• 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.

When you receive a different CGC book than was pictured

Started by Heavy3PO,

244 posts in this topic

slym2none

slym2none

Posted
Posted
For those who insist on no stock photos....how does one sell multiple copies of anything on eBay, for which eBay has a "multiple item listing" function...?

 

You only show one copy, but you have 10 available for sale...how do you suppose that works...?

 

It happens every day, even in comics.

 

I would never do so for comics, esp. CGC slabs.

 

If I were selling salad bowls, or iPhones, or plastic lawn chairs, sure, stock photos work.

But then you wouldn't list as much.

 

Who is to say that? But to be perfectly honest, I get 50 free auctions a month and as often as not, I have unused auctions at the end of the month. So yeah, I am not a large-volume seller by any means.

 

That being said, because I know how eBayers are with comics, I sould still list separate auctions for comics. The small hassle of doing so would offset any possible headache brought on by an unhappy buyer.

 

 

 

-slym

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darkowl

Darkowl

Posted
Posted
We didn't misunderstand Branget. If Branget meant to say something else, he clearly didn't. Instead, we have his "posse" swooping in and speaking for him, because he lacks the ability to verbally express what he "truly means".

 

meh

 

Here's an interesting bit of trivia....

 

Did you know that grading companies (for coins) were started specifically FOR the ability of people to buy coins sight-unseen?

 

Granted, the model didn't survive, as even for coins there are QP differences in the same grades, along with other factors, but the fact remains: the original point of the grading companies was so that people could buy without having to see the coin first, and member dealers guaranteed they would buy those coins at the grades given by the grading companies (PCGS and NGC, CGC's sister company.)

 

So, Branget may have been coy, but he certainly isn't wrong, and no one is "speaking for him."

 

The really interesting part of your trivia is the highlighted bold statement.

 

I'm not the only one who's pointed out where Branget is wrong. You share his same philosophy, so of course you're going to say he's not wrong.

 

"Modern 9.8's all look the same. That's what branget is saying."

 

If that's not speaking for him, then I don't know what Is.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darkowl

Darkowl

Posted
Posted
For those who insist on no stock photos....how does one sell multiple copies of anything on eBay, for which eBay has a "multiple item listing" function...?

 

You only show one copy, but you have 10 available for sale...how do you suppose that works...?

 

It happens every day, even in comics.

 

I'm not saying It doesn't happen. I'm saying it's not wise to do. Even If you are a legit seller, and aren't hiding anything. I'm saying you can increase the chances of having an unhappy buyer. Slym already pointed this out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darkowl

Darkowl

Posted
Posted
Those are just ebay's policy's. Most online comic book stores usually do not post stock images. Why? Because unlike Branget's approach, these reputable companies want their customers to know exactly what they are getting, even If it's a CGC 9.9 or 10 for that matter.

 

That's about as incorrect as you can get. Most online comic book stores utilize stock images heavily.

 

If someone has a multiple quantity listing with 10 copies of a freshly-slabbed CGC 9.8 modern book on eBay, do you honestly think they're going to provide individual scans for each copy? Of course not.

 

You may be correct about this. I only use a few online shops, so I should have said, "most online comic book shops that I use do not usually post stock images", which would be HA, Comic Connect, etc.

 

I cant speak for every seller who may have a multiple quantity listing with 10 copies of a freshly-slabbed CGC 9.8 modern book on ebay. Even If they did, I'm still against It for reasons that Ive already pointed out, especially If it's a value book.

Can't bring up heritage or comic connect though because if they did have multiple copies of new52 batman's at 9.8 or walking dead 121's at 9.8, they would use stock photos because no one would be able to tell the difference. People should only ask for a scan of a duplicate slab if it's a copper or before. If you say :takeit: pending scans in a modern slab selling thread that happens to have dups and there is only one pic, you suck at collecting.

 

Every single book that Ive won in a HA or CC auction has been the exact same book that was pictured. So yeah, I can bring both of them up.

 

People should ask for a scan whenever they want to. Not when It's a duplicate. Not when it's only a book from the copper or previous eras. That's not even relevant. The whole point is that people should know EXACTLY what they are getting, not something similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kav

kav

Posted
Posted

Some people like to use stock photos. Some people like to jump out of planes. If he is ok with the risk factor, I'm ok with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cousin itt

cousin itt

Posted
Posted

The reason large sellers on eBay use stock photos is because it saves time, a lot of time.

