You're right. It's always a great idea to mitigate a loss of profits by engaging in other behavior that can (will) have negative consequences. Eesh.
I'm curious. There has been a lot of "the buyers knew what they were getting into, so they should deal with their bad luck", but no "Bommo knew what he was getting into by listing these in violation of feebay terms, so he should stick with any bad luck". Is that because he is a member, or just some form of caveat emptor?
To my eyes, both parties took risks, yet only the buyer should face the downside? Or was bommo's risk at the sale end, not the result end?
I stayed far far away from these auctions as I'm pretty wary of box breaks, so I have no axe to grind here. I sell on ebbay infrequently, but when I do, I am very clear about not accepting returns, not making guarantees on condition, and inviting any interested buyers to message me with questions. I do this because I want to cover my butt as much as possible so that negs/returns don't happen. Do I leave some money on the table by not calling my cards "mint, perfect, pack fresh, etc"? Sure. But the extent to which I am a business-oriented person, I am on the very very low risk spectrum. I'm not calling into question the judgment or good intentions of the seller or the buyers, but this whole ordeal might just be proof as to why these sorts of auctions are prohibited.
Nobody forced the buyers to bid on these auctions so if they do try and get their money back they are huge **********.
If ebay terms are violated and take action on Boomo then that is their deal, buyers should not try and make it happen just because they only got one auto and paid 70 bucks for it.