I think it all depends on the mistake's nature.

For example, if a seller made an obvious patent or typographical error (e.g. forgetting to add an extra zero to the price - $100.00, but meant to type $1,000.00) when listing the item, I think a buyer should show mercy.

However, as a buyer, it is not my job to price another man's merchandise. It is also not my job to do your homework. This is 2021. Information is readily available at everyone's finger tips. There are internet searches, price guides, prior sales data, etc. So, if you underpriced an item that is on you.

100%! I can’t even believe this is debatable. Completely different story if you found someone with a card/collection and they had no idea what they had- and then you lowballed them. But once they post up on ebay with a price, that’s on them. You shouldn’t have to pay them more after they realized their mistake either. Like what was said earlier... used to be where a man honored their word whether they made a mistake or not.

I’d be ticked if I was the buyer, but it’d probably end there and I’d move on. The facebook / detective work stuff... meh, little weird in my opinion.. but whatever. Just the world today I guess.

Any time I have stuff like that happen, I always think of a scene from A Bronx Tale. Cost you nothing to cross him off your list of “sellers to not buy from”. You got off cheap.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/78-4RobJQ0Y" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

If the error is significant enough no court will enforce the agreement. The Doyle hypothetical is an example. The # is so egregiously low that the buyer shouldn't really expect to get the deal if the seller figures it out. The buyer might even face a lawsuit to rescind the deal on the basis of mistake. That wasn't the case here: $2k instead of $3.2K is not that degree of mistake. $2K instead of $32K probably is.

I've always noticed that there's a fairly stringent efficient market type of expectation here among many (that I never would've expected or rarely saw when I was dealing in high school during the junk wax era).

Well beyond what happened in the story here. Some seem very uncomfortable when an $850 card sells for either 700 or 1000, as if that was some sort of major screw job to either the buyer or seller.

During those dealing days, I had to find ways to make it worthwhile. One of them was raiding quarter and dollar boxes at the local shows right after the new monthly Beckett came out (and looking for cards that had just shot up). Was this taking advantage of the seller? Am I supposed to point out that he didn't bother to take a (now) $5 card out of the dollar box? Most of them would've looked at me annoyed and said something like "if it's there, that's what it costs"

And as some have mentioned, everyone has ample resources to figure out what something is worth nowadays. Unless it's something really egregious (or one party is purposely misdirecting info to the detriment of the other), this taking advantage concept about selling price gets taken too far sometimes.

As far as this spot, I think a $2000 deal to sell cards that were worth maybe twice that (we don't even know since they weren't graded) should have been honored by the seller. He was in the wrong for reneging to get 3200 elsewhere

Three Word Solution:


BST

This makes sense as far as the courts go. The point I was getting at with the Doyle example is that principle in honoring a deal where a seller might miss out on $1200 vanishes with most people when the amount they could lose out on becomes quite large. Relative principle.

Reminds me of an old story:

Guy walks into a bar and sidles up to an attractive lady. He casually asks, "Would you sleep with me for a million dollars?" She looks him over and says, "Sure." So then he says, "Would you sleep with me for 50 bucks?" She gets angry and slaps him, saying "What kind of a woman do you think I am?!"

He replies, "We've already established that. What we're trying to determine now is the price."

I'm a bad businessman. I don't sell too often, but there have been a few transactions where I found I had priced an item too low and had agreed to sell at that price. I have always honored the price. This is strictly a matter of integrity.
On the flip side, I have had a number of occasions where I could have bought something at an extremely low price due to the seller not knowing the market and trusting me. On those occasions I am always honest with the buyer and will give them a fair price for what they are selling. This, too, is a matter of integrity for me.

Sounds a bit like this story to me:

https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...okie-incident/

Rich

Reminds me of the Greed episode where the guy who ripped off the old man at a garage sale got mad when Mastro ripped him off...

This is the best advice I've seen all day. At my first card shows in the early 1970s, there were always a couple guys waiting by the door who were ready to flash a crisp $100 at anybody that wandered off the street carrying a shoebox. I learned at a young age that you need to be educated and skeptical, and you can't take your eyes off your stuff.

As for eBay transactions, I try not to get too excited about any purchase until I'm holding it in my hand. And yes, there will always be another good deal waiting right around the corner, if you're willing to put the work in. In fact, when these crazy prices take their inevitable downturn, I suspect there will be even more good deals to be had, to the disappointment of many who bought at the peak.

I didn't need to hear about the seller's family. As opposed to what some others on here have suggested is fair , they had no part in the transgression and need no mention or be parceled into ridicule. If any of you dodgy characters felt put out dealing with me and got in to mentioning my family on here I'd be googling YOUR address.
You want to mention a bad ebay transaction I think is all good.

I think this is a different situation than an anonymous eBay transaction between strangers, though. Right?

I don't really believe so. I may be old fashioned, but I don't think it's right to take advantage of anyone.

I found out a board member was fishing through my Ebay wins, and emailing sellers offering more money for completed auctions! The guy had the nerve to look me in the face and deny it, until ultimately, I put the cards on the table, or didnt.

In fact he had given me cards to grade, and I refused to return them until I was reimbursed for one of the cards. An Ebay seller specifically told me the name and the town of the person who had offered him more and told him to cancel the sale! Of course I had offered him a $200 direct paypal payment for this information, which he did not take.

Some call me an ass, I like to think I'm shrewd. After a handful of specific cards get " lost or misplaced, damaged by their daughter, etc" one has to open their eyes that something is amiss.

I'll say again, I've met some of the nicest, kindest people in the hobby, but also some of the worst!

So let's say I'm browsing around eBay one night, and I come across a card that I think has a market value of, say, $500 offered for $250 BIN. Your position is that, instead of just clicking BIN, I have a moral obligation to contact the seller and offer $500?

By the time the seller gets back to me, it's entirely possible (even likely) that someone else has gone ahead with the BIN. If the seller then cancels that transaction based on my offer, doesn't that make me similar to the person Ted describes in the post above? He would seem to have a viable claim for tortious interference there.

That sucks, but how was he able to browse through your auction wins?

Was before the "masked bidder " IDs. You could search by bidder. Now it takes going through feedback left

Paying 50% of the value of a card for resale is reasonable. I'm talking about transactions that are obviously unfair to one party or the other. I know when a transaction is wrong by my sense of right and wrong. What any other party to the transaction does is not relevant to what I do. Others may disagree in this world of gray, but I live in a black and white world.

If paying 50% of the value is reasonable, but some unspecified lesser percentage than that is wrong, that sounds a lot like a gray area to me ;).

You stated that "Paying 50% of the value of a card for resale is reasonable." However, wouldn't it depend on the card's value?

In the cited example, the card's market value was $500.00, and its buy-it-now prices was $250.00. Just $250.00 difference. No big deal.

However, would your answer and you 50% is reasonable rule change, if the card's market value was $100,000.00, and its buy-it-now price was $50,000.00? A $50,000.00 difference. That is a big deal.

Everything is relative.

I'm not here to parse hairs. I know what I feel comfortable with. If others feel comfortable doing something else that is up to them.

See my previous post. We could go on and on with individual cases. I'm not going to litigate every case. Like I said, I know where I feel comfortable and where I don't. I guess we all can have our own tipping points.

The silliest thing about all of this is it was posted as some sort of referendum on the state of hobby broadly, but then the OP's investigatory skills quickly uncovered that the dude hardly sells at all.

As far as some moral obligation to tell someone they priced something badly, well that is relative and probably the old case by case basis kind of thing. But if you go down to Florida and are going to buy some widow or widower's condo for $75,000, and you know full well from from searching Zillow that its worth at least $200,000 fair market value, and then a family member catches wind of what's going on and rips the contract up and tells you to stick it where the sun doesn't shine, . . . well, I'm certainly am not pulling my violin out and letting you cry on my shoulder about the sad state of the real estate game.

This makes me wonder about the guy who sold his Jordan RC on eBay for 350k the day before 2 sold at Goldin for 738k each.

If you go back and read my first post, you will see that I wrote the following:

These cards were in great condition and if they had graded high, then I would have doubled my money - maybe tripled.

That's right - IF they had graded high. The star cards in the set could have come back as PSA 6s or even less. If PSA sees the tiniest corner ding, then they can really screw you hard. There is only so much I can see behind my computer screen. I don't even know how much profit I could have made in the end. The point of this thread was that I felt screwed after what he did, especially over $1,200 USD. I've sold so many cards this month, and he if wanted more money, then all he had to do was ask. He should have given me that option because I already bought them! He's an idiot.

And there is something else I want to mention: why does Leon tell everyone to post their names on here? Is that creepy to any of you? Did it creep you out when he put our names below our avatars without even consulting with us first? Not at all! We all need to know who is on the other end - simple as that! Who is this guy that I'm dealing with? Who am I buying from? Who am I communicating with? Are you guys telling me that you've never looked people up before on social media? If so, then you're full of it!

Who is to say what something is worth?

What is Gamestop stock worth?

You're wrong! Check again! :D

A deal is a deal, and . . .

"The law says, bust a deal! Face the wheel!"

Oh, and I forgot to add one more thing! Social media sites give you the option to make your data private or public. If I can look somebody up and see pictures of him with his girlfriend at a Yankees game or I can see a smoking hot lady in a bikini showing off her behind, it's because they WANT me to see them! They want to share their stuff with the world! So, who is the creepy one here? Me or them? Wait, maybe none of us are! Maybe some of you old-timers just don't understand how times have changed! It's not 1968 anymore, guys!

+1 for the Beyond Thunderdome quote.

. . . . he says to the lawyer.

I am with you though. It is hard to say exactly where the line is in terms of making a fair deal vs being predatory. I think the OP is in the clear here, there is not much you can do on an ebay transaction, if an item is priced too low, somebody is going to snatch it, so if you are the lucky one, so be it.

To me though if there is a sad state of the hobby it is that most people see the OP as a victim here. I don't get the moral indignation. The buyer was hoping to grade and flip the cards and make a windfall profit, but the seller got educated and reneged.

OP didn't do anything to earn that profit, so he is not out anything. It is a shame from his standpoint that he didn't get free money but for chrissake move on.

I think things like this are happening more and more these days.

-Ebay sellers cancelling sales because the price of their item changed in value from yesterday to today.

-ebay sellers cancelling sales because they weren't happy with the sales price

I had an experience on the BST here a year or two ago where I accidentally sold a rare card for way less than it was worth. The buyer offered to give me more...I declined. It was my mistake and I accepted responsibility for it.

This year around the holidays...said buyer gifted me a card I've been hunting for for years. I was/am so happy!

I believe in karma. I believe in being responsible for my actions.

The world has become a different place where many/most are just out for themselves. This is sad.

You should stop. The more you say the worse you come off.

Alright, 68Hawk! :D:D

What the seller did was lousy. That is pretty clear. But when I read the title of the thread, I thought the OP was going to recount a story of being out money.

Again, what the seller did was lousy. But not being able to "double -- maybe triple" your money doesn't really seem like the most egregious example of the "sad state of the hobby," IMO.

Weirdo.

what can I say, Scott...I'm a middle aged dinosaur! Next dinner in MN???? Who's comin'!!!!

Weather can't be any worse than it is here right now! I have potential pick ups in Missouri and Oklahoma so I'm about the right longitude, just have to work on the latitude to get to MN.


I had to either be snarky or get political about your larger point of people only looking out for themselves so I decided to be true to my Jersey roots and avoid the ban hammer here and go for snark.

I think you know I'm with you 100%

Yeah, I think I am going to grill some steaks and pick an orange off my tree for dessert tonight instead.

The next N54 contest: The first prize is having dinner in MN. The grand prize is not having dinner in MN.

I kid you my friend. I will wave hello next time I am flying over...