Getting sick of the more obvious frauds

Eric72 · #1 04-10-2013, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardboard Junkie

Maybe he meant Rube Walker....I always kinda liked him.

To get back on topic..wild manipulation of scans is one of my pet peeves, hate it!

David,

Thanks for the rose-colored-glasses vote of confidence here. I will resume my, "glass half-full" mindset and truly appreciate your input

As for Andrew, I will reserve judgment until he replies...and give him the benfit of the doubt here.

And thank you, David, for guiding this thread back towards the original topic. I found myself getting sidetracked. My apologies to all concerned.

Sincerely,

Eric

Leon · #2 04-10-2013, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric72

David,

Thanks for the rose-colored-glasses vote of confidence here. I will resume my, "glass half-full" mindset and truly appreciate your input

As for Andrew, I will reserve judgment until he replies...and give him the benfit of the doubt here.

And thank you, David, for guiding this thread back towards the original topic. I found myself getting sidetracked. My apologies to all concerned.

Sincerely,

Eric

Eric, if it's any consolation I don't know where that comment came from either. Maybe Andrew will clarify. It wasn't only you that kept the train derailed. It's a team effort around here (me included).

And thanks to David too, for getting back to topic. I think a few good things came out of this thread. And the scanner fraud that goes on needs, and has needed more light shined on it. Nice thread in that respect.

Eric72 · #3 04-10-2013, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leon

Eric, if it's any consolation I don't know where that comment came from either. Maybe Andrew will clarify. It wasn't only you that kept the train derailed. It's a team effort around here (me included).

And thanks to David too, for getting back to topic. I think a few good things came out of this thread. And the scanner fraud that goes on needs, and has needed more light shined on it. Nice thread in that respect.

Leon,

Thank you very much for your kind words.

Sorry for momentarily losing focus.

Best Regards,

Eric

Cardboard Junkie · #4 04-10-2013, 09:51 PM

Jeesh!! Case in Point!! Although this is not prewar, it clearly demonstrates what this thread is all about.

The top is a card I sold recently for $26.00.....cheap, but as you can see by the accurate scan I posted, it had slightly brown dingy borders and the corners were soft (top left in particular).

The bottom is the same card listed by the buyer at near twice the price BIN $45.00 with a wildly manipulated scan. Bright borders and hardly noticeable soft corners.

Now I don't care about anyone making a profit, and I am used to buying high and selling low.

My beef is the manipulated scan that is fraudulently depicting the card as nicer than it really is. What say you?

Dave.

HRBAKER · #5 04-10-2013, 09:55 PM

I say - tell me who that seller is.

Cardboard Junkie · #6 04-10-2013, 09:56 PM

wabbitwax_2

Peter_Spaeth · #7 04-10-2013, 10:03 PM

What do you think of pwcc scans?

teetwoohsix · #8 04-10-2013, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardboard Junkie

Jeesh!! Case in Point!! Although this is not prewar, it clearly demonstrates what this thread is all about.

The top is a card I sold recently for $26.00.....cheap, but as you can see by the accurate scan I posted, it had slightly brown dingy borders and the corners were soft (top left in particular).

The bottom is the same card listed by the buyer at near twice the price BIN $45.00 with a wildly manipulated scan. Bright borders and hardly noticeable soft corners.

Now I don't care about anyone making a profit, and I am used to buying high and selling low.

My beef is the manipulated scan that is fraudulently depicting the card as nicer than it really is. What say you?

Dave.

Great example Dave. You can clearly see by brightening the scan, the card looks cleaner and the corners don't look as dinged up.

Sincerely, Clayton

Cardboard Junkie · #9 04-10-2013, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

Great example Dave. You can clearly see by brightening the scan, the card looks cleaner and the corners don't look as dinged up.

Sincerely, Clayton

Buyer/seller also won a 52T Kell in a BVG holder and has it relisted...same thing..wildly manipulated scan!

teetwoohsix · #10 04-10-2013, 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardboard Junkie

Buyer/seller also won a 52T Kell in a BVG holder and has it relisted...same thing..wildly manipulated scan!

I guess some sellers heard people saying "buy the card and not the holder" and a light bulb lit up

Sincerely, Clayton

D. Bergin · #11 04-11-2013, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardboard Junkie

Jeesh!! Case in Point!! Although this is not prewar, it clearly demonstrates what this thread is all about.

The top is a card I sold recently for $26.00.....cheap, but as you can see by the accurate scan I posted, it had slightly brown dingy borders and the corners were soft (top left in particular).

The bottom is the same card listed by the buyer at near twice the price BIN $45.00 with a wildly manipulated scan. Bright borders and hardly noticeable soft corners.

Now I don't care about anyone making a profit, and I am used to buying high and selling low.

My beef is the manipulated scan that is fraudulently depicting the card as nicer than it really is. What say you?

Dave.

To be honest, I think your accurate scan actually presents the card much better.

I don't know about "wildly manipulated" on the second. Just looks like a poor washed out scan to me, with the brightness maybe jacked up a notch.

They do look like two completely different cards at first glance, but I'd buy yours before I bought that second one.

Cardboard Junkie · #12 04-11-2013, 02:39 PM

Perhaps "wildly" is too strong a word, but "manipulated" for sure.

Dave.

Paul S · #13 04-11-2013, 02:41 PM

What's the recourse? Buy the holder and not the card?

doug.goodman · #14 04-11-2013, 02:52 PM

The only "recourse" is common sense, buyer beware, caveat emptor, use caution ahead, etc.

Shill bidding, fakes, "exaggerations'" in descriptions and images, complete lies. None of this stuff is new to the hobby. Prior to the internet, when us old guys used to buy things via snail mail, based on descriptions that used terms like vg/ex or ex/mt, instead of 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 (all of which look undergraded, of course), we got what we got, and we complained as much as we decided to, and our best recourse was sometimes to not buy things again from certain sellers. Often we continued to buy from that seller, but we knew that his ex/mt was really ex-.

In this specific case, maybe this specific seller has a crappy scanner and buyers need to be aware of that fact. Or maybe he doesn't.

But, saying something like the above on a net54 post tends to bring out a bunch of responses that make it sound like there are right and wrong answers, or that the people who lie and cheat and scam will stop doing so if we call them on it.

Grow up people.

There will never be complete honesty in any collectible "hobby", for the same reason that there will never be peace in the middle east. Because people are not generally as nice as they claim to be, or as they think others should be.

So sayeth Doug

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
This is obvious shilling!!!	Edwolf1963	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	6	11-13-2012 02:29 PM
Two eBay frauds	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	3	02-23-2006 09:06 AM
Can it be any more obvious?	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	11	10-20-2005 12:10 PM
The frauds are getting sneaky	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	0	07-16-2003 03:22 AM
another one for Mr. Obvious	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	3	02-13-2003 05:25 PM