TEC 29

[Aman619]

I didnt see those... cool!

[Aman619]

you know, I hate the guffawing graemlin.

when I type l o l

I mean it more like a smiley, but I hate smileys...

 

But I dont mean it like the derisive laughter it appears!

I should learn the type equivalent for what I feel so Im not misunderstood..w/o having to use reply instead of quick reply.

[nearmint]

His 'Tec #27 is pretty sharp, too.

 

I cant read the grades... can you??

 

FN+

 

There's also a 7.5 copy that pops up in the gallery in the left column on some pages. Why have one when you can have two?

[originalisbest]

Hey Mark, I went surfing around the internet and found the following page which explained it - he sure does have a sweet collection - the TEC 29 is just a gem!

 

web page

 

"...The big gun is Eric Roberts. Eric is the son of wall street investor George Roberts, most well known for his company KKR. Eric was not interested in art until sometime in the Spring of 1999. He bought his first piece on eBay (Pupsi, sold by Carpenter), but he didn't really get the art bug until he got his second piece, Weak Germ. Tom Moore passed up on this piece at the Atlanta toy and collectible show in NJ, a decision which he will probably lament forever. In any case, Weak Germ is the piece that did it to Eric and suddenly he was thinking how he could get all of his favorite pieces."

[Silver Surfer]

Seller's return policy:

 

Because of 3rd Party Grading by CGC, a neutral independent professional grader, this Comic is Non Returnable

 

I wouldn't go near it b/c of this policy.

 

Mark for non-dealers such as me, this is a standard blurb on my Ebay listings. I wouldn't want to imagine a scenario where I sell a $4,000 book and for some reason the buyer isn't happy with something CGC has done or not done (such as an Ewart situation). Why should I be left holding the bag if I knowingly sold this in good faith?

[tth2]

Hey Mark, I went surfing around the internet and found the following page which explained it - he sure does have a sweet collection - the TEC 29 is just a gem!

 

web page

 

"...The big gun is Eric Roberts. Eric is the son of wall street investor George Roberts, most well known for his company KKR. Eric was not interested in art until sometime in the Spring of 1999. He bought his first piece on eBay (Pupsi, sold by Carpenter), but he didn't really get the art bug until he got his second piece, Weak Germ. Tom Moore passed up on this piece at the Atlanta toy and collectible show in NJ, a decision which he will probably lament forever. In any case, Weak Germ is the piece that did it to Eric and suddenly he was thinking how he could get all of his favorite pieces."

Interesting. Does anyone one these boards know him?

[VintageComics]

TEC 29

ONE IS A 9.6!!

 

http://www.triksr4kids.com/?id=collection&pg=7&class=1&coll=4&item=30&back=0

 

Check the rest of the site too if you've got a few minutes. He's got a great collection of comics & OA.

 

OA.....

[CW]

I met Mr. Roberts briefly at the Comic Heaven booth in San Diego this year. He and a friend were talking to John Verzyl. (presumably about incredibly valuable comics they own).

[esquirecomics]

Hey Mark, I went surfing around the internet and found the following page which explained it - he sure does have a sweet collection - the TEC 29 is just a gem!

 

web page

 

"...The big gun is Eric Roberts. Eric is the son of wall street investor George Roberts, most well known for his company KKR. Eric was not interested in art until sometime in the Spring of 1999. He bought his first piece on eBay (Pupsi, sold by Carpenter), but he didn't really get the art bug until he got his second piece, Weak Germ. Tom Moore passed up on this piece at the Atlanta toy and collectible show in NJ, a decision which he will probably lament forever. In any case, Weak Germ is the piece that did it to Eric and suddenly he was thinking how he could get all of his favorite pieces."

 

Interesting. I fondly remember those Wacky Packs from my childhood, but can't say I would spend a dime on them now! I e-mailed Roberts. Hopefully he will respond.

[esquirecomics]

Seller's return policy:

 

Because of 3rd Party Grading by CGC, a neutral independent professional grader, this Comic is Non Returnable

 

I wouldn't go near it b/c of this policy.

 

Mark for non-dealers such as me, this is a standard blurb on my Ebay listings. I wouldn't want to imagine a scenario where I sell a $4,000 book and for some reason the buyer isn't happy with something CGC has done or not done (such as an Ewart situation). Why should I be left holding the bag if I knowingly sold this in good faith?

 

Surfer, its not that I don't understand your position, for I do. When I first started selling on e-bay, for a very brief period, I did the same. But then I thought, why? What is the difference between a CGC book and a raw book, at least with respect to grade? Do you permit returns on your raw books, say one for $4,000, if the person is unsatisfied? It is all about customer satisfaction. You simply run the risk of potentially losing a customer if one deal goes bad. If that is a risk you are willing to accept, no problem. I know that I, personally, would not buy from a seller with such a policy unless I didn't care how the book actually turned out upon receipt, i.e., $50 versus $500.

[Aman619]

Seller's return policy:

 

Because of 3rd Party Grading by CGC, a neutral independent professional grader, this Comic is Non Returnable

 

I wouldn't go near it b/c of this policy.

 

Mark for non-dealers such as me, this is a standard blurb on my Ebay listings. I wouldn't want to imagine a scenario where I sell a $4,000 book and for some reason the buyer isn't happy with something CGC has done or not done (such as an Ewart situation). Why should I be left holding the bag if I knowingly sold this in good faith?

 

Surfer, I agree with Mark. All sales should be returnable and the costs worked out between seller and buyer. Its all customer service. Why shouldnt a buyer be allowed to return a book that - - regardless of the CGC slab - - just isnt in hand what it was "supposed" to be? As (xxx) I forget who now) wrote in a well written post, why should a mail ordered CGC slab be any less returnable than a book at a convention? Do you remember that thread?

[jkrk]

Surfer, I agree with Mark. All sales should be returnable and the costs worked out between seller and buyer. Its all customer service. Why shouldnt a buyer be allowed to return a book that - - regardless of the CGC slab - - just isnt in hand what it was "supposed" to be? As (xxx) I forget who now) wrote in a well written post, why should a mail ordered CGC slab be any less returnable than a book at a convention? Do you remember that thread?

 

 

I remember that post. I was one of the posters taking the other side of the trade by arguing that I only sell CGC books as non refundable. However, my thinking centered exclusively on E-Bay auctions (I'm not taking these sales as mail order). I sell very few books through mail order. Since the auction process is not an issue I would have no problem taking back books sold mail order.

In the past, despite my discalimer not to refund CGC purchases, I have taken back books when:

 

1)A defect could not be seen on the scan

2)The buyer had a financial setback and asked if I would take back the book.

 

I have received 813 feedbacks to date on E-Bay without a neg. I am constantly attempting to satisfy all customers. I am simply spelling out my terms up front so the buyers know my position. I understand that I am paying a price (receiving fewer bids and quite possibly realizing a lower selling price) for a policy many don't care for. In exchange I'm hoping to attract serious buyers who have carefully thought about their potential purchase. To date I've been lucky and really have exhanged E-mails or have met in person some really great individual buyers.

If I receive a lower selling price in exchange for the great buyers I've had dealings with then the tradeoff has been worthwhile.

[Aman619]

I dont sell , on ebay, or anywhere. So I cant argue with what works for you. But as a buyer, I dont want to enetr into any deal where Im locked into a sale sight unseen. But since you "prefer" to sell unreturnably (is that a word?) but are still WILLING to make exceptions, I think youre being as fair as you feel you can be.

[clarkkentdds]

de-mented= roberts? Bidding against de-mented gets painful.

[benz]

de-mented= roberts? Bidding against de-mented gets painful.

 

is this true? anyway Mr. Roberts has a wonderfull collection! am in awe...thanks for the link and info guys...love that Tec 38...9.0

[Solar]

Interesting. Does anyone one these boards know him?

 

Not very well, but I've dealt with him before. He's a really nice guy, but I will say it's tough to pry anything from his collection.

[clarkkentdds]

About how old is he???

[Silver Surfer]

Seller's return policy:

 

Because of 3rd Party Grading by CGC, a neutral independent professional grader, this Comic is Non Returnable

 

I wouldn't go near it b/c of this policy.

 

Mark for non-dealers such as me, this is a standard blurb on my Ebay listings. I wouldn't want to imagine a scenario where I sell a $4,000 book and for some reason the buyer isn't happy with something CGC has done or not done (such as an Ewart situation). Why should I be left holding the bag if I knowingly sold this in good faith?

 

Surfer, I agree with Mark. All sales should be returnable and the costs worked out between seller and buyer. Its all customer service. Why shouldnt a buyer be allowed to return a book that - - regardless of the CGC slab - - just isnt in hand what it was "supposed" to be? As (xxx) I forget who now) wrote in a well written post, why should a mail ordered CGC slab be any less returnable than a book at a convention? Do you remember that thread?

 

I don't recall that thread and I'm not saying I would not be open to refunds depending on the circumstances as I always try and work things out with buyers. I guess I'd have to put specific limitations on the refund policy because I wouldn't want some guy to return an expensive book without a valid reason. Sometimes people have buyers remorse and could use the refund policy to their advantage.

[Aman619]

"advantage" is of course a 2-way street. Id say taking away a buyer's rights to return an item they purchased is disadvantaged, or, turned the other way, an advantage in the seller's favor. I think a 'good' trade or deal would not be slanted one way or the other.

 

either way, nobody should go postal lik epoor MystryinOUTERspace.

[Crowzilla]

Here's a question for you Mark.

Lots of times I hear people refer to some vague Federal statute which supposedly requires sellers to take returns or something on items mailed through the post office- but in trying to look through code, I've never found it.

The closest thing I've found is the False Representations section in US Code Title 39, Part IV, Chapter 30, §3005

 

Do you know of any code about returns?