Why do high volume ebay sellers think we believe their lies about shilling their own autctions

[jbhofmann]

This topic stems from everyone thinking they're CSI detectives.

On that "other" board, 100% of the members believe this is a fake Jeter and blame Probstein for selling.



I'm not an expert whatsoever but it looks consistent with early Jeter sigs.

In my opinion this shows that very few people in this hobby know what the hell they're talking about, myself included.

 

[Dilferules]

As stated many times, the price listed is a target investment price (yes it is a sales tactic which I have stated many times). Anyway, it is stated in almost every description and in our FAQ.





If you want to provide the item, I'll get you bidder info. There are multiple (10-20) guys that buy stuff from us every week as we list thousands of items per week. Again, any questions/concerns don't hesitate to email or call directly.

The "target investment price" thing is seen as a misleading and sleazy sales tactic by a large number of collectors. I'm sure you know that, and you have decided that you'd rather have the few extra bucks it gains you from naive collectors. So you can defend yourself all you want but you can't have it both ways...if you're using a sales tactic that's considered sleazy, don't be upset if people think you're sleazy and are more likely to believe that you shill.

The item in question I'm bidding on is 291233156041. One of those old Playoff show-issued /5 Barry Zito cards that in no way will ever be worth anything close to $80, considering I've bought many of his pack-inserted 1/1's for far less than that. Somebody just making the minimum bid sure doesn't seem like a shill, but when it seems as though every single one of your items has bids from people that have 30, 40, 50, 70% bidding activity with you, what do you expect people to think? But once again, people can draw their own conclusions, I drew mine long ago but continue to bid on your auctions once in a while because I know what to expect and like I said I've never had any issue with the cards I receive.

 

[bigboydsportscards3]

The "target investment price" thing is seen as a misleading and sleazy sales tactic by a large number of collectors. I'm sure you know that, and you have decided that you'd rather have the few extra bucks it gains you from naive collectors. So you can defend yourself all you want but you can't have it both ways...if you're using a sales tactic that's considered sleazy, don't be upset if people think you're sleazy and are more likely to believe that you shill.

The item in question I'm bidding on is 291233156041. One of those old Playoff show-issued /5 Barry Zito cards that in no way will ever be worth anything close to $80, considering I've bought many of his pack-inserted 1/1's for far less than that. Somebody just making the minimum bid sure doesn't seem like a shill, but when it seems as though every single one of your items has bids from people that have 30, 40, 50, 70% bidding activity with you, what do you expect people to think? But once again, people can draw their own conclusions, I drew mine long ago but continue to bid on your auctions once in a while because I know what to expect and like I said I've never had any issue with the cards I receive.

There are sales tactics everyone uses in business. Walmart, Costco, gas stations, car salesman, etc etc... Anyway, as for the item the bidder in question he is from California and has had 53 orders with us in the last 12 months, 503 total items won for a total of $1143.24. As you can see, there avg win is around $2 an item so they bid on a lot of items low... If you'd like the user ID, please contact me directly and I will provide the info. Any other questions, let me know.

 

[jofinn36]

Looking at that Jeter theres one thing that stands out. ***. I've owned 4 or 5 *** cards and tried to crossover the few I had after they went out of business the first time. Some were in *** holders some I cracked. PSA said all of them were trimmed. None crossed over and all of them weren't sent in in *** holders. Thats not good.

 

[David Anthony]

There are sales tactics everyone uses in business. Walmart, Costco, gas stations, car salesman, etc etc... Anyway, as for the item the bidder in question he is from California and has had 53 orders with us in the last 12 months, 503 total items won for a total of $1143.24. As you can see, there avg win is around $2 an item so they bid on a lot of items low... If you'd like the user ID, please contact me directly and I will provide the info. Any other questions, let me know.

I am calling bs on these shenanigans. I have never in my life seen Wal-Mart use this sleazy "investment potential" price on any of their items. 90 out of 100 true card enthusiasts will agree that this inflated book value price is sleazy and its sole purpose is to DECEIVE potential buyers. Even if you are 100% innocent of the blatant shilling that goes on in many of your auctions, THIS tactic makes you a total scumbag in my book!

 

[phillyfan0417]

I am calling bs on these shenanigans. I have never in my life seen Wal-Mart use this sleazy "investment potential" price on any of their items. 90 out of 100 true card enthusiasts will agree that this inflated book value price is sleazy and its sole purpose is to DECEIVE potential buyers. Even if you are 100% innocent of the blatant shilling that goes on in many of your auctions, THIS tactic makes you a total scumbag in my book!

Its interesting, it seems no matter what the guy says, you're going to call him names at the end. Oh yeah, stop calling him names.

Listing book value is an accepted practice and some people use it for every transaction. Is it smart? No. Is it dishonest? No.

If you are making purchases of any kind and of any type, do your research.

