yes. I try to find sellers with 100% feedback. I ask sellers to verify condition of cd and inserts (their second opportunity to grade) as these sellers are international and returning it is costly. Still get burned with over graded cds.
I totally feel your pain. At the very least with CDs, a stray mark here or there doesn't in any way affect play (but it does affect your ability to list the item if you ever want to sell it, because you could not go any higher than a VG+ if it has a visible mark on it). In the LP world (and I inhabit both) misgraded items actually affect my ability to enjoy the music.
Yes, definitely, but I've never encountered anything being sold as M or NM being scratched to that degree - or even close. There was one VG+ CD that I once got that did cause my most sensitive CD player to skip (visually should have been probably a G+). But this is why I don't use discogs to buy anything in less than NM condition, unless it's from a very trusted seller.
I had to search out this thread to share something. I actually usually have pretty good luck with eBay and Discogs. It helps that I am generally very happy with a true VG+ record and I'm not someone who NEEDS a NM record to have a good listening experience. That said, I recently picked up this "VG+" record from Discogs, and I dare say this one is a bit overgraded: Lol, what do y'all think? Maybe I should be less picky? (note: visually it's as bad or worse than it sounds, so visual grading is not an excuse here). The seller is now haggling with me trying to offer partial discounts, which I find funny.
At least this was only a $10 purchase so I can laugh instead of cry. Right now I'm insisting on sending the record back to the seller at my expense rather accept a partial refund. This is a matter of principle so I don't want to let this seller off easily, even if it costs me some money.
Well here is my recent back and forth over my NM/NM "Tower of Power" purchase. Tower Of Power - Tower Of Power Yeah I got some money back, but in the end I didn't get what I thought I was paying for, and so now am going to have to buy another copy. It's just not right! I did get the iron on though... Mar 21, 2023 01:44 PM about 1 month ago Oscill4tion This LP is nowhere close to being near mint, and the cover may be close but also not near mint. The iron on is perfect, but still. Side one, which appears physically better than side two, is plagued with surface noise, and yes I cleaned it. Side two has a large scratch running the entire extent of the LP, and at least two spots of fading, still it plays better than side one. The album cover has what appears to be a water or grease stain. I'd give side one an appearance of VG+ and a sonic quality of G. Side 2 has an appearance of G, and a sonic quality of VG. I'm sorry it's been a bit but I've been away and hadn't had the opportunity to inspect this purchase. I can understand that this one may have slid through the cracks, but to me it's important. Thanks, Mar 21, 2023 02:12 PM about 1 month ago liberus Hi I’m sorry to hear your judge of This lp. I’m not really sure I’m agreeing with you. Do you want to keep it or shipping it back? Best regards rune Mar 22, 2023 02:44 AM about 1 month ago Oscill4tion I understand that it seems odd that it would be so far below what it was graded at, but nevertheless I think it is. I could send you photos if you like, I think this one just must have slipped through the cracks. Mar 22, 2023 03:12 AM about 1 month ago liberus Hi. Yes maybe this slipped through the cracks! But anyway this lp isn’t really rare, but the insirt is really rare to find. So if you want a partial refund we can arrange that, but the real value is in the insirt. I’m open for negotiation. Regards rune Mar 28, 2023 11:24 AM about 1 month ago Oscill4tion Hi Sorry I've been out of town, I would say, considering the iron on, if you could drop the price by 15 bucks that would be about right. I'm going to have to find a cleaner copy of this, but I'm hanging on to the iron on! All the best, Mar 28, 2023 11:29 AM about 1 month ago liberus sent refund of €15.00
Why complain? He offered to accept a return and refund your money. You choose to get $15 refund and keep the rare iron on. Some bad seller stories are really bad buyer stories.
Some stories are bad for both. At the end of the day the seller dropped the ball, but if the buyer is ok with the partial refund, then it feels like a Neutral experience. That said, I would say the way Oscillation handled the conversation it felt like he jumped straight into an aggressive mindset, which may be buyer fatigue from previous transactions, but as a seller they may have been quicker to go on the offensive as well.
Who is the seller, I think they deserve to be named and shamed. That record plays like garbage, can you upload a photo of the record itself?
I’m not ready yet to name this guy publicly but I’ll try to put pictures here (pretty bad, VG+ is an insane grade).
Seriously, what would you rate that? A strong G-? I paid about $10 for this ($6.50 for the record plus $3.50 shipping). The seller refunded me $6.50 after several back and forth messages in which I tried to explain I did not want a partial refund, I wanted to ship the record back (at my expense, to make a point) and receive my full $10 back. The seller either ignored or didn't understand. I don't care much about this money, I'm just pretty angry about the nerve of not refunding me the entire amount (including shipping) I paid for a record that literally deserves to be thrown in the trash. In this case I really don't think I should be on the hook for anything. This is not a case about arguing whether a record was NM vs. VG+ or VG+ vs. VG. I wouldn't be angry about that. VG+ vs. an unplayable record is a different story. But I'll say again, this rarely happens to me. Very occasionally I get a significantly misgraded record and the seller is almost always very easy to work with about it. Main exception in my experience has been on eBay with a certain jazz seller who overgrades like crazy and immediately bans anyone who sends him even a polite inquiry about it and sends an obnoxious tirade in response (he does issue full refunds though). That guy then tries to get eBay to remove the negative feedback, which eBay surprisingly accommodates way too often...
I just would not even sell that, I mean assuming it does not skip, by the letter of the law it could technically be a G. But that surface noise is genuinely pervasive to the listening experience. I'd maybe sell it as part of a group lot listed as Poor condition, if it were a decent enough title. Some times, particularly 60s pressings, can look like those in the photos, and play surprisingly well. If I had tested it, not just visually, it may be listed as "G, but plays much better than it is visual appearance". Unfortunately that is the issue with discogs for me, I know the odds on getting something so exceptionally misgraded as that are low, and that's a true One Off situation. But your best case scenario is to send it back and lose your shipping. If this were purchased on eBay 1)perhaps the photos would have helped to avoid this purchase from the start, but that's not a given either. 2) eBay protection would've meant you could have forced the sellers hand to accepting a full refund and sent the junk album back, and not been out a single penny.
LPs that look that bad should de graded trash and filed appropriately. Exceptions would.be someone planning to frame it due to NM sleeve, or a rarity used as a cheap placeholder comes along. If you don’t own an individual store with a bargain bin, you are asking for trouble by listing LPs like this one for sale, particularly is sold outside your country.
Yeah I can see selling a super rare/valuable record in G or worse condition so long as the buyer is made fully aware. Perhaps just for the cover or perhaps just having the object means something. Very strange to sell the record I got this way -- it's not really more than a $20 record even in mint condition. It was clearly a mistake (supposedly due to the incompetent people seller has working for him). It appears this particular seller is just kind of dumb. He issued a partial refund unilaterally and now is trying and can't figure out how to refund the rest. For a $10 purchase including shipping, involving a record that was verifiably unplayable (with photo and video evidence), it's beyond stupid to haggle and try to do partial refunds. Just do a 100% refund and own the mistake. Also, it wasn't just the noise on the record -- it skipped violently like 3 times in my 20 second video clip alone. This would seem to require a "poor" or "fair" rating under the Discogs standards.
I complain because it is a waste of my time and money. Yes the iron on is cool, but that's not why I bought a NM/NM graded album, it was an added bonus. Returning the album, even if the seller refunded the shipping fees, would still leave me out 30 bucks for the customs fees. As for my time, why should I have to spend it chasing down an errant seller on discogs, when I'd much rather spend my time commenting in SHF? I'll post pictures and audio of the "NM" LP I received.
Yes you are correct, although note that I did offer him an out in the "slipped through the cracks" suggestion. It's clear no one who new what they were doing ever looked at this album, and they were just super excited about the iron on, which, frankly, was the last thing on my mind when I bought it.
Hmm I see your dilemma now. I don’t buy from overseas but some need to, in order get the things they want. Very risky shopping. I Hope thing go better next time.
I would use the term "sealed", not mint. Sealed records can be flawed and "mint", to my way of thinking, means "unmarred" or "flawless". As we all know, not all sealed records are unmarred or flawless. I'm mostly good with Goldmine's ratings for NM, VG+, and VG.. I don't care for the term "excellent" when grading a record. "Excellent" is something teachers say once in a while, and Ted and Bill say frequently. I will never understand how a record graded as "good can be called "good" because most of the time they are actually "bad". And "fair"? You gotta be kidding me. When the weather is "fair", I'm a happy guy. When I go to the grocery store and find nice crisp apples at a "fair" price, I'm a happy guy. But get a "fair" LP anywhere near my turntable and look out! So to me, the way most ratings are used: Good = bad Fair = terrible Poor = trash-- why are you even trying to sell this?
I’m inclined to agree with the seller. They offered a return and you chose to keep an unplayable record.
I’ve gotten some incredible bargains on extremely rare and expensive records by taking chances in the G’s. It’s all about the description and if the person grades conservatively in general. Many old garage /psych/blues/jazz records can look pretty rough but play fine or play so loud/hot it’s only minimal background surface noise. And if I receive a record that skips or the surface noise reaches levels of unplayable I reach out to the seller and usually have had no issues making a return.
