Seemingly legit Ebay store sold and then relisted items using same pictures. 1 1

[RockMyAmadeus]

3 minutes ago, Poekaymon said:

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Reading through this thread, your expectations are unrealistic

I was referring to this, which came after you quoted me.  

Fair question.

Quote

1.   There is no consensus about what a baseline 9.8 is. 

That's an unrealistic expectation, because it's not true, as I said earlier. There is a consensus about what a baseline 9.8 is, and even though it's not described by CGC, you can (and many have) gleaned what a baseline 9.8 CGC book is by looking at (and submitting) thousands of examples. 

[Poekaymon]

36 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Fair question.

That's an unrealistic expectation, because it's not true, as I said earlier. There is a consensus about what a baseline 9.8 is, and even though it's not described by CGC, you can (and many have) gleaned what a baseline 9.8 CGC book is by looking at (and submitting) thousands of examples. 

I disagree that that statement represents an expectation, but maybe "baseline" was the wrong word.  I didn't mean that you and others can't look at books and estimate whether they will be graded 9.8s.  I simply meant that if someone tells you something is a 9.8, that doesn't actually tell you exactly what the book looks like--pretty uncontroversial, I think.  And picky/ocd/unrealistic people like me try to find the best copies even within the 9.8 group, so that 9.8 tag becomes the starting point and not the finish line.  (Again, this only applies to buying the thing in the first place, and not buying it and returning it even though it came as pictured.)    

To really make it clear, say I buy a 9.8 from a stock photo.  Having looked at lots of 9.8s, I can reasonably expect it to be a decent copy.  But it can show up to my door with:

1.  A "perfect" cover but something wrong on the back

2.  Minor handling issues, say in the corners, that nonetheless didn't prevent it from earning a 9.8.

3.  Very light stress lines were the only thing keeping it from being a 10 and that a noob like me wouldn't even notice, and which a noob like me would say 'how in the world is this baby not a 9.9 or a 10?'

4.  Massive production issues that don't stop it from being a 9.8 but which a noob like me would say 'holy hell I'd rather destroy this book than look at it again'  

5.  Additional issues which people on this very board, experienced people such as yourself, disagree about whether the book would actually be regraded at a 9.8--I've seen the threads.

6.  Enough defects that it seems like it was a "gift grade" (as I've heard veterans on this forum say) or that it was mislabeled (saw that in another thread) 

And on and on.  I'm not disputing that most or all of these are legitimate 9.8s.  I'm not disputing that people like yourself probably would have guessed that most of them were 9.8 in raw form.  I'm not disputing that if someone buys one of these (especially from a stock photo) they are out of luck.  I'm only saying that just knowing something is a 9.8 doesn't tell you exactly how it looks, and that's important to some of us buyers. I'm pretty sure that's beyond dispute, and completely realistic, but I could be wrong.

Edited February 5, 2020 by Poekaymon

[Poekaymon]

UPDATE

Now if anyone recalls, this started because a seller had multiple items up with no reserve, all had many bids, and all sold.  I bought and received one of them.  It was as pictured.  Then a few days later he reposted several of the high end ones again, with the same pictures, including the one I just bought.  

One of the ones he reposted was one which in the first round of auctions I bid on but did not win as it went up too high.  He reposted that one with the same pic and CGC # etc.  I messaged him after making this thread and got no response.  I decided to bid on that one again anyway and try my luck, figuring I could return it on the basis of having a different CGC number if necessary.

Now this is where it gets stranger, as far as I'm concerned.  Last time it had like 5 (or more) different bidders, one of which was me, who had multiple bids between $350 (starting) and $550 (closing).  This time I was the only bidder and got it for the opening price (350--same as he started it at last time).  I assumed what would come would be a different book, but I just received it today, and it was exactly as pictured.  (same # that was in both auctions, etc.)   So now I'm even more confused because this makes less sense to me than a simple lazy repost.  I guess the top bidder either flaked or was a shill and the seller ust reposted it without offering it to the other bidders, of which I was one?  But even that doesn't explain why none of those other bidders decided to try a second time.  

Now, the one I bought the first time also got reposted, and sold, so I can guarantee the person who won that auction isn't getting the exact book that was pictured because it's here in my hand.  (Unless he has replicator-level counterfeiting skills.)  Would really like to contact the winner of "my" book in the second auction and find out the CGC # of the book they actually received, but of course, can't see the user name of the winner.

This is purely academic at this point as I got my book, and I'm satisfied with it, but I still find it interesting.

