Misleading ebay auction - should I be upset?

[JEA2880]

So I bought a cheap lot of (20) Ike Davis Topps 100 inserts. I received the lot today and received (1) Ike Davis Topps 100 cards and a whole bunch of crappy veteran base cards. I checked the auction and it reads as follows:

Title - (20) 2010 Bowman LOT w Ike Davis Topps 100 TP17 - Mint

Description - (20) 2010 Bowman LOT w 1 Ike Davis Topps 100 TP17 - MINT
Includes over 20 2010 Bowman Cards
PAL ONLY. All in MINT OR NM Condition
Thanks.

[ebay:2r1jlq2m]320545162454[/ebay:2r1jlq2m]

Should I be upset? I obviously bought the lot thinking I was getting (20) Ike Davis cards. Ignoring the price of the lot (yeah I know, it was cheap), does the seller's clearly vague and misleading description justify a negative? Opinions welcome.

 

[daveyou]

sorry buddy....it looks as if the seller was pretty clear on the fact that you are getting some random 19 cards with one being the ike davis...

dave

 

[1st4040]

you bought exactly what the title said.. so no negative can be given.

 

[mudflap02]

You got exactly what was stated in the auction. I wouldn't have listed it that way, but he did include a "w", as in Ike Davis w 20 other cards. I would have expected to receive exactly what you got.

 

[fengzhang]

I personally would not have read it the way you did. He wrote in the title that it is a lot that includes the Ike Davis card. In the description, he clearly wrote there is only 1 Ike Davis card.

 

[17ROCKIES12]

"w 1 Ike Davis"

You can be upset, just not completely at the seller.

 

[clarkfan]

nah, he was honest with what you were getting, no negative deserved there, if you were getting 20 Ike Davis, it would have been written a lot different in the description (and would have sold for a lot more)

 

[Card Magnet]

I can understand your side, but I think the seller was pretty clear. The "w Ike Davis" indicates that the lot includes this card, but is not multiples of that card.

 

[JEA2880]

I went back and re-read it and saw the "w" which I obviously hadn't seen to begin with. To me, the seller's intent was to mislead which is why I posed the question. He referenced Ike Davis only and most importantly to me the picture only showed Davis, so I bid thinking I was getting Davis cards.

I'll live with it, it's good to get the unbiased views from other board members, but it is annoying.

 

[TBTwinsFan]

I can see where you messed up.

You must have read it as "of" instead of "with." I think it was an honest wording mistake, and it clearly states what you are recieving in the description

 

[Tom Oates]

I'm not sure negative is in order but I'm leaning towards neutral at best. I can understand abbreviating "With" as the letter "W" in the title due to the constraints in how many characters you can use. In the description in the auction, there is no reason or excuse for abbreviating with the letter "W" than to mislead people. I believe it was intentional myself.

I would contact the buyer and let him know you are unhappy with the title and description of the auction. Give the guy a chance to make it right and base your feedback on the reply you receive. In all fairness you need to own up to a portion of the blame. If the price it too good to be true...

Tom

 

[daveyou]

honestly? a neutral or even neg?? no way...

i can understand that as a buyer, you always want that "steal" or "good deal" but if the auction is vague (looks as if it's clear to some, vague to others here..), you have to ask the seller first via email on what exactly you are bidding on.

this is more of a blind auction of 19 cards with one guaranteed card of ike davis....

i'd chalk this up as lesson learned and just let it be

dave

 

[Leaf]

The tribe has spoken (wisely as usual).... Seller did nothing wrong imo .... Bg

 

[topprospectalert]

I rarely comment on this stuff but it would be ABSOLUTELY ABSURD for a negative or neutral feedback in this instance. The seller was completely clear in his Title and Description. If the guy has a return policy you may want to return the cards, but the problem is completely with the original poster mis-reading the auction not the seller. There was ZERO intent by this seller to be deceptive with his description and title. That's just what it is: A lot of 20 bowman cards with an Ike Davis Topps 100 card. If the description or title was (20) Ike Davis Bowman Top 100 cards, then the buyer would have a beef.

 

[sebpoo]

A good laugh, a 'for real' facepalm and a great steal tonight on ebay should get everything back to normal

 

[fengzhang]

I'm not sure negative is in order but I'm leaning towards neutral at best. I can understand abbreviating "With" as the letter "W" in the title due to the constraints in how many characters you can use. In the description in the auction, there is no reason or excuse for abbreviating with the letter "W" than to mislead people. I believe it was intentional myself.

I would contact the buyer and let him know you are unhappy with the title and description of the auction. Give the guy a chance to make it right and base your feedback on the reply you receive. In all fairness you need to own up to a portion of the blame. If the price it too good to be true...

Tom

I have to disagree with you here. So, he deserves a neutral for not typing out a word? The seller has a sparkling feedback, some of the highest ratings I've seen. Let's give the guy the benefit of the doubt. Clearly, it wasn't misleading for anyone but the buyer considering the responses he's gotten on this thread and the ending price of the lot. I don't think the seller needs to do anything to "make it right." His description was clearly adequate.

 

[matfanofold]

I have to agree with most everyone else, I do not feel the auction was misleading in any way.

 

[JEA2880]

A few things...

#1 - Yeah, it was a good price, but I didn't buy based on getting a "steal". I wanted the lot and had a significantly higher max bid than what it ended at.

#2- People saying the seller was "completely clear in his title and description" is absurd. Obviously it lacked enough clarity for me to understand it - completely clear would be showing pictures of the cards (at least the pile spread out like a deck of cards) and listing each card. I didn't necessarily want that, but at least the word "different" (i.e. 20 different Bowman cards) would have helped clarify.

I'm not rushing to drop a negative, I came on here to, as I said earlier, get unbiased feedback and see if I was overreacting. I was leaning towards neutral myself because, as suggested by a few above, to me the seller made a concerted effort to mislead by ONLY showing the Ike card and writing things like "w" instead of "with" or "including", which would much more clearly imply it was part of a random lot.

Nevertheless, as someone said - the tribe has spoken.