Quote:
Originally Posted by oldjudge
They would essentially be on the hook for nearly double what the card initially sold for
Not sure what kind of math you are using. They charge buyers 12.5% and do not charge sellers. They would refund to the auction winner what he paid. They would give up the 12.5% the made before and, at worst, lose what the card sold for. But, since auction checks typically don't go out for almost a month after the auction ends they would still have not paid the consignor so it would not be an issue. If the auction winner informed B&L that there was a question with the lot they would withhold consignor payment until the issue was resolved.
|
This assumes every part of the transaction and turnaround, re-grading, etc...was done in a timely manner.
Somewhere along the way things inevitably will get dragged out in most transactions such as this.
What happens if the buyer decides to cross-over a card a month after they bought it from B&L, and it doesn't come back as they expected?
The consignor has already been paid and cashed the check. Is B&L still on the hook?
$1000 card + 12.5% buyers premium = $1125. A month later buyer comes back and say PSA doesn't quite like this SGC card.
B&L refunds the buyer the full $1125, they have already paid the consignor $1000 according to their terms.
Yes, they have the card back. They can re-auction it as a suspect card now, even if it somehow sells for the full price it originally sold for..........they are still $1000 in the hole for the amount they sent to the consignor...........good luck getting that back.
Seems like a pretty big hit to me for the chance to make 12.5% off a sale.
Maybe Leon and Scott are ok with this. I don't know. I think it would give anybody pause to just brush off as a cost of doing business, no matter their ethical standing.
02-20-2011, 02:49 PM
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode