what % of the cards you win on ebay are as described?

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

I am curious as to whether my experience matches yours. I find that probably under 25% of the raw cards I buy over ebay are actually in the condition represented. Just yesterday, for example, I got two cards described as ex and ex+, respectively. The former had a crease and a hole and the other was worn and chipped to a vg-ex at best. since they are both rare and I paid peanuts I will keep them anyway. Luckily, most of what I bid on is rare enough that I don't really care about condition, but I still find overgrading so prevalent that I am dramatically downgrading when I bid even with scans.

Please don't hijack this thread with an argument over grading services; I am really trying to focus on raw card buying experiences.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

haven't been buying a lot of baseball but have been buying some oddball stuff (actually, have been buying some Zeenuts lately). I'd say it's higher than yours but no more than 50%. There's always the crease that wasn't seen or just the minor fact that theres writing on the back of a zeenut that didn't have the back pictured or massive paperloss on an blank backed card which is thought to be unimportant to anyone, so it's neglected to be mentioned.

Overall, the experience could be better.........

[Archive]

Posted By: Sean Coe

I'd say that about 50% of the raw cards I buy are as described, not only on Ebay but auction houses as well.

[Archive]

Posted By: John

My experience has been a little better, but it is obviously the bad examples that stand out in one's memory. I would say about two of three transactions have been positve for me, with cards arriving in stated condition or a little better. Most of the rest are close (overepresented in the description by a grade or less which can be written of to the subjective nature of our hobby). I have had about ten transactions that have been awful, and in each case I blame myself for not asking for a better description or for buying from a seller that normally did not deal in cards. The only time in 600+ transactions or so that I felt I was intentionally duped I purchased what appeared to be and EX-MT 1952 Bowman Large Bobby Layne. The card had staple holes in the center when it arrived that the seller claimed he "was not aware of" when the card was sent. Usually when I see cards listed in auctions that are obviously overgraded by the seller I stay away.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scottopotamus

As a general rule, when buying "raw" cards from Ebay, I automatically subtract two grades from the card. "Mint" means "Excellent", "Excellent" means "Good", and "Good" means "Poor".

It's (somewhat) the same priciple as factoring in shipping costs when bidding. A cheap card isn't cheap if the shipping is through the roof.

Scottoptamus
My T206 Web Site

http://www.freewebs.com/scottopotamus

[Archive]

Posted By: Greg Ecklund

I've had experiences similar to Tom's - about half of the raw cards I buy are as described, and most of my problems have come with blank backed cards like Exhibits. I have bought several 1920's Exhibits that were graded by the seller in the EX to VG/EX range that turned out to have either paper loss or writing on the back that was never mentioned. I also bought a 1921 Walter Johnson Exhibit which was described as EX-MT, but ended up having an obvious corner crease that was easily seen when looking at the card but didn't show up on the scan.

After those experiences, I try to take care when buying Exhibits and always ask for a scan of the back if the seller hasn't included one.

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

Because of experiences as have been cited above, I have developed a small field of eBay sellers which I preferentially purchase from. If a particularly attractive offering is available from outside of this "circle of trustees", I consider bidding as an experiment.

My experiments have been successful better than 10% of the time. But a single purchase does not establish a seller's performance.

It is totally acceptable to me if a seller reproducibly overgrades or overprices his cards. There are several typically high inventory sellers who do this. I know that I will pay extra for their cards. But I also know that their cards are authentic, that they offer a liberal return policy, and that they may have a card which is otherwise difficult to locate.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

If I have any doubts whatsoever, I ask for better scans. If I don't get the scans, I don't bid. There have been a couple of cases where a back-scan was not provided, and the back ended up having writing or paper loss, but now I ask for back-scans if I don't know the seller.

The only minor problems have been when I bought larger lots.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

(feedback only 92 since 1901). I'd say, getting an overgraded card on ebay is rare enough that they DO stick in my mind, and stay there. Their sellers I never deal with again.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I never pay attention to stated grades. I read the description and look at the scan. If a better scan is needed, I ask for it. I generally buy really low grade cards, so stated grades aren't a real issue for me.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted

As mostly a seller on ebay, I have a slightly different perspective on this issue. I only sell raw cards. I just don't believe in slabbing, but will address that in a separate post someday when I have more energy. I have been very consistant in my grading over the years, and have used the Beckett's description as my guide. My policy has always been, if you don't like your purchase for any reason, return it for a full refund of the purchase price. While receiving praise for accurate or better than expected conditions in most of my feedback there is the occasional customer who has a beef with my grading call. This has never resulted in negative feedback, as I have always offered to take the card back. While being only human and capable of error, I would expect that once in awhile I would screw up.

