- Thread starter
- #1
mrmopar
Member
- Jan 19, 2010
- 6,217
- 4,169
I am 99.9% a buyer in this hobby. I also consider myself to have a pretty decent moral compass when it comes to decisions that might be borderline. This leads me into my story for the day. I was scanning some Sports Illustrated issues recently, in hopes of making a few bucks off the boxes of them I have taking up way too much space in my garage. One of the features that caught my eye in one issue was a bit they did on the famous Nolan Ryan rookie card transaction that happened in 1990. Some of you may know what I am talking about from this brief description, but if you don't know the story...
Basically, a kid walks into a store (in Chicago area, I believe) that was being watched by an employee while the owner was out or indisposed of at the time and walks out of the store with a near mint 1968 Topps Nolan Ryan for a cool $12! It was not clear to me from what I read that the card was clearly marked or not as we all have seen a variety of pricing programs at shops and shows, but as the sale ended up being $12.00 instead of the asking price at the time of $1,200.00, clearly there were deeper issues surrounding this transaction. Some stories report that the kid offered $12 and the uninformed employee didn't know any better. and accepted, perhaps thinking no baseball card could be worth $1200.00. Others seemed to suggest that the employee misunderstood/misquoted the price and the buyer accepted, knowing full well it was supposed to be priced $1,200.00. This created a moral dilemma that is probably still used in case studies. The card shop owner tried to get the card back using a variety of tactics, but finally deciding to sue because the kid (and parents) refused to return the card or settle on what was considered a reasonable bounty offered by the shop owner for a card that was supposedly purchased under dubious conditions. In the end, I think the card was auctioned off and the proceeds donated to charity. One article I read suggested that if the kid had just kept his mouth shut instead of bragging about his $12 Ryan rookie deal, this would never have become a case. However, is that really the right way to view this situation? I'm sure there are still 2 sides to this case and it could be hotly argued either way.
That being said, you often see stories shared online from people who have found great deals. Sometimes the comments from others are jealousy of such great luck or praise and other times people are bashed for taking advantage of the other party. We are often quick to point out in similar cases that a buyer should be aware of what they are buying if they got ripped off and yet shouldn't a seller who may have left money on the table not have that same responsibility? In the case of the Ryan though, it was a lot different than clicking a buy it now item on eBay or paying the asking price of something posted online or at a show from an owner. Perhaps the closest you could come to the same moral dilemma in an electronic sale example is to find a freshly listed item on eBay at a fraction of the market price, with the assumption that the seller listed it incorrectly. It does happen. Still, you have opportunity as a seller to edit your listing before it goes live. At what point do you just have to accept responsibility for a foolish mistake and congratulate a savvy buyer for a deal of a lifetime, much the way a buyer has to educate themselves or fall victim to scammers?
I bring this topic up, partially because of the SI article that refreshed my memory about the incident described above, partly because of the thread posted a few days ago about the guy selling base cards with a "free" autograph that were almost certainly all fake, but also because I recently hit a BIN on an auction that I consider to be similar to the "seller beware" theory above, except that the seller named their own price and offered it electronically on an open market. There was no misreading the price or haggling, for that matter. The price paid was the full price asked. I presume the seller had the access and ability to research their item and to price it accordingly. Still, I feel a slight tinge of guilt in that I know the seller could have done much better price wise with either more research or simply a better description of the item. Not so much that I felt the need to point this out or question the asking price.
I likely would have missed this listing on just about any other day. On this particular day though, I think I was working from home and took a short break to hop on to eBay. I can tell you that my eBay time is evenings only, 95% of the time, except weekends. I will sometimes miss great items that are listed during the work day that I never get to see because they are BIN/BO and someone snags it immediately. I don't have the option to sit on eBay all day like some may have. They say something is only worth what some done will pay for it, but sometimes we see a deal that can't be missed and you may wonder what is the catch. I did my daily search this day and saw a "too good to be true" listing with a BIN or BO price. Without disclosing exactly what it was (not ready to do that just yet), there was some question in my mind that this item I was viewing may have not been exactly what I thought it to be and I crafted a question for the buyer. As soon as I sent the question off, I kept checking back for an answer every couple of minutes. Not sure how much time actually passed before I decided that even if what I was considering buying was not what I suspected it was and simply a "lesser" version, I decided I should pull the trigger before someone else discovered it. Even at the BIN price, I felt the item was a decent, if not slightly overpriced deal if the item consisted entirely of what I'll call basic versions. If they were all what I'll call premium, then it was a fantastic deal, a steal might even be a better term for it. For the sake of further clarification of this example, the difference between basic and premium was not something that could be easily missed/overlooked, like some of the modern inserts/parallels that have tiny color or image differences or hard to see serial numbering.
I could wait no longer and finally hit the item at the BIN price and paid immediately. No way was I going to change an offer on this item to save 10 or 20%. I usually pay instantly regardless, but wanted to make sure there was no hesitation on my part that suggested I didn't really want this item. The seller got back to me sometime later that day and answered my question...confirming that all of the items were what I call "premium"! There was no hesitation by the seller with the transaction, he thanked me for the purchase and a few days later it arrived. I was still a little nervous that a possible bait and switch might be in order, but I was happy to find what I was told I was getting when the package arrived.
Without knowing all of the facts, it may be hard to judge a case like this, but as I said, we have seen many stories of shared deals that were met with mixed reviews, sometimes leading the member to be shunned! Maybe sometimes it is best to keep your mouth shut, but if you feel you have truly done nothing wrong except to accept a sweet deal before the next guy gets it, then why worry about facing the "jury" when you share the deal you just found.
I know this was a fairly long ramble. However, if you made it through I not looking for speculation on my transaction per se, but rather any general thoughts on the buyer/seller responsibilities within a transaction to know and be fully informed with what they are dealing with?
Basically, a kid walks into a store (in Chicago area, I believe) that was being watched by an employee while the owner was out or indisposed of at the time and walks out of the store with a near mint 1968 Topps Nolan Ryan for a cool $12! It was not clear to me from what I read that the card was clearly marked or not as we all have seen a variety of pricing programs at shops and shows, but as the sale ended up being $12.00 instead of the asking price at the time of $1,200.00, clearly there were deeper issues surrounding this transaction. Some stories report that the kid offered $12 and the uninformed employee didn't know any better. and accepted, perhaps thinking no baseball card could be worth $1200.00. Others seemed to suggest that the employee misunderstood/misquoted the price and the buyer accepted, knowing full well it was supposed to be priced $1,200.00. This created a moral dilemma that is probably still used in case studies. The card shop owner tried to get the card back using a variety of tactics, but finally deciding to sue because the kid (and parents) refused to return the card or settle on what was considered a reasonable bounty offered by the shop owner for a card that was supposedly purchased under dubious conditions. In the end, I think the card was auctioned off and the proceeds donated to charity. One article I read suggested that if the kid had just kept his mouth shut instead of bragging about his $12 Ryan rookie deal, this would never have become a case. However, is that really the right way to view this situation? I'm sure there are still 2 sides to this case and it could be hotly argued either way.
That being said, you often see stories shared online from people who have found great deals. Sometimes the comments from others are jealousy of such great luck or praise and other times people are bashed for taking advantage of the other party. We are often quick to point out in similar cases that a buyer should be aware of what they are buying if they got ripped off and yet shouldn't a seller who may have left money on the table not have that same responsibility? In the case of the Ryan though, it was a lot different than clicking a buy it now item on eBay or paying the asking price of something posted online or at a show from an owner. Perhaps the closest you could come to the same moral dilemma in an electronic sale example is to find a freshly listed item on eBay at a fraction of the market price, with the assumption that the seller listed it incorrectly. It does happen. Still, you have opportunity as a seller to edit your listing before it goes live. At what point do you just have to accept responsibility for a foolish mistake and congratulate a savvy buyer for a deal of a lifetime, much the way a buyer has to educate themselves or fall victim to scammers?
I bring this topic up, partially because of the SI article that refreshed my memory about the incident described above, partly because of the thread posted a few days ago about the guy selling base cards with a "free" autograph that were almost certainly all fake, but also because I recently hit a BIN on an auction that I consider to be similar to the "seller beware" theory above, except that the seller named their own price and offered it electronically on an open market. There was no misreading the price or haggling, for that matter. The price paid was the full price asked. I presume the seller had the access and ability to research their item and to price it accordingly. Still, I feel a slight tinge of guilt in that I know the seller could have done much better price wise with either more research or simply a better description of the item. Not so much that I felt the need to point this out or question the asking price.
I likely would have missed this listing on just about any other day. On this particular day though, I think I was working from home and took a short break to hop on to eBay. I can tell you that my eBay time is evenings only, 95% of the time, except weekends. I will sometimes miss great items that are listed during the work day that I never get to see because they are BIN/BO and someone snags it immediately. I don't have the option to sit on eBay all day like some may have. They say something is only worth what some done will pay for it, but sometimes we see a deal that can't be missed and you may wonder what is the catch. I did my daily search this day and saw a "too good to be true" listing with a BIN or BO price. Without disclosing exactly what it was (not ready to do that just yet), there was some question in my mind that this item I was viewing may have not been exactly what I thought it to be and I crafted a question for the buyer. As soon as I sent the question off, I kept checking back for an answer every couple of minutes. Not sure how much time actually passed before I decided that even if what I was considering buying was not what I suspected it was and simply a "lesser" version, I decided I should pull the trigger before someone else discovered it. Even at the BIN price, I felt the item was a decent, if not slightly overpriced deal if the item consisted entirely of what I'll call basic versions. If they were all what I'll call premium, then it was a fantastic deal, a steal might even be a better term for it. For the sake of further clarification of this example, the difference between basic and premium was not something that could be easily missed/overlooked, like some of the modern inserts/parallels that have tiny color or image differences or hard to see serial numbering.
I could wait no longer and finally hit the item at the BIN price and paid immediately. No way was I going to change an offer on this item to save 10 or 20%. I usually pay instantly regardless, but wanted to make sure there was no hesitation on my part that suggested I didn't really want this item. The seller got back to me sometime later that day and answered my question...confirming that all of the items were what I call "premium"! There was no hesitation by the seller with the transaction, he thanked me for the purchase and a few days later it arrived. I was still a little nervous that a possible bait and switch might be in order, but I was happy to find what I was told I was getting when the package arrived.
Without knowing all of the facts, it may be hard to judge a case like this, but as I said, we have seen many stories of shared deals that were met with mixed reviews, sometimes leading the member to be shunned! Maybe sometimes it is best to keep your mouth shut, but if you feel you have truly done nothing wrong except to accept a sweet deal before the next guy gets it, then why worry about facing the "jury" when you share the deal you just found.
I know this was a fairly long ramble. However, if you made it through I not looking for speculation on my transaction per se, but rather any general thoughts on the buyer/seller responsibilities within a transaction to know and be fully informed with what they are dealing with?