 

I have no problem with that - so long as the seller is informing the buyer that the item pictured is not the item for sale (or it is otherwise obvious, as in the multiple-item listing.) It does not take any time or effort to mention in the listing that the item pictured is not the item for sale. The buyer is then free to decide if he wants to buy the book sight-unseen.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darkowl

Darkowl

Posted
Posted
For those who insist on no stock photos....how does one sell multiple copies of anything on eBay, for which eBay has a "multiple item listing" function...?

 

You only show one copy, but you have 10 available for sale...how do you suppose that works...?

 

It happens every day, even in comics.

 

I would never do so for comics, esp. CGC slabs.

 

If I were selling salad bowls, or iPhones, or plastic lawn chairs, sure, stock photos work.

But then you wouldn't list as much.

 

Who is to say that? But to be perfectly honest, I get 50 free auctions a month and as often as not, I have unused auctions at the end of the month. So yeah, I am not a large-volume seller by any means.

 

That being said, because I know how eBayers are with comics, I sould still list separate auctions for comics. The small hassle of doing so would offset any possible headache brought on by an unhappy buyer.

 

 

 

-slym

 

^^^^^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kav

kav

Posted
Posted
Some people like to use stock photos. Some people like to jump out of planes. If he is ok with the risk factor, I'm ok with it.

 

:roflmao: This is why we keep you around.

 

:cloud9:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darkowl

Darkowl

Posted
Posted
I guess I'll go through the returns process. Has anyone else run into this though? Where the book received is clearly not the one pictured?

 

I've had the exact same thing happen a number of times. Often it doesn't matter if I receive a copy that has the same wrap and centering as the one I thought I was buying.

 

I have also received copies that, although they were the same grade and page quality, have had absolutely horrible miswraps. I've returned those as "item not as described" with no problems.

 

I generally make a point of not purchasing from anyone who I know uses stock photos just to avoid the potential return hassle.

 

This speaks volumes. Too bad half the people involved in the debate don't even take in into consideration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kav

kav

Posted
Posted
I guess I'll go through the returns process. Has anyone else run into this though? Where the book received is clearly not the one pictured?

 

I've had the exact same thing happen a number of times. Often it doesn't matter if I receive a copy that has the same wrap and centering as the one I thought I was buying.

 

I have also received copies that, although they were the same grade and page quality, have had absolutely horrible miswraps. I've returned those as "item not as described" with no problems.

 

I generally make a point of not purchasing from anyone who I know uses stock photos just to avoid the potential return hassle.

 

This speaks volumes. Too bad half the people involved in the debate don't even take in into consideration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darkowl

Darkowl

Posted
Posted

 

I guess I'll go through the returns process. Has anyone else run into this though? Where the book received is clearly not the one pictured?

 

I've had the exact same thing happen a number of times. Often it doesn't matter if I receive a copy that has the same wrap and centering as the one I thought I was buying.

 

I have also received copies that, although they were the same grade and page quality, have had absolutely horrible miswraps. I've returned those as "item not as described" with no problems.

 

I generally make a point of not purchasing from anyone who I know uses stock photos just to avoid the potential return hassle.

 

This speaks volumes. Too bad half the people involved in the debate don't even take in into consideration.

 

 

That's because you're not on the dark side. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
We didn't misunderstand Branget. If Branget meant to say something else, he clearly didn't. Instead, we have his "posse" swooping in and speaking for him, because he lacks the ability to verbally express what he "truly means".

 

meh

 

Here's an interesting bit of trivia....

 

Did you know that grading companies (for coins) were started specifically FOR the ability of people to buy coins sight-unseen?

 

Granted, the model didn't survive, as even for coins there are QP differences in the same grades, along with other factors, but the fact remains: the original point of the grading companies was so that people could buy without having to see the coin first, and member dealers guaranteed they would buy those coins at the grades given by the grading companies (PCGS and NGC, CGC's sister company.)

 

So, Branget may have been coy, but he certainly isn't wrong, and no one is "speaking for him."

 

The really interesting part of your trivia is the highlighted bold statement.

 

I'm not the only one who's pointed out where Branget is wrong. You share his same philosophy, so of course you're going to say he's not wrong.

 

"Modern 9.8's all look the same. That's what branget is saying."

 

If that's not speaking for him, then I don't know what Is.

 

 

 

 

 

The model didn't last because the market evolved. That doesn't change the fact that it was a market-wide acceptance of the idea of buying coins sight-unseen, at least for a while.

 

I granted you that, and you still made an issue of it....? hm

 

Even still, if I'm buying a 2010 Proof Silver Eagle in NGC MS69, I don't need a photo. I know exactly what it's going to look like. Same with nearly all buyers of these coins. You're not going to find any difference in a picture between any of them, and if you do, that's an extremely rare exception that will be noted (because it will be a selling plus, rather than a detractor.)

 

If I'm buying an MS65 1879-S Morgan Dollar, on the other hand...well, I'll definitely need a picture of that.

 

Same thing applies with comics.

 

No, I'm just speaking for me. He can speak just fine for himself, as can I for myself. If our opinions intersect on this subject, it is not because I am speaking for anyone...I am voicing my opinion. Because I A. understand the point he's making, and B. agree with it, therefore means I am speaking for him...?

 

Interestingly, you used the word "we" in a previous post, indicating that you WERE speaking for others. I would recommend avoiding using that word. Everyone here is an individual, and mostly capable of speaking for themselves. Using the word "we" almost always indicates an attempt to project a stronger consensus than actually exists. It's bad form, even on the rare occasion when it is correct.

 

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darkowl

Darkowl

Posted
Posted

 

We didn't misunderstand Branget. If Branget meant to say something else, he clearly didn't. Instead, we have his "posse" swooping in and speaking for him, because he lacks the ability to verbally express what he "truly means".

 

meh

 

Here's an interesting bit of trivia....

 

Did you know that grading companies (for coins) were started specifically FOR the ability of people to buy coins sight-unseen?

 

Granted, the model didn't survive, as even for coins there are QP differences in the same grades, along with other factors, but the fact remains: the original point of the grading companies was so that people could buy without having to see the coin first, and member dealers guaranteed they would buy those coins at the grades given by the grading companies (PCGS and NGC, CGC's sister company.)

 

So, Branget may have been coy, but he certainly isn't wrong, and no one is "speaking for him."

 

The really interesting part of your trivia is the highlighted bold statement.

 

I'm not the only one who's pointed out where Branget is wrong. You share his same philosophy, so of course you're going to say he's not wrong.

 

"Modern 9.8's all look the same. That's what branget is saying."

 

If that's not speaking for him, then I don't know what Is.

 

 

 

 

 

The model didn't last because the market evolved. That doesn't change the fact that it was a market-wide acceptance of the idea of buying coins sight-unseen, at least for a while.

 

I granted you that, and you still made an issue of it....? hm

 

Even still, if I'm buying a 2010 Proof Silver Eagle in NGC MS69, I don't need a photo. I know exactly what it's going to look like. Same with nearly all buyers of these coins. You're not going to find any difference in a picture between any of them, and if you do, that's an extremely rare exception that will be noted (because it will be a selling plus, rather than a detractor.)

 

If I'm buying an MS65 1879-S Morgan Dollar, on the other hand...well, I'll definitely need a picture of that.

 

Same thing applies with comics.

 

No, I'm just speaking for me. He can speak just fine for himself, as can I for myself. If our opinions intersect on this subject, it is not because I am speaking for anyone...I am voicing my opinion. Because I A. understand the point he's making, and B. agree with it, therefore means I am speaking for him...?

 

Interestingly, you used the word "we" in a previous post, indicating that you WERE speaking for others. I would recommend avoiding using that word. Everyone here is an individual, and mostly capable of speaking for themselves. Using the word "we" almost always indicates an attempt to project a stronger consensus than actually exists. It's bad form, even on the rare occasion when it is correct.

 

:)

 

 

Again, the interesting part is the section I highlighted in bold.

 

I made an issue of It because you insist on using the exact same philosophy that is being debated, even after you acknowledged the collapse of the failed system.

 

I was only accusing youmechoose, and moloney414 for speaking for Branget, but If you want to be included in that group, then by all means. ;)

 

You're going to accuse me of speaking for others because I used the word "we", yet you flat out deny that anyone is speaking for Branget when someone says, "I think you guys missunderstand Branget." Now that's REALLY bad form!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing