@MFeld said:
As much as I dislike how that person has acted, a PM should remain private.
Why? It's not your property, it's owned by the board (PCGS).
You have a copyright interest in the text as the creator. Saying "you are full of ****" and quoting might be fair use.
Sure, there's stuff in the T&C about "right of privacy" but that's a slippery slope. Might be able to argue that by continually shooting one's mouth off, one has become a public figure in the context of our little world... at which point you have to show not only that what is said/posted is untrue, but was done with actual malicious intent. You can't claim I've trashed somebody's reputation when they did it themselves before I ever posted in this thread.
@MFeld said:
As much as I dislike how that person has acted, a PM should remain private.
Why? It's not your property, it's owned by the board (PCGS).
You have a copyright interest in the text as the creator. Saying "you are full of ****" and quoting might be fair use.
Sure, there's stuff in the T&C about "right of privacy" but that's a slippery slope. Might be able to argue that by continually shooting one's mouth off, one has become a public figure in the context of our little world... at which point you have to show not only that what is said/posted is untrue, but was done with actual malicious intent. You can't claim I've trashed somebody's reputation when they did it themselves before I ever posted in this thread.
I didn’t say anything about the PM being my property. And considering that it was originally sent and received through Coin Talk, I don’t see how it would be “owned” by PCGS.
I respect the privacy of private messages. Whether others do is up to them.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@SurfinxHI said:
Not to stir the pot here, but didn't he put IN THE ADD that he was not liable for anything after dropping it at the PO and the seller needed to get insurance, if so desired?
At least that's what he used to do. I'd love to see the original add.....
By "ADD", I assume you mean "listing". A couple of days before this blew-up, I bought his 1937 buffalo nickel in PCGS MS66 for $56. His listing made it abundantly clear that he wouldn't buy insurance and once he mailed my coin he would send me a tracking number and then any problems would be between me and the USPS. I thought this was a rather strange way of conducting business but I was willing to assume the risk of not getting the coin because the USPS lost it, stole it, or destroyed it with their equipment. Once he got my check a couple of days ago, he contacted me to let me know the check arrived, he reiterated the terms that we agreed to, and then he gave me a chance to back out of the deal. I told him that I was willing to self-insure for such an inexpensive coin and to go ahead and mail my coin. The tracking for my coin shows that it will be delivered sometime today. If for some reason I don't get it, I promise you guys that I won't start a thread here whining about it. His terms were very clear and I agreed to them and as a responsible adult I'll live with the consequences.
There is always "the other side to the story".
If, in fact, @ponderit agreed to the same terms then a few dozen people owe @silverpop a bit of an apology.
If you don't like the terms, then don't agree to them.
I'm relatively sure the terms don't say "I get to keep your money whether you get the item or not"...
According to at least two posters (I can't know), the terms say that shipping is at the buyer's risk. I would be interested in hearing from others who have done business with him as to whether that was his standard practice.
That DOES NOT matter for the issue at hand with Ponderit.
Ponderit has stated, before your post I quoted and in a post that you acknowledged, that he NEVER had that disclaimer with him.
So, anyone else that had a transaction with him, WITH that disclaimer is one thing and is NOT part of this issue. To even bring them up as an "IF that were the case" is throwing a smoke cover for silverpop and convoluting the thread in a way that isn't needed and isn't right.
IF IF IF (but, it DIDN'T happen so there IS NO 'if')
@SurfinxHI said:
Not to stir the pot here, but didn't he put IN THE ADD that he was not liable for anything after dropping it at the PO and the seller needed to get insurance, if so desired?
At least that's what he used to do. I'd love to see the original add.....
By "ADD", I assume you mean "listing". A couple of days before this blew-up, I bought his 1937 buffalo nickel in PCGS MS66 for $56. His listing made it abundantly clear that he wouldn't buy insurance and once he mailed my coin he would send me a tracking number and then any problems would be between me and the USPS. I thought this was a rather strange way of conducting business but I was willing to assume the risk of not getting the coin because the USPS lost it, stole it, or destroyed it with their equipment. Once he got my check a couple of days ago, he contacted me to let me know the check arrived, he reiterated the terms that we agreed to, and then he gave me a chance to back out of the deal. I told him that I was willing to self-insure for such an inexpensive coin and to go ahead and mail my coin. The tracking for my coin shows that it will be delivered sometime today. If for some reason I don't get it, I promise you guys that I won't start a thread here whining about it. His terms were very clear and I agreed to them and as a responsible adult I'll live with the consequences.
There is always "the other side to the story".
If, in fact, @ponderit agreed to the same terms then a few dozen people owe @silverpop a bit of an apology.
If you don't like the terms, then don't agree to them.
I'm relatively sure the terms don't say "I get to keep your money whether you get the item or not"...
According to at least two posters (I can't know), the terms say that shipping is at the buyer's risk. I would be interested in hearing from others who have done business with him as to whether that was his standard practice.
That DOES NOT matter for the issue at hand with Ponderit.
Ponderit has stated, before your post I quoted and in a post that you acknowledged, that he NEVER had that disclaimer with him.
