General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[N/A]

So what does your pic requirement do exactly?

 

 

Provides important information to the buyer that the seller should want the buyer to have if he's interested in satisfied customers and efficient business practices.

 

If a seller doesn't want to post pics they should be ready willing and able to accept returns after buyer's receive the item without dispute.

 

Having the cake and eating it too is a tempting fantasy but ultimately one-sided.

 

 

Besides, pictures help buyers and sellers. This isn't the 80's, everyone's got a digital camera or a scanner. If they are on the internet they can post pics of books, and if they want the money then maybe 100% laziness isn't the best way to obtain it.

 

Sellers should want to post pics. They should want to entice buyers to buy. They should want those buyers, when they buy, to buy again because of how happy they were the first time.

 

Your whole argument is assuming honest scammers. Is the goal to limit the scammers, burden sellers or bring the market place to your desired comfort level?

 

If you want returns then insist that every seller has PayPal as a payment option.

If you want satisfied buyers then sellers just need to communicate.

You want a rule that requires a seller to do better. Maybe some sellers are satisfied with their less than efficient business practices. It only hurts them.

 

Your rule of pics does nothing you described.

[N/A]

The trouble it may cause is trouble for the seller. Self inflicted so I don't see the problem.

 

PayPal personal is not an option for payment. Is the thread in question asking for a cheque? If they are allowing PayPal then they are accepting returns.

 

Most of these discussions seem more like sour grapes from would be buyers that needed more info to purchase. Some don't mind taking chances.

 

 

 

 

Well, it's been a long time since I have a half a about whether or not I bought a book so I am immune from said grapes.

 

My only consideration is equity. I don't think having buyers scrambling around looking for technical means to force refunds is superior to seller's taking a modicum of care and diligence to post a photo or voluntarily take the books back if they can't be bothered to scan a book they want to sell for $300-400-500 or more.

 

Scrambling around?

 

Login, one link, done. If they can buy or sell on here then they won't be scrambling. Next is good pics and bad pics. In this forum there is a PGM section that clearly states judging grades from a scan is not accurate.

 

All this does is force sellers to do something else. Add it to the list.

 

 

It isn't:

login

contact seller and request refund

if they don't refund then you have to open a claim

attempt to resolve

then if they won't resolve

you have to request they escalate

then they'll review it

then you might get a refund 30 days or so later.

 

Hardly..."one link, done."

 

Hardly as easy for the buyer as a seller owning up to his failure to grade voluntarily, is it?

 

Forcing the onus on the buyer is forcing the onus on the buyer, and when it's the seller's duty to do so, voluntarily, all along.

 

You are an ardent and zealous lobbyist for the seller's union. I will give you that.

 

You don't have to contact the seller.

You used to be able to escalate immediately.

Sorry, 2 links.

 

Refunds are granted within 7 days I believe.

 

If your goal is a cleaner marketplace then go for it. If your goal is to have great deals then you're slowly killing it. The point is that you are covered by PayPal. No need to stress. It is safe to transact. You will not be able to rule away the possible headaches. All you will do is scare away new sellers. Will you stop some scammers? Maybe.

 

The boards are trending towards only dealers when it used to be an anti-dealer sales section. I try to lobby for balance and options. I tend to be inclusive and battle exclusivity.

 

Never underestimate the desire to inflate my post count.

 

 

 

Are they granted in seven days on a difference of opinion as to grade? Don't they require return for refund? Confirmation that the book has gone back to the seller?

 

I would love it if unfettered free reign let to to be "great deals" but it doesn't seem like a great deal if someone spends $400-500 for a book and then has to force the seller into a refund and waste a week or a month of time, etc. Not a great deal at all when they could have passed with a picture or got their refund without the intervention of a third party corporation's technicalities.

 

A great deal for buyers and sellers would be clear communication, equal care taken on both sides and a deal that is, unassailably, a deal. Doesn't waste the seller's time more than taking in a return and having to issue a refund and having to relist, resell, and reship the same book all over again.

 

You must be able to see the value, as a seller, in doing everything you can to have the deal be completed the first time through rather than leaving doubt that you'll have to repeat all those steps over again, wasting all that time and money and effort.

 

You seem worried about a rule like this applying to your modern slab sales, when it clearly doesn't and when it wasn't the focus of the discussion. Raw SA and raw sales in general have far more vagueness and possibility for difference of opinion or failed grading than a slabbed modern. I realize you are putting yourself in the seller's shoes here, but they don't seem to fit.

 

 

You are using an extreme case as an example. We both know it is easy to argue extremes.

 

Pictures only show issues with cover wear and only good pictures show that. Forcing pics does very little if anything to prevent what you described. Does it prevent some? Maybe

 

I believe it is more harm than good to the marketplace.

 

 

I'm not using an extreme case...I am using the actual current case.

