Buyer Confusion on Nancy Drew #5

I never correct sellers except in unusual situations. The main reason why I do not bother is because at least 50% of the time, the seller does not correct the listing. Whenever I have decided to correct a seller, I have done it politely. Being rude will accomplish nothing. Sometimes sellers have posted rude comments that they have received from buyers in the "Question and Answer" section of their listings, and I am embarrassed that other Nancy Drew collectors are conducting themselves in such a fashion. Even if you think a seller is an idiot or is lying to you, be polite. Educate them; do not ridicule them!

It is frustrating to see one seller after another think that because a book has one date on the copyright page that it is a first printing. For many other publishers, one date on the copyright page often does indicate the first printing. People are only taking what they know about other publishers and trying to apply that knowledge to the Grosset and Dunlap books. They are not trying to annoy us. I get annoyed all the time by it, but I am not going to be rude to all of the clueless sellers.

Did you know that older book price guides from several decades ago state that all Grosset and Dunlap books are reprints and that none of them have value. Imagine that! I have a collection of worthless books! Due to the statements in these older price guides, there are still a few booksellers who scorn all Grosset and Dunlap books and think that all of them are worthless. People who have this mindset will put little effort into their Grosset and Dunlap eBay listings.

A good example of this misinformation cropped up again in a recent thread on the eBay Bookseller's Board. Someone asked if their copy of The House on the Cliff was a first printing. It turned out that the book was the first printing, but an early response came from a bookseller who stated, "Absolutely not a first edition. Grosset & Dunlap was always a reprint house." That person was quickly corrected by other sellers.

This is going to surprise some of you, but there are a few respected series book collectors who deliberately mislead buyers about some of their books. They only do it some of the time, and when they do, they get away with it. Only someone like me will notice what they are doing. Just be aware that the sellers who appear to be deliberately misleading buyers are, in most cases, not the ones who are doing it on purpose. They just do not know what they are doing. They do not deserve the rude comments. At the same time, others are doing it on purpose and with great success.

...........................................................

25 NANCY DREW CAROLYN KEENE ORIGINAL BOOKS VINTAGE Item #360076237511

The seller states, "Dates are the Publication dates not the copyright dates which Im sure you knew already." Based on the general appearance of the list, I believe it was copied and pasted off of my website. I do not have a problem with people copying and pasting my lists for their auctions; I created them so that I could use them for my own auctions. I hope others do use them. It saves a lot of time.

Anyway, the seller uses the original copyright dates for the original text books. As I have already stated, certain books were never printed with the 25 chapter texts in the picture cover format, so a few of those dates cannot be right for this particular listing. Based on what the seller added to the description, someone was rather rude to the seller:

I am not able to break up the set as of Aug 8. Also, since a rather RUDE ebayer stated that I was ignorant or misreprenting the books. Let me clarify AGAIN. These are the Dates that the books were written not the dates they were bought. I explained in my description that I received them Brand new from my grandparents for various occasions I was born in 1961. Im not an expert on Antique books. I was just trying to state what I know . Im sure people bidding on them know what I was talking about. As you can see from the pictures these are the original series bought many years ago when I was between the ages of 9-12. Have a Great Week!!!

The seller does not understand, and whoever was rude to the seller did not solve the problems that the listing had. I do not know the story, but the same lot of books has appeared again twice shortly after the first one closed, and on another ID:

25 NANCY DREW ORIGINAL ANTIQUE CAROLYN KEENE BOOKS Item #260274212348

Once again, the seller states, "Dates are the Publication dates not the copyright dates." The seller does not realize that by stating that the dates are the publication dates, he or she is implying that the specific books offered for sale were printed in the years listed. I made an exception in this case and decided to contact the seller. This is what I sent:

You do need to change the copyright/publication dates on many of the books. I know you are using the original copyright date, probably found on a website, but if you look inside the books, many of them will have a different date than the one you list. The one that is actually inside the book on the copyright page is the one that needs to be in your listing. The reason why it is important is that Nancy Drew books with copyright dates of 1956 and before have 25 chapters, and the ones from after 1956 have 20 chapters. People need to know whether the books have the older or newer texts, so this is why you need the correct years. I can tell by looking at your books that #2 is the 1959 text, #8 is the 1968 text, etc. Check and you will see. I normally don't get involved in situations like this, but I noticed the other listing in which rude people were mentioned. I'm trying to save you some problems once more people see this listing. Good luck!

The seller did not reply to me but did add the actual copyrights to the item's description. It pays to politely explain why the information is important. I have now edited my Nancy Drew list on my website so that I have a list for the original text books and another list for the revised text books. Perhaps the change will help avoid situations like this.