Attn: Discogs Sellers overrating records

soundsreal

I hate to be a complainer, and I understand the hustle. But the last 6 records I have bought off Discogs that have been graded VG+ have arrived playing with multiple skips. WTF is this shit? I don't care if its only a $10 dollar record, after I pay for postage from the US to Canada its costing me nearly $20, and the cost of me returning a record to the US with tracking is $22. If a record isn't worth grading correctly then how is it worth selling?
The worst part about this is a seller offering me a discount on the overgrading. I don't keep records that skip, they go directly into the Goodwill bin. So even if I'm offered a $10 record discounted to $1 I'm still paying $9 for basically a piece of garbage, how is this a fair deal? Why is it my responsibility to pay for the seller's mistake?
This has never happened with any record I've paid more than $20 for, so am I wrong in expecting that if the seller can't be bothered to listen to their own product its their own responsibility to take the gamble on the $8 it costs to ship it? Somebody tell me I'm wrong on this. Paypal should implement a policy that if a record is only "visually graded" it is the seller's responsiblity to pay for the return shipping as well as the full refund should they want their piece of crap back, yea or nay?

rrbeats2004

which record?

with a large stock it's not doable to grade nickles and dimes. but seller should double check when shipping out a record.

bull_ox

soundsreal said:

I hate to be a complainer, and I understand the hustle. But the last 6 records I have bought off Discogs that have been graded VG+ have arrived playing with multiple skips. WTF is this shit? I don't care if its only a $10 dollar record, after I pay for postage from the US to Canada its costing me nearly $20, and the cost of me returning a record to the US with tracking is $22. If a record isn't worth grading correctly then how is it worth selling?
The worst part about this is a seller offering me a discount on the overgrading. I don't keep records that skip, they go directly into the Goodwill bin. So even if I'm offered a $10 record discounted to $1 I'm still paying $9 for basically a piece of garbage, how is this a fair deal? Why is it my responsibility to pay for the seller's mistake?
This has never happened with any record I've paid more than $20 for, so am I wrong in expecting that if the seller can't be bothered to listen to their own product its their own responsibility to take the gamble on the $8 it costs to ship it? Somebody tell me I'm wrong on this. Paypal should implement a policy that if a record is only "visually graded" it is the seller's responsiblity to pay for the return shipping as well as the full refund should they want their piece of crap back, yea or nay?

You seem to be indicating the problem is visual grading. If you are having issues with a lot of records that have been accurately visually graded, then my first reaction is to question how worn your stylus is. The reason records are usually only visually graded is because it is unusual for that to be inaccurate.

Burns

I hear a lot this going on in discogs community. Many G+ records being graded VG+ or better. I never had
a problem. Check their history.

herbacios tweed

soundsreal said:

Paypal should implement a policy that if a record is only "visually graded" it is the seller's responsiblity

lol at the idea that Paypal, which isn't even properly integrated with the company that bought it, would change it's policies to cover only one product (out of print records) being sold on a competitor's website challenging a tiny niche market eBay has no interest in defending.

aka you sound poor

soundsreal

Changing to a reserve stylus to check if that's the problem is the first thing I've done when I've gotten a record that skips. The problem pattern has only been specifically with the last 5 records under $20 I've bought from Discogs that have been listed VG+. Records over $20 I haven't had any problem with, records I've bought on private sales, through Ebay or from stores haven't given me any problems at all.

I realize its not practical to listen to every record that gets "listed" but I think it's a mistake to either a) not listen to a record before it actually goes out, b) list and sell a record that is so cheap as to not be worth listening to before sending out, or c) get defensive about their grading ability and assume that the buyer is trying to pull a fast one on them. Even without paying for return postage from Canada the seller still stands to lose the original postage when a record is returned.

I think the answer for me is going to have to be to just stop buying records that the seller can't be bothered listening to on a case by case basis.

soundsreal

herbacios tweed said:

soundsreal said:

Paypal should implement a policy that if a record is only "visually graded" it is the seller's responsiblity

lol at the idea that Paypal, which isn't even properly integrated with the company that bought it, would change it's policies to cover only one product (out of print records) being sold on a competitor's website challenging a tiny niche market eBay has no interest in defending.

aka you sound poor

haha, maybe I sound that way, but its actually more the principle of it that annoys me. Records under $20 are a pretty small percentage of my buying pattern, and I usually write off the loss rather than even bother with the aggravation of dealing with a seller who comes across even poorer. I don't actually expect paypal to change their policy fool, its a hypothetical.

soundsreal

herbacios tweed said:

aka you sound poor

Anyways what if I was poor? Wouldn't that be all the more reason I'd need sellers to check their shit? AKA you sound like a royal douche. I can't help it if not every tune I want isn't expensive.

Kinetic

Need to step up your seller assessment game

b/w

I've had one or two overgraded records on disocgs, but for the most part stuff is better graded than the average ebay purchase. Just depends on who you're buying from.

bluesnag

Weird. I've only just started using Discogs, only 5 buying transactions so far, and I've been happy with every one of them. I guess the only thing you can do is ask the seller if you can return the record, and if they don't let you, try to do a paypal chargeback and leave negative feedback. Leaving negative feedback is key of course, so that other people will be warned.

Anyways, I decided to try Discogs in hopes of finding better graders than on eBay, where I occasionally have overgrading problems. Not the case for me on Discogs thus far, but I guess I've just gotten lucky. But everyone I've bought from have had very very good feedback.

spelunk

Discogs, just like eBay, has a HUGE range of grading accuracy. The difference is that with eBay, you could sense these things based on what template was used, whether the dude could spell, etc. With Discogs, it's masked by the seller not having to do any of that.

As a seller it's a curse and a blessing - lot of wary buyers, and I grade conservatively, so things I grade VG I'm sure get passed up all the time because the average Discogs VG is really rough. But then at the same time, repeat customers are really thankful for accurate grading that they do come back again and again.

LaserWolf

I think sellers should try to make buyers happy.
Sometimes that means taking a hit.

I think buyers should be reasonable in what they expect from sellers.
Sometimes that means taking a hit.

5 vg+ records in a row that skip from 5 different sellers, sounds more like a statistical anomaly than a trend.

As a seller it hurts my business every time someone sells an inarticulacy graded record.
It is bad for all sellers.

If you only want to buy play graded records, then you can't expect to buy $10.00 records.
My own experience is that many records play better than they look. But a true nm record (one that has not been played, or only played a handful of times) is going to be better than one that has 50 spins but sounded good to the seller. So I want my records visually graded.

.02c

The_Non

LaserWolf said:

5 vg+ records in a row that skip from 5 different sellers, sounds more like a statistical anomaly than a trend.

So tomorrow, if 5 separate people on the streets of Portland punched you in the face, you wouldn't start to believe that something is up and/or not go out in the streets for at least a day?

bull_ox

soundsreal said:

Changing to a reserve stylus to check if that's the problem is the first thing I've done when I've gotten a record that skips. The problem pattern has only been specifically with the last 5 records under $20 I've bought from Discogs that have been listed VG+. Records over $20 I haven't had any problem with, records I've bought on private sales, through Ebay or from stores haven't given me any problems at all.

I realize its not practical to listen to every record that gets "listed" but I think it's a mistake to either a) not listen to a record before it actually goes out, b) list and sell a record that is so cheap as to not be worth listening to before sending out, or c) get defensive about their grading ability and assume that the buyer is trying to pull a fast one on them. Even without paying for return postage from Canada the seller still stands to lose the original postage when a record is returned.

I think the answer for me is going to have to be to just stop buying records that the seller can't be bothered listening to on a case by case basis.

You never responded as to whether all the records you're complaining about were actually visually graded correctly. As I already mentioned, this form of grading is correct the vast majority of the time, and if you're consistently having problems I think the problem is not with the grading but that something is going wrong on your end.

If the problem is with sellers grading incorrectly that is entirely different.

gaz

Never buy VG+ albums unless you know the seller
Buy only VG++ / Ex or NM

Improve your betting odds

neil_something

Isn't the real problem that the record grading system is complete bullshit? In my experience VG/VG+ has always meant scuffs, surface noise and light scratches since VG+ actually equates to average or worse.

I will never lose my amazement over a system so idiotic as to grade unplayable records as "Good".

gaz

neil_something said:

Isn't the real problem that the record grading system is complete bullshit? In my experience VG/VG+ has always meant scuffs, surface noise and light scratches since VG+ actually equates to average or worse.

I will never lose my amazement over a system so idiotic as to grade unplayable records as "Good".

I would say that in this "idiotic" grading system were stuck with regarding discogs it is difficult to grade accurately above VG+ as it leaps to NM so I do find myself listing records in discogs as VG+ where they are actually much better but not NM

neil_something

My point isn't so much about mis-grading. As you say above, if you know the seller you tend to have an understanding of how they grade and can buy VG+ with confidence if you know they grade conservatively.

My point is just that it is semantically absurd to label something "good" or "very good" when in reality these labels actually mean "poor" or "below average". Ask a non-record buyer what they would expect to get if they bought a record in "good" condition and I can guarantee it won't include a record with pops or scratches.

gaz

I got your point and am in total agreement , I suppose it came from the fact that if it went

VG+ Pretty worn out noisy
VG Shit
G Dont bother unless you need the cover only

record dealers would sell lot less
need a new grading system 1 to 6 , 2 being VG+

soundsreal

A lot of people makin good sense on here. Someone asked if the records showed up at least looking like they were VG+, out of the 5 you have 5 different answers from 1-clearly the seller was smoking crack to 5-this is an unfortunate instance of where the record mostly looks NM but there's that one spot that skips, and if the record were selling for a higher price, they might have looked closer and caught it.
I think the replies about knowing your dealer, and spending more money both make sense. Its often that the same title will have entries listed at both $10 and $40 from 2 different seller even when graded the same, and I've always wondered why. I guess now I have my answer.

LaserWolf

neil_something said:

Isn't the real problem that the record grading system is complete bullshit? In my experience VG/VG+ has always meant scuffs, surface noise and light scratches since VG+ actually equates to average or worse.

I will never lose my amazement over a system so idiotic as to grade unplayable records as "Good".

I like that discogs states clearly what a vg+ record should look (and sound) like.

Generally worth 50 percent of the Near Mint value. A Very Good Plus record will show some signs that it was played and otherwise handled by a previous owner who took good care of it. Record surfaces may show some signs of wear and may have slight scuffs or very light scratches that don't affect one's listening experiences. Slight warps that do not affect the sound are "OK". The label may have some ring wear or discoloration, but it should be barely noticeable. The center hole will not have been misshapen by repeated play. Picture sleeves and LP inner sleeves will have some slight wear, lightly turned up corners, or a slight seam split. An LP cover may have slight signs of wear also and may be marred by a cut-out hole, indentation or corner indicating it was taken out of print and sold at a discount. In general, if not for a couple things wrong with it, this would be Near Mint. All but the most mint-crazy collectors will find a Very Good Plus record highly acceptable.

Emphasis mine.

All discogs sellers should follow these guidelines or be reported. Sorry.

When not on discogs I use NM/EX/VG with no plus or minus.
My VG was about where discogs VG+ is.

I agree a vg record should be something you would want to own and listen to.

I think in coins and stamps G also means Bad.

LaserWolf

The_Non said:

LaserWolf said:

5 vg+ records in a row that skip from 5 different sellers, sounds more like a statistical anomaly than a trend.

So tomorrow, if 5 separate people on the streets of Portland punched you in the face, you wouldn't start to believe that something is up and/or not go out in the streets for at least a day?

"I do not entertain hypotheticals. I find the real world vexing enough."