Edited February 6, 2020 by Poekaymon

[Lazyboy]

2 hours ago, Poekaymon said:

Now this is where it gets stranger, as far as I'm concerned.  Last time it had like 5 (or more) different bidders, one of which was me, who had multiple bids between $350 (starting) and $550 (closing).  This time I was the only bidder and got it for the opening price (350--same as he started it at last time).  I assumed what would come would be a different book, but I just received it today, and it was exactly as pictured.  (same # that was in both auctions, etc.)   So now I'm even more confused because this makes less sense to me than a simple lazy repost.  I guess the top bidder either flaked or was a shill and the seller ust reposted it without offering it to the other bidders, of which I was one?  But even that doesn't explain why none of those other bidders decided to try a second time.

If they're using a single image for multiple copies, why do you think they would pay attention to which one they send out? The simple answer is that they sent out a different copy to the first winner.

As for the other bidders, maybe they weren't paying attention this time or already spent their money on something else. The fact that you won this one for the starting bid, after the earlier auction went much higher, suggests that the seller does not use shills.

[Poekaymon]

54 minutes ago, Lazyboy said:

If they're using a single image for multiple copies, why do you think they would pay attention to which one they send out? The simple answer is that they sent out a different copy to the first winner.

As for the other bidders, maybe they weren't paying attention this time or already spent their money on something else. The fact that you won this one for the starting bid, after the earlier auction went much higher, suggests that the seller does not use shills.

I was just pointing out possibilities, however unlikely. I agree that they didn’t use shills in the second auction. Your explanation may be The most likely, though it’s still surprising to me that everyone would suddenly become uninterested or unable. 

[Gravin]

4 hours ago, Poekaymon said:

I was just pointing out possibilities, however unlikely. I agree that they didn’t use shills in the second auction. Your explanation may be The most likely, though it’s still surprising to me that everyone would suddenly become uninterested or unable. 

Alot of eBay is timing - yes there are those of us that rabidly monitor saved searches for certain issues, but the majority of eBay buyers only log on now and then. My favorite story is my first eBay sale - it was some D&D second edition module (sorry, don't remember which one.) and I put it out as a BiN for $20...it went 2 months without selling, I put it up for auction and 4 different bidders went over my $20 original asking and the end price was $41.

It is just a weird auction world...

[William-James88]

On 1/28/2020 at 8:01 PM, Poekaymon said:

What do you guys make of this?  So a seemingly reputable store had a lot of reasonably limited 9.8 graded stuff up (like 20-100 "graded at" on the census).  I bid on and/or bought several items.  He did deliver.  Later I did a search for one of the ones I didn't win and noticed it was back up.  Looked pretty familiar, so I compared it to the one I bid on, and lost, and sure enough it's the same picture and CGC number.  Then I searched and found several other relisted items that he had put back up--identical CGC numbers.  Now I guess you could think well maybe the buyer backed out or something, but: one of the items he has relisted is sitting right here in my hand--same CGC number.

I guess the least sinister explanation is that he actually has multiples of each item and just did a bunch of relists and it automatically used the same pictures?  I don't sell on Ebay so I have no idea how that works.  But even if that's true, the ones that are up right now for bid are not the actual ones that the people will be getting when they win.  That's an issue, isn't it?

Not sure what board policy is but I'm pretty curious about what is going on here.  Can message out some links if anyone is interested.

I found something similar, what do you think of this e-bay seller, should they be avoided? They state that their comic is NM or higher and yet we see a pic of a slabbed comic and a non slabbed comic. I don't know what's going on here.

https://www.ebay.ca/itm/Starslayer-Issue-2-Pacific-Comics-NM-1982-1st-Rocketeer-L2F4-Amricons/362834133096?_trkparms=aid%3D555018%26algo%3DPL.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20131003132420%26meid%3D60fd22322323497a88a0c9296b113eec%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D3%26rkt%3D12%26mehot%3Dpf%26sd%3D303283922084%26itm%3D362834133096%26pmt%3D1%26noa%3D0%26pg%3D2047675&_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851

 

Edited February 19, 2020 by William-James88

[Willbert]

@William-James88     Sorry if this is an old comment, but did you ever purchase from that auction? What was your experience, if you did? The photo selection is odd for sure but being a high volume seller gives me a bit of confidence. I can understand large volume sellers taking some listing "short cuts" but best practice has to be to show the exact item being soled and sent out, IMO. Thanks.

[William-James88]

On 3/5/2020 at 7:23 PM, Willbert35 said:

@William-James88     Sorry if this is an old comment, but did you ever purchase from that auction? What was your experience, if you did? The photo selection is odd for sure but being a high volume seller gives me a bit of confidence. I can understand large volume sellers taking some listing "short cuts" but best practice has to be to show the exact item being soled and sent out, IMO. Thanks.

No, I did not. Not gonna waste my time with a weird listing like that for a book I can buy from pretty much anywhere else.