Boring! That is how I feel about the first half of the book. It is not until page 115 that the girls finally arrive at Sun Dial Lodge. The first half of the book should be called Billie Bradley Worries about Someone Else's Lost Treasure Chest for No Reason. The treasure was found in the previous volume and belongs to someone else. While Billie is supposed to receive a small share, it little matters if the treasure is lost.
In volume 1, Billie's treasure was important since it was the means for Billie to pay for her tuition to Three Towers Hall. When that treasure was stolen (naturally all treasure chests get stolen in Syndicate books), it was vitally important that Billie recover it.
Back to the current treasure chest: Why couldn't the treasure have disappeared near the end of the last volume and then been recovered? Why waste space in this volume with the lost treasure chest? I don't care about the dang treasure chest! It belongs to a man who barely appears in this volume. I mean, really?
The first 115 pages also covers the story of Mrs. Westlock, who is the old lady who was given money near the beginning of the story (see this post) I am just not feeling the story of Mrs. Westlock. She is a pitiful old woman, and she certainly needs help. Why don't I care? Maybe if she actually interacted with the young people, I would care. She is just there, kind of like the missing treasure chest that means nothing to me.
Ah yes, once the young people arrive at Sun Dial Lodge, the book redeems itself. Vi sees a shadow lurking behind a tree and thinks it might be a ghost. The others doubt her, but we readers know that the shadow must have been a very bad person. If I were reading Nancy Drew, I'd know the person must be swarthy.
The house is completely surrounded by trees, to the point that no sunlight shines through the open windows. This is spooky. The description of the herb garden reminds me so much of the description of the grounds of Heath Castle in the Nancy Drew book, The Clue in the Crumbling Wall. I'm liking this portion of the book very much. I like descriptions of overgrown gardens with winding paths. Why couldn't the whole book have been like this?
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
eBay's Best Match 2.0 and Top-Rated Sellers
I am getting increasingly frustrated at eBay. Last week, eBay rolled out its second batch of changes for the year. OH NO... that stupid test search must have been the trial run for Best Match 2.0. I hate it. The Buy It Now icons are gone, so they are very hard to spot. Someone said they called eBay the other day, and the representative claimed the changes are here to stay. How is hiding the Buy It Now icon helping the item sell? Can someone explain that to me?
My next grievance is the stupid top-rated seller icon. That thing is HUGE. It also proclaims that those are the very best sellers, and as a buyer, I take this to mean that all sellers who do not have the icon are somehow inferior to the top-rated sellers and cannot be trusted. Additionally and possibly worst of all, buyers can now filter their searches to show only the top-rated sellers. For all of you sellers who are not top-rated, exactly how does that make you feel?
A few months ago, eBay sent me a message stating that I was on track to be a top-rated seller. My DSRs range from 4.9 to 5.0 and my seller dashboard says that I have no ones or twos, so I definitely qualify. However, I missed the cut, and I know why. It was originally implied that small sellers could qualify for top-rated seller status, but this is not true. I had more past sales still showing for the previous year a few months ago. As I continue to sell on Bonanzle instead of on eBay, my sales for the previous year are dropping off fast. I no longer qualify.
A bait and switch has been done by eBay. The power seller icons were retired and replaced by the top-rated seller icons. They mean exactly the same thing, except that not all power sellers qualify to be top-rated sellers. The top-rated seller icon is for an exclusive club of sellers—the cream of the crop power sellers plus those that eBay favors like Buy.com. You do know that eBay manipulates the feedback of large companies, don't you? What all of this means is that eBay has now angered many of its power sellers and all of its sellers who are not power sellers.
My seller dashboard says that I am "Above Standard," yet "Above Standard" has no impact on search ranking. Then what good is it? We either get top-rated seller status which boosts our listings in search, or we get told that we are all "Above Standard Sellers." Erik Andresen has created an image which sums up the situation nicely and has given permission for it to be shared across the internet.
The image speaks for itself.
As for those of us who are ASS sellers, this is what an eBay representative had to say about us (see this thread):
I am so glad that I quit selling on eBay on January 1 (except for the occasional bulk item), since the situation has unfortunately grown quite worse.
By the way, I have reversed my opinion on the five free auction listings per month. I now think it is great, since I only intend to sell occasionally on eBay. My items are getting buried in search because I am not a top-rated (power) seller and because I have no recent sales. When I do list, it needs to be free because it won't sell since no one will notice it. I have to list multiple times before I get any takers. The final value fees are higher, but at least I don't pay for all of the unsuccessful listings.
I feel that I have around the same exposure on Bonanzle that I would have on eBay. I really do. I probably have less exposure on Bonanzle, but the way I see it, I have around the same exposure. My stuff is now hidden from buyers on eBay in a big giant mass of stuff, while on Bonanzle, I can actually get noticed. I like it.
Last, I feel that the best thing eBay has done this year is is to create the eBay Bucks program. Woo-hoo, I keep earning those bucks! I get my next certificate in a few days. Nice...
By the way, I could post lots of links here to all of the discussions about these latest changes, but it would be too much work. The idiocy of eBay management knows no bounds, and I have not mentioned everything. It appears that eBay wants to go to a bizarre feedback system in which buyers rate sellers on a scale of 1 to 10 based on whether they would recommend that seller to their family and friends (who in my case don't shop on eBay so I wouldn't be recommending anyone to them - ???). I can think of a number of specific instances in which I would not recommend a good seller to someone else, so that is just stupid. It would also be too hard to try to give a seller that kind of rating and be fair. If eBay goes to that system, I will probably never leave feedback again.
My next grievance is the stupid top-rated seller icon. That thing is HUGE. It also proclaims that those are the very best sellers, and as a buyer, I take this to mean that all sellers who do not have the icon are somehow inferior to the top-rated sellers and cannot be trusted. Additionally and possibly worst of all, buyers can now filter their searches to show only the top-rated sellers. For all of you sellers who are not top-rated, exactly how does that make you feel?
A few months ago, eBay sent me a message stating that I was on track to be a top-rated seller. My DSRs range from 4.9 to 5.0 and my seller dashboard says that I have no ones or twos, so I definitely qualify. However, I missed the cut, and I know why. It was originally implied that small sellers could qualify for top-rated seller status, but this is not true. I had more past sales still showing for the previous year a few months ago. As I continue to sell on Bonanzle instead of on eBay, my sales for the previous year are dropping off fast. I no longer qualify.
A bait and switch has been done by eBay. The power seller icons were retired and replaced by the top-rated seller icons. They mean exactly the same thing, except that not all power sellers qualify to be top-rated sellers. The top-rated seller icon is for an exclusive club of sellers—the cream of the crop power sellers plus those that eBay favors like Buy.com. You do know that eBay manipulates the feedback of large companies, don't you? What all of this means is that eBay has now angered many of its power sellers and all of its sellers who are not power sellers.
My seller dashboard says that I am "Above Standard," yet "Above Standard" has no impact on search ranking. Then what good is it? We either get top-rated seller status which boosts our listings in search, or we get told that we are all "Above Standard Sellers." Erik Andresen has created an image which sums up the situation nicely and has given permission for it to be shared across the internet.
The image speaks for itself.As for those of us who are ASS sellers, this is what an eBay representative had to say about us (see this thread):
In order for us to be confident in identifying a seller as Top-rated, the seller must sell at least 100 items per year and sell at least $3k in merchandise.So I have to sell at least 100 items worth at least $3,000 in one year, or eBay has no confidence in my track record? What if I successfully sell 50 items and get all positives with no ones or twos? Apparently that is not good enough. They do only want high volume sellers.
There are many great sellers who sell less than that, eBay can't be confident enough to promote them, badge them, etc.
I am so glad that I quit selling on eBay on January 1 (except for the occasional bulk item), since the situation has unfortunately grown quite worse.
By the way, I have reversed my opinion on the five free auction listings per month. I now think it is great, since I only intend to sell occasionally on eBay. My items are getting buried in search because I am not a top-rated (power) seller and because I have no recent sales. When I do list, it needs to be free because it won't sell since no one will notice it. I have to list multiple times before I get any takers. The final value fees are higher, but at least I don't pay for all of the unsuccessful listings.
