One of the most unscrupulous eBay listings/sellers I’ve ever seen (perhaps a bit hyperbolic) 2 2

[Hey Kids, Comics!]

This guy listed a Web 20 MJ 9.8 with the description saying it was the only one on Earth knowing full well he had another as they are consecutively serial numbered/. Now he’s trying to lie and say he got them back in two separate subs (although the numbering proves that’s not true) and didn’t know when he posted the first one for auction. He’s confused as I’m not even the buyer. I probably shouldn’t have called him names but I hate this type of thing. 

Edited March 14 by Hey Kids, Comics!

[troydivision1]

Honest question -
This listing / seller affected you how?

[Number 6]

If what you’re asserting is true - that both copies are part of same submission - then both copies would be on the census when the first one was up for auction. 
 

If someone is the type of buyer to going for the “highest-graded unicorn of x-y-z variant” sales pitch then I would think he would at least check the census to verify this claim before going full-throttle on an auction like this. 
 

And whether a buyer checks the census or not, if he’s falling for the “one-of-a-kind in existence” hucksterisms on a mass-produced item then they’re kind of setting themselves up for disappointment when the next copy pops on the census regardless of when it happens or who’s selling. 
 

Honestly, $205 doesn’t really seem like “unicorn” money to me. I don’t know what regular 9.8 copies of this book go for but if this seller is guilty of predatory profit I think he’s doing it wrong. I suspect most bidders saw through all the film-flam. 
 

I mean yeah it’s kinda dooshy but buyers have a choice of whether to play along or give him a hard pass. And with the census data and the sale of the first book on e Bay’s completed auctions it doesn’t seem like the 2nd buyer was having his arm twisted. 

Edited March 13 by Number 6

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 3/13/2024 at 6:41 PM, Number 6 said:

If what you’re asserting is true - that both copies are part of same submission - then both copies would be on the census when the first one was up for auction. 
 

If someone is the type of buyer to going for the “highest-graded unicorn of x-y-z variant” sales pitch then I would think he would at least check the census to verify this claim before going full-throttle on an auction like this. 
 

And whether a buyer checks the census or not, if he’s falling for the “one-of-a-kind in existence” hucksterisms on a mass-produced item then they’re kind of setting themselves up for disappointment when the next copy pops on the census regardless of when it happens or who’s selling. 
 

Honestly, $205 doesn’t really seem like “unicorn” money to me. I don’t know what regular 9.8 copies of this book go for but if this seller is guilty of predatory profit I think he’s doing it wrong. I suspect most bidders saw through all the film-flam. 
 

I mean yeah it’s kinda dooshy but buyers have a choice of whether to play along or give him a hard pass. And with the census data and the sale of the first book on e Bay’s completed auctions it doesn’t seem like the 2nd buyer was having his arm twisted. 

I understand but do want to interject that the census doesn't break out mark jeweler.

9.8s? Yes, so they'd see all the 9.8s in the census and think to themselves, this is the "only mark jeweler?"

Take that with a grain of salt, too, because it is impossible for the census to even tell you how many mark jeweler there are.

Same with signature series.

Even Canadian or other price variants that may be broken out in the census is iffy, as cgc missed those early on.

 

Edited March 14 by ADAMANTIUM

[Number 6]

Clearly, my ignorance regarding MJ variants in relation to the census is indicative of how little I care about this sort of thing. 
 

But that does kind of get back to my overall point:  I would think someone who does care about MJ variants would know that MJ variants aren’t broken out….and therefore know that any seller making a “unicorn” claim is making at best an unverifiable claim. 
 

And if a buyer is like me and ignorant of that and chooses to take a seller like this at his word then they're failing to do a whole lot of due diligence, not the least of which is how fleeting “single-highest-graded” status can be. 
 

Seriously, the amount exclamation points in that listing alone would have me looking for the swampland. 
 

 

Edited March 14 by Number 6

[MAR1979]

I purchased a book from this seller 1.5-2 years back.   Book at date of listing had  2 pop in 9.8 and seller made a huge deal about that in Caps in auction description. . Seller timed their 5 day auction perfectly so the census would not reflect the one they were selling which they knew to be the 3rd in 9.8

As crooked as any Comic or Comic Art or trading card dealer. Not to say there aren't any honest ones but in all seriousness in 4 decades of collecting I've never personally met any. Only varying degrees of dishonest. IMHO honest people don't become collectible dealers.

BTW I do recall the seller shipped item first thing the next day and packaged it extremely well - well enough I still recall unraveling what seemed to be half a football field of colored bubble wrap.

 

Edited March 14 by MAR1979

[Hey Kids, Comics!]

On 3/13/2024 at 6:16 PM, troydivision1 said:

Honest question -
This listing / seller affected you how?

It was a good friend who bought it and had no idea about the second copy until I let him know. 

But even if it wasn't, I think that things like this should be pointed out to potential buyers. 

[MAR1979]

one ? if the items were consecutive cgc serial numbers how did census not reflect there were 2? Unless same situation as in my last post and the number jumped from 1 to 3

Edited March 14 by MAR1979

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 3/13/2024 at 7:31 PM, MAR1979 said:

one ? if the items were consecutive cgc serial numbers how did census not reflect there were 2? Unless same situation as in my last post and the number jumped from 1 to 3

Again you can't tell what issues of Mark jewelers there are by the census. The listing was hopeful at best

[Hey Kids, Comics!]

On 3/13/2024 at 8:34 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Again you can't tell what issues of Mark jewelers there are by the census. The listing was hopeful at best

He has others (like Web 33 9.6) that he lists as the only one on Earth with none higher when this can't possibly be known. 

[MAR1979]

On 3/13/2024 at 8:34 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Again you can't tell what issues of Mark jewelers there are by the census. The listing was hopeful at best

Thanks - now i get it.  Taking that into account IMHO it's a damnable lie from the seller/dealer.

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 3/13/2024 at 7:36 PM, Hey Kids, Comics! said:

He has others (like Web 33 9.6) that he lists as the only one on Earth with none higher when this can't possibly be known. 

Unscrupulous was a good word. It is just his dealing method, in a Grey area and so on, so not on the up and up.

Ebay doesn't have a block seller list, but given this thread and any other heated response it might be good to put him on your block buyers list.

Mark Jewelers aren't sectioned in the census and that said I didn't look how many 9.8s there were either.

Knowing ebay, I know in the end it wouldn't have amounted to him being reprimanded.

So this is the kind of thing to speak up about, and I have absolutely no opinion on how it turned out. If only to say it is good to speak up period the end, but I don't know of a fix.

Because there isn't a fix. It is just a vent in frustration, which shouldn't be debated, it is what it be, just an Unscrupulous seller.

It's unfortunate 

Edited March 14 by ADAMANTIUM

[Hey Kids, Comics!]

It looks like he used the auction as a gauge as to the market value and then listed the other directly after with that price as the BIN. I would think the underbidder on the other copy snapped up the BIN. 

[Albert Thurgood]

That ebayer certainly loves his "!" key.

[Hey Kids, Comics!]

On 3/13/2024 at 8:48 PM, Hey Kids, Comics! said:

It looks like he used the auction as a gauge as to the market value and then listed the other directly after with that price as the BIN. I would think the underbidder on the other copy snapped up the BIN. 

To clarify the auction ended at 8:11 PM and the BIN was purchased at 9:38 PM that same night.

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 3/13/2024 at 7:48 PM, Hey Kids, Comics! said:

It looks like he used the auction as a gauge as to the market value and then listed the other directly after with that price as the BIN. I would think the underbidder on the other copy snapped up the BIN. 

Good deal. It isn't pretty, but it is shady I agree, just idk a fix myself other than to vent and get out the word as you ARE doing.

 

[Hey Kids, Comics!]

On 3/13/2024 at 8:50 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Good deal. It isn't pretty, but it is shady I agree, just idk a fix myself other than to vent and get out the word as you ARE doing.

 

Definitely no fix and I'm really not looking for one. I just wanted people to know the kind of guy they're potentially dealing with.

[Point Five]

If you're going to police this sort of thing on ebay you're going to be very, very sad.   

 

[Ryan.]

On 3/13/2024 at 9:08 PM, Point Five said:

If you're going to police this sort of thing on ebay you're going to be very, very sad.   

 

Or tired.

[Hey Kids, Comics!]

On 3/13/2024 at 9:08 PM, Point Five said:

If you're going to police this sort of thing on ebay you're going to be very, very sad.   

 

Yeah, I get it. I'm already pretty tired of going back and forth with the guy. I'm pretty over it already. Like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic or whatever the saying is.