Am I right to be upset? Yes, another Ebay issue

B

bkrysko

Verified Trader
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
1,124
Reaction score
0
Location
Kitchener, ON
I like to think I have great patience and I give people the benefit the doubt but my patience is drawing thin. I want to know if I have legitimate reasons to be upset here.

First Card: 08-09 Mikkel Boedker Rookie Playmakers 89/100
Popped up with a more than reasonable BIN so I jumped on it. Took 1 month + 1 day to arrive and the bottom left corner is mangled. Seller never mentioned it, can't see it in the scan.

Second Card 08-09 Mikkel Boedker Victory RC? I think
Card in the scan is clearly a Victory Black and nowhere in the description does he say you will not receive card in scan. I figure its the regular but for 0.99 I take the gamble. Sure enough, regular rookie. Do I have a right to complain by saying I was expecting card in scan?

Am I off base for being upset here?
 
I'd be cheesed about the first one, but the second one looks like the seller simply stole the wrong image from eBay. For 99 cents, I wouldn't go through the hassle but I'd bust some heads over the Playmakers auction.
 
My question about the 2nd one, is why didn't you ask before bidding? Instead of "taking a gamble" why not clarify before your bid. That being said, it does seem deceptive. I have a hunch the seller knew full-well what they were doing?
 
I would definitely say that you've got grounds to complain regarding the second one. If he posts an image of a card you expect to receive that card. A couple months back I picked up another Gorges HG and buddy had used an old image of the 5/10 card, which I already owned, so I fired off an email asking which one he actually had and within an hour he put up the new image of 10/10. That one was easy enough to deal with, but in your situation you had every reason to believe that you'd be receiving the Victory Black, so if it's worth it to you I'd say go for it.
 
I think the first both deserve refunds however the .99 cents is not worth the hassle.

If the guy who sold you the damaged rookie playmaker will not give a refund, neg his butt.
If something isn't right and the seller won't do anything about it then you should be using the feedback system in the proper way.
 
You have the right to complain about both.The first is a no brainer but the second is a very misleading and is becoming a trend.I've come across a few auctions with the regular version listed in the title and the high end parallel pictured. The sellers know what there doing!!!!Just another way to beef up the sale
 
I'd grieve both, but in different ways.

The damaged card should be taken up with the seller. Give it around 2 or 3 days to reach an agreement. If he decides to be irksome, file the chargeback.

The Victory Black? For 99 cents, it's not worth the chargeback issue, but he does deserve a negative for it. It's clearly misleading.
 
For this one: 08-09 Mikkel Boedker Rookie Playmakers 89/100
You received a damaged card. I would definitely take exception with this.

For this one: 08-09 Mikkel Boedker Victory RC
I can understand your annoyance, but it is a low-risk, high-reward gamble. You didn't ask the seller if the listing is for the Black version. If you had received the Black version, would you have offered the seller more money? For $0.99, I wouldn't make an issue out of it.
 
do something about the first card.

do nothing for the second card. - you clearly state you knowlingly took the gamble; it didn't pan out so move on. your wondering if you should do something about it shows you weren't ready to "take the gamble"
 
I would definately be upset with the playmakers card and would try and work on a resolution with the seller.

As for the victory card, that is clear deception by the seller, I doubt he mistakenly put up the wrong image.
 
allstarcollectors said:
My question about the 2nd one, is why didn't you ask before bidding? Instead of "taking a gamble" why not clarify before your bid. That being said, it does seem deceptive. I have a hunch the seller knew full-well what they were doing?
Click to expand...

I was hoping the seller was just ignorant and had no idea it was a parallel. Didn't want to tip him off if indeed it was just an oversight.

Thanks for the input guys.
 
My input...

Playmakers - I can see the bottom left corner in the auction is not 100% right - would I say mangled based on that picture? Nope, but I would have asked.

Victory Black - definitely an email to the seller saying "hey this isn't the card pictured..." but the above comments are kind of right you knew you were taking a chance...

Kev
 
Auction #1 - Did the card you received have the same serial # as the one in the picture?? By "mangled" do you mean the marks from the packer? There seems to be something like that in the bottom left corner. Provided it is the card in the picture, is it possible that the card was damaged at all in shipping? I think you definitely have a case here for at least half your money back, or a full refund if the card returns to the original seller.

Auction #2 - I have no idea what I feel about this. Despite the picture being the black, it doesn't say it anywhere in the description...but yeah .99 probably not worth the effort
 
Hello.

Regarding auction #2. Sure the auction is misleading, but like stated above, NOWHERE in the title or description does it state Victory Black. And like someone mentioned earlier, if it were the Black version, would you e-mail the seller stating that you would offer more b/c it was Black? As much as its the sellers responsibility to figure out EXACTLY what their selling, its also the buyers best interest, to make sure they know 100% know what they are bidding on.

And before sounding like the perfect little angel, I've done the exact same thing. I've bought auctions hoping to come out ahead of the game. But I'd say that 99% of the time its kicked me in the rear. And in this case, for .99 cents, it was worth the gamble.

Cheers,
E:beer:
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
389,467
Messages
2,232,812
Members
4,146
Latest member
E_Thom_Tech
Back
Top