 

[David Anthony]

Its interesting, it seems no matter what the guy says, you're going to call him names at the end. Oh yeah, stop calling him names.

Listing book value is an accepted practice and some people use it for every transaction. Is it smart? No. Is it dishonest? No.

If you are making purchases of any kind and of any type, do your research.

The key word here is "book value". The prices that he states in his auction titles are NOT book values. They are "investment potential values".

 

[Dilferules]

Listing book value is an accepted practice and some people use it for every transaction. Is it smart? No. Is it dishonest? No.

He doesn't list book value, he lists something he calls "target investment value" which is an inflated number he pulls out of his butt. Naive collectors or those not paying enough attention see the dollar value placed in the title of the auction and assume it's a book value, as it looks like you did. He will sometimes bury an explanation that it's not a book value but an "target investment value" in the item description, sometimes not. Here it is:

DISCLAIMER THE PRICES LISTED ARE TARGET INVESTMENT PRICES NOT PRICES FROM ANY GUIDE DUE TO THE EXTREMELY VOLATILE EBAY MARKET CONDITIONS

And it's NOT similar to any sales tactic used by businesses like Wal Mart and Target. The only somewhat similar thing I can think of is when a manufacturer puts a ridiculously inflated MSRP on something that never is intended to sell for that much, as I've seen with watches and jewelry. Some examples of this:
[h=3]MIKE TROUT $40+ MINT ANGELS ROOKIE XFRACTOR REFRACTOR RC SP 2012 TOPPS CHROME
BV is $15, actually sells for $4-7...also it's not a RC and take a look at the guy who bid $7.77
[/h][h=3]MIKE TROUT /2012 $40+ MINT ANGELS ROOKIE GOLD RC SP 2012 #446 TOPPS BORDER "GEM"
BV is $10, actually sells for $1-7...also, once again, 2012 Mike Trout cards aren't RCs by any hobby definition
[/h][h=3]HANK AARON $20+ BRAVES HOME RUN LEGENDS REFRACTOR SP TOPPS CHROME PRIME NINE 9
BV is $4, actually sells for about a buck, there are 9 currently available on COMC for under a dollar
[/h][h=3]MIKE TROUT /199 $80+ MINT GOLD REFRACTOR SP 2013 #200 TOPPS ARCHIVES RAINBOW GEM
BV is $20, actually sells for about $20 except for one BigBoyd sold for $40 when he said it was worth $80, and you can go look that one up yourself to take a look at the bid history
[/h][h=3]BARRY ZITO 2004 DONRUSS ORANGE COUNTY COLLECTION EMBOSSED ATHLETICS SP #4/5 $80
LOL
[/h]And more presented without research, just for the laughs:
[h=3]MIKE TROUT $50+ MINT ANGELS ROOKIE PURPLE REFRACTOR RC SP 2012 TOPPS CHROME "GEM
[/h][h=3]VLADIMIR GUERRERO 2005 TOPPS UPDATE GOLD /2005 AS $12
[/h][h=3]MIKE TROUT $25+ MINT ANGELS 2012 ROY ROOKIE MINI RC SP 2013 CARD #338 TOPPS "GEM (it's a frickin 2013 base mini card)
[/h][h=3]MIKE TROUT $40+ MINT ANGEL ROOKIE GOLD SPARKLE REFRACTOR RC SP 2012 TOPPS AS GEM (it's just a Topps Update Gold Sparkle parallel)
[/h][h=3]TERRMEL SLEDGE 2004 DONRUSS ORANGE EMBOSSED RC #1/5 $50
[/h][h=3]JEFF CLEMENT 2005 BOWMAN DRAFT RC ROOKIE *MINT* $12 QTY
[/h][h=3]RANDY JOHNSON 2004 LEAF ORANGE COUNTY EMBOSSED DIAMONDBACKS SP #3/5 $150
[/h]I can't see how this isn't deceptive and sleazy.
[h=3][/h][h=3][/h][h=3][/h][h=3][/h][h=3][/h]

 

[Topnotchsy]

Looking at that Jeter theres one thing that stands out. ***. I've owned 4 or 5 *** cards and tried to crossover the few I had after they went out of business the first time. Some were in *** holders some I cracked. PSA said all of them were trimmed. None crossed over and all of them weren't sent in in *** holders. Thats not good.

I sent a couple cards in to PSA in *** holders. They all came back as "evidence of trimming." I had planned on eating a loss on them but looking at them they did not look trimmed at all (and over the years I've developed a pretty good eye for card size.) I cracked them out and measured against a bunch of commons. They were absolutely 100% full size. I resent them to PSA. They both got graded.

I'm not saying *** did not grade some funky items, and I know that you mention some of the items were cracked out, but PSA either is biased against cards in *** holders, or can't accurately assess a card that is in a holder.

I am calling bs on these shenanigans. I have never in my life seen Wal-Mart use this sleazy "investment potential" price on any of their items. 90 out of 100 true card enthusiasts will agree that this inflated book value price is sleazy and its sole purpose is to DECEIVE potential buyers. Even if you are 100% innocent of the blatant shilling that goes on in many of your auctions, THIS tactic makes you a total scumbag in my book!

I can't speak of your views on ethics, but the concept of "anchoring" is a classic idea in behavioral economics. Tons of items have an MSRP that is far higher than the listed price. That's designed to make you feel like you are getting a good deal. Walk into a clothing store where the MSRP of a shirt is $80, but it's always at least 50% off. Walk into a music store and you'll see it on every instrument the price is 25% or more less than the MSRP. Jewelry stores were already mentioned. It's a standard practice.

Does it work in when it comes to ebay and auctions? I have no clue. But the concept is used all over the place.

 

[nyc3]

This topic stems from everyone thinking they're CSI detectives.

On that "other" board, 100% of the members believe this is a fake Jeter and blame Probstein for selling.

View attachment 40474

I'm not an expert whatsoever but it looks consistent with early Jeter sigs.

In my opinion this shows that very few people in this hobby know what the hell they're talking about, myself included.

There is no chance thats legit and looks nothing like his early signature. It has nothing to do with it being in a *** holder except the forger used them almost exclusively for a year or 2 before they stopped labbing these.

 

[jbhofmann]

There is no chance thats legit and looks nothing like his early signature. It has nothing to do with it being in a *** holder except the forger used them almost exclusively for a year or 2 before they stopped labbing these.

After researching it a bit you're right.

See, guys like me have no clue.

 

[nyc3]

After researching it a bit you're right.

See, guys like me have no clue.

Since *** went to the toilet (long long ago) they been passing off massive amounts of forgeries. Its now moved on to their new company GA. Since almost no one will send them anything besides forgers they are left no choice but to pass them all for $$$

 

[Dilferules]

I can't speak of your views on ethics, but the concept of "anchoring" is a classic idea in behavioral economics. Tons of items have an MSRP that is far higher than the listed price. That's designed to make you feel like you are getting a good deal. Walk into a clothing store where the MSRP of a shirt is $80, but it's always at least 50% off. Walk into a music store and you'll see it on every instrument the price is 25% or more less than the MSRP. Jewelry stores were already mentioned. It's a standard practice.

I feel that the difference here is the way the dollar price is put in the title of the auction, people are going to infer that it's a book value or sales value or something of the sort. In fact, it's a value pulled out of thin air that is always higher than both book value and sales value. In that way it is meant to deceive and take advantage of people.

 

[David Anthony]

I feel that the difference here is the way the dollar price is put in the title of the auction, people are going to infer that it's a book value or sales value or something of the sort. In fact, it's a value pulled out of thin air that is always higher than both book value and sales value. In that way it is meant to deceive and take advantage of people.

^This guy gets it. Misleading words in auction titles is a total scumbag move in my book. Does Mr. Terry Boyd care to discuss why he would put "RC" in the title of an auction for a second or third year card of a players? Does Wal Mart blatantly lie about the items they are selling too?

 

[Topnotchsy]

I feel that the difference here is the way the dollar price is put in the title of the auction, people are going to infer that it's a book value or sales value or something of the sort. In fact, it's a value pulled out of thin air that is always higher than both book value and sales value. In that way it is meant to deceive and take advantage of people.

I'm not sure I see it the same way. I don't see how putting a number on a collectible whose value differs dramatically based on an individual (and could theoretically be worth that much to someone who specifically collects that player or set) is more deceptive than a jewelry company having an MSRP that is 2x-3x what the item is ever sold for or worth in an industry that has pretty set pricing (certainly for the components like diamonds or gold that went into making the jewelry, and often for the kind of item it is.)

I am not saying that every practice that is utilized is fine, or that I think having a price makes a difference, I don't think having a number in the listing is anything duplicitous or deceptive.

 

[ozzy]

Its interesting, it seems no matter what the guy says, you're going to call him names at the end. Oh yeah, stop calling him names.

Listing book value is an accepted practice and some people use it for every transaction. Is it smart? No. Is it dishonest? No.

If you are making purchases of any kind and of any type, do your research.

Have you even bothered reading this thread before you comment?

 

[200lbhockeyplayer]

After reading this thread in its entirity...I won an auction from Probstein last night.

An auction that was won for 66% of my max bid.

Thanks to the OP for potentially scaring people away.

Side note, FIRE!!!!!!!!!!! EVERYBODY RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!!!!!

 

[phillyfan0417]

Have you even bothered reading this thread before you comment?

Is this your contribution?


If you disagree with what I said, by all means let me know.


Thanks

 

[David Anthony]

Anyone have anything else to add to this?