Yeah, I missed it, but thanks for the all caps emphasis. I'll make sure I pay special attention to your weekly BST blowup in the new few days.

Choo- choo.... this is the Cannon Ball Express heading for "Train-Wreck Taverns"...

My 2 cents...

A quick recap -

<ul>
<li>A T206 UZIT card is offered on BST for $1K.
<li>Potential buyer (person who started thread) agrees to $1.3K and delivery in a short period of time.
<li>Potential buyer finds out that seller doesn't own the card, rather the card is up for auction via Heritage Auctions. The delivery time of the card is prior to the end of the auction - How can that be. This rubs the buyer the wrong way and the potential buyer is pissed off enough to out the potential seller in this thread.
<li>New twist - someone else shows interest in the card and the potential seller tells that person that the card is theirs for $1.4K - now, that is really pushing the enveloped on the part of the potential seller.
<li>We are all waiting for the potential seller to respond to this thread.... I CAN'T WAIT....
</ul>

Some people might think the actions of the seller are fine, as long as he follows through with the sale. Personally, I think it's a real bad way to do business, especially with another board member. What really makes this bad is the accusation that the potential seller would have taken more money for the card from someone else. If this is in fact true then I think that the potenial seller has a lot of explaining to do.

Doesn't common sense dictate that you can't sell what you don't own and you should honor your price on a card, even if you are offered more for it. GREED!!!!

The BST is caveat emptor. Actions like these will almost force the moderators to create rules for something that is supposed to be a friendly arena for trade.

Here's the link to the UZIT cards in question (being auctioned by Heritage):

http://sports.ha.com/common/view_ite...7&Lot_No=81043

I hope nobody gets upset that I posted the link but it's already common knowledge which card is in question and which auction house is selling it.

Potential Buyer = happy to make deal :D
Potenial Buyer = puzzled about potential sellers actions :eek:
Potential Buyer = pissed off after finding out what potential seller is up to :mad:

Definitely not an ethical way to do business in my opinion...but wow...look at all those uzits! I think Jamie is consulting with Tiger Wood's PR person prior to making his statement.

Maybe I missed the piece of information in the carnage, but why would a buyer be paying $1300 for a card that was offered at $1000? If the seller was crawfishing on the deal to start with, that was probably a good sign to walk away (run away) from dealing with him.

I Guess I have to defend myself.. after 75 posts by Chicago
 

Back from being out all night...Time to stick up for myself. this will be a long one...
Before I start..If posting a card you do not own in the BST ..to find a "partner" in a auction is not allowed.. then I am sorry for that....i have never done it before so i wasnt sure.

Chicago,

First of all i dont appreciate how you have tried to blow this up into a huge deal. You have already needed to appoligize to the board once before for posting first and thinking second.

Here was my intentions: to win the auction and sell the card to Chicago for the agreed upon $1300, keeping the seymour for myself. Collecting the $1300 after I had won the auction. Thats it. I told Chicago that I DIDNT OWN THE CARD on April 2nd, here is the email sent to him then:
"Phil.

The card is being sold with a second card that I want. I have no interest in the jennings uzit. So after I receive the jennings I'm looking to have someone to send it to right away... The card is a very good 1."

here is the email I sent today about Phil wanting me to put "sold" on bst :
" ..(I wont) put its sold until I have the card in hand. Which will be in a couple weeks. As I said I'm not looking for anyone else. So as long as my deal goes through. So will ours."

and my last email to him today:
"I took down the Uzit post. I will need notice if you for some reason need to back out. Because then I have to find someone else interested. So you 100% want the uzit for 1300 right?"



Where is the scam there. Maybe I am wrong for assuming that I am going to win the auction. But I have a very good idea of what this SHOULD end at.. and what I was going to bid.... But the word scam means that I am looking to rip someone off.. which i have never done ever!.. i told you I didnt own the card April 2nd... and you RAISED your offer price AFTER I said that....how dare you start this thread Chicago.. go make more youtube videos of your backs if you want to waste time...

What if by some small percentage this auction went up to a rediculious amount? More then I was willing to pay..... Then I would have to appoligize because my deal fell through.. and look to make it up to him in a future deal... Chicago found out from ME that this was not my card and I needed to buy it from "another source".. i did not want to mention where.. because maybe he goes and bids on the lot and now I am weakening my chance to win the Seymour.

And I believe 2 one offs I wanted to address... I had no agreement with anyone else at 1000... just interest.. chicago was the only one I had an agreement with.. and as soon as we had an agreement I removed the ad from the bst saying I am no longer looking for a buyer.. so clearly planning on honoring my agreement with Chicago...
2nd someone said that I dont value my rep on this board..?.. I am on this board every day.. posting all the time... ofcourse I care about this board..

Jamie

It seems to me there were only 2 choices.

1) Try to win the auction on your own and sell the card you didn't want later.
2) Out the auction by looking for a partner up front.

Jamie,

Your reply did not respond to the fact that you offered the card at $1400.

Both of you have a bit to be desired in how this whole thing is being handled.

Chicago, you are going to have to learn on this board if you are going to go after somebody there are going to be defenders both ways and your past rep will get brought up.

Who says you can't sell what you dont own ask Bernie madoff. :D

Lee

My two cents;

Sellers actions don't seem right. There HAD to be a better way of going about doing what he ultimately wanted to do; i.e., win an auction for two cards and sell the card he wasn't interested in.


As far as offering MORE for a card than a seller is asking, I can see it happening, ESPECIALLY if the seller says he wont have the card for two weeks. My take on that would be the seller was buying cards from someone else and might have a money squeeze going on OR the second seller is wavering about the sale price.

In either case the buyer, who is expecting the card in two weeks, could then think if he increases the amount he is willing to pay for the card he wants it will give the person he is buying the card from a little leverage in either getting the deal done or getting it done sooner.

What I wouldn't expect to be happening is that I was being used as a silent and unkown partner in an auction. If that were the case, I could just bid on the same two cards and, if I won them, sell the card I didn't want.

If I were being used like this, I would be upset too.

David

Seems Chicago Gecko starts fights everywhere he goes and then throws around how much money he has to fight these fires he starts. (pun intended for the engineer from the Chicago Fire Department) This act gets old real fast and when I first saw him post here I just knew he was going to start fires here too!

Maybe i can make a suggestion... nothing can be sold or attempted to be sold on BST unless you own it outright, other then that, list it as an auction partnership.

I dont think Jamie was trying to scam anyone, I think we are all guilty of "assuming" people know what we mean when we say something. I think Jamie will be a little more careful next time as there are sharks lurking for every auction.

Chicago, i understand your point totally, but maybe before ranting and raving, use some discretion and try all means, including giving someone ample time to solve the issue without going overboard.

we all have too much drama in our lives with wives, kids, mortgages, etc

Cards should be drama free


Just my two cents worth, if it matters

+1

This is precisely what upset me...And Jamie was absolutely wrong in what he did. But rather than apologize, he is trying to defend these very lame actions.

Oh, and Jamie....I see you like to post snipets of our emails to try to defend what you did. Why dont you post....word for word....the actual emails in total we had? I can do it if you want. Lets show the forum that in over 12 emails to me, you never mention the card is part of an auction. You say in one email that "Im buying this card with another", but that could mean you have a deal in place with a dealer, another collector, or a buddy from college. The very LAST thing im thinking is "auction". You guaranteed me the card in 2 weeks if I was willing to commit $1300. How can you do that when the card is in an auction? You cannot guarantee you will be high bidder. At that point is when you should have told me that you "guarantee the card would be mine IF you were the high bidder". But you didnt.....instead, you continued your lies and deception. Now you come in here and accuse ME of being unreasonable? Take some responsibility for your own actions Jamie. You tried to deceive me.....not the other way around.

Ok....enough of Jamie's lies. Not once did he ever say anything even similar to "as long as my deal goes through, so will ours". I strongly feel the need to list every word of every email regarding this matter. The newest is on top, the oldest at the bottom, so read from bottom, up.




Re: Uzit...second request‏
From: BLUNDER19@AOL.COM
Sent: Sat 4/03/10 6:38 PM
To: phil wyantt (golddigger10932@hotmail.com)

There is no answer because that situation wouldn't have come up because I told u today I need to buy the card first.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: phil wyantt <golddigger10932@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 18:35:14 -0500
To: <blunder19@aol.com>
Subject: RE: Uzit...second request


Im really not either. It was just an honest question. I wanted to know what excuse you were gonna give me if you didnt win that auction lot. Thats not alot to ask, is it?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: golddigger10932@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Uzit...second request
From: BLUNDER19@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 23:22:37 +0000

Phil I'm not big into back and forth crap so good luck with your collecting.

Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: phil wyantt <golddigger10932@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 18:18:50 -0500
To: <blunder19@aol.com>
Subject: RE: Uzit...second request



Have you ever "planned on winning an auction", but it didnt happen? Yeah, me too! You guaranteed I would get the card if I committed to pay the $1300. When the auction ended in 19 days, and if you were not the winner, what did you plan on telling me Jamie??? Im VERY curious to know!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: golddigger10932@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Uzit...second request
From: BLUNDER19@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 23:09:42 +0000

Sorry u feel mislead u. All I was trying to do is find a buyer for a card that I am going to buy but don't want. I am planning on winning this card. And I didn't let u wait 2 weeks because I told u today I needed to buy it first. I will just look for someone else. Sry to have wasted ur time. Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: phil wyantt <golddigger10932@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 17:55:41 -0500
To: <blunder19@aol.com>
Subject: RE: Uzit...second request



Go back and read our emails.....Now answer the following question:

Under what circumstances was I willing to wait 2 weeks? AS LONG AS YOU GUARANTEED I OWNED THE CARD!

Correct or no? I did not agree to wait 2 weeks to SEE IF I GET THE CARD. Correct or no?

Furthermore, since the auction doesnt end for 19 days, and it will take at least another 5-7 days before you actually get the card, we are talking closer to a month than 2 weeks, arent we?

You tried to use me as leverage to buy an auction lot without telling me so. If I did go along with it, not knowing, and you were NOT the winner of that auction, then what? You come here to tell me "sorry, tough luck"? Tell me that after I have commited my money to you??? And you see nothing wrong there? Wow!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: golddigger10932@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Uzit...second request
From: BLUNDER19@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 22:46:23 +0000

Phil I don't follow. If I get the card I was looking to sell it to someone interested. I wasn't taking your money until I have the card in hand. If your not interested in waiting 2 weeks then why did you tell me you were? Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: phil wyantt <golddigger10932@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 17:42:58 -0500
To: <blunder19@aol.com>
Subject: RE: Uzit...second request


Unreal Jamie. VERY deceptive thing you did. Im only willing to wait 2 weeks because you GUARANTEED it would be mine. How do you guarantee a card thats in a live auction? Im not going to commit my money, and pass on other deals so that I MIGHT get the card IF you place the winning bid. You should have been more upfront with me....you should not have guaranteed the card to me if I commited to you. And thats what you did. Reread our emails...I was very clear that I dont mind waiting as long as it was a sure thing. Next time look for an "auction buddy" so that he at least understands there is a chance he wont get the card. Thanks anyway.

Phil


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: golddigger10932@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Uzit...second request
From: BLUNDER19@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 22:18:04 +0000

I took down the Uzit post. I will need notice if you for some reason need to back out. Because then I have to find someone else interested. So you 100% want the uzit for 1300 right?

Jamie Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: phil wyantt <golddigger10932@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 17:08:06 -0500
To: <blunder19@aol.com>
Subject: RE: Uzit...second request


The sharks are in a feeding frenzy in your BST ad. Im doing everything in my power to restrain myself from posting that I bought it. Perhaps it would be best for you to state the card has sold?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: golddigger10932@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Uzit...second request
From: BLUNDER19@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 21:55:00 +0000

Ok good. I'll keep you posted.

Jamie Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: phil wyantt <golddigger10932@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 15:26:19 -0500
To: <blunder19@aol.com>
Subject: RE: Uzit...second request


Its a deal Jamie! Im in no hurry as long as I know its mine..:-). Consider the deal done.

Phil


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: golddigger10932@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Uzit...second request
From: BLUNDER19@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 20:10:17 +0000

Also you have my word that even if someone else were to offer 1400 for example.. I would turn it down.

So no worries on that front. As long as you are ok with waiting 2 weeks.

Jamie Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: phil wyantt <golddigger10932@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 15:04:57 -0500
To: <blunder19@aol.com>
Subject: RE: Uzit...second request


As long as I have your word that its mine....I have zero problems waiting the couple of weeks. Just let me know when it arrives, and i'll get a bank check out to you that day. Not sure if you saw my thread I posted yesterday, but I have just completed the 15 brands backs collection. Of the 15 cards, all are graded but 1....its a super beater Uzit that I was able to buy for $300 as a filler. Today feels great as now I have a decent example of an Uzit. I thank you for the opportunity!


Phil


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: golddigger10932@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Uzit...second request
From: BLUNDER19@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 19:50:20 +0000

Phil
I would prefer certified bank check..so I don't have paypal fees.. Paypal is fine if you want to do is as a gift... Or add 3%... But hold off on paying until I get it in the mail. It may be as long as 2 weeks. But I will not go around looking for anyone else. If you have a problem waiting 2 weeks.. Let me know so I can look for someone else.

Jamie Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: phil wyantt <golddigger10932@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 14:45:08 -0500
To: <blunder19@aol.com>
Subject: RE: Uzit...second request


I'll take it. How do you want payment?

Phil


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: golddigger10932@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Uzit...second request
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 13:14:02 -0400
From: blunder19@aol.com


Phil,

Heres the scans.. let me know if you are in at 1300.... and I will not seek out anyone else.

jamie





-----Original Message-----
From: phil wyantt <golddigger10932@hotmail.com>
To: blunder19@aol.com
Sent: Sat, Apr 3, 2010 12:29 pm
Subject: RE: Uzit...second request


Hey Jamie. Just writing to let you know that my offer of $1300 is solid until Monday morning. Hopefully you will know by then. Although I badly want the card for my backs collection, I have been presented with another fantastic opportunity for a card I want as well (but your Uzit is my priority). Hate to wait longer than Monday just to hear someone else offered higher on your Uzit, and then lose this other opportunity as well, im sure you understand my dilemma. The sooner, the better on letting me know if I own the Uzit at $1300. Thanks.

Phil


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: golddigger10932@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Uzit...second request
From: BLUNDER19@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 01:58:16 +0000

Let me send u the scans 1st. I also have other people that I promised to send the pic to. So to be fair to them I have to hear what they want to pay. I will not make any decisions without letting you know what's going on. U seem very interested, and I know the feeling.
Jamie Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: phil wyantt <golddigger10932@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 20:39:40 -0500
To: <blunder19@aol.com>
Subject: RE: Uzit...second request


Consider it sold to me at $1300 as long as it has decent eye appeal for a 1. I dont care about creases at all, I just hate paper loss. If the card looks sharp for a 1, I will take it at $1300. Let me know if this is ok with you.

Phil


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: golddigger10932@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Uzit...second request
From: BLUNDER19@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 01:20:51 +0000

Phil.

The card is being sold with a second card that I want. I have no interest in the jennings uzit. So after I receive the jennings I'm looking to have someone to send it to right away... The card is a very good 1. Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: phil wyantt <golddigger10932@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 19:40:06 -0500
To: <blunder19@aol.com>
Subject: RE: Uzit...second request


Thanks for the reply Jaime. If the card is a higher end 1, I wouldnt mind spending $1,300 on it. Just keep that in mind before selling it. Talk with you tomorrow.

Phil


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: golddigger10932@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Uzit...second request
From: BLUNDER19@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 00:35:53 +0000

Phil I am busy with quarter end work... I am not free until tomorrow. I will catch up on baseball stuff tomorrow... I have many people interested in getting the card. Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: phil wyantt <golddigger10932@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 19:17:56 -0500
To: <blunder19@aol.com>
Subject: Uzit...second request


Hi Jamie. This is my 2nd request to see the Uzit. Let me know whats going on when you get the chance as I'd like to own the card. Thanks.

Phil

Definitely a shady practice
 

I can certainly understand why Chicago is upset. Nowhere in Jamie's write up does he list this as needing an "auction partner". If he had disclosed that information, this could have been handled a lot earlier. Leon asked if he could post a scan and he didn't respond to that. Dan asked if he owns the card, again no response. People were trying to asertain information because the "seller" wasn't being forthright in the ad. He was holding people to their word, when he wasn't with his. How long would he have continued to shop the card that he didn't own? What if the buyer was really interested in another card that he couldn't now afford because he had $1300.00 locked up on this only to have the "seller" of the UZIT card (which he didn't own) come back 2 days later to say oh, thank you for your interest, but someone else just offered me $1400.00.

I agree that you shouldn't be able to post anything for sale on the BST unless you have the card in hand. If you are looking for a partner, say so, don't be deceptive.

I have no dog in this fight, but as a frequent buyer on the BST, I certainly would be pi$$ed if this were me. But again, I would have been a little suspect if I didn't get the card for the original $1000.00 that the seller agreed to on the original post.

r/
Frank

unreal - what a way to wake up on Easter morning...

10 pages later - now I'm awake...

My 2 cents - Jamie was looking for an auction buddy. He didn't want others to know and lose out on the card he wanted from the lot. Improper post in a B/S/T to begin with and very misleading. It read that first one to email Jamie and pay 1K would get the card.

Chicago requested scans and sensed Jamie was unsure who to sell the card to and upped the amount to 1.3K to seal the deal. Nothing really wrong with what Chicago did - unless he knew the card was already promised to someone else for 1K. I don't believe that is the case.

Chicago - email exchanges from you and Jamie were helpful - but they are also private in a sense. You posted yours and his email address for everyone to see. Please edit and remove them at the very least.

My opinion is that Jamie made a mistake, and Chicago gets too excited. Let's move on.

BTW - anyone looking for a partner is the upcoming HA auctions. I hear there are some Uzits.... ;)

It's obvious from those emails, and the email he sent me, that Jamie was well aware of what key words to omit so as to not raise suspicion. He knew that listing for sale something he didn't own was not right. Hopefully he can't plead ignorance and get away with it.

Jamie also never had any intention of keeping his word to Phil. Check out the last line in his email to me. He obviously was looking for more than the $1300 he had already agreed to with Phil. "The high guy right now is at 1300. I will send picks if your still interested."

The working title of this helluva movie is .....
 

"Blunder's, Blunder" :)

Back in the day
 

I was told "Blue Chip" did the exact same thing. They would run these big ads in BHN; then when they got orders; would go to shows and pay for the cards they had sold. Nice business; get $ in hand; sell cards for less than you sold them for.

And yes, I sold a lot of cards to "BC" that way; but it was an interesting concept.

Rich

Rich,

An interesting idea, absolutely, not a problem with doing that as long as you are on the up and up with your intentions. Don't advertise a card for $1000.00, then behind the scenes take offers. He was tying up peoples money for an uncertainty that was another 3 weeks away. Full disclosure on the BST should be a must.

r/
Frank

Not much I can add that hasn't already been said, other than to say this whole thing is deplorable. And I don't even want to take sides.

But a short piece of advice to Jamie: never, ever assume you are going to win something at auction before the auction ends. What if a serious T206 back collector was looking for a Uzit Jennings, or a Uzit Seymour, for the last ten years? And he saw this as his one and only chance to get one. You would have been dead in the water. Repeat: never, ever assume you know what an auction lot will go for, and furthermore, don't sell anything you don't own. Whatever your intentions, that is very bad business.

The rest of this argument is pretty much "he said, she said" kind of stuff so I will stay out of it. Thank you.

Uzits
 

This is kind off point, but I am curious as to why Heritage is selling 2 Uzits in 1 lot. Considering the rarity and the fact that there are so many people interested in Uzits, wouldn't the consigner make more $ if these were sold individually? Personally, I might consider placing a healthy bid on 1 Uzit for my personal collection, but I don't really need or want 2.

Rick

Only thing I can think of reading through all of this is Jaime didn't want to disclose the location of the card and auction for fear of weakening his buying position - now the entire board knows where it is, what it is and when it ends. Heritage and the seller of this lot couldn't have asked for better promotion!

no doubt Ed....my brother collects rare backs and hadn't even looked at the Heritage auction until I told him last night ! This "deal" being discussed sounds shady at the least. Why should board members be allowed to sell cards they don't even own ?? I think something should be done so this behavior doesn't continue on the BST area.

Perfect thread for Easter Sunday. :eek:

As soon as I saw that BST listing the first thing I thought was that
he didn't have the card. That's why he was being so vague and it had
no scans which he usually posts.

I decided a while back that I would not be doing any deals with Blunder after
he stole my entire EBay listing of photo, set-up and lengthy description after I
sold him an item. To some it may seem like no big deal but it just rubbed me
the wrong way and showed no respect, especially since he knew I was a board
member. I blocked him from my auctions after that. I just don't care for the
way he goes about things.

The part that concerns me:
 

"What if by some small percentage this auction went up to a rediculious amount? More then I was willing to pay..... Then I would have to appoligize because my deal fell through.. and look to make it up to him in a future deal..."

I would never advertise something I didn't own, I realize others may feel differently. The even bigger issue for me is, I just cannot understand the quote above. It appears Blunder was not going to follow through on the deal if it got too pricey. That is wrong, this is clearly a willingness to break your word

Frank,

I "stole" a picture... of what.. a card that I owned at the time? .... after I buy a card i always save a pic from the seller... dont you? Its a pic of my card. I love how people are trying to ruin my reputation. after years and years of collecting I have never had 1 person where money was exchanged say 1 bad thing about me.

Im sorry to have wasted everyones time. This is rediculious that I am put on blast in such a way. Really?? a 12-15 page thread on this?? just rediculious.. I hope that auction ends at $10,000. I want no part of it now.

I told Chicago I didnt own the card .. not in our very first dialog.. so for that Im sorry... how many dam sorrys do I have to give.. and I didnt let him wait the 2-3 weeks thinking I owned the card. Thus the start of this thread. If my intentions were to lock up his money thinking I owned the card.. I would have never said anything to him.. and he would have not started this ranting and raving thread.

JP... I asked you about the 1400 BEFORE I had an agreement with Chicago... can you comprehend that....Im tired of you blabing your mouth that I wasnt going to come through fro Chicago... who are you to speak of my intentions?? I recall a thread about you being shady with deals not too long ago.... Chicago offered 1300 .. I didnt say yes at first...I wanted to see if anyone else wanted to go higher... we had no agreement then... but then he emailed me that he wanted an answer or he was out... which was after any talks with you. Thats when I said ok.. Is that NOT how it happened Chicago?


The 2 cards are very different in value. a HOFer and a commoner. by looking for an auction buddy, I would have tryed to agree upon a price with the other buyer for the jennings. One problem. I was not sure of the market value for the jenninngs. I had an idea but thought posting on the bst would get people to make offers and then I could have an agreement with the highest one realizing a more accurate market value for the jennings uzit.... so one last time thge way i went about finding market value and a partner was wrong. so I am sorry. Chicago now if you want your jennings you can spend 2k+ because thats what it is goinng to end at.

Im not looking at this page once more on easter.. going to spend time with my family... hopefully you are doing the same and not reading this crap... maybe by tomorrow this can be a 20 page thread on a deal where no money was exchanged and one "member" who could start a 20 page thread blasting anyone.

Chicago= Mad drama... deal with him if you like that... me, I get enough of that from my GF. so Im good on that front.

And your spelling sucks too.

It's just bad timing for you Jamie...
 

Someone had to come off the bench and fill in for Bruce now that he's in the penalty box for 30 days! It's what we call a Bad Beat in the casino business.

Jamie...I don't know you...other than that you put together a t206 set in record time...then sold it...and are now putting together a t206 backs collection...but your attempted sale was unethical and just wrong...and the way you're handling this is pretty poor. If you were to admit that what you did was wrong...and apologize...this would go away...but the way you're acting...this will not soon go away...it'll only get worse. Happy holidays to everyone!

I don't know why these are difficult concepts to master
 

There is a big difference between preselling a card that is part of a deal you have in place and preselling a card that you are trying to win in an auction. In the former situation you have an actual property right to sell (a contract in place for the item but possession hasn't passed yet) while in the latter you have nothing legally yours to sell. Former is OK; happens all the time in many aspects of commerce. I've done it myself. Latter isn't ever OK. What I read sounded like the seller was trying to sell off a piece of a deal in place, not a bidder hoping to win an auction with a partner.

Frank, Perhaps stealing your item description is a legit gripe. But c'mon It's petty to be upset that a buyer takes the scan of his purchase. I do it all the time and never thought the seller would get his BVDs all bunched up.

Incidentally, if anyone wants scans of my beaters, have at it.

To get back on track. Both guys are knuckleheads of varying degrees. Great hobby ehh?

Jamie, you're just making it worse by not actually apologizing. And what the hell is this?

"One problem. I was not sure of the market value for the jenninngs. I had an idea but thought posting on the bst would get people to make offers and then I could have an agreement with the highest one realizing a more accurate market value for the jennings uzit...."

Your bst ad said you were selling a card for $1000. Now it appears you were running a secret auction for a card you never owned....way worse than selling a card you don't own. Instead of lashing out at everyone, just admit that you purposely deceived six ways to (Easter) Sunday.

My 3 cents:

Bottom line: It should be common sense never to list an item on the B/S/T that you do not own. There isn't any excuse or explanation that will make what was done ok.

Whatever the intention was should have been made crystal clear from the initial post.

The fact that you are not apologizing without making all kinds of other statements/excuses demean the apology, and doesn't help your cause.

As far as Chicago, maybe the way he goes about things sometimes is controversial and a total turn off, however he has every right to be pissed as well as everyone else that values the B/S/T.

Rob

Rediculious!!:eek:

David, you're seplling is apawling!!!

i want the last 10 minutes of my life back after reading this.
but funny chicago was so concerned as he said many times about his 1300 being "tied up" but said later that losing 300 was no big deal because its just like a bad blackjack 20 minute run. just think that you went on a bad run for a little over an hour and having it tied up doesnt seem like such a big deal, right?

Jeff,

That's uncalled for and "rediculious!"

nail on head
 

Rob- your post put it fairly succinctly in my mind. There is no way someone should be (trying) to sell something, or take offers, on something they don't own and don't even know if they WILL own. Saying you will apologize if you don't win it, and can't come through with your end of a deal, is total asshattedness (I just made that derivative up, leave me alone :)) . It is NOT OK to do what Jamie Blunder did on the BST. What he should have done, and that every other board member does, is look for an auction partner for that lot. Without knowing an ending price all you have to do is give a percentage for each card in the lot. Say 65% for HOF and 35% for common, or whatever. I have done it and still do it. To not communicate that you don't own it is fraudulent in my book. The other mods and I will discuss it. It's not like anyone will go to jail or anything but I can see some time away from the BST, or the board, or both, as being possibilities. This was NOT acceptable behavior on our board.

One last thing...I am not sure when the situation about how much anyone pays for a house came up but that kind of information should, and will, remain private UNLESS it is already posted on here (by the party buying the house) or posted on another public forum. Even if posted somewhere else it really shouldn't be posted here by other than the original person as it is their own information. Hope that makes sense. Please, no more of that, even if you are making a point you can just use generalities and probably be ok. Something like, and this is not what was said "Quit braggin' about how much you pay for a house" would be ok.....giving details, probably not.

The other mods and I want the BST to be as transparent and friendly AND ETHICAL as possible. How many times do we say the key to doing smooth transactions is to communicate and OVER-Communicate. There was intentional deception in this transaction, imo, and that won't be tolerated. best regards

I'll give you 2,000 for this Unix guy and I'm going to over bid all of youzit guys at that Auction. If there enough dopes to go on for 15 pages about a deal that almost was, I want to own that stuff, so you can buy it from me for triple on e-bay "buy uzits now". Thanks for the info.:D

Another example, Jim, of why you're all that's wrong with humanity.

You're just jealous that you didn't get promoted from "all that's wrong with the hobby."

Not true. We all have our place in life, and mine apparently is destroying the hobby. Though I think I could expedite the process if only I'd get involved in a B/S/T or eBay flare-up on a weekly basis. I need to work on that.

It is very difficult to tell this week which member of the Net54 community is ruining the hobby the most.

I vote Jim VB, but that's just me.

-Al

I used a Just So tobacco card to light a cigar the other night, so I'd like to think for that fleeting moment I was ruining the hobby the most.

You're not paying attention. Rob D., is ruining the hobby. I, am ruining all of humanity!

Both of us are too busy to spend time ruining a small message board community. (We are taking applications for henchmen, however!)

Hobby?
 

Wait, this is a hobby?

Rawn

SteveF/Ladder7 - is right. I should not have complained about the scan
being lifted. The rest of the listing I do think is wrong to just copy and paste
especially when I was selling another of the identical item at that time.
It was not a card, it was a book - the description was 100+ words and I
still maintain it was a disrespectful move.

one more comment
 

I feel the need to add another comment :rolleyes:. I don't believe Jamie was out to scam anyone. It was more of a deceit by omission, from what has been shown. regards

Rob D and Jim VB are the weapons of mass destruction in both our hobby and all of humanity. Me? I'm just an honest, hard-working guy that gets taken advantage of by all of you wheeler-dealer types.

Apparently you're expanding your collection to include thank-you e-mails and PMs.

Only if it was a cheap cigar. If it was something really good, then Rob and JVB are still out front.

J

Now that I have had time to calm down and emotion is out of the way..
I will say I am sorry to Chicago for making him feel he was guarenteed the card.. unless in hand nothing is guarenteed and that is my error..

Just dont question my motives.. I am a man of my word... if I won the auction the card would have went to chicago at 1300..

if I want an auction buddy I should have posted on the main board.. lesson learned..


Jamie

Hi Al,
I agree.... But his real name is Donna Chang....

Be well Brian

PS I only read the last 2 pages....:)

Jamie - main board or BST - the issue wasn't the location of the post, but that you were selling a card that you didn't own; the lesson is when you're looking for an auction partner, just say so.

You also turned a "first $1000 gets it" into a vague free-for-all with higher offers accepted.

I see JP is a man that doesnt know how to accept an appoligy.. you must be one of those round and round we go guys...

"Compleetley REEDICULUS"

"I'm agassed"

Hey, anyone want to buy a Uzit? I know where I can find one (or two, or three...) that are being auctioned, right now!

Happy Easter to all!!!

matt I agree with your point.. so lesson is learned there as well...

JP anything else...? should I pay you restitution for all of your damages in this painful event? oh wait you had none.

Blunder ... I, myself ... am a wonderful liar ... But .....
 

*

But ..... Go on with your story. :)

Do you have a benefits package in place?

If an "appoligy" is some sort of weird exploratory surgery...you're right, I won't accept it.

How about apologizing to me and all of the others who were interested in buying the card you didn't have for $1000, that you broke your word with to accept more money? You make it seem like your only mistake was posting your "deal" in the BST, when in reality what you did was a lot worse.

not sure what you trying to say Joe.. that I am a liar??.. I dont even know who the hell you are .. your not invloved in this at all...and your calling me a liar?

I am done with this thread... and being publicly hung... for a small incident...

I would love to challenge someone to come forward with 1 bad experiance where money was exchanged and when I was involved on either the buying or selling side. When I take someones money, they get what they paid for, and they get my money for things that I buy from them, 100% of the time.

I made the 520 set without 1 complaint and sold it without 1 complaint. I have been buying/selling T206s for years without 1 complaint....my apology was already issued...

Jamie

JP
 

here is my 1 and ONLY email to you....

"No. I've got a lot of responses... I'm looking for someone that wants to buy this card because I have to buy it along with another card for sale which is the one I want. They are being sold as a pair. And I want to find someone interested in the uzit jennings so I only end up with the card I want and not paying for both. The high guy right now is at 1300. I will send picks if your still interested.
Jamie"


I was upfront with you from the second I spoke with you. this email was sent before I had an agreement with Chicago.. round and round we go.. You knew right from the start I didnt own the card.. so why are you playing victim?

Yes, Jamie, it appears Joe is calling you a liar. It's pretty easy for him to call it like he sees it. I also am calling you a liar. If you think the email you sent to me, that you just posted, is "upfront" then you're never going to get it. You lied by ommission. Those cards aren't "for sale". That makes it sound like you can just buy them from someone for a fixed price and you're done. You were deceptive by not mentioning it was in an auction. And no, I didn't know from the start you didn't actually have the card. But like everyone else, including two moderators who asked for proof and weren't answered, I suspected as much. Your email to me and everyone else shouldve mentioned the auction, and how winning the cards weren't guaranteed...

Hey Jamie
 

Hey Jamie
We don't need this to go on forever but JP is correct here. You still aren't seeing the point. Your email is not helping your cause. No one said you were "scamming" someone. What everyone has said is that you weren't being truthful and honest. It seems as though you still aren't accepting of that fact. A light, misdirected apology to make it all go away won't quite do the trick. I guess my main thing now is that you seem to be skirting the real issue with each post.

How can you say "I was upfront with you from the second I spoke with you."? Of course you said you had to buy it but you didn't say you would have to "win" it in auction first. IF you had said that this whole thread probably wouldn't have started as then you would have been truthful. I can't imagine asking for a buyer for a card, that I still have to win in auction, and then thinking if I don't win it I can just say I am sorry and will make it up in the future. That is all wrong, imho. best regards

BLUNDER doesn't get it, does he? ... Or .....
 

He doesn't want to get it!

Just came home from ham, german potato salad, pees (while not all the "riligeeous", had to celebrate the ressurection of Jesus and I read...this.

If you play the stock market, you look at this thread in a different way. You use monies and own companies that you don't own and own them in spec. Especially if you trade in options.

If his intent was an "iron-clad" guarantee that this card could be sold in X amount of days for X amount of dollars, then the person not owning the card was in fact gambling, in which if the price extended beyond what he had hoped for part of the duo and he bailed, he would be in the wrong for sure.

Saying "Sorry guy, I can't come through" in not an option if you guarantee something. So if you pay $5,000 for the lot, you HAVE to agree to sell it to this gent for the agreed upon price.

I'm not saying what he did was right, nor is the practice, but if better prepared, with more disclosure (you disclosed jack from what I read), it could have benefitted both parties and this could have been avoided. Oh well, Happy Easter!

DanC

Playing The Board To Get An Uzit At A Discount?
 

....Jamie's "point" is unless he takes someone's money and doesn't deliver a card then he is basically free to do whatever he wants by way of deception.

But the lack of monetary damages here is mostly beside the point. If he had taken the money without delivering the cards -- and what may have happened here is that he was going to take the money to help pay for the lot before he actually had the cards in hand -- that would have been criminal, of course. That would have been theft.

But what really happened here is he tried to play the board with a lack of information, to try to run up interest in an auction he wanted to participate in without actually disclosing the auction. He was actually hoping to save money on this.

I would want to know the maximum bid he was willing to make. Let's see, get someone to commit to $1,300 and then hopefully the auction only goes to $2,000, then I get an UZIT for $700. And if the auction goes to $2,100? No worries -- I don't have to be the highest bidder. I can just say, sorry Mate, didn't buy the card, don't send me any money.

My take is he was playing the board to try to get an UZIT at a discount. That's my take on it.

Jamie, you really should have known better...

This is exactly how it reads to me as well...the clincher was when he told Jon C that he'd take $1400 for it. He seemed to be playing potential buyers against one another on a card that he could not guarantee he would win. Imagine if he'd gotten an offer high enough to win the entire lot that guaranteed him to actually make money and keep the other Uzit. This is totally immoral.

Dan

Absolutely!


#1 - A lifetime subscription to the online edition of a major metropolitan newspaper.

#2 - There won't be any money, but when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness.

Deathbed? Are you wishing for someone's demise?

-Al

Just had a chance to read this thread and feel that I should add that I e-mailed Jamie on Friday about this card and said I was interested if it was still available. He responded within a few minutes that the "top offer is $1300" and that he would send a scan the next day, to which I replied that I was interested. There was no mention that the card was not in hand and I found it a bit odd that it had originally been advertised at $1000. I figured that there was a lot of interest so he began taking offers above that price. I was strongly considering making an offer myself depending on how the scan looked but I never received it so assumed that it had been sold. Not sure how this affects anything, if at all, but as a frequent BST user, I just wanted to make this information available to the board.

my two cents (though no one asked for it)
 

I usually lurk, but felt compelled to chime in on this one.

I'm not taking sides in this particular dispute. Regardless of whether or not "Chicago" is in the right or not, or whether Jamie is in the right or not, this whole situation could have been handled privately (or semi-privately).

As a result, reputations for both parties in the eyes of their fellow collectors have likely been downgraded.

On a positive note, I will say this -- Jamie bought over 100 T-206s from me in multiple transactions back in 2008 when he was working on his set. Every transaction went off without incident. Jamie was a good buyer - he paid quickly, and we exchanged e-mails and scans so that there would be no misunderstandings when the cards and money were exchanged.

What did we all learn? Be clear with your communications. Be as honest and as accurate as possible when posting items for sale. Be cautious and have all of the information you feel you should have before committing any money to a seller. Caveat emptor.

Like them or not, their reputations did not deserve to be dragged through the mud in this fashion. Everyone makes mistakes (small ones or large ones). Everyone can learn from mistakes. Hopefully both parties will have the opportunity to show their fellow collectors that they are deserving of their business and hobby friendship.

Mike

PS: If you don't agree with me, fine. As I lurk, I probably won't see or respond to your post. Happy Collecting!

[QUOTE=Blunder]Back from being out all night...Time to stick up for myself. this will be a long one...
Before I start..If posting a card you do not own in the BST ..to find a "partner" in a auction is not allowed.. then I am sorry for that....i have never done it before so i wasnt sure.

"...was that wrong? Should I not have done that? I tell you, I gotta plead ignorence on this thing, because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing is frowned upon... you know, cause I've worked sold in a lot of offices b/s/t, and I tell you, people do that all the time..."

sorry, just had to go into a Seinfeld tangent :)

Plot twist that you didn't see coming...
 

Pot, meet kettle... (lifted from the CU forums)

http://forums.collectors.com/message...hreadid=770246

(The thread is already poofed - but in it, Chicago206 allegedly came clean and admitted that this has all been a ruse...)

Tom
 

I would be interested in seeing this thread over there but it seems like it's not a good link?

Tom,

I'm getting an error when I attempt to open your link.

r/
Frank

I edited my previous thread to include his alleged admission.