So, anyone else that had a transaction with him, WITH that disclaimer is one thing and is NOT part of this issue. To even bring them up as an "IF that were the case" is throwing a smoke cover for silverpop and convoluting the thread in a way that isn't needed and isn't right.
IF IF IF (but, it DIDN'T happen so there IS NO 'if')
Except those posters claim this is a common disclaimer used by silverpop on all his listings. And I raised the question before pondering addressed the issue.
We actually have no proof as to whether it did or didn't happen since the listing, like all his listings were deleted.
No smokescreen. A legitimate question that was raised by two customers of silverpop, not me.
@SurfinxHI said:
Not to stir the pot here, but didn't he put IN THE ADD that he was not liable for anything after dropping it at the PO and the seller needed to get insurance, if so desired?
At least that's what he used to do. I'd love to see the original add.....
By "ADD", I assume you mean "listing". A couple of days before this blew-up, I bought his 1937 buffalo nickel in PCGS MS66 for $56. His listing made it abundantly clear that he wouldn't buy insurance and once he mailed my coin he would send me a tracking number and then any problems would be between me and the USPS. I thought this was a rather strange way of conducting business but I was willing to assume the risk of not getting the coin because the USPS lost it, stole it, or destroyed it with their equipment. Once he got my check a couple of days ago, he contacted me to let me know the check arrived, he reiterated the terms that we agreed to, and then he gave me a chance to back out of the deal. I told him that I was willing to self-insure for such an inexpensive coin and to go ahead and mail my coin. The tracking for my coin shows that it will be delivered sometime today. If for some reason I don't get it, I promise you guys that I won't start a thread here whining about it. His terms were very clear and I agreed to them and as a responsible adult I'll live with the consequences.
There is always "the other side to the story".
If, in fact, @ponderit agreed to the same terms then a few dozen people owe @silverpop a bit of an apology.
If you don't like the terms, then don't agree to them.
I'm relatively sure the terms don't say "I get to keep your money whether you get the item or not"...
According to at least two posters (I can't know), the terms say that shipping is at the buyer's risk. I would be interested in hearing from others who have done business with him as to whether that was his standard practice.
That DOES NOT matter for the issue at hand with Ponderit.
Ponderit has stated, before your post I quoted and in a post that you acknowledged, that he NEVER had that disclaimer with him.
So, anyone else that had a transaction with him, WITH that disclaimer is one thing and is NOT part of this issue. To even bring them up as an "IF that were the case" is throwing a smoke cover for silverpop and convoluting the thread in a way that isn't needed and isn't right.
IF IF IF (but, it DIDN'T happen so there IS NO 'if')
Except those posters claim this is a common disclaimer used by silverpop on all his listings. And I raised the question before pondering addressed the issue.
We actually have no proof as to whether it did or didn't happen since the listing, like all his listings were deleted.
No smokescreen. A legitimate question that was raised by two customers of silverpop, not me.
Thank you for your input.
I think it says a great deal that the seller didn’t dispute the details posted here by the buyer.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@SurfinxHI said:
Not to stir the pot here, but didn't he put IN THE ADD that he was not liable for anything after dropping it at the PO and the seller needed to get insurance, if so desired?
At least that's what he used to do. I'd love to see the original add.....
By "ADD", I assume you mean "listing". A couple of days before this blew-up, I bought his 1937 buffalo nickel in PCGS MS66 for $56. His listing made it abundantly clear that he wouldn't buy insurance and once he mailed my coin he would send me a tracking number and then any problems would be between me and the USPS. I thought this was a rather strange way of conducting business but I was willing to assume the risk of not getting the coin because the USPS lost it, stole it, or destroyed it with their equipment. Once he got my check a couple of days ago, he contacted me to let me know the check arrived, he reiterated the terms that we agreed to, and then he gave me a chance to back out of the deal. I told him that I was willing to self-insure for such an inexpensive coin and to go ahead and mail my coin. The tracking for my coin shows that it will be delivered sometime today. If for some reason I don't get it, I promise you guys that I won't start a thread here whining about it. His terms were very clear and I agreed to them and as a responsible adult I'll live with the consequences.
There is always "the other side to the story".
If, in fact, @ponderit agreed to the same terms then a few dozen people owe @silverpop a bit of an apology.
If you don't like the terms, then don't agree to them.
The cost is only $3.40 to insure item valued between $50 to $100. A very small fee/sacrifice that's not going to break anyone to pay. And I'm reading with the USPS, insurance is automatically added/included with Priority Mail. So.....is this all about being too damn lazy to file a claim with the USPS if the mail/packages get lost?
And what's his "return policy"? Are you not going to include insurance if you send it back/return the coins? lol
It'd also be interesting to learn if Silverpops "walks his talk" with buying coins. Does he make demands that there be no insurance added on his coin orders? Or worse, demands the seller fork/pay for the insurance because the seller wants it, right?
Cause, I'm a strong/firm believer that one should always "walk the talk they spew" when the shoe is on the other (his) foot!
