![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Thanks for the confirmation, Pat. That's the thing that made the most sense. Glad to see I wasn't running down the OP. Logically, the buyer doing something wrong or attempting to scam wasn't realistic in this situation.
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It helped me ask the more objective question - What would the buyer have as a motivation to do what I accused him of doing. I agreed with your conclusion that it didn't make a whole lot of sense for the buyer to be doing a switch - just not a whole lot of potential upside even though it meant I must be wrong. Still working on the mystery of what the heck happened to the card that I had listed.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hey Howard,
Not to regress things, but one possibility no one has mentioned is that you sold the lesser #144...sometime long before and hence forgot about it, whether to this buyer or someone entirely different, but that eventually made it to him and now a scam begins... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Or maybe he sold the better card long ago but posted the wrong image on the latest sale.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Fair inverse; probably I was subconsciously assuming Howard wouldn't have sold off his good one and have kept a crappier one for himself!
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have both a PSA 8 and an even nicer BVG 8!
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sooo, might your nicer BVG 8 then be a PSA 9, or just 8.5??
|
![]() |
|
|