I just won a beta MOX JET for $75 US!

[Jakolanten]

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll ... RK:MEWN:IT

Hi everyone. On Australian ebay recently I won a lot of 600+ cards, and apparently a Beta Mox Jet. All sounds fair enough except that the finishing price was $99.00 Australian or about $75 US dollars!

I really think it may be a scam and I was wondering if Im the luckiest person alive and I should just pay or if Ill pay and never receive the cards.

Im relatively new to ebay and I was wondering if with the payment methods he likes, if theres any way of me getting my money back if the cards don’t arrive.

Please post any tips and suggestions for what I should do and quick! He probably wants to get the deal finalised soon.

Sorry if the message doesnt really make sense, just tell me what you would do in my position. ???

[Celebrindor]

His only negative feedback is from a seller.  Also, its not as if you got it for pennies - it was a no reserve auction, and not terribly many people bid - it happens.  

On the other hand, while not terrible, his feedback isnt high either, and he hasnt even been active for over 3 months.  Also, the payment methods are very suspect - the type of thing you'll never be able to recover.

Try to see if he will allow you to pay via a more secure method, preferably paypal.  Otherwise, I would be very, very cautious of this.  (though it would be amazing deal if real).

[Jakolanten]

Thanks for your speedy reply celebrindor. Ill email him and ask if he will except paypal. I really hope I can get this worked out!

[silver.paladin]

My answer to this - Do not expect to receive the Mox.  Nowhere in the auction details does he say the Mox is part of the deal - rather, it is "selling here a random lot of 600+ magic cards from many sets with Lots of Rares and Uncommons from my collection"
Often people will use a prime card, such as Moxen to entice, and try to increase the value of the auction.
If you win this auction, and you do get 600+ cards, including a number of Us and Rs, then that is what you agreed to purchase in this auction.  If you do not get a Mox, well, that is too bad, as a Mox is not stated as being in this batch of cards.
Unfortunately, I think you paid high, but who knows, you may get book value of $75 US.  And if you do get a bunch of miscellaneous cards, you would still owe a postive feedback, unless there is some other reason why positive is not deserved.
So, this is a type of scam auction, but as long as you get the 600+ cards, you did not get scammed.  You will probably only get what the description states.

p.s.  If you do get a Mox, congrats.  I would not expect it, but if you do, then you did come up with a good deal.

[Celebrindor]

One thing I forgot to mention.  The Mox is graded, and there is a number on the PSA label.  Anyone care to look it up, get some info on it?

[flatmatt]

Yeah, I already looked that up, the record is for a PSA 9 Beta Mox Jet, the number being 30869477.

[hammr7]

On these types of scams, no assurance that the seller even owns the mox jet.  He might try to argue he borrowed the artwork from some other auction to show potential customers the type of cards (i.e. magic instead of pokemon or yu-gi-oh) he was offering.

His auction clearly states that you are getting a 600+ lot of cards, and he implies that you might get one or more of the types of older or rarer cards that he has.  Nowhere does he claim that he only has 600+ cards, or that you will definitely get even one of the listed cards.  Even if you didn't get any rares or uncommons, he could argue that his collection is mostly commons (like most larger collections) and that you were simply unlucky in "your" random lot.  As for the value, most commons have a high Scrye value of $0.25, so 600+ cards would be worth $75.00+.  Of course they aren't, but he has an iron-clad response if what you get is junk.  Hope that he actually does send something of value, but don't hope too much.

[Jakolanten]

Thanks to everyone who replied. I agree that the top paragraph of his description is very misleading. I have just emailed him asking if he accept paypal and asking "do I recieve the pictured card"

Ill keep you posted.

[Celebrindor]

Yeah, I already looked that up, the record is for a PSA 9 Beta Mox Jet, the number being 30869477.

A '9', eh?  Looks like an '8' in the pic, doesnt it?

[mintcollector]

If I had to guess, you just paid $75.00 for a 600+ card repacks.  To be specific, he used the term random which means any 600 cards from his collection.  

Some sellers tend to steal artwork from other auctions (which I wish they would make illegal), but some people try to use the argument they do not have a scanner available.

Other aspects if the auction:  no insurance is offered.  This could be one of those...oops, lost in the mail scenarios.  I use a rule that I will insure any auction $50 or more.  If the seller will not offer it, then I will not bid.  Also the accepted forms of payment are in question.  The forms allowed allow you to not recover any funds.  Also do not expect the seller to allow you to pay via PayPal.  His forms of payments he accepts were clearly listed and he can hold you to those terms.  Also as a heads up, that since he is Australian, and if you are not, you will need to send an international money order instead of a domestic one.  These are typically more expensive ($3.00 locally here).  If you send him a US postal money order, he will be unable to cash it easily if at all.  Direct bank transfers are usually costly to make, I think around $20 if I recall as I have not had to do one in quote some time.  

Future advice:  Carefully read any auctions listed.  If it seems too good to be true, then read it very carefully.  There are scammers out there who will take you for a lot of money and send you shoddy winnings.  

Even if the seller does own the listed Mox then I would not expect to get it regardless.  He for example could split his collection into 2 parts.  One pile of cards worth selling, then the other of crappy rares and the like.  He can simply take 600 cards from the crappy split and this satisfies the listed term of random from his collection.  I would not expect to even receive $75 worth of cards.

I wish you luck as I doubt you will get anything worthwhile.  Don't feel bad as since you are new to eBay, you just were unlucky to stumble across one of the eBay predators.  Most of eBay is a great place you can get stuff you may not find locally and will speed your collection up greatly.  Even if this does not work out, stick with it, but just bid more wisely in the future.

[AXIOS]

magic ebay scam word "RANDOM"

nowhere in the world will there be a chance you get the mox, forget it.
on the paying note, you HAVE to pay.
by bidding on this object you have made a binding contract, the seller has to sell his RANDOM card lot and you HAVE to pay for the RANDOM card lot.


bad luck for you, sorry

[ende73]

Obviously you will get 600 crap cards I'm afraid  :-[

However I am not convinced you have to pay.

Of course bidding means entering into a binding contract, but the picture used on this auction is deceiptful and grossly misrepresenting fo what is being actually sold.

If the seller wanted to sell 600 random cards, he could have avoided including a picture or rather include a picture of "600 random Magic cards"  [smiley=idea.gif]

I am quite sure Ebay would agree with this argumentation if called to decide upon a non-paying bidder claim.

It would be really helpful if all these "Ebay predators" out there (I like this definition) were actually penalized for their deeds...

[silver.paladin]

Obviously you will get 600 crap cards I'm afraid  :-[

However I am not convinced you have to pay.

Of course bidding means entering into a binding contract, but the picture used on this auction is deceiptful and grossly misrepresenting fo what is being actually sold.

If the seller wanted to sell 600 random cards, he could have avoided including a picture or rather include a picture of "600 random Magic cards"  [smiley=idea.gif]

I am quite sure Ebay would agree with this argumentation if called to decide upon a non-paying bidder claim.

It would be really helpful if all these "Ebay predators" out there (I like this definition) were actually penalized for their deeds...

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you.  He will have to PAY for this auction.  The seller did not do anything wrong, unethical perhaps (open for debate) but nothing wrong.  He clearly stated a lot of Random items.
How do you take a picture of random items? If you take a picture of 'random' items, then obviously it is not completely random, if you expect to get what you see.
The picture is strictly an attraction item - and Ebay supports the idea of adding a picture to your auction, as pictures help enhance the sell-ability of an auction.

There is no reason why a non-bidder claim should be made in this auction.  If anything, this is just a learning curve, unfortunately a somewhat expensive learning curve (if $75USD is expensive to the auction winner).

Everybody makes mistakes in learning Ebay, some mistakes are just more costlier than others.

[ende73]

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you.  He will have to PAY for this auction.  The seller did not do anything wrong, unethical perhaps (open for debate) but nothing wrong.  He clearly stated a lot of Random items.
How do you take a picture of random items? If you take a picture of 'random' items, then obviously it is not completely random, if you expect to get what you see.
The picture is strictly an attraction item - and Ebay supports the idea of adding a picture to your auction, as pictures help enhance the sell-ability of an auction.

There is no reason why a non-bidder claim should be made in this auction.  If anything, this is just a learning curve, unfortunately a somewhat expensive learning curve (if $75USD is expensive to the auction winner).

Everybody makes mistakes in learning Ebay, some mistakes are just more costlier than others.

You reply is very interesting and well written, silver.paladin.

However, I think this Topic is relevant enough to push this debate further.

Let me set an extreme example which, though probably most unlikely in real life, will serve to illustrate my way of thinking.

Suppose I put an Ebay auction using the scan of a Blue Hurricane (Summer Magic Edgar 1994), describing the item as follows:

"Up for auction is a Hurricane card from Magic the Gathering, coming from the English Revised set that was released in 1994. This card is in NM condition according to Scrye guide".

Suppose I then "forgot" to answer all the hundreds of questions I'd probably get.

It is most likely that this auction would finally fetch something more than $1, giving me an undue profit on the sale of a perfectly normal Revised Hurricane.

Of course my item description is perfetcly true (nowhere do I state this item is extra-rare or comes from the Summer Magic or Edgar printing), but the picture I use is grossly misleading and completely misrepresents the actual item for sale.

As I said this example is completely extreme and far-fteched, but my question is: If I did just that, would the winning bidder have to pay me? Would Ebay.com enforce that contract when provided with all relevant info and called upon to make a decision? I strongly doubt it.

In this specific case, if this seller wanted to offer 600+ random Magic cards he should have avoided to include the picture of a PSA graded Beta Mox Jet.
"600 random cards" can be easily enough depicted by taking a photograph of a box containing a row of that quantity of MTG cards, just showing the back of the first one.

The very fact an Ebay newbie admits having been deceived by this description, and paid more for this item simply because of its misleading picture, implies (imho) that this auction was a violation of Ebay policies, as well as of all ethical trading standards.

[mintcollector]

Where is this a violation of policy?  You cannot make such a statement without providing proof.  As far as images are concerned there are no rules or policy I can find in regards to this.  I did find a listing on image theft I was unaware of:

http://pages.ebay.com/help/confidence/v ... theft.html

There also rules regarding adult oriented listings and if you really wnat to stretch things, copyright infringement.  I spent quite a bit of time searching eBay for any reference for or against having an image not related to what is actually being sold.  Believe it or not, there is none.  Your Blue  Hurricane example trumping up a revised one is techinically legal by current policy.  Under handed imo, but legal nonetheless.  

silver.paladin is correct, Jakolanten will be required to pay, and as I said before can be held to pay by the methods listed.

If I am wrong, then please prove me so.  Just because you feel something is not right, does not make it a violation of policy.  I challenge you to show me your reference as to why this is a violation of policy.