Discussion in 'Marketplace Discussions' started by glamorbowie1, May 10, 2021.
I'm referring to the turntable and cart. My mistake if that was not quite clear.
I have a new Discogs horror story that just happened minutes ago. How's this for a 'VG+' sleeve? Oh, I don't think so. I promptly emailed the seller and said this was grossly over-graded and I expect a 50% refund. Don't people have the slightest bit of conscience until they are called out? I would never have purchased something that looks like this, even for $5. So the fact that I'm only asking for a half price refund is very generous on my part:
Would that be a VG sleeve?
The goldmine guide is highly subjective. Is that "ring wear to the point of distraction" or not - it doesn't distract me. So this is a VG+ sleeve. It also doesn't appear to have side splitting on all 3 sides.
VG to me as long as the seams aren't split. But it is borderline VG+ by the rules.
All I can say is there must be a lot of buyers out there who think Near Mint equals covered in hairline scratches, because otherwise I can’t understand why some large quantity sellers with high feedback scores continue to list records as NM when they’re clearly not.
I have lost count of the number of transactions I’ve had where the “Near Mint” record I bought from a seller with 99.9%+ positive feedback turned out to be VG+ or even VG. I figure at this point that it must be worth their while to take a hit every so often from buyers like me, for the number of mediocre records they manage to shift without anyone complaining.
I had one just last week and ended up asking
“Is it possible you sent me the wrong copy? You listed it as NM/NM and said it was never played, but the record is covered in marks, the labels are covered in spindle trails, the inner sleeve is mouldy and the outer sleeve has numerous creases on it...”
And of course then I got the “oh yes I must have sold that copy and sent you the other one I had, apologies” and a 50% refund. And now I’ve got another VG/VG+ copy of a common record I’ve already had 3 of in that condition.
But I get it... it gets that mediocre copy out of their inventory. How are they going to manage that if they list it correctly?
I would never, ever consider anything in this poor shape to be VG+ on any level, and that's with 40 years of experience. If any of you who feel it is sell on Discogs, feel free to share your seller name so I can make sure to accept your listings accordingly. To me, this is absolutely misgraded, seam splits or not. That amount of ringwear and general scuffing squeaks in at VG.
Because, as in this case, the requested partial refund prevents me from leaving feedback. So it appears I'm part of the problem but it's not the first time I've been given a refund or partial in exchange for keeping my feedback to myself. I have seen negative feedback where the seller responds with something like "I gave you a refund, so why the negative?"
The above post by livingforever ( post #107)is absolutely on point. My quote is from a few days ago. I stand by what I said.
As livingforever is across the pond, how many times does he receive product that is two grades off until he gets the point that he will not buy lp's except for his own local shop and/or the area record shows (sorry lf--fairs) Postage has gotten stupidly expensive these days and the recipient doesn't want to continuously get soaked on added costs. I don't blame him for being upset. I've been friends with a guy for nearly 40 years and he finally threw in the towel regarding collecting vinyl, getting tired of the same issue livingforever has right now.
That's one good thing, among several things about the shows. You can see what you're getting. I frequently buy on Amazon, Discogs, SHMF, and E-bay. I don't sell other than doing consignment with a couple dealers/friends. If you see good presentation, accurate grading, and a personable dealer you are going to do ok, all things considered. and I've done enough shows in enough states to know who does a good job at the shows regarding these observations. Fortunately shows are slowly but surely opening up, will be a while for me to attend them but when I do I will splurge on deals.
Because the feedback system is broken. If the item is not as described leave negative. That is the only way the feedback system will work. I am guilty of this also if they refund I do not leave negative. Perhaps I should leave neutral. Until then it will always be broken.
If I had a record that looked like that, I wouldn’t even keep it in the garage...
You’re right , and of course I’ve done the same. “Oh, they gave me a partial refund, it would be rude to leave a negative.”
This last time I left a positive that said the item was overgraded but that the seller dealt with it quickly. Not good enough, I know, I need to get braver. At least on Discogs you have separate buyer and seller ratings so if someone trashes your buyer rating you can still sell without problem...
I have started now to send messages to sellers questioning them on their items, that way I figure that if they don’t reply I can just avoid them.
Had a good success recently by asking someone if a record was truly Near Mint because I already had a couple of VG+ Copies and was looking for the final one - they went and checked it under bright light and said they couldn’t see any marks at all except one tiny spindle mark on the label - sure enough it arrived and it plays like the day it was bought.
I also think avoiding some of the massive-volume sellers might be a good plan.
Hey, you're learning!
Now, you just need to return the crap you're sold instead of accepting a partial refund.
I'm sending back an original UK press of Van Der Graaf Generator's H to He Who Am the Only One to a seller who listed the LP as NM. Thankfully, it's been a smooth transaction as the seller already refunded my money and I'll be mailing the LP back to him today. Anyway, the LP didn't look NM to me, maybe VG+ with quite a few hairlines. He listed the album cover as VG+, but it looked as bad, as that Last American Virgin soundtrack. But I wouldn't have complained too much about the cover if the LP played well. Anyway, it was an expensive LP and it was really, really noisy to the point of being unlistenable halfway through side two. I just don't understand why a seller will ask for a lot of money without at least play grading it first. To me, it would eliminate a lot of headaches for all parties involved.