But what I have really found is that out of the thousands of customers I have had, there is not total agreement on what constitutes a specific grade. Each of us has our own pet peeve that has to be 100% dead on or it loses lots of "points" in their grade. Corners, centering, focus, gloss, you name it, and we all have our preferences for perfection. Some give a little leeway for cards that are over 50, or 75, or 100 years old, and let the scale slide some.

My biggest dilemma in grading is the difference between good, fair and poor. Beckett lumps them together and just says they are well worn, and then lists other issues. Does anybody have any written guidelines they use for these categories, or the better grades for that matter, that have been helpful in grading raw cards?

Ted
He who so shall, so shall he who!

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff

Ted,

"My biggest dilemma in grading is the difference between good, fair and poor. Beckett lumps them together and just says they are well worn, and then lists other issues."

And that's just one of the reasons I despise Beckett price guides.

The last Standard Catalog Of Baseball I have (2002) states

Good(G): A well-worn card, but exhibits no intentional damage or abuse. May have major or multiple creases. Corners rounded well beyond the border.

Fair(F or Fr): Shows excessive wear, along with damage or abuse. Will show all the wear characteristics of a Good card, along with such damage as thumb tack holes in or near margins, evidence of having been taped or pasted, perhaps small tears around the edges, or creases so heavy as to break the cardboard. Backs may show minor added pen or pencil writing, or be missing small bits of paper. Still basically a complete card.

Poor(P): A card that has been tortured to death. Corners or other areas may be torn off. Card may have been trimmed, show holes from a paper punch or have been used for BB gun practice. Front may have extraneous pen or pencil writing, or other defacement. Major portions of front or back design may be missing. Not a pretty sight.

Don't know if that will help you or not.

Jeff

[Archive]

Posted By: jackgoodman

As a seller, I don't try to assign a grade to the cards I'm selling. Instead, I try to describe its condition and problems as best I can and also provide a decent scan of the card so that the buyer can decide for themselves. I always state that I have a back scan available if asked, but don't always post one to avoid the additional photo charge (depending on the value of the card up for auction). This process has been sucessful for me and I can count the number of returns on less than one hand.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I collect 20th century photographs where condition is not as much an issue. Obviously a gouge or crease in the image is significant, but the difference between Ex and Near Mint on a 1930 photo has little to no effect on value. Yet, most photos I buy are either accurately graded or undergraded.

I guess that when it makes little difference to value, the sellers figure they might as well be honest. It's when something greatly effects value that people start 'fudging.'

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

all the (prewar)cards i buy off ebay are in the vg or lesser grades, so of course my expectations are not high.what bothers me is when some sellers only show the front of the card, as most fail to mention paper loss,pen marks,erased pencil etc. on the back.so, if these issues bother you ask.EVEN IF THEY ARE SLABBED.

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred

This is an interesting question -

I guess everyone would have to follow the same set of standards and then everyone would have to strictly adhere to these condition descriptions and here again lies the problem - this is all subjective. I suppose if you have low standards then most everything would come back as agreeable. If you have higher standards then you will probably be unhappy with most of the ebay material. It's funny how a seller thinks a card is better than it is and a buyer always scrutinizes it and it is almost always overgraded.

The sad part is that we run into the same arguement and discussion in that grading is subjective which leads me to my response -

The raw and graded cards I get off of ebay seem to be over graded in many cases. I guess that may indicate that I'm really picky and need something to complain about.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

This is an easy one. I've bought a ton of mid 50s cards advertised on Ebay as NM; about 20$ actually come back from PSA as high as 7. The rest are 6s. So, about 20% (at best) of cards advertised on ebay are accurate.

[Archive]

Posted By: Glenn

Presumably the percentage of "near mint" cards that are near mint is inversely proportional to the age. So if it's 20% of cards from the 50s, it might be 50% of the cards from the 80s and 5% of the cards from the 20s.

If there are any other statisticians here, what do you think of this? We can collect data from everyone on the forum for a few months and run a multiple regression with buyer's impression of 1) the card's grade from photo(s) only, 2) the age of the card, 3) the condition claimed by the seller, and 4) the seller's percent positive feedback as predictor variables, and with 5) the eventual grade as judged by the buyer upon receiving the card as the criterion. I'm guessing the four predictors would account for at least 90% of the variance.

I'd be happy to run the analyses, but I don't buy enough myself to get a decent sample size anytime soon. And in any case it wouldn't be a representative sample. If anyone wants to send me the data (i.e., the numerical values for each of the five variables mentioned above) for any cards they buy on ebay in the future, I can report the results here once I have a sufficiently large dataset.

[Archive]

Posted By: Zach

I would say that I usually get 100 percent because the cards I buy are more low grade so a suprise word in pen on the back is usually not big deal for me, and with buying lowgrade cards you dont really compare them to the scan to see it you notice anything differant...well atleast I don't. Though I did just buy a 1964 Mantle with a little writing on the back but otherwise good condition I was suprised when it arrived today to see a smudge of paper lose on the check that didn't show in the scan.

[Archive]

Posted By: barry arnold

i was getting about 25% accuracy, 'til i decided that i (with Julie,Jay,and
Scott)would ask for detailed scans. No scan--no bid.
Since doing this, I would say that their grades may still be off, but my
grading of the card is pretty accurate. Obviously, if i like the price
and MY grade, i go for it.


all the best

Barry Arnold

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

is my biggest pet peeve. Most hairline creases will not show up on even the most detailed scan. I cannot even count the large # of cards I receive like this.

As far as low grades go, I tend to be a little tougher, but I think I am right in line with the grading services, the proof being that I am very rarely surprised by a grade on a card I submit. For example, to me, a card with nice corners and edges, good gloss, no creases, and four tack holes in it is in poor condition, maybe fair if it is really, really sharp otherwise, yet many dealers will list this as g or even vg. In compiling my price guide I've had to make many, many such calls on grading cards that sold.

Hate to admit it, but the slabbers are quite useful...

[Archive]

Posted By: HW

I would say that 25% of the cards are properly graded, but I am happy 90% of the time because I go out of my way to ask many questions.

I usually ignore their grade and try and come up with my own.

[Archive]

Posted By: pete

you should always expect at least 1 or 2 grades less that described, I dont remember anyone selling "raw" cards stating they work for PSA...I rarely buy "raw" cards anymore since there's so many fakes and reprints being sold as authentic...the only ones I do buy are from legitimate sellers I know from here...and even then I ask for a larger scan front and back...otherwise I'm spending more on graded/slabbed cards.
pete-

[Archive]

Posted By: Sean Coe

I sell raw and graded cards as well. I try hard to describe the condition of a card as specifically as I can, but I always have large scans available so buyers can decide on their own.

[Archive]

Posted By: LGB

Well, when I've actually received the cards I've won, I'd say about 70%. Personally I haven't bought a card on ebay in over a year due to simply not getting material that I "won" and paid for.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I once sold a 1960s photo on eBay. The photo was nice but had some edge chipping, a wrinkle or two and someone wrote on the back. I described said wear in the auction. When the buyer received the photo, he emailed back, "Beautiful photo. And Mint condition too!" ... The answer still perplexes me, and if I told you who was the winner you'd find the response even odder (No one who reads this board).

[Archive]

Posted By: mcavoy

If a scan is provided, no matter the appearance, I have learned from experience, the condition is never better than stated.

On the other hand, once or twice (1997-1998, the relatively early days on ebay), I bought a lot of raw cards advertised as EX-MT without scans (early on, pics were not supported, I think) and was shocked and pleased upon delivery: most of the cards were at least as good as stated (better than excellent and less than mint)!

edited to correct grammar as best i can and add a comment about the condition of the lot

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

pics were supported in the early days of eBay, you just had to host them yourself abd be able to write html code to make it work. When I started doing that, prices realized on my auctions started making major jumps. I'm still not convinced that gallery listings get all that much more action.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: barry arnold

Adam,
i took a chance a couple of weeks back and bought an ebay raw 206 white cap
Matty even though the seller listed it as poor, because the scan showed
a beautiful,crisp,creaseless Matty. I told myself (with Carl Rogers),
'it's a risky thing to live.'

I got it yesterday and it looks even better than i surmised. admittedly,
there's paper loss on the back, but the front is easily ex-mt.
I 'ran' to the post office and sent it off to SGC and will let you know what
happens.

This doesn't change my opinion from the earlier post, but knew you'd
appreciate this surprise---particularly with our apocalyptic 'thin bubble'
discussion.

all the best

Barry Arnold