Did Silverpop insist that there'd be no insurance on his recent acquisition of the Morgan dollar he posted in another thread?
Come on, Silverpop, tell us how your Morgan dollar was mailed to you. Do you walk your talk?
Leo
To add, maybe the problem is with the USPS. Accepting values for raw coins that haven't been certified. And they want a letter from a reputed dealer about the coins that are lost when a claim is filed.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
(Godwin's law, short for Godwin's law (or rule) of Nazi analogies, is an Internet adage asserting that as an online discussion grows longer (regardless of topic or scope), the probability of a comparison to Nazis or Adolf Hitler approaches 100%)
@USMC_6115 said:
What happened? Last time I checked this thread, it was mostly unanimous that Colin should "make it right." Now there's a bunch of flip flopping.. IMO, this is still wrong on every level. Colin's moral behavior of not making this right and outright awful communication completely ignoring Bill is far beyond being okay! Just because it worked out for some members, doesn't make it okay to screw Bill! JMHO
It really comes down to what the terms were at the time of the sale. IF IF IF the terms are "shipping at buyer's risk", it is a very different story.
NOTE:
1. I don't know. I've never done business with him.
2. That doesn't mean that Colin is either nice, a good communicator, etc.
But if I accept the risk of shipping, it's not really fair for me to shift it later. [IF IF IF that's what happened.]
I NEVER would have done business under either term (check payment or assuming the risk myself). However, to me, it does matter what the ORIGINAL terms were and what was agreed to. @CoinHoarder says that Colin has been specifying that shipping risk is the buyer's going back to 2019. If true, doesn't that make this a different kettle of fish?
If, ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a Merry Christmas. @silverpop has never made such a claim, which speaks volumes, so why would you? Why are you trying to defend someone that won't defend themselves?
@USMC_6115 said:
What happened? Last time I checked this thread, it was mostly unanimous that Colin should "make it right." Now there's a bunch of flip flopping.. IMO, this is still wrong on every level. Colin's moral behavior of not making this right and outright awful communication completely ignoring Bill is far beyond being okay! Just because it worked out for some members, doesn't make it okay to screw Bill! JMHO
It really comes down to what the terms were at the time of the sale. IF IF IF the terms are "shipping at buyer's risk", it is a very different story.
NOTE:
1. I don't know. I've never done business with him.
2. That doesn't mean that Colin is either nice, a good communicator, etc.
But if I accept the risk of shipping, it's not really fair for me to shift it later. [IF IF IF that's what happened.]
I NEVER would have done business under either term (check payment or assuming the risk myself). However, to me, it does matter what the ORIGINAL terms were and what was agreed to. @CoinHoarder says that Colin has been specifying that shipping risk is the buyer's going back to 2019. If true, doesn't that make this a different kettle of fish?
If, ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a Merry Christmas. @silverpop has never made such a claim, which speaks volumes, so why would you? Why are you trying to defend someone that won't defend themselves?
Notice I said won't defend themselves, not can't.
I AM NOT THE ONE WHO POSTED THAT HE HAS A DISCLAIMER IN ALL OF HIS LISTINGS.
I think it says a great deal that the seller didn’t dispute the details posted here by the buyer.
MAYBE. Except the seller basically had a tantrum and went away. We haven't heard anything from him in a while. I also think it says a great deal that two forum members testified that all his listings have had a disclaimer for years.
Either way, I think this thread has become unseemly and gratuitous.
@CoinHoarder said:
I have been buying coins from silverpop since at least 2019.
As I stated in an earlier thread, he always made it perfectly clear that once the post office had the package he was mailing to me, he was no longer responsible for any loss. I told him that I had no problem with that, because my loss of money would be minimal if the coin(s) were lost in transit.
Also, his prices for what he was selling his coins, were among the best on our BST in my opinion. Well worth the risk to me.
As far as pay pal goes, I can understand why many old school people do not use it. I just started using pay pal myself a couple of years ago. Silverpop deals in cash and checks only. I can understand that, and have no problem with it.
In all of my dealing with silverpop, after he received my checks, he promply mailed my coins and sent me a tracking number. All coins arrived safe and sound.
@CoinHoarder said:
I have been buying coins from silverpop since at least 2019.
As I stated in an earlier thread, he always made it perfectly clear that once the post office had the package he was mailing to me, he was no longer responsible for any loss. I told him that I had no problem with that, because my loss of money would be minimal if the coin(s) were lost in transit.
Also, his prices for what he was selling his coins, were among the best on our BST in my opinion. Well worth the risk to me.
As far as pay pal goes, I can understand why many old school people do not use it. I just started using pay pal myself a couple of years ago. Silverpop deals in cash and checks only. I can understand that, and have no problem with it.
In all of my dealing with silverpop, after he received my checks, he promply mailed my coins and sent me a tracking number. All coins arrived safe and sound.
MAYBE. Except the seller basically had a tantrum and went away. We haven't heard anything from him in a while. I also think it says a great deal that two forum members testified that all his listings have had a disclaimer for years.
Either way, I think this thread has become unseemly and gratuitous.
Did they use the word "all"? Or just that, in the threads THEY participated in to buy, it was there?
Did those "two forum members" see 100% of the selling posts by the person in question? If not, why make it like they are the end all on this?
Ponderit has stated that it was there, and wasn't communicated, to him.
While I value and trust the 2 forum members who said it was there in their transactions, I will also give Ponderit my trust (unless and until PROVEN otherwise...which hasn't happened...that would require a screenshot or an unedited post stating it).
I just don't get your digging in of your heels on this and all the "IF IF IFs"...I really don't.
Before jumping on any flame-throwing bandwagon recall to mind a very young forum member with a freshly minted family. He was a real up and comer in numismatics when he got himself in very deep trouble and owed some money. Some forum members really turned up the heat and began a trashing campaign. I'm sure all you long-time forum veterans know what happened next. This poor young man couldn't take the pressure and took his own life.
You never truly know a person's mindset. Reaching out and offering help rather than flaming may be the better choice. There may be something going on behind the scenes you don't know about.
USAF (Ret) 1974 - 1994 - The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. Remembering RickO, a brother in arms.
@SurfinxHI said:
Not to stir the pot here, but didn't he put IN THE ADD that he was not liable for anything after dropping it at the PO and the seller needed to get insurance, if so desired?
At least that's what he used to do. I'd love to see the original add.....
By "ADD", I assume you mean "listing". A couple of days before this blew-up, I bought his 1937 buffalo nickel in PCGS MS66 for $56. His listing made it abundantly clear that he wouldn't buy insurance and once he mailed my coin he would send me a tracking number and then any problems would be between me and the USPS. I thought this was a rather strange way of conducting business but I was willing to assume the risk of not getting the coin because the USPS lost it, stole it, or destroyed it with their equipment. Once he got my check a couple of days ago, he contacted me to let me know the check arrived, he reiterated the terms that we agreed to, and then he gave me a chance to back out of the deal. I told him that I was willing to self-insure for such an inexpensive coin and to go ahead and mail my coin. The tracking for my coin shows that it will be delivered sometime today. If for some reason I don't get it, I promise you guys that I won't start a thread here whining about it. His terms were very clear and I agreed to them and as a responsible adult I'll live with the consequences.
There is always "the other side to the story".
If, in fact, @ponderit agreed to the same terms then a few dozen people owe @silverpop a bit of an apology.
If you don't like the terms, then don't agree to them.
I'm relatively sure the terms don't say "I get to keep your money whether you get the item or not"...
According to at least two posters (I can't know), the terms say that shipping is at the buyer's risk. I would be interested in hearing from others who have done business with him as to whether that was his standard practice.
That DOES NOT matter for the issue at hand with Ponderit.
Ponderit has stated, before your post I quoted and in a post that you acknowledged, that he NEVER had that disclaimer with him.
So, anyone else that had a transaction with him, WITH that disclaimer is one thing and is NOT part of this issue. To even bring them up as an "IF that were the case" is throwing a smoke cover for silverpop and convoluting the thread in a way that isn't needed and isn't right.
IF IF IF (but, it DIDN'T happen so there IS NO 'if')
Except those posters claim this is a common disclaimer used by silverpop on all his listings. And I raised the question before pondering addressed the issue.
We actually have no proof as to whether it did or didn't happen since the listing, like all his listings were deleted.
No smokescreen. A legitimate question that was raised by two customers of silverpop, not me.
Thank you for your input.
I think it says a great deal that the seller didn’t dispute the details posted here by the buyer.
Is it possible the seller isn't interested in arguing and has stopped following this thread or has even left this forum?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
MAYBE. Except the seller basically had a tantrum and went away. We haven't heard anything from him in a while. I also think it says a great deal that two forum members testified that all his listings have had a disclaimer for years.
Either way, I think this thread has become unseemly and gratuitous.
Did they use the word "all"? Or just that, in the threads THEY participated in to buy, it was there?
Did those "two forum members" see 100% of the selling posts by the person in question? If not, why make it like they are the end all on this?
Ponderit has stated that it was there, and wasn't communicated, to him.
While I value and trust the 2 forum members who said it was there in their transactions, I will also give Ponderit my trust (unless and until PROVEN otherwise...which hasn't happened...that would require a screenshot or an unedited post stating it).
I just don't get your digging in of your heels on this and all the "IF IF IFs"...I really don't.
The IF IF IF it's icky to emphasis that, like you only more humbly, I don't know the truth here. I'm willing to entertain the possibility that the truth lies in between the two stories.
@SurfinxHI said:
Not to stir the pot here, but didn't he put IN THE ADD that he was not liable for anything after dropping it at the PO and the seller needed to get insurance, if so desired?
At least that's what he used to do. I'd love to see the original add.....
