bojay1997

You can post that form from now until forever, but I'm not aware of the FBI ever pursuing an individual fraud claim, especially as the result of filing an electronic form. They have bigger fish to fry and the purpose of that form is to report massive scale fraud, scams, malware, etc.. They use those forms to aggregate complaints in the event that they need to pursue massive legal sweeps against crime syndicates, not individual buyers on an auction website. There is also no way Ebay executives would be found culpable of fraud, the same way that the post office isn't liable for mail fraud and the phone company isn't responsible for telemarketing scams. They conduct an investigation of every claim filed and while they overwhelmingly favor buyers, it's not fraudulent to require sellers to refund return shipping, especially since this policy has been disclosed. Moreover, if a buyer is really a bad person, all they need to do is take a hammer and damage whatever you sent them and then ship it back. You'd have no way of ever proving they did anything wrong. That's my point, ultimately most people are good and whether you sell on Ebay or anywhere else, as a seller there is always a chance of being screwed. Paypal offers refunds, credit card companies do and unless someone pays in cash in person, money orders, checks and other forms of payment can always be reversed. Ultimately, if you want to reap the financial rewards of being in resale, you have to be prepared to suffer an occasional loss.

And I think as someone who doesn't sell on Ebay, you have no idea what you're talking about. Under Ebay's policies for a number of years, buyers have been entitled to return items by claiming something as not as described. The only difference now is that the buyer will be reimbursed for return shipping. Considering that buyers could have been engaged in the same kind of fraud you seem so concerned about under the old policy, I doubt there is going to be some surge of new fraud just because people will get their few dollars back for return shipping. Most buyers don't have the time or inclination to open a claim, wait a week for Ebay to take action, repackage an item, drive to the post office, ship the item back and then wait another week or two until the refund is processed. People looking to engage in fraud like switching damaged items for good ones could easily do that now and in certain cases probably do. Similarly, buyers looking to "rent" something through Ebay like a seasonal item were likely not deterred by having to spend a few bucks shipping something back. In short, you're being alarmist about something that will have zero impact on anyone but good buyers who have suffered legitimate losses.

Filing a false criminal complaint is actually a crime in many states. Ebay forcing sellers to pay for returns is not a crime and it's part of the new terms of service. If you don't like it, don't use Ebay to sell things. There are plenty of other options including this very forum. The truth is, like most sellers, you only want what's in your self interest, the largest possible market, the best sales price and no liability, Fortunately, Ebay is finally protecting consumers in the way they should have been all along. Good sellers won't be impacted at all by this change.

There is no option in the condition description for "as is" and hasn't been for many years. There is "non-working/for parts" and "used", but even if you describe something this way, you are still liable and will be forced to accept a return if the buyer says that the item wasn't as described. Frankly, Amazon marketplace is pretty terrible for buyers and I suspect sale prices are far lower there (if things even sell) as I have found as a buyer a significant portion of Amazon marketplace sellers to be pretty dishonest and just won't use them. I know a lot of other people who feel the same way. Amazon will also force you to take a return, although they do limit the number of claims a buyer can file in a certain period of time and generally they don't force the seller to pay return shipping.

Actually, you do have to offer returns if an item is not as described. It doesn't matter what your auction says about returns. That has been Ebay's policy for years. The only difference with this most recent policy change is that if an item is returned as not as described, you as the seller pay return shipping where the buyer used to pay it. Frankly, if you haven't had problems previously, there is no reason to think this new policy will change anything.

But you as the seller chose the shipper, so that issue is between you as the seller and the shipper. The buyer shouldn't suffer a loss because of your poor choice of shipper.

Because as-is is not a condition of sale that Ebay permits, just like it won't permit a no returns/refund policy for items that aren't as described. If you as a seller have an item that you can't back with some form of guarantee, at a minimum that what you picture and describe is what will be delivered, you shouldn't be selling that item on Ebay. Frankly, that's what Craigslist, swap meets, garage sales and other similar outlets are for.

Then how would you have Ebay handle the situation when a buyer gets something that is either not as described or damaged? From my perspective as a heavy buyer on Ebay, it doesn't happen alot, but it does happen from time to time and it's not at all fair that I should have to pay return shipping when the item was either misrepresented or damaged as a result of a seller's bad packaging. Frankly, it's come to the point where Ebay has to choose one side or the other and in this case, I think the buyer should get the benefit of the doubt. You're free to disagree, but as a buyer, I have plenty of other options from Amazon to individual retailer websites to forums and everywhere in between and if Ebay becomes less buyer friendly, that just means I will buy less, especially for items that are available elsewhere.

Ebay already does this to some degree. They do a review of every case that is filed and check the filer's claim history as well as the seller's. Buyers who have a high ratio of returns/refunds to purchases are suspended or warned of suspension. Sellers with excess returns and a relatively low number of sales are similarly suspended or warned.

Yep. It's Sean Kelly's copy, one of the founders of Digital Press, CGE and the Videogame Museum.

Actually, Ebay has added more sellers every year and with every new policy change that has resulted in a far more buyer friendly stance. I predict this will result in fewer bad sellers and more buyers willing to take the risk of buying from Ebay sellers and that prices won't change at all on average.

