What would you do - mislabeled jersey purchased through charity auction

[paul457]

Recently I purchased a signed St Patrick's day jersey through MLB Auctions, which was selling these jerseys for a team's charity. The jersey was listed as a game used jersey but the MLB COA # was not in the listing.

When I received the jersey I looked up the MLB COA # and the jersey is certified as a game issued jersey. I called the charity and asked about the cert and was told that the player didn't play that day, but he wore it in the dugout, so it should technically be certified as a game used jersey (I don't necessarily agree, but that's not really the point of this post). He said the player left early that day so his jersey was authenticated at a different time than the other jerseys, which is likely why it was certified as issued...

Cliff notes: Bought a 'game used' jersey through charity auction, the jersey never saw game action, and is listed in the MLB database as 'issued'.

So now I'm in a position because my bids and price paid waere based off of the jersey being a game used jersey. And I feel bad internally about making a stink about this to a charity... but this wasn't a cheap jersey, and I feel like I paid much more than I would have if the auction listing was accurate.

So just curious what folks here would do in this situation. Would you return the jersey and request a full refund? Request a partial refund and keep the jersey? Do nothing because the funds went to a charity?

Feedback is appreciated!

[emann]

I'm wondering if you knew the player didn't play in the game before you bid on the jersey. If not, (and not trying to sound like a jerk) I'd say it is more a case of you didn't do part of the homework before bidding. The player is on the bench, so bid accordingly . . . if you want a jersey that is actually used on the field, this probably wasn't the game to get one from. If you just want a worn one—it is probably a unique and cool-looking jersey.

For me, the "team issued" situation doesn't bother me at all in most scenarios—I prefer it. If the jersey can either be (A) photomatched or (B) is from one game use where the player sat on the bench (like a pitcher), the MLB holo wouldn't matter to me. This is a one time use jersey from spring training—the jersey isn't going to be hammered, so the value should reflect that accordingly.

It sounds like you might have overpaid (without knowing cost) probably based on bidding against a whole slew of outside bidders who might be more attracted by the charity aspect than the actual "game used" aspect. [I know this from experience with the Red Sox, when they hype the St. Pats/Camo/Marathon jerseys auctioned for the Red Sox Foundation on NESN, within minutes all the bids gets bumped up.]

In short, I'd eat the loss to charity. I'd think they're not going to refund you anything anyway (unless there is some policy about buyer satisfaction). If you have resentment over the jersey, you can always list it on ebay and try to move it.

[paul457]

I'm wondering if you knew the player didn't play in the game before you bid on the jersey. If not, (and not trying to sound like a jerk) I'd say it is more a case of you didn't do part of the homework before bidding. The player is on the bench, so bid accordingly . . . if you want a jersey that is actually used on the field, this probably wasn't the game to get one from. If you just want a worn one—it is probably a unique and cool-looking jersey.

For me, the "team issued" situation doesn't bother me at all in most scenarios—I prefer it. If the jersey can either be (A) photomatched or (B) is from one game use where the player sat on the bench (like a pitcher), the MLB holo wouldn't matter to me. This is a one time use jersey from spring training—the jersey isn't going to be hammered, so the value should reflect that accordingly.

It sounds like you might have overpaid (without knowing cost) probably based on bidding against a whole slew of outside bidders who might be more attracted by the charity aspect than the actual "game used" aspect. [I know this from experience with the Red Sox, when they hype the St. Pats/Camo/Marathon jerseys auctioned for the Red Sox Foundation on NESN, within minutes all the bids gets bumped up.]

In short, I'd eat the loss to charity. I'd think they're not going to refund you anything anyway (unless there is some policy about buyer satisfaction). If you have resentment over the jersey, you can always list it on ebay and try to move it.

Well, if I had known that the player didn't play in the game, prior to bidding, this post wouldn't be here. And if I had done homework (which I feel I shouldn't really have to do, since an MLB team listed the jersey as game used), again this post wouldn't be here.

The amount of money I bid was based on the fact that the jersey was game used, just like everyone else. No one is bidding on a jersey solely for the charity aspect, otherwise they'd just pick up the phone and pledge their money vs getting a jersey in return. The jersey is driving their bid / pledge price.

MLB / NFL authentication drives auction prices, and secondary market prices. So unlike you, I, and others, put a lot of stock in those little serial numbered stickers. So when MLB Auctions has an authenticated game used jersey listed on their site, I believe them that the jersey is as described.

I love the jersey, hammered or not. I collect issued jerseys as well. That's not the point here. the point is that I spent x amount of money on a game used jersey that was really an issued jersey. If this was purchased through eBay, Goldin, or Heritage, would I absolve the auction house of any wrongdoing in this scenario? Absolutely not. The jersey would be going back. Should I just overlook this specific instance because it's related to a charity? Maybe...

Again - I haven't really taken action on this, I'm conflicted on what I should do. Because this is a charity I'll probably just let it go, but there's still part of me that is a bit miffed that the jersey was not as advertised.

[xsentrixsupra]

I would say maybe contact them and see if you can work on the price which is doubtful. I probably wouldn't raise too much of a stink for it, because like you said in the end it is for charity. I'd just chalk it up as a learning experience and look at the silver lining of helping a charity and end of the year talk to an accountant about writing off a larger amount for charity contributions!

[SEAFAN76]

I bought a game used batting helmet from the Mariners this year.
The hologram says "game issued" when I go to the MLB site.
It IS game USED, it's pretty obvious from the game us.

I went back and asked them, WTF?
Turns out the people that enter the info into the site don't always get it right.

[ethanoah]

If it's going to bother you having it in your collection I would just ask for a refund. I've had this same thing happen to me (luckily my items were only $150 a piece so I just ate the cost) and have seen several charities do this. You'll at some point in the future probably buy from their charity again so no need to feel bad. Next time you'll just ask for the mlb holo number before bidding :)

Ethan
ethanoahkc@gmail.com

[emann]

I bought a game used batting helmet from the Mariners this year.
The hologram says "game issued" when I go to the MLB site.
It IS game USED, it's pretty obvious from the game us.

I went back and asked them, WTF?
Turns out the people that enter the info into the site don't always get it right.

This has been discussed here in tons of threads but the authenticators (the people who enter the info) will not hologram an item as "game used" unless they see the player using it (or in the case of some teams now, it has UV marking applied to it). It goes into the database as "team issued."

[emann]

Well, if I had known that the player didn't play in the game, prior to bidding, this post wouldn't be here. And if I had done homework (which I feel I shouldn't really have to do, since an MLB team listed the jersey as game used), again this post wouldn't be here.

The amount of money I bid was based on the fact that the jersey was game used, just like everyone else. No one is bidding on a jersey solely for the charity aspect, otherwise they'd just pick up the phone and pledge their money vs getting a jersey in return. The jersey is driving their bid / pledge price.



Unfortunately, yes, you do need to do the research on ANY item you buy. It doesn't matter who it comes from, there is always a chance something won't be what it seems—even in situations where there is no intended malice. Otherwise you end up here . . .

I'm relatively sure I know which jersey you bought and I do agree with you that the Foundation should have disclosed the player didn't play in the information. I think your best argument is that they did not list the hologram # in the original auction listing. Therefore, you could not look it up until the auction was over.

Also, I've been to plenty of charity events where any item is NOT what drives the bidding. An acquaintance used to bid 5 figures on multiple items that he would literally give to his kids to play with in the back yard (and these auctions already took place at dinners that cost 5K a plate to attend). Very wealthy, didn't care—the money was a small dent in his end of year tax writeoff and his kids got to play with real equipment for a few hours . . . Despite spending more on game used items than most people here could afford, he was not a collector and had basically no interest in the items themselves.

[danesei@yahoo.com]

Recently I purchased a signed St Patrick's day jersey through MLB Auctions, which was selling these jerseys for a team's charity. The jersey was listed as a game used jersey but the MLB COA # was not in the listing.

When I received the jersey I looked up the MLB COA # and the jersey is certified as a game issued jersey. I called the charity and asked about the cert and was told that the player didn't play that day, but he wore it in the dugout, so it should technically be certified as a game used jersey (I don't necessarily agree, but that's not really the point of this post).

Although I try to avoid buying jerseys that were dugout used, I believe that the mass audience that would be bidding on charity items would consider the jersey you described as game used. If the player was on the day's roster and sitting in the dugout, they were in the game. If you're having buyer's remorse about your purchase, just be honest with yourself about it.

Sometimes, fans will bid on St Patty's jerseys, even ones that weren't necessarily used, because they're a once per year item. Also, since it's a Spring Training jersey, in the case of some minor leaguers, it might be their first Major League stint (even pre-season). If you don't mind, what player was it?

[paul457]

Appreciate all of the feedback, keep it coming.

I'd prefer not to say which player, team, charity this is. I buy a lot of GU stuff direct from this team, and have bought several jerseys from their charity auctions. The point of the post was not to slam anybody, rather, I found myself in the middle of something that I found to be an interesting internal struggle, so thought I'd share.

It's a beautiful jersey with a great signature, so I'm not parting with it. I just wanted to see how others would react to the situation.