By "ADD", I assume you mean "listing". A couple of days before this blew-up, I bought his 1937 buffalo nickel in PCGS MS66 for $56. His listing made it abundantly clear that he wouldn't buy insurance and once he mailed my coin he would send me a tracking number and then any problems would be between me and the USPS. I thought this was a rather strange way of conducting business but I was willing to assume the risk of not getting the coin because the USPS lost it, stole it, or destroyed it with their equipment. Once he got my check a couple of days ago, he contacted me to let me know the check arrived, he reiterated the terms that we agreed to, and then he gave me a chance to back out of the deal. I told him that I was willing to self-insure for such an inexpensive coin and to go ahead and mail my coin. The tracking for my coin shows that it will be delivered sometime today. If for some reason I don't get it, I promise you guys that I won't start a thread here whining about it. His terms were very clear and I agreed to them and as a responsible adult I'll live with the consequences.
There is always "the other side to the story".
If, in fact, @ponderit agreed to the same terms then a few dozen people owe @silverpop a bit of an apology.
If you don't like the terms, then don't agree to them.
I'm relatively sure the terms don't say "I get to keep your money whether you get the item or not"...
According to at least two posters (I can't know), the terms say that shipping is at the buyer's risk. I would be interested in hearing from others who have done business with him as to whether that was his standard practice.
That DOES NOT matter for the issue at hand with Ponderit.
Ponderit has stated, before your post I quoted and in a post that you acknowledged, that he NEVER had that disclaimer with him.
So, anyone else that had a transaction with him, WITH that disclaimer is one thing and is NOT part of this issue. To even bring them up as an "IF that were the case" is throwing a smoke cover for silverpop and convoluting the thread in a way that isn't needed and isn't right.
IF IF IF (but, it DIDN'T happen so there IS NO 'if')
Except those posters claim this is a common disclaimer used by silverpop on all his listings. And I raised the question before pondering addressed the issue.
We actually have no proof as to whether it did or didn't happen since the listing, like all his listings were deleted.
No smokescreen. A legitimate question that was raised by two customers of silverpop, not me.
Thank you for your input.
I think it says a great deal that the seller didn’t dispute the details posted here by the buyer.
Is it possible the seller isn't interested in arguing and has stopped following this thread or has even left this forum?
@CoinHoarder said:
I have been buying coins from silverpop since at least 2019.
As I stated in an earlier thread, he always made it perfectly clear that once the post office had the package he was mailing to me, he was no longer responsible for any loss. I told him that I had no problem with that, because my loss of money would be minimal if the coin(s) were lost in transit.
Also, his prices for what he was selling his coins, were among the best on our BST in my opinion. Well worth the risk to me.
As far as pay pal goes, I can understand why many old school people do not use it. I just started using pay pal myself a couple of years ago. Silverpop deals in cash and checks only. I can understand that, and have no problem with it.
In all of my dealing with silverpop, after he received my checks, he promply mailed my coins and sent me a tracking number. All coins arrived safe and sound.
@SurfinxHI said:
Not to stir the pot here, but didn't he put IN THE ADD that he was not liable for anything after dropping it at the PO and the seller needed to get insurance, if so desired?
At least that's what he used to do. I'd love to see the original add.....
By "ADD", I assume you mean "listing". A couple of days before this blew-up, I bought his 1937 buffalo nickel in PCGS MS66 for $56. His listing made it abundantly clear that he wouldn't buy insurance and once he mailed my coin he would send me a tracking number and then any problems would be between me and the USPS. I thought this was a rather strange way of conducting business but I was willing to assume the risk of not getting the coin because the USPS lost it, stole it, or destroyed it with their equipment. Once he got my check a couple of days ago, he contacted me to let me know the check arrived, he reiterated the terms that we agreed to, and then he gave me a chance to back out of the deal. I told him that I was willing to self-insure for such an inexpensive coin and to go ahead and mail my coin. The tracking for my coin shows that it will be delivered sometime today. If for some reason I don't get it, I promise you guys that I won't start a thread here whining about it. His terms were very clear and I agreed to them and as a responsible adult I'll live with the consequences.
There is always "the other side to the story".
If, in fact, @ponderit agreed to the same terms then a few dozen people owe @silverpop a bit of an apology.
If you don't like the terms, then don't agree to them.
I'm relatively sure the terms don't say "I get to keep your money whether you get the item or not"...
According to at least two posters (I can't know), the terms say that shipping is at the buyer's risk. I would be interested in hearing from others who have done business with him as to whether that was his standard practice.
That DOES NOT matter for the issue at hand with Ponderit.
Ponderit has stated, before your post I quoted and in a post that you acknowledged, that he NEVER had that disclaimer with him.
So, anyone else that had a transaction with him, WITH that disclaimer is one thing and is NOT part of this issue. To even bring them up as an "IF that were the case" is throwing a smoke cover for silverpop and convoluting the thread in a way that isn't needed and isn't right.
IF IF IF (but, it DIDN'T happen so there IS NO 'if')
Except those posters claim this is a common disclaimer used by silverpop on all his listings. And I raised the question before pondering addressed the issue.
We actually have no proof as to whether it did or didn't happen since the listing, like all his listings were deleted.
No smokescreen. A legitimate question that was raised by two customers of silverpop, not me.
Thank you for your input.
I think it says a great deal that the seller didn’t dispute the details posted here by the buyer.
Is it possible the seller isn't interested in arguing and has stopped following this thread or has even left this forum?
Sure, it’s possible. However, that doesn’t change the fact that he posted here (more than once) and on Coin Talk, as well. And he didn’t say anything that conflicted with the details provided by @ponderit.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
It's funny how members here act towards different people. The guy that lost out on $110 already has said he is just letting everyone know what happened and how.
I posted how a well know dealer canceled a done deal with me where he would of left about the same amount on the table, and some folks here got upset with me for naming the dealer.
This thread is looking like a 16th century witch trial.
4 pages of the same fluff is enough. I'm sure everyone has gotten the point by now.
@SurfinxHI said:
Not to stir the pot here, but didn't he put IN THE ADD that he was not liable for anything after dropping it at the PO and the seller needed to get insurance, if so desired?
At least that's what he used to do. I'd love to see the original add.....
By "ADD", I assume you mean "listing". A couple of days before this blew-up, I bought his 1937 buffalo nickel in PCGS MS66 for $56. His listing made it abundantly clear that he wouldn't buy insurance and once he mailed my coin he would send me a tracking number and then any problems would be between me and the USPS. I thought this was a rather strange way of conducting business but I was willing to assume the risk of not getting the coin because the USPS lost it, stole it, or destroyed it with their equipment. Once he got my check a couple of days ago, he contacted me to let me know the check arrived, he reiterated the terms that we agreed to, and then he gave me a chance to back out of the deal. I told him that I was willing to self-insure for such an inexpensive coin and to go ahead and mail my coin. The tracking for my coin shows that it will be delivered sometime today. If for some reason I don't get it, I promise you guys that I won't start a thread here whining about it. His terms were very clear and I agreed to them and as a responsible adult I'll live with the consequences.
There is always "the other side to the story".
If, in fact, @ponderit agreed to the same terms then a few dozen people owe @silverpop a bit of an apology.
If you don't like the terms, then don't agree to them.
I'm relatively sure the terms don't say "I get to keep your money whether you get the item or not"...
According to at least two posters (I can't know), the terms say that shipping is at the buyer's risk. I would be interested in hearing from others who have done business with him as to whether that was his standard practice.
That DOES NOT matter for the issue at hand with Ponderit.
Ponderit has stated, before your post I quoted and in a post that you acknowledged, that he NEVER had that disclaimer with him.
So, anyone else that had a transaction with him, WITH that disclaimer is one thing and is NOT part of this issue. To even bring them up as an "IF that were the case" is throwing a smoke cover for silverpop and convoluting the thread in a way that isn't needed and isn't right.
IF IF IF (but, it DIDN'T happen so there IS NO 'if')
Except those posters claim this is a common disclaimer used by silverpop on all his listings. And I raised the question before pondering addressed the issue.
We actually have no proof as to whether it did or didn't happen since the listing, like all his listings were deleted.
No smokescreen. A legitimate question that was raised by two customers of silverpop, not me.
Thank you for your input.
I think it says a great deal that the seller didn’t dispute the details posted here by the buyer.
Is it possible the seller isn't interested in arguing and has stopped following this thread or has even left this forum?
Sure, it’s possible. However, that doesn’t change the fact that he posted here (more than once) and on Coin Talk, as well. And he didn’t say anything that conflicted with the details provided by @ponderit.
He also didn't post anything that is inconsistent with the testimony of coinhoatder and others. All he posted here is something about not knowing what the postv office is doing.
I don't know the truth. But I also have no reason to doubt coinhoarder and others who testified that going back to at least 2019 silverpop had a shipping disclaimer. Since the listing had been deleted for 2 months, isn't it also possible that ponderit forgot the terms or ignored then at the time?
Whatever the truth, I'd like someone to explain how the TWO thread on this are at all productive. And dont tell me they are warning people to avoid the guy who left the forum. Once this thread finally dies, "nevermind" is not a search term that will warn anyone.
@SurfinxHI said:
Not to stir the pot here, but didn't he put IN THE ADD that he was not liable for anything after dropping it at the PO and the seller needed to get insurance, if so desired?
At least that's what he used to do. I'd love to see the original add.....
By "ADD", I assume you mean "listing". A couple of days before this blew-up, I bought his 1937 buffalo nickel in PCGS MS66 for $56. His listing made it abundantly clear that he wouldn't buy insurance and once he mailed my coin he would send me a tracking number and then any problems would be between me and the USPS. I thought this was a rather strange way of conducting business but I was willing to assume the risk of not getting the coin because the USPS lost it, stole it, or destroyed it with their equipment. Once he got my check a couple of days ago, he contacted me to let me know the check arrived, he reiterated the terms that we agreed to, and then he gave me a chance to back out of the deal. I told him that I was willing to self-insure for such an inexpensive coin and to go ahead and mail my coin. The tracking for my coin shows that it will be delivered sometime today. If for some reason I don't get it, I promise you guys that I won't start a thread here whining about it. His terms were very clear and I agreed to them and as a responsible adult I'll live with the consequences.
There is always "the other side to the story".
If, in fact, @ponderit agreed to the same terms then a few dozen people owe @silverpop a bit of an apology.
If you don't like the terms, then don't agree to them.
I'm relatively sure the terms don't say "I get to keep your money whether you get the item or not"...
According to at least two posters (I can't know), the terms say that shipping is at the buyer's risk. I would be interested in hearing from others who have done business with him as to whether that was his standard practice.
That DOES NOT matter for the issue at hand with Ponderit.
Ponderit has stated, before your post I quoted and in a post that you acknowledged, that he NEVER had that disclaimer with him.
So, anyone else that had a transaction with him, WITH that disclaimer is one thing and is NOT part of this issue. To even bring them up as an "IF that were the case" is throwing a smoke cover for silverpop and convoluting the thread in a way that isn't needed and isn't right.
IF IF IF (but, it DIDN'T happen so there IS NO 'if')
Except those posters claim this is a common disclaimer used by silverpop on all his listings. And I raised the question before pondering addressed the issue.
We actually have no proof as to whether it did or didn't happen since the listing, like all his listings were deleted.
No smokescreen. A legitimate question that was raised by two customers of silverpop, not me.
Thank you for your input.
I think it says a great deal that the seller didn’t dispute the details posted here by the buyer.
Is it possible the seller isn't interested in arguing and has stopped following this thread or has even left this forum?
Sure, it’s possible. However, that doesn’t change the fact that he posted here (more than once) and on Coin Talk, as well. And he didn’t say anything that conflicted with the details provided by @ponderit.
He also didn't post anything that is inconsistent with the testimony of coinhoatder and others. All he posted here is something about not knowing what the postv office is doing.
I don't know the truth. But I also have no reason to doubt coinhoarder and others who testified that going back to at least 2019 silverpop had a shipping disclaimer. Since the listing had been deleted for 2 months, isn't it also possible that ponderit forgot the terms or ignored then at the time?
Whatever the truth, I'd like someone to explain how the TWO thread on this are at all productive. And dont tell me they are warning people to avoid the guy who left the forum. Once this thread finally dies, "nevermind" is not a search term that will warn anyone.
Whatever the truth, many threads here aren’t “productive”. Is that your suggested bar to set?😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@SurfinxHI said:
Not to stir the pot here, but didn't he put IN THE ADD that he was not liable for anything after dropping it at the PO and the seller needed to get insurance, if so desired?
At least that's what he used to do. I'd love to see the original add.....
By "ADD", I assume you mean "listing". A couple of days before this blew-up, I bought his 1937 buffalo nickel in PCGS MS66 for $56. His listing made it abundantly clear that he wouldn't buy insurance and once he mailed my coin he would send me a tracking number and then any problems would be between me and the USPS. I thought this was a rather strange way of conducting business but I was willing to assume the risk of not getting the coin because the USPS lost it, stole it, or destroyed it with their equipment. Once he got my check a couple of days ago, he contacted me to let me know the check arrived, he reiterated the terms that we agreed to, and then he gave me a chance to back out of the deal. I told him that I was willing to self-insure for such an inexpensive coin and to go ahead and mail my coin. The tracking for my coin shows that it will be delivered sometime today. If for some reason I don't get it, I promise you guys that I won't start a thread here whining about it. His terms were very clear and I agreed to them and as a responsible adult I'll live with the consequences.
There is always "the other side to the story".
If, in fact, @ponderit agreed to the same terms then a few dozen people owe @silverpop a bit of an apology.
If you don't like the terms, then don't agree to them.
I'm relatively sure the terms don't say "I get to keep your money whether you get the item or not"...
According to at least two posters (I can't know), the terms say that shipping is at the buyer's risk. I would be interested in hearing from others who have done business with him as to whether that was his standard practice.
That DOES NOT matter for the issue at hand with Ponderit.
Ponderit has stated, before your post I quoted and in a post that you acknowledged, that he NEVER had that disclaimer with him.
So, anyone else that had a transaction with him, WITH that disclaimer is one thing and is NOT part of this issue. To even bring them up as an "IF that were the case" is throwing a smoke cover for silverpop and convoluting the thread in a way that isn't needed and isn't right.
IF IF IF (but, it DIDN'T happen so there IS NO 'if')
Except those posters claim this is a common disclaimer used by silverpop on all his listings. And I raised the question before pondering addressed the issue.
We actually have no proof as to whether it did or didn't happen since the listing, like all his listings were deleted.
No smokescreen. A legitimate question that was raised by two customers of silverpop, not me.
Thank you for your input.
I think it says a great deal that the seller didn’t dispute the details posted here by the buyer.
Is it possible the seller isn't interested in arguing and has stopped following this thread or has even left this forum?
Sure, it’s possible. However, that doesn’t change the fact that he posted here (more than once) and on Coin Talk, as well. And he didn’t say anything that conflicted with the details provided by @ponderit.
He also didn't post anything that is inconsistent with the testimony of coinhoatder and others. All he posted here is something about not knowing what the postv office is doing.