I feel that I have around the same exposure on Bonanzle that I would have on eBay. I really do. I probably have less exposure on Bonanzle, but the way I see it, I have around the same exposure. My stuff is now hidden from buyers on eBay in a big giant mass of stuff, while on Bonanzle, I can actually get noticed. I like it.
Last, I feel that the best thing eBay has done this year is is to create the eBay Bucks program. Woo-hoo, I keep earning those bucks! I get my next certificate in a few days. Nice...
By the way, I could post lots of links here to all of the discussions about these latest changes, but it would be too much work. The idiocy of eBay management knows no bounds, and I have not mentioned everything. It appears that eBay wants to go to a bizarre feedback system in which buyers rate sellers on a scale of 1 to 10 based on whether they would recommend that seller to their family and friends (who in my case don't shop on eBay so I wouldn't be recommending anyone to them - ???). I can think of a number of specific instances in which I would not recommend a good seller to someone else, so that is just stupid. It would also be too hard to try to give a seller that kind of rating and be fair. If eBay goes to that system, I will probably never leave feedback again.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Do you own the first printing of Crossword Cipher?
Recently, Jenn Fisher asked me if I owned the first printing of the 44th Nancy Drew book, The Clue in the Crossword Cipher. I replied that I did not, and she shared that she does not own one either. We wondered why it is so hard to find.
I was reminded of this when I received a complete set of all 56 Nancy Drew picture covers. This set came from someone's collection. It contained nearly all first printing picture covers from #8 up through #56. #44 was one of the very few books that was the second printing instead of the first printing. I already had the third printing, so now I have both the second and third printings.
I find it very odd that the first printing is so elusive. Now I have an idea about this, but it is based upon what I think is the true scarcity of the first printing. I need to get an idea of how many other people actually own one.
I have created two polls. The first poll asks whether respondents own the first, second, or third printing of Crossword Cipher. The first printing of Crossword Cipher lists only to #42 on the back cover. Both the second and third printings list to #44, and I bet many people own a second or third printing and think they have the first printing.
The second printing of Crossword Cipher has no interior list, either pre-text or post-text. The third printing of Crossword Cipher has an interior post-text list of titles that ends with #43.
In my second poll, I ask which scarce picture cover printings are owned by the respondents. The list includes the $1 box editions, #7 with the 1932 text, #11 man with pipe 1934 and 1965 text variants, #41 with the tri-fold, #44 listing to #42 on the back cover, #49 with the yellow overlay on back cover, #55 first printing, and #56 first printing. That should cover the scarcest picture cover printings, aside from any unusual anomalies that have been mentioned in this blog but not documented in Farah's Guide.
This brings me to what I really think: I suspect that the first printing of Crossword Cipher is an anomaly and that possibly very few examples exist. I could be wrong, so I need to get an idea of how many people have one. I know it exists, since Farah's Guide has documented it. But was it really an entire print run as is suggested by Farah's Guide? I doubt it.
Crossword Cipher was published in 1967. Checking Farah's Guide, 1967 books tend to list to either #43 or #44 on the back cover. 1965 and 1966 books tend to list to #42. It is rather odd that the 1967 first printing of Crossword Cipher lists only to #42. This is why I think it might be an anomaly—perhaps it was a mistake or leftover back boards were used on some copies.
Aside from that, it will be interesting to see how many people own the other scarce picture printings, especially the ones that are regularly touted as so extremely RARE on eBay.
If you own one of the first three printings of Crossword Cipher or any of the scarce picture cover editions, I would really appreciate you taking the time to answer the polls.
I was reminded of this when I received a complete set of all 56 Nancy Drew picture covers. This set came from someone's collection. It contained nearly all first printing picture covers from #8 up through #56. #44 was one of the very few books that was the second printing instead of the first printing. I already had the third printing, so now I have both the second and third printings.
I find it very odd that the first printing is so elusive. Now I have an idea about this, but it is based upon what I think is the true scarcity of the first printing. I need to get an idea of how many other people actually own one.
I have created two polls. The first poll asks whether respondents own the first, second, or third printing of Crossword Cipher. The first printing of Crossword Cipher lists only to #42 on the back cover. Both the second and third printings list to #44, and I bet many people own a second or third printing and think they have the first printing.
The second printing of Crossword Cipher has no interior list, either pre-text or post-text. The third printing of Crossword Cipher has an interior post-text list of titles that ends with #43.
In my second poll, I ask which scarce picture cover printings are owned by the respondents. The list includes the $1 box editions, #7 with the 1932 text, #11 man with pipe 1934 and 1965 text variants, #41 with the tri-fold, #44 listing to #42 on the back cover, #49 with the yellow overlay on back cover, #55 first printing, and #56 first printing. That should cover the scarcest picture cover printings, aside from any unusual anomalies that have been mentioned in this blog but not documented in Farah's Guide.
This brings me to what I really think: I suspect that the first printing of Crossword Cipher is an anomaly and that possibly very few examples exist. I could be wrong, so I need to get an idea of how many people have one. I know it exists, since Farah's Guide has documented it. But was it really an entire print run as is suggested by Farah's Guide? I doubt it.
Crossword Cipher was published in 1967. Checking Farah's Guide, 1967 books tend to list to either #43 or #44 on the back cover. 1965 and 1966 books tend to list to #42. It is rather odd that the 1967 first printing of Crossword Cipher lists only to #42. This is why I think it might be an anomaly—perhaps it was a mistake or leftover back boards were used on some copies.
Aside from that, it will be interesting to see how many people own the other scarce picture printings, especially the ones that are regularly touted as so extremely RARE on eBay.
If you own one of the first three printings of Crossword Cipher or any of the scarce picture cover editions, I would really appreciate you taking the time to answer the polls.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Posts That Strike a Nerve
Since I have been ripped for being a vile, despicable person in a comment to my previous post, I thought I would post my response in a new post. Why not give it the attention it deserves? Here it is:
To respond to the first comment, I feel that the seller withheld the information on purpose, but I do not wish to be accused of defamation of character, so I waited to publish this post. I really do not wish to harm any seller, which brings me to the last comment...
Hmm...interesting that someone would take such offense at my comments. You aren't by any chance that seller are you? If not, then I was not speaking of you, and you had no reason to take offense.
Are you the seller who defrauded me? If not, then you had no reason to take offense.
Are you someone who packs badly, therefore allowing valuable, collectible books to get damaged? If not, then you had no reason to take offense.
Guess what? I have two lots for sale on eBay this week. I am an eBay seller (at least occasionally), yet I take no offense when people belittle eBay sellers. I know whether their comments refer to me.
As to enjoying watching the feedback crumble, I'm sorry you think I enjoy it. I have been defrauded by that seller of more than 30 dollars. I am not very happy about it. I don't know why someone would not understand how I feel when I have lost money, and more importantly, when I am not going to receive a purchase that I very much wanted to receive. I am a victim, just like when people are victims of crimes. Don't they want the perpetrators to be punished? I want my seller to be punished.
I meant the title of that post to be kind of humorous, but obviously you had to take it personally. Of course I am going to take interest in watching the feedback go down. Yes, I want retribution. I feel that bad sellers deserve bad feedback. I suppose that makes me a bad person.
It is a fact that in general sellers who sell series books on eBay at very low prices tend not to pay attention to detail. This does not make them bad sellers. It does provide me with some interesting content for this blog, which of course some people choose to take personally. There is nothing wrong with selling items for low prices. There is nothing wrong with packing badly, except that it stresses buyers out who want to receive their books in good condition. There is nothing wrong with defrauding buyers...no wait, there is. I don't care if this post makes more people angry. I just don't care.
P.S. I am not upset. I just find it amazing that people take offense at comments that are not intended in a mean-spirited fashion and are not aimed at them. If the shoe fits...
P.P.S. Just like on message boards, we tend to discuss the bad more than the good. The vast majority of my eBay transactions are flawless. I don't discuss them here because it would not be very interesting. Don't think for a minute that I think all eBay sellers are bad. 99% of my eBay transactions have been great. I have bought around 3,000 items on eBay in the past 12 1/2 years. I have been defrauded fewer than 10 times. While I have received hundreds of purchases that were packed badly, I have had fewer than two dozen purchases that were received damaged due to inferior packaging. Most transactions, and most sellers are great.
Anyone else want to have at it?
To respond to the first comment, I feel that the seller withheld the information on purpose, but I do not wish to be accused of defamation of character, so I waited to publish this post. I really do not wish to harm any seller, which brings me to the last comment...
Hmm...interesting that someone would take such offense at my comments. You aren't by any chance that seller are you? If not, then I was not speaking of you, and you had no reason to take offense.
Are you the seller who defrauded me? If not, then you had no reason to take offense.
Are you someone who packs badly, therefore allowing valuable, collectible books to get damaged? If not, then you had no reason to take offense.
Guess what? I have two lots for sale on eBay this week. I am an eBay seller (at least occasionally), yet I take no offense when people belittle eBay sellers. I know whether their comments refer to me.
As to enjoying watching the feedback crumble, I'm sorry you think I enjoy it. I have been defrauded by that seller of more than 30 dollars. I am not very happy about it. I don't know why someone would not understand how I feel when I have lost money, and more importantly, when I am not going to receive a purchase that I very much wanted to receive. I am a victim, just like when people are victims of crimes. Don't they want the perpetrators to be punished? I want my seller to be punished.
I meant the title of that post to be kind of humorous, but obviously you had to take it personally. Of course I am going to take interest in watching the feedback go down. Yes, I want retribution. I feel that bad sellers deserve bad feedback. I suppose that makes me a bad person.
It is a fact that in general sellers who sell series books on eBay at very low prices tend not to pay attention to detail. This does not make them bad sellers. It does provide me with some interesting content for this blog, which of course some people choose to take personally. There is nothing wrong with selling items for low prices. There is nothing wrong with packing badly, except that it stresses buyers out who want to receive their books in good condition. There is nothing wrong with defrauding buyers...no wait, there is. I don't care if this post makes more people angry. I just don't care.
P.S. I am not upset. I just find it amazing that people take offense at comments that are not intended in a mean-spirited fashion and are not aimed at them. If the shoe fits...
P.P.S. Just like on message boards, we tend to discuss the bad more than the good. The vast majority of my eBay transactions are flawless. I don't discuss them here because it would not be very interesting. Don't think for a minute that I think all eBay sellers are bad. 99% of my eBay transactions have been great. I have bought around 3,000 items on eBay in the past 12 1/2 years. I have been defrauded fewer than 10 times. While I have received hundreds of purchases that were packed badly, I have had fewer than two dozen purchases that were received damaged due to inferior packaging. Most transactions, and most sellers are great.
Anyone else want to have at it?
Failure to Fully Disclose Information
Too many sellers withhold information about their listings, some because they do not know better, and others on purpose. One such seller and listing are the subject of this post, and I have decided not to link to the listing. I also delayed publishing this post until I knew that the listing would not show in the completed items search, so that it would be much harder for the item to be found. I could be wrong about the seller's intent, so I'm playing it safe. The seller is not someone who normally sells series books.
The listing was for an early printing of The Clue in the Crumbling Wall with dust jacket. The seller stated that the book was a first edition in the title of the listing. The seller's picture showed that the back panel of the dust jacket lists the Beverly Gray series to Beverly Gray's Problem, so the dust jacket is definitely not the first printing dust jacket. Of course since the front flap lists to The Secret in the Old Attic, most buyers who do not have a Farah's Guide would assume that the book is the very first printing.
The seller received an informative comment from someone who was hoping to help the seller avoid a bad situation.
If the seller had found through research that the book was the "2nd printing of the 1st edition," then why on earth did the seller not place that information in the listing?
The listing was for an early printing of The Clue in the Crumbling Wall with dust jacket. The seller stated that the book was a first edition in the title of the listing. The seller's picture showed that the back panel of the dust jacket lists the Beverly Gray series to Beverly Gray's Problem, so the dust jacket is definitely not the first printing dust jacket. Of course since the front flap lists to The Secret in the Old Attic, most buyers who do not have a Farah's Guide would assume that the book is the very first printing.
The seller received an informative comment from someone who was hoping to help the seller avoid a bad situation.
Question: According to Farah's Guide, the generally recognized authority of ND books, this is a 2nd -5th printing. The first printing shows Judy Bolton 1-15 titles on the back panel. The 2nd printing has a wartime conditions statement on the title page. The 2nd- 5th printings also list to Attic on the front flap with BG 1-13 on the back panel. Experienced collectors know this, but the novice lookers seem to take everything the seller says as 'gospel' and then don't exhibit any sense of humor, even over an honest mistake. It can be ugly. Good luck!The seller's response annoyed me tremendously. It sounds like the seller knew from the beginning that the book was not the first printing, but chose for whatever reason to leave that information out of the description. Not only that, it sounds to me like the seller thought that using "first edition" was all that mattered. Who cares which printing the book actually is? Gee, thanks.
Answer: Hi, Thanks for the e-mail....according to my source (AbeBooks.com) this is the 2nd printing of the 1st edition. I use AbeBooks.com as my reference source for rare and out of print books. Thanks for your information.
If the seller had found through research that the book was the "2nd printing of the 1st edition," then why on earth did the seller not place that information in the listing?
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Billie Bradley Page Now Up
I just placed the link to the Billie Bradley section on the main page of my site. Here is a link:
Billie Bradley section
I almost put it up a week ago, but I was feeling ill enough that I never followed through. I still have to finish the summary for #7, which I am currently reading, and do the summaries for #8 and #9, which I have yet to read. At the rate I am going, it might be a number of weeks. #7 has been difficult to get through, but it is getting better. I am on page 124, which is where I found the quote that I used on the main page of the Billie Bradley section. Finally, the book is getting interesting. I will expand upon my thoughts regarding #7 in another post.
Last weekend before I felt too ill to do anything, I placed my extra Billie Bradley books up for sale on Bonanzle.
Billie Bradley books for sale
These books are from some lots that I purchased relatively recently on eBay. In each lot, I was able to get at least a couple of dust jackets that I did not already have.
In just the last week, I acquired one of the Sully dust jackets. I like the Sully dust jacket because it actually has summaries of the first three titles in the series. The Cupples and Leon dust jackets do not have summaries.
Billie Bradley section
I almost put it up a week ago, but I was feeling ill enough that I never followed through. I still have to finish the summary for #7, which I am currently reading, and do the summaries for #8 and #9, which I have yet to read. At the rate I am going, it might be a number of weeks. #7 has been difficult to get through, but it is getting better. I am on page 124, which is where I found the quote that I used on the main page of the Billie Bradley section. Finally, the book is getting interesting. I will expand upon my thoughts regarding #7 in another post.
Last weekend before I felt too ill to do anything, I placed my extra Billie Bradley books up for sale on Bonanzle.
Billie Bradley books for sale
These books are from some lots that I purchased relatively recently on eBay. In each lot, I was able to get at least a couple of dust jackets that I did not already have.
In just the last week, I acquired one of the Sully dust jackets. I like the Sully dust jacket because it actually has summaries of the first three titles in the series. The Cupples and Leon dust jackets do not have summaries.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Watching a Seller's Feedback
10/01/2009: I edited the title since some people apparently found it offensive.
10/05/2009: PayPal has decided the claim in my favor and states that $33.95 will be credited to my account within five days. I have not received the books, nor have I received any communication from the seller. The seller did apparently mail out some items that were sold around two weeks after my purchase, since she has received some positive feedback for those transactions. It is a mystery why some sellers decide not to mail some purchases but then mail ones that were sold later.
.........................................
On August 25, I bought a fixed-priced lot of books from a seller on eBay. As I have mentioned in the past, the fixed-price lots that are priced a little low tend to arrive packed badly, since the sellers do not know what they are doing. Another problem with low fixed-price lots is that the sellers might not be honest.
Readers of this blog may recall that I had to file a PayPal claim earlier this year for a Betty Gordon book that I never received. I had to file a PayPal claim this week on the lot of books from August 25. As far as I can recall, this is the first time I have had to file more than one PayPal claim in one year due to not receiving a purchase, so from my perspective, eBay is not a better place after J.D. tightened the rules for sellers. I feel like he drove off half the good ones, and all of the bad ones are still there.
My seller's feedback was fine on August 25, and there were no signs that anything was amiss. In fact, the seller's feedback was fine until this week. The only indication of a problem was that the shipping time DSR was slightly lower than the other three DSRs, and I do mean slightly. I did not think I would have a problem because of the fact that the shipping DSR was lower; I knew the seller would ship a little slow, so I was not concerned about the purchase until three weeks had passed. The feedback comments were great, so the buyers had no problems with the seller. Slow shippers can still be overall good sellers.
This is a good example of how the DSRs do not help. The shipping time DSR was only slightly low and actually reassured me that everything would probably work out in the end. It did nothing to warn me of the kind of person that the seller actually is. No matter much eBay harasses sellers and reassures buyers that transactions are guaranteed, eBay cannot prevent this from happening. We, as buyers, have to make educated decisions about whether we can trust our sellers, and we are always taking a risk when we send money to a stranger. We cannot be protected by eBay (I typed "from eBay" accidentally at first, which is quite funny and true.).
I filed my claim on Thursday. I would have done it sooner, but I was too tired to feel like messing with it. I noticed that when I filed the claim, PayPal had me escalate it immediately, which is not how it normally works. Usually PayPal has a seven day waiting period in order for the seller to have time to leave a response. PayPal stated that the seller was unable to respond and that I should escalate at once. This told me that the seller must have already lost access to her PayPal account due to multiple claims. Not good.
I now have a new recreational activity, which happens each time I find myself in this position. I now take the time to check my seller's feedback multiple times per day to see what kind of feedback is getting posted. The seller's feedback is tanking. The communication and shipping time DSRs are plummeting fast.
I predict that the account will be suspended within the next week or so. The seller had listings up until this week, so the account may now be restricted. I hope so. Who knows how many people were defrauded, and we do not need any more people to join us.
There is still a slight possibility that I might receive the books, but I do not expect it to happen. I hope that PayPal will recover my money ($33.95 to be exact), but I have no guarantee. I will add an update to this post once something happens.
10/05/2009: PayPal has decided the claim in my favor and states that $33.95 will be credited to my account within five days. I have not received the books, nor have I received any communication from the seller. The seller did apparently mail out some items that were sold around two weeks after my purchase, since she has received some positive feedback for those transactions. It is a mystery why some sellers decide not to mail some purchases but then mail ones that were sold later.
On August 25, I bought a fixed-priced lot of books from a seller on eBay. As I have mentioned in the past, the fixed-price lots that are priced a little low tend to arrive packed badly, since the sellers do not know what they are doing. Another problem with low fixed-price lots is that the sellers might not be honest.
Readers of this blog may recall that I had to file a PayPal claim earlier this year for a Betty Gordon book that I never received. I had to file a PayPal claim this week on the lot of books from August 25. As far as I can recall, this is the first time I have had to file more than one PayPal claim in one year due to not receiving a purchase, so from my perspective, eBay is not a better place after J.D. tightened the rules for sellers. I feel like he drove off half the good ones, and all of the bad ones are still there.
My seller's feedback was fine on August 25, and there were no signs that anything was amiss. In fact, the seller's feedback was fine until this week. The only indication of a problem was that the shipping time DSR was slightly lower than the other three DSRs, and I do mean slightly. I did not think I would have a problem because of the fact that the shipping DSR was lower; I knew the seller would ship a little slow, so I was not concerned about the purchase until three weeks had passed. The feedback comments were great, so the buyers had no problems with the seller. Slow shippers can still be overall good sellers.
This is a good example of how the DSRs do not help. The shipping time DSR was only slightly low and actually reassured me that everything would probably work out in the end. It did nothing to warn me of the kind of person that the seller actually is. No matter much eBay harasses sellers and reassures buyers that transactions are guaranteed, eBay cannot prevent this from happening. We, as buyers, have to make educated decisions about whether we can trust our sellers, and we are always taking a risk when we send money to a stranger. We cannot be protected by eBay (I typed "from eBay" accidentally at first, which is quite funny and true.).
I filed my claim on Thursday. I would have done it sooner, but I was too tired to feel like messing with it. I noticed that when I filed the claim, PayPal had me escalate it immediately, which is not how it normally works. Usually PayPal has a seven day waiting period in order for the seller to have time to leave a response. PayPal stated that the seller was unable to respond and that I should escalate at once. This told me that the seller must have already lost access to her PayPal account due to multiple claims. Not good.
I now have a new recreational activity, which happens each time I find myself in this position. I now take the time to check my seller's feedback multiple times per day to see what kind of feedback is getting posted. The seller's feedback is tanking. The communication and shipping time DSRs are plummeting fast.
I predict that the account will be suspended within the next week or so. The seller had listings up until this week, so the account may now be restricted. I hope so. Who knows how many people were defrauded, and we do not need any more people to join us.
There is still a slight possibility that I might receive the books, but I do not expect it to happen. I hope that PayPal will recover my money ($33.95 to be exact), but I have no guarantee. I will add an update to this post once something happens.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Some Funny "RARE" Books
Vintage RARE Nancy Drew Book LoT Double Books C. Keene Item #300338900982
Since when are Twin Thriller editions RARE? I laughed when I saw it, which is why it ended up in my watched items list for mention here later.
This next one is even funnier:
RARE Nancy Drew Mystery stories 7 Hollow Oak ATTIC bell Item #360181180489
Now ordinary Nancy Drew picture covers from the 1970s are RARE. I really laughed at this one! Also funny is how the books were placed on top of a bush for the photo. I would never have thought of photographing books on top of a bush.
This next one is an example of a seller stating rarity for the wrong reasons.
RARE NANCY DREW APPLEWOOD THE MESSAGE IN THE HOLLOW OAK Item #200366792295
The seller stated in the description, "HOLLOW OAK IS A RARITY- I DID NOT FIND 1 ON EBAY INCLUDING COMPLETED AUCTIONS!!!"
Back ten years ago, not finding a book in the completed listings actually meant something. Completed listings went back three months. For quite a few years, completed listings went back 30 days. That length of time has now been reduced to 15 days. So what the seller was really saying was that the Applewood Hollow Oak is a rarity because one had not been seen on eBay in the previous two weeks. Wow. I did not know that rare books are ones that have not been seen in two weeks.
So what about Linda Carlton's Perilous Summer and Linda Carlton's Hollywood Flight which no one can find for their collection? Hmm? The books were published in the 1930s and have all but disappeared from the face of the earth. A few people own them, but most people will never ever see a copy, even if they search for 30 or more years. I am not exaggerating. Isn't that what "rare" ought to mean? No wait... that is what "rare" means to people like me, which is why I laugh at these listings.
Since when are Twin Thriller editions RARE? I laughed when I saw it, which is why it ended up in my watched items list for mention here later.
This next one is even funnier:
RARE Nancy Drew Mystery stories 7 Hollow Oak ATTIC bell Item #360181180489
Now ordinary Nancy Drew picture covers from the 1970s are RARE. I really laughed at this one! Also funny is how the books were placed on top of a bush for the photo. I would never have thought of photographing books on top of a bush.
This next one is an example of a seller stating rarity for the wrong reasons.
RARE NANCY DREW APPLEWOOD THE MESSAGE IN THE HOLLOW OAK Item #200366792295
The seller stated in the description, "HOLLOW OAK IS A RARITY- I DID NOT FIND 1 ON EBAY INCLUDING COMPLETED AUCTIONS!!!"
Back ten years ago, not finding a book in the completed listings actually meant something. Completed listings went back three months. For quite a few years, completed listings went back 30 days. That length of time has now been reduced to 15 days. So what the seller was really saying was that the Applewood Hollow Oak is a rarity because one had not been seen on eBay in the previous two weeks. Wow. I did not know that rare books are ones that have not been seen in two weeks.
So what about Linda Carlton's Perilous Summer and Linda Carlton's Hollywood Flight which no one can find for their collection? Hmm? The books were published in the 1930s and have all but disappeared from the face of the earth. A few people own them, but most people will never ever see a copy, even if they search for 30 or more years. I am not exaggerating. Isn't that what "rare" ought to mean? No wait... that is what "rare" means to people like me, which is why I laugh at these listings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)