View Single Post
  #30  
Old 03-22-2010, 01:27 PM
Jim VB's Avatar
Jim VB Jim VB is offline
Jim VB
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barrysloate View Post
Leon- if BCCG was created for venues like the Home Shopping Network, why is a card like a 49 Leaf Paige even put in one of these holders in the first place? Shouldn't a scarce and very valuable card be automatically passed over to BVG?
The misdirection on the part of Beckett is the use of a totally different grading scale. The BCCG scale runs from BCCG 5 to BCCG 10. That means that a BCCG 6 IS NOT a high grade card.

So, a buyer who is not aware of this can be duped into approaching it like it's a 6 out of 10, when it clearly isn't.

So to answer Rob's question about proportioning blame:

I put 60% with the seller, who clearly cracked and resubmitted the card with the intent of raising the grade while finding a sucker to buy it.

I put 30% with Beckett for setting up a fraudulent grading system that asks for this kind of abuse.

And I put 10% with the buyer, for not asking to see a back scan, not knowing that BCCG and the seller were screwing with his bank account, and not listening to The Electic Light Orchestra when they said "A fool and his money soon go separate ways."


Editted to add: I could make an argument to raise each and every percentage listed, but Rob, being the stickler for details that he is, would want them to add up to 100%, not 180%

Last edited by Jim VB; 03-22-2010 at 01:32 PM.
Reply With Quote