpful to others is only helping your case of being one of the most useless members on these boards.

 

[Speedy-D]

Man, he agreed to a deal, then tried to change it a couple times, then backed out and said "Do what you gotta do," then blamed it on graders' notes...that reeks of buyer's remorse. I don't think I've ever seen so much defense of this position before in a PL dispute where the defendant hasn't even spoken up yet. So what if it's expensive? If you're the nervous sort, caveat the and hope for the best. And if knowing that CGC gave it an 8.0 isn't enough for you, again, caveat the . :shrug:

 

 

You don't see an issue with something being called NOT a stain or "an odd light" and having that be part of the description of a book pre-sale and then CGC identifying it as a "stain running through the entire book"?

 

If the buyer is relying on that initial description of the stain as part of his decision to purchase I don't see how it can be ignored given CGC's designation.

 

And I read through Bob's requests to alter the deal. None of those attempts involved paying the seller less than 100% of his asking original asking price. Doesn't sound like buyer's remorse.

he didn't say it wasn't a stain. He said he thought it was an odd light. And all of the attempts to change the deal seems sketchy to me. Not like it's a scam, but also not like someone who's fully committed to the deal. Finally, I personally wouldn't bring him up for the PL, if I felt like he honestly didn't want the book and I could still resell it for the same amount. But this isn't about me.

 

 

What's "an odd light"?

I assume it means a trick of the light...catching the light at an odd angle.

[comix4fun]

Knowing both people reasonably well I can see both sides of the situation here.

 

Bob definitely is one of those picky collectors (and I mean that in a nice way) where he only purchases books that he is happy with in spite of what the number in the top left says or the price. He does pay good money for books he likes.

 

Also, as an aside that I feel is relevant, even after the question was asked in the thread (and answered by Dan) and the seller stated that he didn't think it was a stain, I still felt it was a stain. I was interested in the book myself and didn't engage because I couldn't get away what my eyes saw.

 

The bottom line is that in a case like this where there is any ambiguity the seller needs to proceed with caution as nobody knows what his pet peeves are going to be except for him. It looks like according to the black and white of the agreement, Bob is on the hook for the book.

 

As I said, technically according to the way the story is currently presented, he's in breach at this point.

 

Having said that, I have had plenty of board members in very good standing (upstanding members of the community) either not ship books or just forget about deals and not pay for them. I've given them a free pass at least the first time around because I realize that in those specific cases their intention wasn't to reneg. and in this case, I am not so sure it was Bob's intention to reneg on a deal.

 

To each their own.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's where I'm stuck.

 

If the book is described as having anything less than the type of stain CGC identified is the buyer still on the hook for buying something that now has a description that is now different than when the agreement was struck?

 

If nothing had been said in the thread regarding the stain and if the seller didn't make any statements regarding what he thought that stain was, then it might be more clear cut, at least for me.

[Logan510]

Although, he is a close personal friend of Casey's. I suppose that should count as a Get Outta Jail Free card...

 

That wasn't the point...but you know that.

 

 

Don't you have some two year overdue commissions to wrangle out of someone?

 

::

 

Hey Speedy, remember when you went out of your way, dedicating free time to make a large number of boardies whole.

 

You are such a loser.

 

 

Haven't I embarrassed you enough publicly? Please keep quiet while the adults are talking.

 

 

Thank you

 

::

 

Hey Shia Lebouf I'm not sure if you're going for irony by reposting what I say to you, but if you are you are about as funny as usual.

 

You should realize mocking someone for being a good member and helpful to others is only helping your case of being one of the most useless members on these boards.

 

[comix4fun]

Man, he agreed to a deal, then tried to change it a couple times, then backed out and said "Do what you gotta do," then blamed it on graders' notes...that reeks of buyer's remorse. I don't think I've ever seen so much defense of this position before in a PL dispute where the defendant hasn't even spoken up yet. So what if it's expensive? If you're the nervous sort, caveat the and hope for the best. And if knowing that CGC gave it an 8.0 isn't enough for you, again, caveat the . :shrug:

 

 

You don't see an issue with something being called NOT a stain or "an odd light" and having that be part of the description of a book pre-sale and then CGC identifying it as a "stain running through the entire book"?

 

If the buyer is relying on that initial description of the stain as part of his decision to purchase I don't see how it can be ignored given CGC's designation.

 

And I read through Bob's requests to alter the deal. None of those attempts involved paying the seller less than 100% of his asking original asking price. Doesn't sound like buyer's remorse.

he didn't say it wasn't a stain. He said he thought it was an odd light. And all of the attempts to change the deal seems sketchy to me. Not like it's a scam, but also not like someone who's fully committed to the deal. Finally, I personally wouldn't bring him up for the PL, if I felt like he honestly didn't want the book and I could still resell it for the same amount. But this isn't about me.

 

 

What's "an odd light"?

I assume it means a trick of the light...catching the light at an odd angle.

 

 

Here's the thing, if he wasn't sure of what it was when asked directly it would have been better to say that than what was said.

 

What was said could create an expectation on behalf of the buyer. Who knows better what's on the book than the person who owns the book? If you ask them if it's a stain and they think it's something else that creates expectations. Those expectations are what go into agreements to buy and sell. It's a material defect to many collectors. When someone relies on that descriptor and it turns out to be false then the underpinnings of the meeting of the minds that created their agreement is destroyed.

[Sqeggs]

Knowing both people reasonably well I can see both sides of the situation here.

 

Bob definitely is one of those picky collectors (and I mean that in a nice way) where he only purchases books that he is happy with in spite of what the number in the top left says or the price. He does pay good money for books he likes.

 

Also, as an aside that I feel is relevant, even after the question was asked in the thread (and answered by Dan) and the seller stated that he didn't think it was a stain, I still felt it was a stain. I was interested in the book myself and didn't engage because I couldn't get away what my eyes saw.

 

The bottom line is that in a case like this where there is any ambiguity the seller needs to proceed with caution as nobody knows what his pet peeves are going to be except for him. It looks like according to the black and white of the agreement, Bob is on the hook for the book.

 

As I said, technically according to the way the story is currently presented, he's in breach at this point.

 

Having said that, I have had plenty of board members in very good standing (upstanding members of the community) either not ship books or just forget about deals and not pay for them. I've given them a free pass at least the first time around because I realize that in those specific cases their intention wasn't to reneg. and in this case, I am not so sure it was Bob's intention to reneg on a deal.

 

To each their own.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's where I'm stuck.

 

If the book is described as having anything less than the type of stain CGC identified is the buyer still on the hook for buying something that now has a description that is now different than when the agreement was struck?

 

If nothing had been said in the thread regarding the stain and if the seller didn't make any statements regarding what he thought that stain was, then it might be more clear cut, at least for me.

 

For me, too.

 

However unintentionally, the seller misrepresented the book. He was asked in the thread whether the book had a stain. He gave his honest opinion that it didn't and that what appeared to be a stain was a trick of the light. Turns out the book did have a stain.

 

But the buyer did, apparently, unconditionally say he would buy the book. He didn't include a proviso about not wanting the book should the apparent stain turn out to be an actual stain.

 

I suppose that if push comes to shove, the seller can insist that the buyer pay for the book or be put on the PL. But I agree with Bedrock that this would be a pretty hard-nosed position for a seller to take. (At least, I think that is Bedrock's point.)