Creating your "good luck" buying vinyl on Discogs & eBay

There really needs to be a grading between NM and VG.

 

Is that really good? I mean, to the seller, "cleaning your vinyl" might mean running the record under a faucet or spraying it with a household cleaner or something.

 

I had a terrible experience on Discogs just this week. A Marillion LP described as NM/NM and it's nothing short of a disgrace. The sleeve is "good", but the LP is unplayable, It cam covered in some sort of fluid (god knows what he had been up to), scratched to buggery and with curious blotches on it. Totally unlistenable.

When I emailed him he simply said it was "perfect".

This is just the latest in a string of disasters on Discogs. A couple of the others have refunded me. I am just composing my words for the negative feedback I'm planning to leave but as has been pointed out, I probably won't do it because I don't want him to leave any neg for me.

 

If you can clearly demonstrate the return negative was retaliatory, admin will probably remove it. They will review all the correspondence that took place between you and the seller (through their console) before they make a ruling.

.

 

Great thread. I ask the same questions.
Pics?
Play graded?
Confirm it is THIS pressing?
Will you ship outside the jacket/sleeve?

 

I stopped buying from Ebay long time ago. Some of the sellers were great and undergraded rather than overgraded vinyl just for the sake of satisfyed customers. Then for a long period I got in the hands of not so serious dealers. I got some good prices on a couple of rarities, but five out of ten "mint" or "near mint" turned out to be VG or worse. When I complained they said - send it back then! But since the insured postage from Sweden was on me and the sellers in USA or South America it wasn't worth it. I also got the feeling that some of them had substandard copies on the side and if the end bid was too low they took a chance and sent one of those instead.

 

I usually just stick to Japanese or German sellers as I have found them to be the most reliable in terms of grading. One`s NM is another`s VG it seems but the amount of NM I have seen/bought that are thrashed would amuse me if it were not that there can be significant amounts of shekels involved sometimes! Just recently I requested photo`s of a NM/NM lp on Discogs. I politely told him that in no way was that record NM - it was VG at best but in fairness it wasn`t that expensive for a playable first pressing. Only the day before I bought an EX+/EX+ lp from Japan at a very reasonable price. Holy Smokes!!! The thing was beyond mint. I mean, you couldn`t wish for a better copy, and this for an lp that is nearly 40 years old. If a seller can`t be bothered accurately grading stuff or replying to queries then I don`t bother as they are usually clowns

 

This is a good point....however

I bought a whole slew of LPs from a seller that stated in all the listings, "professionally VPI cleaned." However.....there was no way these records were EVER cleaned, let alone via a RCM!! Totally filthy.

I would also like to comment on your original post as it is advice well taken. I too have been burned by over grading, sometimes dramatically so - NM lps that barely qualify as VG. But equally annoying is the release page many of these sellers link to, is not the accurate pressing information! So from now on.....I ask.

JQ

 

That is a HUGE problem on Discogs.

.

 

You don't want them to clean it. It's far better if you do it yourself. I had one guy who thought he was doing a service to everyone by "cleaning" his records with Formula 409...or Windex, he couldn't remember which. But they sounded like someone had poured sugar all over them before playing. I washed everyone in Dawn...and then onto my VPI to save them.

 

There is...VG+ and NM-.

 

I would much rather a record arrive to me uncleaned rather than a record cleaned with who-knows-what. I can clean it myself without whining about it.

 

I had a ridiculous album come through MusicStack last week.

A Bowie Station to Station listed as NM/NM was so riddled with warps, I wasn't about to let my tonearm go skipping across it. I just threw it away and got a refund.
It looked like it had been sitting on the front porch, in the middle of summer, for about a week.

 

I can't think why anyone wouldn't check it's the correct pressing. Most sellers on discogs aren't going to spend time listing their exact pressing.

 

I second that. Some of those substances scare me. Whatever the dirt is I'll fix it myself with isopropylalcohol in a minute or so.

 

That's definitely part of the problem. Another issue is the way Master Release pages are indexed, or rather I should say not properly indexed. Very hard to find exactly what you're looking for sometimes.

.

 

Just to provide counterpoint....
I've had good luck with a couple European sellers. In both cases these were clearly stores, rather than individuals, with thousands of titles and 99% ratings. I would go there on the basis of one title and wind up buying 6-7 to get a good deal on shipping. One seller had a lot of titles reasonably priced, listed "VG" but "closer to NM" in the listing. I thought that was an effective way of listing EX records (which they were).

Anyway. I asked some questions but I didn't bombard the seller... I had a good feeling based on their reviews and it paid off. And I now have a nice assortment of UK Bowies, Cure, Elton John, The Jam, and an absolutely fantastic UK Band On The Run that cost me $8.

Also, as an occasional Discogs seller, I can sympathize with the other side. I mostly sell sealed stuff but if it's a used title, I describe it as accurately as possible and send pics when asked. Even so, I've had some weird questions (a seller wanting the "earlier press" when there was only one press)... And one guy returned a Classic Peter Gabriel due to excessive noise. (I didn't doubt his claim and he actually switched it with a different item I was selling, so I wasn't out money. But when I got the PG back, I gave it a quick spin... Absolutely silent. Does a cartridge/TT combo really make that much difference?)

 

I quit (or at least, slowed down) buying records on eBay a couple of years back after purchasing hundreds of records over the years with too many disappointments. It simply became too frustrating trying to weed out the bad sellers from the good, and like many of you, I find it too big a hassle dealing with returns. I ocassionally buy an eBay record now only if it's a relatively new release that is sealed, and I can get a great deal on it. I did that with a couple of recent RSD releases that were actually less expensive than my local store, even after shipping was factored in.

As for Discogs, I'm relatively new to buying vinyl there, and overall I'm satisfied with most of my purchases. I have about 30 transactions completed over the last two years or so. Of these, I'd say about 3 were definitely overgraded and were a disappointment, and 2 were from completely dishonest sellers who claimed NM/NM and the records were both visually bad and unlistenable. It was obvious they lied about condition to get the sale. I left negative feedback for both (about a year ago) and so far have not received any retaliatory negative feedback. I complained to Discogs about one of the sellers and that was a waste of time, I suspect because the seller had hundreds of listings and (probably) it was not in Discogs best interest to do anything about it for reasons others have stated here.

To the OP, many thanks for the suggestions. I too look at feedback ratings pretty closely. On Discogs, I will no longer purchase from anyone below 99% and with (preferrably, but not always) at least 20 transactions. I prefer buying from sellers who have dozens or even hundreds of transactions completed and a 99.5%+ fb rating, even if I have to pay a little more. When reading the feedback comments, I especially look for information about grading accuracy and packaging. I also like to read (in the listing) that the seller understands the importance of separating the vinyl from the jacket to prevent seam splits in transit, and uses LP mailers with cardboard inserts to help prevent corner bends. Although grading accuracy is of utmost importance, it's also important (to me) to receive a cover in the condition stated. I am irritated when a cover is damaged in transit due to insufficient packaging. It's a given that packages will be abused by the mail carriers, so LP's need to be packaged accordingly! If the seller understands this concept, it's usually a good sign that he/she is a vinyl enthusiast, that they have experience buying records online themselves and they care about customer satisfaction. I have had much better luck with my purchases recently when applying these criteria.

 

My issue with this is that it lets bad sellers continue to misrepresent. If a seller knows that he can grade something NM that is nowhere close and sell it for more and the only risk is that they may have to issue a partial refund occasionally in order to keep the word from getting out that they are a crapoy seller, well the incentive to cheat is there.

I should be able to leave negative feedback even if the seller refunds me any money.

I actually tried to dispute a negative feedback I received for being a "bad buyer" for not contacting a seller first about a NM album that was scratched to hell and back & covered in slime. No response and the meg feedback on me is still there.

 

I've generally had good luck with eBay, and very good luck with Discogs - although I don't do it as often as some who have already posted (dozens per year - not hundreds).

My general rule of thumb is

• forget anything rated less than VG++ (I'm more lenient with Discogs, grading seems more conservative there)
• only buy cheap stuff, and avoid bidding wars
• investigate any seller with less than a 99% rating (or ignore altogether, depending on mood)

Works for me. I've only had to ask for a refund for two items over the past two years (both from eBay, both without any argument).

 

I just started selling on ebay and though I'm with everyone else about being very specific about play grading, cleaning, etc. a lot of buyers really don't care as much as we do here and the most un-audiophile Czech pressing vinyl I regret buying still gets snatched up immediately if people like the music and I price it right. It isn't that hard to achieve 100% feedback if you have any understanding of how records work and are honest but it does take a lot longer to post large quantities of records if you write a novel about the sonics for each side.

 

In my experience this is unlikely to happen. If you return the LP to the seller before giving feedback he/she will more likely call into question you're reasons for doing this when you've already received a full refund or contest the fact that the album was poorly graded in the first place. If you choose not to return the item and leave poor feedback you've got even less of a leg to stand on.

 

My point was leaving retaliatory feedback is considered feedback abuse, and one has a case for having such retaliatories removed. I have been successful with this. But of course it won't always work. It's certainly worth a try, though.

Not sure I agree with that. In fact, I think the opposite is true.

.

 

Partial refunds are big part of Discogs and a major problem because it discourages negative feedback. Some sellers are very generous when offering a a partial refund but it still doesn't escape the fact you've been left with an LP you probably don't want and will at some point replace with a better copy. Other sellers just don't seem to get the fact that the price of vinyl is often reflected by the condition - it's all about condition. They fail to understand the difference in price between a NM and a VG can be quite pronounced (sometimes depending on the title). I once purchased a £50 LP described as NM, played only a couple of times - in fact it was trashed, a -VG/Good at best. It was worth a 1/3 or even 1/4 of the price. He offered me a £10 refund, lol.

 

Yes, I agree Louis. I have tried in the past and failed unfortunately. I guess the seller has to do something pretty stupid/petty to qualify.

I guess what I mean with not returning the item is that might open you up to accusations of trying to scam the seller for a refund. What's your take on that?