Jump to content

Why Do They Do It? Bad Mr Atomic Ebay


chilli

Recommended Posts

The seller has been good enough to show this pic proving it's an Osaka Tin Toy/Tomy which from what I understand was the factory of the originals in '62. *Altaira had mentioned to me a few months back in discussing the Mr. Atomics that she considers the 1993 items to be re-issues from the original company, from the original presses and not reproductions. I tend to agree.

Know your seller has never been more true. Also knowing what you're buying. The 'Tin Toy Institute' removes all doubt that it's not a '62 'bot. As far as I know 1200 OTTI were made in each colour whereas the 'Mike's Toy House' versions which I'd consider reproductions are scarcer at 500 production each blue/silver.

post-298-0-55027900-1413933275_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand your gripe, Chilli. I have looked at the listing and it does sound a little confusing as to the originality of this robot in the sellers description (whom I do not know) especially so for someone like myself, having never really had an interest in this particular robot. My only reason for replying is that sometimes on older toys that I've seen and even on a newer one like shown in Morbius' reply photo, the copyright date sometimes throws me off for a second till I realize it is a copyright date and not a production date. The copyright date should always stay the same, and production dates are rarely printed or embossed. And I am only saying how this might be very confusing for a lot of folks. :scratchhead:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He has now added the following

"On Oct-22-14 at 11:05:46 PDT, seller added the following information:

*EDIT:

There
was reproductions of the original mister atomic, all were made in the
same year 1980~1993 in blue and silver by 2 companies, some were made by
MTH and some were made by metal house for Osaka tin toy company.

this
one is one of the 600 silver reproduction osaka tin toy with the logo
tin age on the side and logo osaka tin toy in the battery box.

best regards
Information
given by a friendly user, i can't change the original information but
like photos show that "TIN AGE" tell all this info about the item.
YOU'RE BIDDING A REPRODUTION OF ORIGINAL MISTER ATOMIC."
cheers
Chilli
glad we cleared that one up, its a repro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is my point completely, put the full description in the words, clearly.

My first purchase was also 2 Mr Atomics but lucky l had done my homework and realised they were MTH.

The highest bid at this moment is about right for the robot.Which is a nice item.

cheers

Chilli

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate confusing auctions, and I'm glad the seller updated the info.

This is why I always tell new collectors to do as much research into these toys as possible. Do it before the toy comes up for sale -- especially if it's a high-end, expensive piece. Know what the toy is supposed to look like, what makers marks it's supposed to have, what variations exist, etc. The more you know, the better you can identify these types of situations ahead of time.

Of course... It's not always as easy as that, and it helps to have a community of friends to talk to! That's why it's so vital that we share information with one another. For a long time, hobbies like this one were very closed off -- the people in the seemed to like keeping information to themselves. Alphadrome blew the doors off that, and I think the hobby is much stronger for it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spot on Dratomic.

You can get a bargain by taking a chance on a badly photographed or sold as " old vintage robot" which is fair enough. If it turns out rubbish the seller did not say he knew about it, but when it is being sold by a collector or dealer then the item should be fully explained, at which point you spend more cash but expect a fair deal.

Cheers

Chilli

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The keywords are only as misleading as the reader wants them to be. It's a 1962 design, and the design is about as original as they get. He could even say "vintage" and be in the clear, but I'd expect him to specify the vintage, e.g. vintage 2005 or whenever the heck these came off the line. The seller wants viewers, but he's not out to cheat anyone. The pics have him squarely in the safe zone. This is not even "buyer beware" territory. "Buyer know what you are buying" is all this is about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont agree Keith, l and a lot of others can read the pictures, fine, but the ones that get caught out are the gullible, inexperienced that just see "original,Mr Atomic. cragstan" Copy, repro, was never mentioned. He has not cheated l agree but it was taking advantage of the inexperienced.

A bit of promting and he changed his ad. He sells some expensive and nice items, it would be good to see a fuller description so no mistakes were made by beginners. That said,l will now put my undies back on under my tights!!!!

cheers

Chilli

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know a guy who will call a knock-off box he's selling as something like "beautiful box, very close to mint and original as you can find" or some crap like that. What I say is that if a buyer is fine with educating himself in the marketplace, that's one way to go. Alternatively, he can dive into Alphadrome and maybe save himself from goofing up. On the same topic, I think it's fine to list reproduction toys in vintage (pre-1970) robots, since the era distinguishes the look. If I were selling a late model Mr. Atomic, I'd call it a re-issue or a reproduction, but anyone who knows robots knows exactly what this is. I think the headline is (or was) arguably misleading yet also arguably not misleading, depending on how much duty one ascribes to a seller. What I don't see is that the guy said it was actually manufactured in 1962, but I did not bother to read the description beyond the listing headline, which is the springboard. Last but not least, what I can say with relative certainty is that ebay would back up a seller who received the robot and claimed from the description that he had reason to believe that the toy was made in 1962, "because look, ebay, it says 1962 right there in the headline" and yup, some know-nothing at ebay would agree and tie up the seller's funds. It's a shame that people have gotten away from reading and thinking like they have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not disagreeing with you but It all semantics at that point, I just personally think it better to give the full story if you are a seller, people then go back to you as they have all the facts.

Our friend from this site in the Netherlands is a good example, gives a nice informed story with his sales that can be used for reference for future purchases.

I guess its all about being educated in the realms of robot history, and a beginner myself it is easy to come unstuck, saying that I enjoy the homework.

cheers

Chilli

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree that the use of the term "original" is up for interpretation in a situation where an item has been produced in one era and reproduced in another. There are originals from back in 1962 and there are reproductions of this toy from the 90's. Period. A seller could try to use ignorance or some other explanation for the use of the term but as you pointed out Keith, I think ebay would side with an unhappy buyer in this case. Now that the seller has edited his description I hope the bidders notice it. For the price it's at now, even for a reproduction, I would hold out for a boxed example. And for what it's worth- I think it's plausible that the seller was actually fooled by the copyrite on the toy. You can sell plenty of robots but unless you read a lot of Alphadrome you could miss out on a lot of knowledge. This seller is not familiar to me as a robot-guy per se, and going by his other items I see someone who is just into tin toys in general. Plus I think a scammer who knew the robot was a repro would have finessed the description a little more. I think the seller was confident he had an original at first. But this is all moot now thanks to "the community"!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except the guy also had these for sale

post-1849-0-89952200-1414185883_thumb.pn

he does know his toys. But nice to see he has added the correct info. Maybe just an oversight as you say!!!!!!

cheers

Chilli

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This site uses cookies to improve your visit. If you're happy with this, please continue.