At what point has a seller earned less than positive FB?

I support the school of thought who always gives a seller positive feedback as long as the item is shipped in a half reasonable time period and in the same condition as the auction described. But a recent transaction has me asking myself whether I should adjust my feedback philosophy.


Here's the situation-
I had been watching about a card that appeared in the picture to be a graded refractor auto. I was on my phone and not paying terribly close attention when I placed my bid, ultimately winning the item for less than refractor autos of the particular player generally get. To investigate why I got such a low price, I checked the description when I could get to a computer, which describes the card as a "rookie auto" (not describing it as a base OR refractor), and listed sub-grades different from those pictured in the scan.

Knowing I probably just overpaid for the base version (although I don't mind, I still want it), I sent the seller a question asking which version it was. Instead of an answer, I got an invoice. Three days later, no answer and another invoice. I ended up just paying for it because I still want the card.

I received the card just under two weeks later and sure enough, it's the base version.

You tell me what feedback is appropriate, considering the following:

1. Deception- The seller deceived me (and all buyers) by using a picture of a card that was clearly not what he was auctioning, which affected the price in his favor. This is what irritates me most because I likely would not have bid if I had paid closer attention and known it was a base.

2. Poor Communication- I asked a question and got no answer, even though I did get two invoices afterward.

3. Not as described- It's obvious considering point #1, but I should point out that the item was not at all what was pictured, which, in my opinion, means the item was not as described since the picture is a very important part of the description in an eBay listing.

4. Arrived in fine condition, but took two weeks- To his credit, the item arrived in fine condition, although it was delivered somewhat slowly (although still within my guidelines of what I consider reasonable).

I was going to just leave him a positive with bad Detailed Seller Ratings in the appropriate areas, but then I realized that I was completely unsatisfied with two of the four DSR categories (item as described and communication), and wasn't especially pleased with his performance in a third (ship time). When two of the average of your DSR ratings is about a 1.5, it seems like a positive feedback might not be appropriate after all, because you are clearly unsatisfied with the transaction.

So given this information, what feedback do you think is appropriate?

So let me get this straight: in the title AND description, no differential is made between base and REF, leaving only the picture as reference? I'd like to see the actual auction, but that is a bait-and-switch to me.

I'm with you in that if an item arrives and in fine condition, positives all around. I DSR the shipping time (unless it's free, and you can't, in which case communication takes the ding).

But what sets me off is NO communication, and a "**** you, pay me" attitude. If he hasn't responded to any of your specific questions, and the auction is laid out just as you stated: neg.

I come from the same camp as you; if I get the card, I can let a lot of things slide. From the sounds of it, however, in this case I think you have a valid reason to give negative or (at best) neutral feedback.

It is the seller's responsibility to inform bidders what card is for auction, a process done dually through the description and the image. In this case, because the seller showed a picture of a refractor, he needs to actively disclaim it (i.e., state that you are bidding on the base version) in the description. However, the only two relevant pieces of information that you quote are that it is a "rookie auto" and that the sub-grades are different. To an unaffected mind, this should imply either that the card being bid on is not the one in the picture, or that the sub-grades listed in the description are incorrect (very possible, if the description was generally copied over from another auction of the same seller). Neither of these two options tell you that you are NOT bidding on a refractor; the picture, a part of the description, tells you that you are.

When the reason you believe that you may not have actually won a refractor is because many sellers are deceptive on this count, there is definitely a problem. Honestly, leaving a positive would be like saying "it's my fault I got scammed, because it's a common scam", or, in another context, "I wouldn't have got mugged if I didn't walk down that dark alleyway at night." Exacerbating this, the fact that the seller sent invoices in response to your questions strongly implies that he was trying to further his deception through to the payment.


If it's worth the hassle, you could file a dispute and try to get your money back. Otherwise, I would probably leave a negative concisely explaining the problem; after thinking through it and writing the above response, I really do believe that one is justified.

if memory serves me, if you leave a neg feedback then you can't give 1's and 2's for DSR's. feel free to correct me if i'm wrong. i'm a big boy i can handle it

bowmanchromeandorr said:

if memory serves me, if you leave a neg feedback then you can't give 1's and 2's for DSR's. feel free to correct me if i'm wrong. i'm a big boy i can handle it

Click to expand...

You are wrong. I just left a negative a short while ago with 1's for someone who sent me a card in a PWE and it got mangled in the PO sorting machine.

I would say a neg. is appropriate here.

The item seems poorly listed, but as mentioned, in a deceptive way. He knew what he had, but he obviously tried to make a couple bucks from you extra.

That "communication" is terrible.

The shipping was not the worst I have seen, but certainly not the best.