[joshmiller0]

Appreciate all of the feedback, keep it coming.

I'd prefer not to say which player, team, charity this is. I buy a lot of GU stuff direct from this team, and have bought several jerseys from their charity auctions. The point of the post was not to slam anybody, rather, I found myself in the middle of something that I found to be an interesting internal struggle, so thought I'd share.

It's a beautiful jersey with a great signature, so I'm not parting with it. I just wanted to see how others would react to the situation.

If you plan on doing business in the future with them, I'd let it be. No need to make a bad situation over it... Like others said, in the future just be more mindful.

[Phil316]

first off I do not care who you are buying from, even if it's right from the player. You have to do your investigation or homework as members on here call it. Make sure dates add up ect.... No exceptions to this rule.

Now that you have completed the transaction and clearly it's not what you expected.mif you wanna keep good relations I would not really rock the boat. If you are gonna be bothered by it the whole time this is piece is in your collection then speaking up and going the extra mile might be worth it.

What I would do is take it as a lesson learned.

Happy collecting.

[esquiresports]

I disagree with the view that you "must do your diligence or it's your fault." If someone holds an item out as game used, and it is not game used, you have a perfectly legitimate reason to return the item.

Would it be nice/prudent to first research the issue - of course. Is it a requirement to be able to return? No.

I would be perfectly comfortable returning the jersey. They can auction it again and be more clear in their description.

Personally, I would not consider a jersey worn by a player sitting on the bench the whole game as being game used. Maybe game worn, but not used. I understand this is open to interpretation.

[yanks12025]

These were spring training jerseys? Right??

[TwinLakesPark]

Some of these responses have made me throw up in my mouth. You purchased an item from a MLB team (I would love to hear which team it is) that clearly misrepresented the item, which entitles you to a full refund, and they should be more than happy to do so. I will be happy to call them on your behalf.

What blows my mind is that if any one of us misrepresented that item on eBay or a big auction house, we would get ROASTED on here for doing so. We would be called a fraud and there would be a thread permanently posted on here dragging us through the mud - yet it is perfectly ok for a professionally mlb team to do it AND you are told you should have done your homework?

Unreal.

[paul457]

Some of these responses have made me throw up in my mouth. You purchased an item from a MLB team (I would love to hear which team it is) that clearly misrepresented the item, which entitles you to a full refund, and they should be more than happy to do so. I will be happy to call them on your behalf.

What blows my mind is that if any one of us misrepresented that item on eBay or a big auction house, we would get ROASTED on here for doing so. We would be called a fraud and there would be a thread permanently posted on here dragging us through the mud - yet it is perfectly ok for a professionally mlb team to do it AND you are told you should have done your homework?

Unreal.

Haha, excellent and very accurate point.

The team / charity has offered me a full refund, but they can't guarantee it will be re-auctioned on MLB. It could be used at a fundraiser or any number of events. I like the jersey, issued jerseys don't bother me, and I don't really want to return it.

My a$$ is just a little chapped because I feel if it was listed accurately, I would have likely paid a lot less for it.

[yanks12025]

This all boils down to one thing, what is "game used". Some people think when a player wears a jersey but doesn't play in the game, it's not game used. But other people think they're game used. some people think BP is game used, while others think it's not. Are spring training items really game used??

[onlyalbert]

I had the mirror image happen to me. Cardinals charity auction. Game used Molina bat. Bat was in a tube on display and they said it was a March bat and not authenticated. I won the bat at a decent price. Got home and took it out of the tube. Notice the 3 was an 8 for late Aug and there was a auth sticker covered by the black tube end. Looked it up and it was used 2013 nlcs gm 6. The pennant clincher! Prob would've drawn more bids had that been known.

[sox83cubs84]

Sad to say, though, that there are some less than accurate or incomplete descriptions that charities will stand behind, even if they're confronted with it.

In the mid-1990s, a guy sent me a Warren Moon Oilers "Game-used" jersey to get an opinion on. When I looked at it, it was obvious the jersey was a reatil version, with no wear except for one or two small dirt smudges. I sent it back to the guy, and, feeling gypped by the charity, confronted them and wanted a refund.

Sad to say, the charity wouldn't cooperate. After hearing the bidder's explanation, a spokesperson mealy-mouthed an excuse that "We nere said Moon wore it in an NFL game". The game it was used in, as it turned out, was the charity's celebrity touch football game in Houston several months earlier. They would NOT issue him a refund, and the poor guy was stuck with it.:mad:

[Phil316]

Your a fool if you put full trust in anyone without doing some research. That includes buying from auction sites whether it be Ebay, MLB Auctions, NFL Auctions..... At least from my point of view. Just look at the Auction forum. Imagine if no one did research and trusted everyone. That place is proof to do research before buying. I think almost every auction site has shown to have some kind of issue wetter it is dealt with or ignored.

I do not think it is the original posters fault completely. Had he known I am sure his bid would have been less like he said.

I like this forum lots of different views.

[gingi79]

This is exactly why this hobby needs a set-in-stone list of definitions of what each item actually is. Preseason/Spring Training isn't as desirable/valuable/the same as actual season used game worn. Worn while watching on the bench/dugout isn't the same as worn during participation in an actual game. Issued to the team as a backup with team mods isn't "pro model with similar mods".

I'd settle for using Game Worn/Used being used EXCLUSIVELY for regular/post season worn while actually playing the game and leaving everything else made to team/player specs, worn on the bench, worn as a backup as "issued" while leaving all other versions as "replica".

Everyone from auction houses to the average person posting on Craigslist has impunity to call any old item whatever they wish because our hobby has no guidelines or criteria for terminology. We are actively contributing to the muddling of and depreciation therefore of our items. Consider as well, the perception that everything in our hobby and the autograph hobby are fake.

Due to the fact the only time average folks hear about our hobbies is a 60 Minutes expose on Operation Bullpen or the recent bust and indictment of what they deemed "impeccable sources of game used memorabilia" at the National, I cannot be alone in understanding our hobby requires stringent guidelines to help police and classify items.

[johnsontravis@ymail.com]

If the player was active and in the dugout by MLB Authentication guidelines the jersey was in fact "game used". Whether or not you agree with that wording it is what it is.

The problem I see in this situation is the fact the authentication number says issued. At that point it should be sold as that...That is what happens in every other case so the integrity of the program is upheld. It was wrong to call it game used.

[Roady]

I always thought of "game used" as the player actually "played" in the game, not watch everyone else from the dugout.
I think I will continue to believe that.

[paul457]

The problem I see in this situation is the fact the authentication number says issued. At that point it should be sold as that...That is what happens in every other case so the integrity of the program is upheld. It was wrong to call it game used.

Exactly. There are a few side discussions in this thread - a) what is game used and what isn't, and b) do your homework before you purchase, neither of which were really the focus when creating this thread.

The story I got from the team was: The team / charity listed all of the jerseys for that game as 'game used', all were signed. All of the players were present for the game, some played and some didn't. This particular player didn't play, and left early, so also didn't sign his jersey that day (everyone else did). So the actual signature and authentication for this jersey was done almost two weeks after the rest of the batch (and after the auction ended). The authenticator could not confirm that the jersey was worn in the dugout that day, so they authenticated the signature, and listed the jersey as game issued on the COA. The team has been in touch with the authenticator and they are not willing to change the COA. I feel comfortable with this story and in some ways respect the authenticator for NOT changing the COA.

Still doesn't change the fact that the listing was incorrect and I likely paid more for this jersey than I would have if it was listed correctly as an issued jersey. It is what it is, the charity and team have been in contact with me and are being helpful, so I have no beef with them. I can't stand the thought of taking money back from a charity, so I'm leaving it alone. Sounds like an honest mistake.

The real point of this thread was to seek advice / feedback on how others would handle this situation. TwinLakesPark hit it on the head - if anyone here did this, they would be berated and thrashed into submission, and no questions asked people would be returning the jersey. But there's a charity twist to this specific situation, so that really throws a wrench into the standard approach as a refund is taking money away from a charity...

Just thought it was an interesting twist to a common issue here, but it seems to have gotten lost within the "you're stupid, do your homework!" and the "that's not game used!" side discussions.

[Phil316]

Hopefully you took something away from this experience you had bidfing on MLB auctions ;)

[TwinLakesPark]

Hopefully you took something away from this experience you had bidfing on MLB auctions ;)

Is this a joke?

BTW, MLB Auctions is a program that provides a platform for MLB teams to sell merchandise in a central location. This experience was with a single baseball team with very poor executive leadership and customer service. The Authentics is just another way to connect with your fan base and enhance their experience, not a profiteering engine. It is unfortunate that some teams place this program in the hands of low level employees without much oversight.

That's my takeaway...

[emann]

Exactly. There are a few side discussions in this thread - a) what is game used and what isn't, and b) do your homework before you purchase, neither of which were really the focus when creating this thread.

The story I got from the team was: The team / charity listed all of the jerseys for that game as 'game used', all were signed. All of the players were present for the game, some played and some didn't. This particular player didn't play, and left early, so also didn't sign his jersey that day (everyone else did). So the actual signature and authentication for this jersey was done almost two weeks after the rest of the batch (and after the auction ended). The authenticator could not confirm that the jersey was worn in the dugout that day, so they authenticated the signature, and listed the jersey as game issued on the COA. The team has been in touch with the authenticator and they are not willing to change the COA. I feel comfortable with this story and in some ways respect the authenticator for NOT changing the COA.

Still doesn't change the fact that the listing was incorrect and I likely paid more for this jersey than I would have if it was listed correctly as an issued jersey. It is what it is, the charity and team have been in contact with me and are being helpful, so I have no beef with them. I can't stand the thought of taking money back from a charity, so I'm leaving it alone. Sounds like an honest mistake.

The real point of this thread was to seek advice / feedback on how others would handle this situation. TwinLakesPark hit it on the head - if anyone here did this, they would be berated and thrashed into submission, and no questions asked people would be returning the jersey. But there's a charity twist to this specific situation, so that really throws a wrench into the standard approach as a refund is taking money away from a charity...

Just thought it was an interesting twist to a common issue here, but it seems to have gotten lost within the "you're stupid, do your homework!" and the "that's not game used!" side discussions.

For the record, I don't think any of us called you "stupid." I certainly don't think you're stupid, you just didn't Google a boxscore before putting a high bid on an item. When I finally started posting on this forum after years of reading it, the one main tenet from the educated, respected, and longtime collectors (most of whom stopped posting before you or TwinLakes joined) was "do your homework." As Phil said, it doesn't matter the source . . . A few seconds of research would have spared you this issue entirely. Sorry to be the one who points this out, don't kill the messenger.

After I looked at the listing, as I said, I agree with your main argument: the team's listing was incorrect. This was not out of malice (I know who the authenticator is that is involved, it was an oversight), the truth is they don't know/care sometimes and mistakes are made.

This is an entirely different scenario that what TwinLakes is ranting about: this is clearly not someone taking advantage or trying to swindle you (and certainly I don't think you are accusing the team of doing this). Therefore nobody is rushing this thread trying to expose the fraud, etc. This is not a seller who takes a pro cut jersey and tried to pass it off as a gamer. The team screwed up the listing, you bid on it and it sounds like they'd take it back if that is what you desired.

As for people derailing your thread. This is an internet forum: not everyone will agree with you. Differing opinions are what make this forum helpful.

[emann]

Is this a joke?

BTW, MLB Auctions is a program that provides a platform for MLB teams to sell merchandise in a central location. This experience was with a single baseball team with very poor executive leadership and customer service. The Authentics is just another way to connect with your fan base and enhance their experience, not a profiteering engine. It is unfortunate that some teams place this program in the hands of low level employees without much oversight.

The team in question has a bad track record of tagging "gamers" which can cut both ways if you're a collector . . . I've picked up some great items that are gamer worn that were tagged "issued" or not at all.

All the MLB Authenticators are ex-law enforcement to some degree, so they're not low level employees with no training or ability to think for themselves. I think the main problem with the authentication program is they just don't have enough of them to clear the volume of items that every team churns out on an almost daily basis. The fact that the big market team the OP has issues with has ONE authenticator assigned to them shows the problem.

[Phil316]

emann thank you for understanding my point. I don't think the original poster is stupid at all and hopefully it did not come off that way.

[paul457]

I don't think the original poster is stupid at all and hopefully it did not come off that way.

No no, I don't think that you were accusing me of being stupid. Just reading the replies and side conversations I broke them up into two general themes and added a little flair. :)

I've bought tons of GU and issued items from this team and the charity through MLB Auctions over the years, and everything has always checked out 100%. Given the explanation I was given, and the fact that these jerseys were listed prior to authentication, I can see how this particular jersey slipped through the cracks. This was an honest mistake, and it doesn't change my view of MLB Authentication or the team's GU items.

[emann]

No no, I don't think that you were accusing me of being stupid. Just reading the replies and side conversations I broke them up into two general themes and added a little flair. :)

I've bought tons of GU and issued items from this team and the charity through MLB Auctions over the years, and everything has always checked out 100%. Given the explanation I was given, and the fact that these jerseys were listed prior to authentication, I can see how this particular jersey slipped through the cracks. This was an honest mistake, and it doesn't change my view of MLB Authentication or the team's GU items.

No worries here—BTW, I think that you've got a nice jersey and there are not many of that player's green jerseys out there—worn or otherwise.

Also (sort of odd and something I had forgotten until now), I also have a 2009 St. Pat's jersey from another star player on the same team that came with no tagging at all (no holo, etc). Shows use, dirt, and I bought it direct from the team like that . . . and it was sold to me as "game worn." :rolleyes: