Buy Of The Year On Ebay. Not

http://www.ebay.com/itm/400924757221

This looks at first glance to be a run of the mill offering of a section of Scott Specialty pages for France. Take a minute and read the exaggeration and hyperbole this seller uses- it is 'rare' and sells of over $100. In fact it is currently listed as in stock on Amos' website for I think around $33 or so. Plus the one he is selling is not complete- this section of pages is supposed to go through 1994, his goes through 1993.

Interesting that he has now reduced the price on this 'rare' item. Sellers like this sort of make me sick.

BTW I think this is the same seller I bought a set of White ace pages from early this year and sent back- they were described as new and in excellent condition. They were badly dinged and smelled like a musty old basement. How much you want to bet this seller knows very little about stamps? He bought a bunch of remainder stuff and is unloading it for what he can get and doesn't mind exaggerating.

I see no hyperbole in the listing. Kind of an unfair attack on an ebay seller IMO.

You're welcome to your opinion as am I. He lies about this being scarce, how much it has gone for, etc. It' sleazy IMO. But it really doesn't matter either way, I guess. Thanks for your input.

BTW, I AM also an ebay seller..

I hesitate to even comment, but wouldn't it take you about fifteen seconds to verify if this is or is not the seller you had an issue with a while back?

Yes I did check right after and it is.

I get the feeling I stepped in it by even posting my original comment. I am sorry if I violated some board rule. My intent was simply to share what I thought was a mildly amusing misrepresentation of a common supplement as being some great rarity. There have been discussions on here in the past about ebay listings.

The mods are free to delete the whole thing-

PS the seller has deleted his comments abut rarity, etc. I sent him a carefully worded message pointing out the issues and he apparently agreed. It is apparently no longer an issue.

I must have seen the listing after he changed it. It didn't look so bad to me. Perhaps you've helped someone see the light? His listing boilerplate references sports cards, so you are probably right about stamps not being his primary passion.

If there is anything of interest here, to me, it is that Amos/Scott apparently used the same item number for an updated item? The item number clearly showing in the seller's photos appears to match a current item number on Amos' website, with somewhat different content.

If this is the case, that could surely be confusing to their customers... somewhere, some poor sap is wondering how come there aren't any spaces for his French stamps from 1993.

Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Cjd- that is what I an thinking, HungaryforStamps viewed it after he'd made the changes. This has been a comedy of errors.

Nothing more to see here, folks..

No reason to remove the post. I'm just saying that 30 minutes after you posted, I looked at the auction and saw no evidence of what you claim the guy wrote. So, I would say its a good thing if he recognized his claims were wrong and made changes. Is he dishonest? I don't know. But I have no reason to believe he isn't given this auction as it is now written.

I think its okay to point out when a seller is misrepresenting an item, but too often posts make assumptions about the motivation of a seller, use sarcasm and express outrage that may not be warranted, and sometimes resort to baseless allegations, and then we find out the seller maybe made a mistake or the allegations are incorrect. Sure there are bad, dishonest sellers, but I think we should try to hold down our own exaggeration and hyperbole and present only the facts.

Hungary, well taken points. I give the seller full credit for doing the right thing, he was a little huffy in a reply to me but that's understandable, he fixed the listing to remove claims of great rarity, etc. I shouldn't have made the post at the end of a stressful day!