 

That's exactly what's happening right now in GSB.

 

Asking that all sellers who sell raws either post pics (if the book is over certain dollar amount say $50 or $100) OR have a return policy is unreasonable or does harm?

 

I think he's saying that the market will likely sort this type of problem out in most cases. Its a dumb marketing strategy to sell high cost books without scans, but not a regulatory issue. Especially when it doesn't seem fair to let ANYONE establish the value thresholds for such action. What if they're $1 under the threshold? howabout 1 cent? Marketing suggestions and regulatory practices are not and should not be the same thing.

 

Yuuup!

 

We're supposed to be adults here. I don't need anyone protecting me from lazy sellers and I don't want them chased away.

[comix4fun]

So what does your pic requirement do exactly?

 

 

Provides important information to the buyer that the seller should want the buyer to have if he's interested in satisfied customers and efficient business practices.

 

If a seller doesn't want to post pics they should be ready willing and able to accept returns after buyer's receive the item without dispute.

 

Having the cake and eating it too is a tempting fantasy but ultimately one-sided.

 

 

Besides, pictures help buyers and sellers. This isn't the 80's, everyone's got a digital camera or a scanner. If they are on the internet they can post pics of books, and if they want the money then maybe 100% laziness isn't the best way to obtain it.

 

Sellers should want to post pics. They should want to entice buyers to buy. They should want those buyers, when they buy, to buy again because of how happy they were the first time.

 

Your whole argument is assuming honest scammers. Is the goal to limit the scammers, burden sellers or bring the market place to your desired comfort level?

 

If you want returns then insist that every seller has PayPal as a payment option.

If you want satisfied buyers then sellers just need to communicate.

You want a rule that requires a seller to do better. Maybe some sellers are satisfied with their less than efficient business practices. It only hurts them.

 

Your rule of pics does nothing you described.

 

 

It accomplishes all of it, and faster than the 30+ day time for forcing a paypal refund on less than promised items.

 

Part of seller communication is to post pics, details, descriptions.

 

Are you really saying that pics don't help buyers and sellers? Do you realize how many people have been busted using pics they stole from books they don't own? Forcing someone to provide pics on high priced raws is a simple measure of prevention that keeps buyers from buying from someone they shouldn't be buying from.

 

Avoidance is entirely superior to recompense.

 

This isn't craigslist, and we shouldn't push it that way just so everything's nice and easy.

[N/A]

So what does your pic requirement do exactly?

 

 

Provides important information to the buyer that the seller should want the buyer to have if he's interested in satisfied customers and efficient business practices.

 

If a seller doesn't want to post pics they should be ready willing and able to accept returns after buyer's receive the item without dispute.

 

Having the cake and eating it too is a tempting fantasy but ultimately one-sided.

 

 

Besides, pictures help buyers and sellers. This isn't the 80's, everyone's got a digital camera or a scanner. If they are on the internet they can post pics of books, and if they want the money then maybe 100% laziness isn't the best way to obtain it.

 

Sellers should want to post pics. They should want to entice buyers to buy. They should want those buyers, when they buy, to buy again because of how happy they were the first time.

 

Your whole argument is assuming honest scammers. Is the goal to limit the scammers, burden sellers or bring the market place to your desired comfort level?

 

If you want returns then insist that every seller has PayPal as a payment option.

If you want satisfied buyers then sellers just need to communicate.

You want a rule that requires a seller to do better. Maybe some sellers are satisfied with their less than efficient business practices. It only hurts them.

 

Your rule of pics does nothing you described.

 

 

It accomplishes all of it, and faster than the 30+ day time for forcing a paypal refund on less than promised items.

 

Part of seller communication is to post pics, details, descriptions.

 

Are you really saying that pics don't help buyers and sellers? Do you realize how many people have been busted using pics they stole from books they don't own? Forcing someone to provide pics on high priced raws is a simple measure of prevention that keeps buyers from buying from someone they shouldn't be buying from.

 

Avoidance is entirely superior to recompense.

 

This isn't craigslist, and we shouldn't push it that way just so everything's nice and easy.

 

 

Now you want to depend on the board police.

 

Scammers are after money. Protect the money if you need to. Making sellers jump through hoops does not dissuade scammers.

[comix4fun]

So what does your pic requirement do exactly?

 

 

Provides important information to the buyer that the seller should want the buyer to have if he's interested in satisfied customers and efficient business practices.

 

If a seller doesn't want to post pics they should be ready willing and able to accept returns after buyer's receive the item without dispute.

 

Having the cake and eating it too is a tempting fantasy but ultimately one-sided.

 

 

Besides, pictures help buyers and sellers. This isn't the 80's, everyone's got a digital camera or a scanner. If they are on the internet they can post pics of books, and if they want the money then maybe 100% laziness isn't the best way to obtain it.

 

Sellers should want to post pics. They should want to entice buyers to buy. They should want those buyers, when they buy, to buy again because of how happy they were the first time.

 

Your whole argument is assuming honest scammers. Is the goal to limit the scammers, burden sellers or bring the market place to your desired comfort level?

 

If you want returns then insist that every seller has PayPal as a payment option.

If you want satisfied buyers then sellers just need to communicate.

You want a rule that requires a seller to do better. Maybe some sellers are satisfied with their less than efficient business practices. It only hurts them.

 

Your rule of pics does nothing you described.

 

 

It accomplishes all of it, and faster than the 30+ day time for forcing a paypal refund on less than promised items.

 

Part of seller communication is to post pics, details, descriptions.

 

Are you really saying that pics don't help buyers and sellers? Do you realize how many people have been busted using pics they stole from books they don't own? Forcing someone to provide pics on high priced raws is a simple measure of prevention that keeps buyers from buying from someone they shouldn't be buying from.

 

Avoidance is entirely superior to recompense.

 

This isn't craigslist, and we shouldn't push it that way just so everything's nice and easy.

 

 

Now you want to depend on the board police.

 

Scammers are after money. Protect the money if you need to. Making sellers jump through hoops does not dissuade scammers.

 

Really? So making them post scans of books and raising the bar of communication doesn't dissuade scammers?

 

And the "Board Police" have done some great work here making this place as good as it is, and as profitable as it is, for many people here. I wouldn't dismiss their value out of hand so quickly.

 

Have you encountered criminals much? They take the path of least resistance...always. Open windows, cars with keys in them, empty houses with the shades open, items near the exit, places without safeguards where no one asks questions.

 

That's why craigslist is rife with them and we can pick them out relatively quickly as the revelation is in the details.

 

Christ, this place is fargin fee free, the least a seller can do is show what they're selling if they haven't been able to get CGC's opinion on it first. Isn't that easy enough money?

[revat]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=8831482#Post8831482

 

threadkrap?

[Red84]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=8831482#Post8831482

 

threadkrap?

 

I don't know if it's technically a threadkrap since he's just repeating information that is present in the sales thread. I will say it is completely unnecessary and super annoying when people say they would get something but for (insert BS). You see that on Facebook all the time.

[wombat]

I have no clue what compels some people to make posts. They just can't control themselves.

[revat]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=8831482#Post8831482

 

threadkrap?

 

I don't know if it's technically a threadkrap since he's just repeating information that is present in the sales thread. I will say it is completely unnecessary and super annoying when people say they would get something but for (insert BS). You see that on Facebook all the time.

 

"I'm not buying this item solely because it doesn't meet my higher standards. But I certainly hope someone else with lower standards comes along and buys it." That is what is being said. It's absolutely could make someone question buying the item, and is totally unnecessary. There's no place for it.

Edited August 27, 2015 by Revat

[bababooey]

Just for clarification - return policies aren't redundant because of Paypal

 

If someone accepts a seller's "no returns" provision when buying they better either suck it up or have a pretty good reason for seeking & forcing compensation through Paypal's terms without the seller's consent.

 

 

 

 

IMHO

 

 

 

[comix4fun]

I have no clue what compels some people to make posts. They just can't control themselves.

 

 

 

It's possibly the "Loud Noises Theorum" wherein it was postulated and later proven that people will say mess if they can say mess.

 

 

[Red84]

If photos are not going to be required then a seller Should be required to announce their rules regarding Pending Scans.

[comix4fun]

If photos are not going to be required then a seller Should be required to announce their rules regarding Pending Scans.

 

 

Also a good idea. No pics leads to that little hornets nest as well.

[Sqeggs]

The trouble it may cause is trouble for the seller. Self inflicted so I don't see the problem.

 

PayPal personal is not an option for payment. Is the thread in question asking for a cheque? If they are allowing PayPal then they are accepting returns.

 

Most of these discussions seem more like sour grapes from would be buyers that needed more info to purchase. Some don't mind taking chances.

 

 

 

 

Well, it's been a long time since I have a half a about whether or not I bought a book so I am immune from said grapes.

 

My only consideration is equity. I don't think having buyers scrambling around looking for technical means to force refunds is superior to seller's taking a modicum of care and diligence to post a photo or voluntarily take the books back if they can't be bothered to scan a book they want to sell for $300-400-500 or more.

 

Scrambling around?

 

Login, one link, done. If they can buy or sell on here then they won't be scrambling. Next is good pics and bad pics. In this forum there is a PGM section that clearly states judging grades from a scan is not accurate.

 

All this does is force sellers to do something else. Add it to the list.

 

 

It isn't:

login

contact seller and request refund

if they don't refund then you have to open a claim

attempt to resolve

then if they won't resolve

you have to request they escalate

then they'll review it

then you might get a refund 30 days or so later.

 

Hardly..."one link, done."

 

Hardly as easy for the buyer as a seller owning up to his failure to grade voluntarily, is it?

 

Forcing the onus on the buyer is forcing the onus on the buyer, and when it's the seller's duty to do so, voluntarily, all along.

 

You are an ardent and zealous lobbyist for the seller's union. I will give you that.

 

You don't have to contact the seller.

You used to be able to escalate immediately.

Sorry, 2 links.

 

Refunds are granted within 7 days I believe.

 

If your goal is a cleaner marketplace then go for it. If your goal is to have great deals then you're slowly killing it. The point is that you are covered by PayPal. No need to stress. It is safe to transact. You will not be able to rule away the possible headaches. All you will do is scare away new sellers. Will you stop some scammers? Maybe.

 

The boards are trending towards only dealers when it used to be an anti-dealer sales section. I try to lobby for balance and options. I tend to be inclusive and battle exclusivity.

 

Never underestimate the desire to inflate my post count.

 

 

 

Are they granted in seven days on a difference of opinion as to grade? Don't they require return for refund? Confirmation that the book has gone back to the seller?

 

I would love it if unfettered free reign let to to be "great deals" but it doesn't seem like a great deal if someone spends $400-500 for a book and then has to force the seller into a refund and waste a week or a month of time, etc. Not a great deal at all when they could have passed with a picture or got their refund without the intervention of a third party corporation's technicalities.

 

A great deal for buyers and sellers would be clear communication, equal care taken on both sides and a deal that is, unassailably, a deal. Doesn't waste the seller's time more than taking in a return and having to issue a refund and having to relist, resell, and reship the same book all over again.

 

You must be able to see the value, as a seller, in doing everything you can to have the deal be completed the first time through rather than leaving doubt that you'll have to repeat all those steps over again, wasting all that time and money and effort.

 

You seem worried about a rule like this applying to your modern slab sales, when it clearly doesn't and when it wasn't the focus of the discussion. Raw SA and raw sales in general have far more vagueness and possibility for difference of opinion or failed grading than a slabbed modern. I realize you are putting yourself in the seller's shoes here, but they don't seem to fit.

 

 

You are using an extreme case as an example. We both know it is easy to argue extremes.

 

Pictures only show issues with cover wear and only good pictures show that. Forcing pics does very little if anything to prevent what you described. Does it prevent some? Maybe

 

I believe it is more harm than good to the marketplace.

 

 

I'm not using an extreme case...I am using the actual current case.

 

That's exactly what's happening right now in GSB.

 

Asking that all sellers who sell raws either post pics (if the book is over certain dollar amount say $50 or $100) OR have a return policy is unreasonable or does harm?

 

I think he's saying that the market will likely sort this type of problem out in most cases. Its a dumb marketing strategy to sell high cost books without scans, but not a regulatory issue. Especially when it doesn't seem fair to let ANYONE establish the value thresholds for such action. What if they're $1 under the threshold? howabout 1 cent? Marketing suggestions and regulatory practices are not and should not be the same thing.

 

Yuuup!

 

We're supposed to be adults here. I don't need anyone protecting me from lazy sellers and I don't want them chased away.

 

This is all well and good, but what does RMA think about it?

[Buzzetta]

I really do not understand why posting some image of the item you are selling is so hard.

 

Hold the book up to the isight camera on your mac or use your cell phone if you do not have a scanner.

 

If it is too much work to take a pic of the item you want to sell then how do I know if it is too much work for you to ship it the right way or even go to the Post Office at all.

 

I have a bunch of things on their way back from CGC. Some I plan on keeping and some I plan on selling. Scanning sucks. It is not fun and I am not looking forward to it. I am looking forward to getting some money for them though so scan away I will.

 

People... just produce an image of what you want for sale. Your item doesn't even have to smile. Just get us a pic.

[jsilverjanet]

the item you are selling is so hard.

 

[rodan57]

I really do not understand why some image of the item you are selling is so hard.

 

Hold the book up to the isight camera on your mac or use your cell phone if you do not have a scanner.

 

If it is too much work to take a pic of the item you want to sell then how do I know if it is too much work for you to ship it the right way or even go to the Post Office at all.

 

I have a bunch of things on their way back from CGC. Some I plan on keeping and some I plan on selling. Scanning sucks. It is not fun and I am not looking forward to it. I am looking forward to getting some money for them though so scan away I will.

 

People... just produce an image of what you want for sale. Your item doesn't even have to smile. Just get us a pic.

 

You can add to this the concept of taking pride in what one does.

[Buzzetta]

the item you are selling is so hard.

 

 

[Ryan.]

Post scans. Slackers.

[Buzzetta]

Heh - I just thought of the name for my next sales thread.