While I agree that there is room for fraud with this new policy, as someone who buys a lot on Ebay and has dealt with some really bad sellers, I applaud the change. I would also suggest that if an item gets damaged in transit by a forklift, you do have control over it. You chose how to pack the item and typically which carrier to use. USPS gives $50 in insurance with all Priority packages now, so if you are worried, you can simply pay the extra dollar or two to pay for additional insurance and require sellers to use Priority Mail rather than cheaper services. A buyer shouldn't be punished simply because a seller wants to cut corners with packaging or by using a cut rate carrier.

Nope. Like I said, I have seen games with the glue seal come both ways fresh out of the case. It appears that at some point Atari added shrinkwrap to some glue sealed games likely as a result of requests from distributors or just so their stock was delivered in consistent packaging.

I've seen them come directly out of the cases both ways. The bigger box first party stuff with the joystick holders included were always shrinkwrapped as far as I can tell. Similarly, the later release first party stuff was always shrinkwrapped by the factory. I would assume that the first release games that were glue sealed were not factory shrinkwrapped as I have seen several unopened cases of those opened for the first time and the games inside were not shrinkwrapped. I have never seen copies of the two Lucasfilm games in the white boxes with factory shrinkwrap. Part of the problem is that Atari essentially did a relaunch of the 5200 in the late 80s and continued to sell both consoles and new games directly to the public. I would assume that games that were originally just glue sealed could have been rewrapped to be consistent with the later releases.

It's Classic Game Source, so you can never trust their photos. They are a bulk seller that uses stock photos and a lot of what they have is former Telegames UK stock so there are crushed boxes, reseals and all manner of other oddities. I think someone on here got gatefold Mission X copies from them a year or so back, but they ran out of those and started sending non-gatefold as their quantity depleted in prior auctions.

I'd like to know when the last time an NTSC copy of the game new in box sold for $80. Atari2600.com had a new copy posted on their store for like a day two years ago that sold for $100. Prior to that in 2011, they had a new copy for $80 that also sold instantly. The last few new copies I have seen on Ebay on those rare occasions when it shows up have gone for $150+. I agree that a boxed complete copy is not worth $200-$400 or more, but a new copy is probably bumping up into the $150+ range given how many sealed 7800 collectors there are now and the very constrained supply of new NTSC copies on the market.

My issue with your comments is that you seem to be implying that there may be Mean 18 NTSC boxes out there without the stripe or the "Printed in Hong Kong" on the box. You're essentially opening the door to people getting scammed by entertaining the possibility that some variant that has never been proven to exists now exists. It's fine to keep an open mind, but there's just no evidence to support that conclusion and none has surfaced in the 25 years since release. So, until that evidence is provided, I believe it is safe to conclude that no such NTSC variant for Mean 18 exists.

I'm sorry, but you're simply confusing things further. Have you ever seen a single Mean 18 NTSC version without the "new" stripe on the front of the box or the Printed in Hong Kong/Made in China? I have not and based on my years of collecting 7800, I feel very comfortable in concluding that Andre is correct. If you have evidence to the contrary, please present it. Otherwise, you're not helping things.

Gotta agree with Andre on this one. Mitch did say "Nope, first party 7800 games use the same manual and box. No difference between NTSC and PAL". Whether you're talking about the "New" ribbon on front or the "Made In" designation on the back, there are many NTSC 7800 games with outer boxes that are unique from the PAL versions.

While this is true, isn't the presence of a "New" ribbon on the front of the box a safe way to tell on sealed 7800 games? I don't believe PAL copies ever came this way as every complete and sealed PAL copy I have ever seen of Mean 18 does not have a new ribbon on the front.

Jack Berg has been around for many years, but they have sold most of their merchandise and what's left is in pretty crappy shape. In fact, someone from a hi-fi collector site I sometimes visit took a trip to their warehouse a while back and posted pictures of how they store stuff. Stacks of dented cartons piled up on the floor and water leaks and dirt/dust everywhere. In any event, I had mixed luck with them even 15 years ago when they were selling games on Ebay. Some items were perfect, others looked like they got run over by a truck. I doubt they have much of interest left and as others said, most of the games they have listed can be readily purchased on Ebay for the same or less.

Pretty sure this was already done years ago. I don't know that the display turned up, but several headsets and other components were given to a couple of collectors who contacted Virtuality. http://jagcube.atari.org/jaguarvr.html

To be honest with you, putting a soft box inside a metal box where there is any chance at all it can shift around is a huge mistake. I can't really tell, but if that SNES box can possibly strike the inside of the metal box, it may dent and damage the SNES box. Also, if you went through Ebay, they will still find in favor of the buyer. Ebay policy requires that the item be delivered in the same condition as described and they won't accept USPS did the damage as an excuse, even if you provide video or photos of good packing.

I don't know if I'd be so confident of priority mail boxes being a safe shipping alternative. They have become very thin recently and I have actually had items shipped to me in them with interior padding where the box was crushed in and the item was damaged. It seems to be happening on a regular basis so I suspect in an effort to combat all the free box misuse, they went cheap on the construction and legitimate users are paying the price.

While this is undoubtedly true, I still find it shocking when I purchase a very expensive item and receive the most minimal of packaging. I bought an item for several hundred dollars a few weeks back and the seller literally just took brown paper wrap and some tape and sent it off as is. This despite the fact that I asked and offered to pay any costs associated with a box and proper padding. The seller ignored me, shipped it his way and ended up eating postage both ways and receiving a badly damaged item back. I mean, what's the logic in gambling on the post office and trying to save a few bucks in fees and postage when you're selling an item for far more than you paid for it initially to someone you know cares about condition?