mbassoc2003 wrote:

harami2000 wrote:

mbassoc2003 wrote:So if you're goint to spend $1500+ on a mint digest book, how are you going to confirm its real? Or is the chance to read it worth $1500 alone?

Hey, remember the $200 OCE context from the last time you quoted that, Ian!

I don't remember, but at least with OCEs you can compare like with like relatively easily.

Heh. And I thought you were just being "tongue in cheek" last time, guru.

Oops, wrong mod!

mbassoc2003 wrote:In years to come, we'll look back and think 'I remember when you could get an orange B3 for $1500, and OCE sets were $200 a pop!'

Most of the reason I avoid mint copies of toruneys is the counterfeit possibility. Even if it comes from a reputable seller, there is no way to know if the person HE got it from was legit. Same as STD's.

It must be fairly hard to counterfiet a toruney that is run off on a dot matrix, unless you have easy access to the equipment, and the time and software to typeset it. Its not something you can really do on your home PC or local copy shop.

So I'd feel safe bidding on dot matrix toruney, but not necessarily the photocopied ones.

well it doesnt instil me with any form of confidence at all

think i will save my money and see what i can try and catch in stormy's next load of auctions, which is always fun

afoolandhis$ wrote:Yeah, it's a bit of a dilemma. Whether to blow it all now, or wait for Paul's auctions. At least he's doing us the favor of letting us know before the first Fazzle auction ends.

As for the Philly bidder...think about it.

well at least you know where the stuff is coming from so its better really and the stuff is more interesting and its a real fisticuffs between all the collectors which is great to watch and take part in

bclarkie wrote:Ian, Maxwell is from Washington State, and Creep is from Missouri. Another thing I dont like are the people f*cking around in the questions with "Hi, jonb here" and the other person using my name. I suspect that someone reading this forum is really trying to mess with us now in an attempt at hoping to pick it up on the cheap. I have a pretty good suspicion I know who it is, and its not jonb.

Brian ... I am sure there a few people named Brian in the US  :wink:  Maybe even some of the play / collect D&D stuff.  :wink:  :wink:

bclarkie wrote:

improvstone wrote:
Brian ... I am sure there a few people named Brian in the US Maybe even some of the play / collect D&D stuff.

No doubt.  I just don't like the coincidences that seem to be piling up on this auction, thats all.

bri reminds me of the mel gibson character in conspiracy theory

bet he has filing cabinets full of stuff he keeps cross-referencing

improvstone wrote:
2. The price has not reached a point where I believe the zero bidder is having any real effect on the final price.

Agree there. My name may in fact be a coincidence, the jonb comment is not however. That is a deliberate attempt to scare people from here away from bidding on it. That to me means that whoever asked that question either is a member of this forum or is at least more than a casual browser. Nothing like taking advantage of the fact that we are already a little bit leary of the Zero feedback newbie bidder who has been on EBay for 4 years and no feedback seemingly trying to jack up the bid and then to blatanly ask that inflamtory question to get people even more leery. I have my suspicions as to who did it, but I have asked him regardless. I also question the fact that it seems to me that the nebie with the $860.00 bid does not seem to have found the other Fazzle auction with a bid currently sitting at $560 to his satisfaction. Think about this, lumberjacques scan is absolutely horrible, it almost makes it look fake. Then look at the pictures of the other Fazzle that I am currently leading on. There are multiple picture, big and bright, much more attractive to particulary a newbie bidder who is not supposed to know the source of the current one is reliable. If you were really a newbie, compare both auctions without knowing the sellers and which one would you be most likely to bid on....

afoolandhis$ wrote:

bclarkie wrote: Think about this, lumberjacques scan is absolutely horrible, it almost makes it look fake. Then look at the pictures of the other Fazzle that I am currently leading on. There are multiple picture, big and bright, much more attractive to particulary a newbie bidder who is not supposed to know the source of the current one is reliable. If you were really a newbie, compare both auctions without knowing the sellers and which one would you be most likely to bid on....

I'm not sure I follow you here, Brian.

Are you saying it's being shilled, yet the question from "Jonb" was meant to scare us off?

Well, it is possibly being shilled, but yes that jonb comment was definitely meant to scare off potential bidders, particularly from here. Only someone with extensive knowledge of the most recent jonb incarnation would know to ask that question. That was done by someone with the knowledge that it would be picked up by the forum members here. My point is that whether or not that zero feedback bidder is legit or not, whoever asked the jonb situation knows that most of us are very leery of the zero feedback bidder. The very publicv attention that this zero feedback bidder has gotten here already got people on edge and that jonb question is without a doubt an attempt to further attempt to make the mebers here paranoid. The thing with shilling is, that shilling only works for a seller if the shill bid ends up not being the highest bid. So with that the shill has to be be careful not to take too large of a lead on the auction and to slowly jack the price up, because if he does get to far up, he might just end up winning the auction, which is the worst case scenario for a seller. The seller obviously doesn't want to sell this item to himself as there is no profit on that. I will be the first to admit, that I am obviously not 100% that the zero feedback bidder is a shill or not. I am however totally sure that the jonb question was meant with only one intention in mind and that was to put everyone here futher on edge. WIth that in mind with the auction is where it stands, the likelyhood of that bidder on top if he is in fact a fake bid increasing his bid is nil. Someone who knows that fols are leary of the shill bid can try take advantage of the reluctance of legit bidders to come in with a high enough snipe to take advantage of the other bidders not bidding, but still getting the item much cheaper than if everyone who is interested in bidding backs off. See the problem.