• 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 Seller Issue...

Started by AL Comics,

257 posts in this topic

RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted

And it needs to be said, I have sold hundreds, if not thousands, of slabs, and this particular scenario has never, ever, ever come up for me.

 

The odds of dealing with a book that CGC thought was restored, and I disagreed (meaning, I would most likely have had to sub it myself to be sure), and then me subsequently cracking that book out to sell raw are extremely small. It's a very, very rare scenario.

 

And I disclose restoration on raw books when it exists because it's the right thing to do, and I know what it's like to have undisclosed resto sold to me. In fact, I sold a Tec #401 to a fellow board member through eBay, and during the course of packing it up, discovered it was color touched. I informed the buyer, and we cancelled the sale. There's no question: restoration that the seller knows about MUST be disclosed.

 

But the principle remains: if CGC thinks something is restored, and I honestly think it's not, I have the right to not only disagree with CGC, but also to not be required to disclose that information if I sell it to someone else, and so does everyone else. We're talking about reasonably debatable conditions, remember.

 

Disclose what is there, no question.

 

And yes, I would probably do the jimjum route of sending it back again. Maybe not a third time, but definitely a second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CKB

CKB

Posted
Posted
I guess this would be my issue. Obviously there are plenty of people that buy books with the intention of subbing to CGC. Without knowing who will or won't and knowing this will most likely be an issue for those that do it feels a bit sketchy to me.

 

As a somewhat follow up question for those that would not disclose. If the buyer mentioned they were going to submit it would you say anything?

 

Understand, the issue here isn't "not disclosing" for the sake of hiding something.

 

The issue is reasonable disagreement. As always, context is everything.

 

First, you have to actually, honestly disagree. If a trim job is as plain as the nose on your face, and you know it, you can't say "oh, well, clearly this hasn't really been trimmed", but you, your mother, your dog, and the postman can see it has, you can't reasonably disagree. It has to be reasonable debatable in the first place.

 

Second, reputation comes into play. If Joe Blow comes around and says to himself "I don't think there's color touch, here", who is he, and what does his say so mean?

 

But if...let's pull a random name out of the air that I trust to get it right most of the time...Nick of Comicana (Flaming Telepath here) were to say "bollocks. I've had this book since it was new, there's no color touch", then yes, no problem. FT is someone who has been dealing with comic books since I've been alive.

 

So, what happens when a book that CGC originally thought had restoration is resubbed and comes back Universal...? Is the seller, with a book in a CGC Universal slab, obligated to say "well, this USED to be in a slab that said it was trimmed, but this time around, they either didn't catch it, or changed their mind"...? To be consistent, you'd have to say yes.

 

I would say yes. I think you are obligated to disclose everything pertinent you know. That history is pertinent. If your neighbor who once owned a copy of AF15 but sold it in 1969 thinks it's restored but changed his mind, that isn't pertinent. A history with CGC is.

 

I do understand your point of view and I am not going to judge it. It's just not for me.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
koollectablz

koollectablz

Posted
Posted
And it needs to be said, I have sold hundreds, if not thousands, of slabs, and this particular scenario has never, ever, ever come up for me.

 

The odds of dealing with a book that CGC thought was restored, and I disagreed (meaning, I would most likely have had to sub it myself to be sure), and then me subsequently cracking that book out to sell raw are extremely small. It's a very, very rare scenario.

 

And I disclose restoration on raw books when it exists because it's the right thing to do, and I know what it's like to have undisclosed resto sold to me. In fact, I sold a Tec #401 to a fellow board member through eBay, and during the course of packing it up, discovered it was color touched. I informed the buyer, and we cancelled the sale. There's no question: restoration that the seller knows about MUST be disclosed.

 

But the principle remains: if CGC thinks something is restored, and I honestly think it's not, I have the right to not only disagree with CGC, but also to not be required to disclose that information if I sell it to someone else, and so does everyone else. We're talking about reasonably debatable conditions, remember.

 

Disclose what is there, no question.

 

And yes, I would probably do the jimjum route of sending it back again. Maybe not a third time, but definitely a second.

 

Totally agree with that.

 

I think a few people are taking this very specific example out of context and applying it across the board to the broader subject of restoration.

 

Would I sell a book I knew to be restored as unrestored? No.

 

Would, if in the very unlikely scenario, I disclose that CGC opinioned that a book I knew to be 100% fine was trimmed? No. Because they would be wrong. It's pretty simple tbh.

 

That is something that, yes, is plainly ridiculous.

 

It's important to keep this specifically about trimming, everything I've said is within that context. No one is infallible in detecting, or indeed, in not detecting trimming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
I guess this would be my issue. Obviously there are plenty of people that buy books with the intention of subbing to CGC. Without knowing who will or won't and knowing this will most likely be an issue for those that do it feels a bit sketchy to me.

 

As a somewhat follow up question for those that would not disclose. If the buyer mentioned they were going to submit it would you say anything?

 

Understand, the issue here isn't "not disclosing" for the sake of hiding something.

 

The issue is reasonable disagreement. As always, context is everything.

 

First, you have to actually, honestly disagree. If a trim job is as plain as the nose on your face, and you know it, you can't say "oh, well, clearly this hasn't really been trimmed", but you, your mother, your dog, and the postman can see it has, you can't reasonably disagree. It has to be reasonable debatable in the first place.

 

Second, reputation comes into play. If Joe Blow comes around and says to himself "I don't think there's color touch, here", who is he, and what does his say so mean?

 

But if...let's pull a random name out of the air that I trust to get it right most of the time...Nick of Comicana (Flaming Telepath here) were to say "bollocks. I've had this book since it was new, there's no color touch", then yes, no problem. FT is someone who has been dealing with comic books since I've been alive.

 

So, what happens when a book that CGC originally thought had restoration is resubbed and comes back Universal...? Is the seller, with a book in a CGC Universal slab, obligated to say "well, this USED to be in a slab that said it was trimmed, but this time around, they either didn't catch it, or changed their mind"...? To be consistent, you'd have to say yes.

 

I would say yes. I think you are obligated to disclose everything pertinent you know. That history is pertinent. If your neighbor who once owned a copy of AF15 but sold it in 1969 thinks it's restored but changed his mind, that isn't pertinent. A history with CGC is.

 

I do understand your point of view and I am not going to judge it. It's just not for me.

 

 

You've got it a bit backwards. If anyone wants to disclose the information, they should, and there's nothing stopping them. It's about not judging those who don't think an opinion with which they have a reasonable disagreement need be disclosed.

 

CGC isn't the end all, be all. CGC doesn't pretend to be, and the market would be substantially healthier if they didn't behave as if they were.

 

A lot of people use third party grading companies as a crutch, and have either allowed their grading ability to atrophy, or never bothered to develop that ability in the first place. This isn't limited to comics, either. This phenomenon has been well observed in other fields, too.

 

"It's a 9.8!"

 

"Why?"

 

"Because it's in a CGC 9.8 slab. Duh! What are you, stupid?"

 

"So, the only reason you know this book is a 9.8 is because someone else told you so...?"

 

"Of course! What are you, new?"

 

You can see the implications...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
koollectablz

koollectablz

Posted
Posted

Something else to consider....

 

If you submit a book with very obvious colour touch and TS it WILL come back restored, crack it out and resubmit, it will continue to come back restored pretty much ad infinitum.

 

Submit a trimmed book, it MAY come back restored, crack it out and resubmit it enough times, at some point it will probably come back universal. I don't like that, you don't like that, CGC certainly don't like that. But that's what will happen. That's what does happen.

 

And now If CGCs opinion is weighted above all, is the book now unrestored? Of course not. CGC made a mistake. Just as in the example of the OO newstand fresh example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ghostzapper

Ghostzapper

Posted
Posted

Sometimes they get it wrong. Never had it happen to a comic but I've submitted cards to both PSA and BGS that were 100% pack fresh and on multiple occasions I got back cards as being trimmed. Knowing that was impossible, after sending them back with other orders every time they were graded.

 

So if I decided to sell one of those cards ungraded I should put in the listing PSA or BGS said the card was trimmed even though I know it's impossible? I wouldn't do that.

 

In this situation I don't think the guy deserved a negative. He has close to 3000 feedback in the last 12 months and No negs. and he gets banged for one on something that seems subjective. For me, I would have left him a positive feedback after he refunded me. He gave a full refund after hearing back a month or two later, hey I subbed that book to CGC and they said it was trimmed. You got a full refund and he disagreed with a 3rd party grader. Not talking about other restoration, just on it being trimmed or not, If he disagreed with you or CGC he should put in the listing someone subbed the book to CGC and they said it was trimmed but I disagree? Again, I wouldn't do that. Now if someone asked if the book was restored, I would say someone subbed it to CGC and they said it appeared trimmed but disagreed for whatever the following reasons but if I disagreed I wouldn't put it in my listing.

