I don’t know how long you’ll be able to access this page at ebay, but you should really check it out since it’s one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen on an auction.
You have to read all the commentary from the guy through to the bottom as he does a not-so-slow burn. It helps if you imagine Daffy Duck’s voice as his frustration mounts.
Thanks to Brandy Hauman for pointing this one out.
PAD
• 
It’s obvious none of you are Beanie Baby collectors. There are many, just as there are many coin collectors etc. The value lies in finding the rare and AUTHENTIC Beanie. Several offered in this auction were rare if real. There were only about 1000 of the talked about Royal Blue Peanut made by Ty Inc. The buyer believed the story told that they were mostly purchased at Hallmarks and other authorized retailers and that he was selling his x-wife’s Beanies. Well, he’s not even divorced. If he didn’t know they were fake then why lie about the origin of them? Why lie about even having a wife? He had impecible feedback so she took a chance. It’s ILLEGAL to sell counterfeits of copyrighted items and against eBay rules. It’s the seller’s obligation to know according to eBay rules. If you all think it’s fine to not follow eBay rules and the law then I hope you are not disappointed if you buy a collectible on eBay that is not authentic. While many think Beanie Babies are funny because they are stuffed animals the serious collector does not find it funny to buy fakes, worth 10 cents when they pay for real stuff. Yes, I agree the auction was hilarious. A hilarious crime is still a crime. Taking a stupid chance in buying anything does not justify the illegal selling by a collectible dealer of fake collectibles. Think about it. Would you find it so funny if the seller was offering counterfeit coins? Counterfeit Prada bags?
DJ
DJ, what planet are you from and do you think you’re still on it? You are speculating the man was lying. What proof do you have? No one is saying for sure he was completely honest, but we must occasionally give the benefit of the doubt. Personally, I think anyone who states flat out their uncertainty of a genuine article should be given some credit (the rule against such a thing should be removed if someone points out s/he is unsure, if you ask me) and, as someone reiterated above, “let the buyer beware”. If anyone was dishonest, it was she who uses several names to sidestep being blocked (and why should anyone believe her statement of “authenticity” allegedly made by a third party?), yet you choose to believe the wrong person. And what does not being divorced have anything to do with it?
“If you all think it’s fine to not follow eBay rules and the law…” Now where did you get that from? In spite of my opinion, I don’t think anyone here is going to go to that extreme. I do hope that something positive results from this in favor of the sellers. Then again, I hope the winner of next year’s election gets to be president.
As a comic and music collector, I would never look down upon anyone who collects things, having been the victim of ridicule myself over the years, and if anyone here thinks collecting Beanie Babies or anything else in life is “funny” that person is a hypocrite. But nowhere here has anyone stated such a thing, so please don’t make assumptions. I’m surprised you didn’t type “counterfeit comic books”.
“Taking a stupid chance in buying anything does not justify the illegal selling by a collectible dealer of fake collectibles.” You said it yourself. If it’s stupid, it justifies it. I’ve known that from experience. The wrong decision was made. The potential bidder should have contacted eBay right away.
WSJournal OpinionJournal 11/4
“There is yet another installment in the saga of thedrunkensailor and his Beanie Babies, stuffed animals purportedly left by his ex-wife. It appears the sailor may have taken some liberties with the truth when he sold the toys. The South Florida Sun-Sentinel’s Ralph De La Cruz reports: . . . .Steve, 32, and wife Mary, 28, found the box when they packed to move from . . .” In the original story, Steve admitted to being happily married. It made a good story but auction guidelines say listings are to be factual.
So what is wrong with taking a chance if one can afford to do it? It was MY money and not my husband’s — to the poster who suggested it might have been my husband’s money. Sexist remark, wot?
The basis was there to take a chance: 500 positive feedback with no negatives; impressive ME Page; contact information which was verifiable. There was nothing to indicate he spent most of his time drinking beerand might have forgotten he had a wife.
Oh, and I also take chances playing poker, and I buy Powerball tickets weekly.
Nothing alters the fact of the illegality of selling counterfeits, albeit disguised in a clever and humorous listing. Usually these sellers are easily picked out because (1) my kid needs tuition money, (2) my car broke down, (3) my wife or girlfriend had a baby, (4) I lost my job, ad nauseam. Steve’s listing was a few notches above those. Anyone with 1000 beanies who made weekly trips to Hallmark and another store had a darn good inkling of the value. The five rare beanies did not come from a Hallmark. I’d bet my last dollar on that. I suspect he got them from a shyster at a flea market when he and Mary were looking for other collectibles or from another scammer on eBay. Notice I said “I suspect” and didn’t say “he did.”
The third party who does my authenticating is Peggy Gallagher who is TY’s only recognized authenticator. TY is the owner of the trademark.
Geez, you guys sure do a lot of guess work in an effort to read other people’s minds. None of you has been very good at reading mine.
And by the way, “several” commonly is used in English to mean more than two. I used TWO ID’s to bid — unaware of the eBay rule but not an excuse. If I err, I admit it and don’t make excuses. Of course, “several” embelished the story.
Good nite y’all. You are really not bad folks. I enjoy your posts. In a few days there will be a new topic/person to disect.
As more information comes out, I don’t see where anybody is innocent here. Taisha bought goods that she felt were phony and almost everything Drunken Sailor put in his ad turned out to be false.
Taisha, you claim that you were just taking a chance, just like poker or any other gamble, but you clearly stated that you felt they were phoney and bought anyhow, that is not taking a chance, it is more like not using your brain. You only have yourself to blame for buying false goods that you knew were false goods.
As for the second ID, you claimed to know eBay rules and regs when you emailed Drunken Sailor, but you claim ignorance about the no second ID rules. Your honesty would be very questionable in this circumstance.
I see no real injured party here, just a couple of dishonest people, one who was funny and one who complains because of the decision that she made.
Yeah, I have to admit I was a jerk; however, please reread what I have always said. When I first saw the auction I was doubtful — simply because there are so many sellers with zany fabricated stories selling hard-to-finds on eBay. Several of us discussed TDS’s auction before I decided to bid. When I looked at the 500 pefect feedback, his ME Page, and was able to verify his contact information, I thought I just might be missing out on the real thing if the rest of his story was truthful and I didn’t bid. He portrayed himself as an angry man whose wife had given him the boot. I am well aware that omestic relations can be ugly and mean — and spiteful. I had missed out on a RBP a month before with a newbie beanie seller on eBay. The beanie turned out to be genuine.
The “how to” people recommend asking questions BEFORE PAYING if there is a doubt. I did, and asked the date on a tag. Had he told me that date, I would have known the beanie was a fake. For that kind of money it seemed to me to be a reasonable and innocuous question. Instead of answering, he sent me an abrasive eMail — which is his style when not talking about quaffing beer.
I guess my reputation on eBay meant more to me than my money and I went ahead. I readily admit not showing much sense by paying. But think about it in this vein: had I not won the auction, someone else bidding behind me would have won and been stuck with counterfeits.
SOMEONE was going to buy counterfeits.
Looking at the bidding history, it is now obvious to me and several others that there was a tad bit of shill bidding going on. One bidder was suspended last I looked a couple of weeks go.
If you want to consider me dishonest, fine, but I am pleased that you are no longer dumping the entire load on me. TDS apparently had his price at which he would turn to making a dishonest buck. If I was dishonest I hurt nobody but myself.
I won’t bore you with more posts. Thanks for permitting me to say a bit about what led to my stupidity.
Incidentally, I still have not found the second ID rule. I have said several times that not knowing was my fault and it was not an excuse.
jonny