I do the same thing and avoid sellers that don't respond. Even with that step, I have received numerous records that were overgraded. One double LP that was listed as near mint was covered in hairlines and audible clicks and pops during the music, very loud distortion in between songs. I emailed the seller and he told me his $60,000 turntable plays with LPs without issue and that my stylus must not be square. I also bought a VG+ Gaucho from this seller, it was Good+ at best, audible distortion while the music was playing, covered scratches. He ultimately refunded my money, but not without some back and forth over his experience with the same LPs. I saw where he re-listed the albums one grade lower, which is still loverly optimistic.
I've bought maybe 100+ records from Discogs over the years and have had only two bad experiences.
One was a typical example of a seller extremely overgrading the record and also completely whiffing on which pressing it was - kind of a big deal with Blue Note records. To make matters worse he lied about when he actually mailed it - a week after payment I asked him if he had mailed the thing, and he told me he figured it must be halfway to the destination by now. The package a few day later finally showed up in the USPS tracking system as "label created." Woof.
But the worst experience I had kind of warns against leaving people "neutral" ratings. I bought a $6 "NM" classical music record from a seller - not exactly the big leagues and not even something I hotly desired. It was just something that piqued my curiosity after hearing a bit of it on the radio.
The seller took forever - and I mean forever - getting it to me. After a couple of weeks I chimed in to ask if he had sent it yet - I figured it wasn't a huge sale for him and not something I was anxiously awaiting, so I gave him more time to get it out the door than I usually would have. He replied that he sent it but it had just recently returned to him because of a label error. Ok, fine, it happens.
Then another few weeks go by and nada. This time he tells me he just plain forget to send it out. A few more weeks go by and nothing. Finally, a full two months after the order, the record shows up - absolutely covered in scratches. It was one of the noisiest records I ever heard. I complained to the seller that far from NM it was nigh near unlistenable, and he apologized and said he'd refund the money.
So I left a neutral rating. Didn't write much, just said record was not in advertised condition but seller refunded the money.
The seller then gave me a "bad" rating with the review, "Buyer got the album for free and he STILL complained!!!"
To this day that's the only bad review I have, either buy- or sell-side. It's enough to knock my overall grade to something like 98%, however, which sucks.
What Discogs needs is a rating system closer to what eBay has. On eBay you can leave positive, negative or neutral feedback but also grade the seller on how accurate the description of the item was, quality of communication, speed at which they mailed the item...that would be better than just the three current options as you could leave a positive or neutral feedback (assuming you were happy with the way the seller dealt with the problem) but still knock them for how well they described the album. I look at those ratings on eBay often.
I will only send items back if the seller pays for return shipping. Why should I be out of any money if it was there fault for miss representing the item.
As mentioned regularly in this thread and elsewhere, PayPal has a refund program to reimburse shipping costs back to buyers.
Really did not know that. Thanks To be honest I did not read the entire thread.
I would grade that G+.
My latest horror story is I ordered a NM/NM UK pressing. The LP I received at a quick glance looks NM but if you inspect closer it's got some mild hairlines, ok fine. Upon first play it I got a pfft, pfft, pfft for the 1st half of each side. A close inspection reveals this is either a pressing flaw OR one side of the LP was exposed to heat which cause some mild warping. My needle moves towards the center each time it hits this spot like the groove has been warped inward.
I informed the seller and I get: My gear isn't setup right, my gear sucks, all the pressings are like this, pressings aren't supposed to be perfect, this isn't an audiophile release, His friend works for the largest pressing plant in Germany and he fwd'd the audio clip to him for review and he says it sounds fine, I'm stupid for buying it, I need to buy a cheaper turntable to play it on.
I requested a 50% refund and I keep the LP and got "you're stealing food from my kids mouth" routine...
He offered me to send the LP back for a full refund but prefaced it with all kinds of warnings like if it looks like this or that he won't refund me. So I decided to just keep it. There's no way I'm sending this back to him only to get stiffed again. It's at this point you just have to cut your losses and be done with it.
I don't understand how this
[MOD - PLEASE READ FORUM RULES BEFORE POSTING INFORMATION SUCH AS THIS _ THANKS]
has a 99.7% pos feedback. I even told him he's the most cantacorous a** I've ever dealt with on Discogs. It's the worst after the sale customer service experience I've had with anyone in a long while. Easily top 5 worst discog experiences. I'm very close to saying goodbye to discogs as I've pretty much got what I want at this point.
No way that's VG+. I agree you could call it VG and be within the guidelines. But I'd probably call it VG- so that there was no disappointment from the buyer.
The problem mostly is that there are now idiots who know nothing about records or about record grading looking for a quick buck on Discogs. Everything is M- to them.
Separate names with a comma.