 

This guy seems to sell primarily stamps and sells comics he buys in lots so I don't think he altered the book intentionally to enhance the grade to get a better price, he doesn't even put CGC in the title on several books he's selling graded.

 

The OP said he sent the book in immediately after receiving it and a week later the book was on his invoice as altered or trimmed, did you send it in for Express Grading? Because a week to find out the book was trimmed seems pretty quick, I don't know but would they come to that determination that quick if you subbed a book for a 10 or 20 business day turnaround?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fifties

fifties

Posted
Posted

Wow, 15 pages over this;

 

Negative.......Advertised unrestored, CGC says trimmed. After refund seller relisted unrestored................. u***t ( 1521)

L0087: Strange Tales #107, in VF condition! (#311275849569) US $404.00 View Item

 

The seller gave him a resistance free refund, so he based the neg bomb not on his OWN experience, but rather on a subsequent listing, with no bids.

 

Yeah, real fair. He's defending the comic collecting world on an outside opinion that is known to err, just like any other human being.

 

First of all, CGC is, IMHO, FAR from perfect. As an example, these "experts" grade books with brittleness -0.5 by Overstreet standards- as high as 3.0; http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=8423401&fpart=6

 

Secondly, the seller stated that he had gotten an expert opinion from a dealer, to the contrary of what CGC determined. Now whether he did or not is really immaterial; how many here, in selling a book, would rely on what a disgruntled buyer claimed from a third party grader of his own choosing?

 

Thirdly, it's been posted here more than once that "the book is obviously trimmed". Well if it's so damn obvious to everyone, why did the OP buy it in the first place? And OP, don't you think that an informed buyer (damm, I hope he's informed, if he's gonna drop 2 Benjamins) just might notice, or question about any trimming?

 

I don't agree with the neg bomb, nor do I agree that the seller is obligated to potentially degrade the value of his book by discussing whether the book has or has not been trimmed, as determined by two different sources, if he himself does not believe that the book has been altered in any way.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wombat

wombat

Posted
Posted

Seems risky for any seller trying to avoid negative feedback. Selling a book you know was once identified as trimmed by CGC and not knowing if it will be subbed again certainly seems to open yourself up to a negative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fifties

fifties

Posted
Posted
how many here, in selling a book, would rely on what a disgruntled buyer claimed from a third party grader of his own choosing?

 

 

When that third party was CGC? I bet most.

Doubt that; not after reading about some of their foibles in this thread. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bomber-Bob

Bomber-Bob

Posted
Posted

CGC did not officially grade this book = they did not officially declare it trimmed. So you're a seller and you hear from a disgruntled buyer that CGC said the book was restored but they did not grade it. Maybe you don't believe the buyer's story but you take it back because you are a good seller.

I have an AF15 that CGC pre screened at 9.8 but I stopped the full grading process because I decided I didn't want it slabbed. Do you believe me ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AL Comics

AL Comics

Posted
  • Author
Posted
CGC did not officially grade this book = they did not officially declare it trimmed. So you're a seller and you hear from a disgruntled buyer that CGC said the book was restored but they did not grade it. Maybe you don't believe the buyer's story but you take it back because you are a good seller.

I have an AF15 that CGC pre screened at 9.8 but I stopped the full grading process because I decided I didn't want it slabbed. Do you believe me ?

 

Well that's a great example (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mijael.Levy

Mijael.Levy

Posted
Posted

Some books looks obviously trimmed and they dont look good . This book looks great , just because the O.P said to the seller that CGC says its trimmed now the book is not good and since the seller has not put that information now he deserves to be in the negative list ?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shrevvy

Shrevvy

Posted
Posted

 

I've just been reading this thread, but not sure what (if any) opinion I have formed. Once the possibility of this book being trimmed has been suggested, several people in this thread have declared that the book has obviously been trimmed. No questions. Yet, the book went through two PGM threads and not one poster grading the book suggested it was trimmed. Grades were given as high as 9.2 for the book. Not sure if that means anything, but I thought it to be interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing