Getting sick of the more obvious frauds

[Matthew H]

Glenn, for what it's worth, I think 5500 might be kinda low for today's market on that particular card. I join the ranks of people that think it's crazy to collect tobacco ads and I don't collect T206... But after reading your exchange, I wonder why you'd offer 5500 for a Tris Speaker T206 if you weren't into the back "fad".

I kinda wish this topic would have stayed on track. We were discussing a newer kind of fraud in which sellers lie, using scan doctoring and false descriptions, to try to sucker someone into buying their card at their price. Yes, obviously any one can ask anything for what they own, buy they need to do it truthfully. People who get suckered this way are most likely newbies, who will most likely not remain in the hobby very long after they realize how scumy some sellers are. That is bad for a hobby that relies on newcomers for prices to remain stable as oldtimers sell off their collections.

[Shoele$$]

Originally Posted by Matthew H

But after reading your exchange, I wonder why you'd offer 5500 for a Tris Speaker T206 if you weren't into the back "fad"

So then you do feel that offer was fairly decent considering it seemed high to you for the back? If offers because I'm a huge Tris collector as well, the back was just an added bump due to overall rarity. But it wasn't an invitation to try to give it to me in the a$$ with no lube. That's my whole point in the first place. If I really wanted to low ball I wouldn't have offered almost $6,000. Common sense should start kicking in to some people as 6-65 is about what it would pull in even at an AH.

[smtjoy]

This auction made me think of the title of this thread- "more obvious frauds"- boy I sure love the private bidding as well as the nice clean bidding amounts, ouch-

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-11-T206...item33811d6066

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-11-T206...item4ac31c5284

[Matthew H]

Originally Posted by smtjoy

This auction made me think of the title of this thread- "more obvious frauds"- boy I sure love the private bidding as well as the nice clean bidding amounts, ouch-

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-11-T206...item33811d6066

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-11-T206...item4ac31c5284

Perfect example. Rare back? If a real person "wins" that card, they'd probably be someone new to the hobby who read about rare backs somewhere and believed this description.

[sbfinley]

A couple of personal points.

1. Anyone in the market for the original card in question should be doing their due diligence and know the issue's previous history. This is not a card that an unsuspecting mother, father, or wife would pull the trigger on for a loved one's gift. I would venture to guess that less than half of this board's registered members had even seen a copy of it before this thread. It also does not carry the popularity of as, say, one of his T206 poses so it would not be on the radar of even above-average collectors. What are there, maybe a couple dozen graded examples of the card?

2. I do not personally consider adjusting scans an agent of fraud. To me that is reserved for trimmed, recolored, swapped, and stolen cards. Part of selling is making the product seem appealing. If the scan was edited to hide something (paper loss-creases) I might consider otherwise, but simply adjusting the scan to make the card pop does not constitute fraud to me. Unethical maybe, but not fraud.

3. Use common sense. The card is slabbed poor with obvious creases. Yes, I know not all poor cards are built alike, but know what you are getting. I have purchased many lower grade cards before and never have I commented "I really thought it would present better" when I received them. They are poor for a reason.

4. A seller can ask whatever they want for card. It is their business. This isn't the late 80's and early 90's when everyone was a dealer and that was their livelihood. There are a few big time dealers left on the bay who make a living turning cardboard, but the vast majority are doctors, lawyers, educators, or businessmen and women first. It is not a job for them, it is a hobby and their family isn't going to go hungry because they wouldn't come down 10%-15% on a $3k card.

5. I'll over pay for a card that I really want. I am a very impulsive buyer. There are many collectors who are very selective and patient, but there are also many like me who, when they want it and have the cash, will jump on it. I had been following a card sitting on a 1k buy it now for almost a year. It was more likely a $600-650 card. It sold two weeks ago. I thought I knew who picked it up so I sent him an email. He was the one who finally bit and when I asked him if he thought it was a bad deal he responded that he hadn't seen another one come up in months and he really wanted it. He was happy. The seller was happy. Everyone was happy.

6. It is a baseball card.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

A couple of personal points.

1. Anyone in the market for the original card in question should be doing their due diligence and know the issue's previous history. This is not a card that an unsuspecting mother, father, or wife would pull the trigger on for a loved one's gift. I would venture to guess that less than half of this board's registered members had even seen a copy of it before this thread. It also does not carry the popularity of as, say, one of his T206 poses so it would not be on the radar of even above-average collectors. What are there, maybe a couple dozen graded examples of the card?

2. I do not personally consider adjusting scans an agent of fraud. To me that is reserved for trimmed, recolored, swapped, and stolen cards. Part of selling is making the product seem appealing. If the scan was edited to hide something (paper loss-creases) I might consider otherwise, but simply adjusting the scan to make the card pop does not constitute fraud to me. Unethical maybe, but not fraud.

3. Use common sense. The card is slabbed poor with obvious creases. Yes, I know not all poor cards are built alike, but know what you are getting. I have purchased many lower grade cards before and never have I commented "I really thought it would present better" when I received them. They are poor for a reason.

4. A seller can ask whatever they want for card. It is their business. This isn't the late 80's and early 90's when everyone was a dealer and that was their livelihood. There are a few big time dealers left on the bay who make a living turning cardboard, but the vast majority are doctors, lawyers, educators, or businessmen and women first. It is not a job for them, it is a hobby and their family isn't going to go hungry because they wouldn't come down 10%-15% on a $3k card.

5. I'll over pay for a card that I really want. I am a very impulsive buyer. There are many collectors who are very selective and patient, but there are also many like me who, when they want it and have the cash, will jump on it. I had been following a card sitting on a 1k buy it now for almost a year. It was more likely a $600-650 card. It sold two weeks ago. I thought I knew who picked it up so I sent him an email. He was the one who finally bit and when I asked him if he thought it was a bad deal he responded that he hadn't seen another one come up in months and he really wanted it. He was happy. The seller was happy. Everyone was happy.

6. It is a baseball card.

Agree with everything you said Steven....but you lost me on this one-

"2. I do not personally consider adjusting scans an agent of fraud. To me that is reserved for trimmed, recolored, swapped, and stolen cards. Part of selling is making the product seem appealing. If the scan was edited to hide something (paper loss-creases) I might consider otherwise, but simply adjusting the scan to make the card pop does not constitute fraud to me. Unethical maybe, but not fraud."


Deceiving is fraud and making a scan look better than the card really is, is called deception. Plain and simple fraud to me. I guess it's debateable, just not in my mind.

[Matthew H]

Yeah Steve you also skipped over the lying in descriptions part, which was the original topic of this post.


-Matt

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by Leon

Agree with everything you said Steven....but you lost me on this one-

"2. I do not personally consider adjusting scans an agent of fraud. To me that is reserved for trimmed, recolored, swapped, and stolen cards. Part of selling is making the product seem appealing. If the scan was edited to hide something (paper loss-creases) I might consider otherwise, but simply adjusting the scan to make the card pop does not constitute fraud to me. Unethical maybe, but not fraud."


Deceiving is fraud and making a scan look better than the card really is, is called deception. Plain and simple fraud to me. I guess it's debateable, just not in my mind.

Too me it is hard to say when a scan has been deceptively manipulated. A scanner is a camera, you have to chose the settings that best show the card to what you seen in hand on your monitor.

The problem is that not everyone uses a color management system so everyone's view is different. Also every scanner is different along with the default settings so what one person's scanner captures can be different then the next person. Then you add on top of that different scanning software. So really every you make a scan the software is making a tweak (whether you know it or not) to make the output on your monitor match the photo taken by the scanner.

So when every scan consists of at least three (scanner, software, monitor) different things to make the outcome. If you add printing a catalog into it then you have another adjustment from another outside company.

[sportscardpete]

willferrel.jpg

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

So when every scan consists of at least three (scanner, software, monitor) different things to make the outcome. If you add printing a catalog into it then you have another adjustment from another outside company.

Agreed. I recently sold a hat on ebay, using the default images that my scanner produces. The seller thought they were getting a grey hat, when it was actually brown. I've found that I have to up the contrast and the red setting to get an accurate depiction. But even doing that, I've had hobby friends ask me questions that indicated to me that their monitor and my monitor weren't in sync. Also, there is at least one auction house that produces ridiculous card scans that look cartoonish - I'm sure it isn't on purpose, as it can't possibly help their sales.

I think that often, the sellers are just trying to depict their item accurately and end up making a mistake. And on the flip side of the coin, most of us have picked up things cheap because the scan did not represent the item fairly for the seller.

[Matthew H]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Agreed. I recently sold a hat on ebay, using the default images that my scanner produces. The seller thought they were getting a grey hat, when it was actually brown. I've found that I have to up the contrast and the red setting to get an accurate depiction. But even doing that, I've had hobby friends ask me questions that indicated to me that their monitor and my monitor weren't in sync. Also, there is at least one auction house that produces ridiculous card scans that look cartoonish - I'm sure it isn't on purpose, as it can't possibly help their sales.

I think that often, the sellers are just trying to depict their item accurately and end up making a mistake. And on the flip side of the coin, most of us have picked up things cheap because the scan did not represent the item fairly for the seller.

It depends on what kind of issues you're buying/selling. I've recieved faded OJs in the mail that looked great in the scan... These sellers/AHs know exactly what they're doing and why.

-Matt

[sbfinley]

Understandable opinion. What I stated was more of how I personally view the topic. I guess that it is largely contextual. Trimming a card's border is fraud no matter how much is cut. Using a stolen scan and shipping a different card to a buyer is obvious fraud. Adjusting a scan is not the same to me. Eye appeal is subjective. If a seller brightens a scan to make a card standout, but when I receive the card I am happy with its appearance was I truly defrauded? If I chose to sell it one day, the amount that I receive depends on the several factors: the grade, the market, and how the card appeals to the buyers. If the next owner is equally as happy then no one is the chain was defrauded. Other people probably look at the situation differently and that is completely acceptable.

Originally Posted by Leon

Agree with everything you said Steven....but you lost me on this one-

"2. I do not personally consider adjusting scans an agent of fraud. To me that is reserved for trimmed, recolored, swapped, and stolen cards. Part of selling is making the product seem appealing. If the scan was edited to hide something (paper loss-creases) I might consider otherwise, but simply adjusting the scan to make the card pop does not constitute fraud to me. Unethical maybe, but not fraud."


Deceiving is fraud and making a scan look better than the card really is, is called deception. Plain and simple fraud to me. I guess it's debateable, just not in my mind.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

Understandable opinion. What I stated was more of how I personally view the topic. I guess that it is largely contextual. Trimming a card's border is fraud no matter how much is cut. Using a stolen scan and shipping a different card to a buyer is obvious fraud. Adjusting a scan is not the same to me. Eye appeal is subjective. If a seller brightens a scan to make a card standout, but when I receive the card I am happy with its appearance was I truly defrauded? If I chose to sell it one day, the amount that I receive depends on the several factors: the grade, the market, and how the card appeals to the buyers. If the next owner is equally as happy then no one is the chain was defrauded. Other people probably look at the situation differently and that is completely acceptable.

I know Steven. And when I wrote what I did I also know there are boundaries. I don't want to see a card be super bright and crisp...then get it and it's a dull turd. Otherwise, a little bit of brightness is ok.....just not a whole lot . We are most certainly on the same page. Now about that low ball offer you made me. ....................

[D. Bergin]

Is there somebody in this thread actually throwing their mob connections around?




This has been a very, very entertaining read.

[Runscott]

Internet forum hugeness ineptitude. Reminds me of this scene:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LAnmnS0-9g