I don't know the truth. But I also have no reason to doubt coinhoarder and others who testified that going back to at least 2019 silverpop had a shipping disclaimer. Since the listing had been deleted for 2 months, isn't it also possible that ponderit forgot the terms or ignored then at the time?
Whatever the truth, I'd like someone to explain how the TWO thread on this are at all productive. And dont tell me they are warning people to avoid the guy who left the forum. Once this thread finally dies, "nevermind" is not a search term that will warn anyone.
Whatever the truth, many threads here aren’t “productive”. Is that your suggested bar to set?😉
Lol. Fair enough. Although most threads don't have a clone also getting bumped.
I defer. Please get your pitchforks and torches and continue.
@Lazybones said:
Before jumping on any flame-throwing bandwagon recall to mind a very young forum member with a freshly minted family. He was a real up and comer in numismatics when he got himself in very deep trouble and owed some money. Some forum members really turned up the heat and began a trashing campaign. I'm sure all you long-time forum veterans know what happened next. This poor young man couldn't take the pressure and took his own life.
You never truly know a person's mindset. Reaching out and offering help rather than flaming may be the better choice. There may be something going on behind the scenes you don't know about.
I considered posting something similar to this yesterday, but hesitated because the circumstances are very different and this is surely a painful memory for many here.
But enough is enough. This is a lot of vitriol and has gone way beyond “warning” other buyers. Let’s save the “warnings” for the scammers that keep popping up here with no intention of ever sending a coin.
Comments
Why? It's not your property, it's owned by the board (PCGS).
You have a copyright interest in the text as the creator. Saying "you are full of ****" and quoting might be fair use.
Sure, there's stuff in the T&C about "right of privacy" but that's a slippery slope. Might be able to argue that by continually shooting one's mouth off, one has become a public figure in the context of our little world... at which point you have to show not only that what is said/posted is untrue, but was done with actual malicious intent. You can't claim I've trashed somebody's reputation when they did it themselves before I ever posted in this thread.
https://careers.collectors.com/termsofuse
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
I didn’t say anything about the PM being my property. And considering that it was originally sent and received through Coin Talk, I don’t see how it would be “owned” by PCGS.
I respect the privacy of private messages. Whether others do is up to them.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Imagine burning your reputation for $110.
Please forgive the cross-post from the autographs forum, but let's see what Warren Buffett has to say about it:
That DOES NOT matter for the issue at hand with Ponderit.
Ponderit has stated, before your post I quoted and in a post that you acknowledged, that he NEVER had that disclaimer with him.
So, anyone else that had a transaction with him, WITH that disclaimer is one thing and is NOT part of this issue. To even bring them up as an "IF that were the case" is throwing a smoke cover for silverpop and convoluting the thread in a way that isn't needed and isn't right.
IF IF IF (but, it DIDN'T happen so there IS NO 'if')
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
"When...or when not. There is no if"
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
Except those posters claim this is a common disclaimer used by silverpop on all his listings. And I raised the question before pondering addressed the issue.
We actually have no proof as to whether it did or didn't happen since the listing, like all his listings were deleted.
No smokescreen. A legitimate question that was raised by two customers of silverpop, not me.
Thank you for your input.
I think it says a great deal that the seller didn’t dispute the details posted here by the buyer.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Anyone wondering if pops insisted on insurance for
The cost is only $3.40 to insure item valued between $50 to $100. A very small fee/sacrifice that's not going to break anyone to pay. And I'm reading with the USPS, insurance is automatically added/included with Priority Mail. So.....is this all about being too damn lazy to file a claim with the USPS if the mail/packages get lost?
And what's his "return policy"? Are you not going to include insurance if you send it back/return the coins? lol
It'd also be interesting to learn if Silverpops "walks his talk" with buying coins. Does he make demands that there be no insurance added on his coin orders? Or worse, demands the seller fork/pay for the insurance because the seller wants it, right?
Cause, I'm a strong/firm believer that one should always "walk the talk they spew" when the shoe is on the other (his) foot!
Did Silverpop insist that there'd be no insurance on his recent acquisition of the Morgan dollar he posted in another thread?
Come on, Silverpop, tell us how your Morgan dollar was mailed to you. Do you walk your talk?
Leo
To add, maybe the problem is with the USPS. Accepting values for raw coins that haven't been certified. And they want a letter from a reputed dealer about the coins that are lost when a claim is filed.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
This thread: Godwin's Law
(Godwin's law, short for Godwin's law (or rule) of Nazi analogies, is an Internet adage asserting that as an online discussion grows longer (regardless of topic or scope), the probability of a comparison to Nazis or Adolf Hitler approaches 100%)
We're getting close.
peacockcoins
@braddick didn't you get us on the steps of that with your post just now
If, ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a Merry Christmas. @silverpop has never made such a claim, which speaks volumes, so why would you? Why are you trying to defend someone that won't defend themselves?
Notice I said won't defend themselves, not can't.
Philippians 4:4-7
I AM NOT THE ONE WHO POSTED THAT HE HAS A DISCLAIMER IN ALL OF HIS LISTINGS.
MAYBE. Except the seller basically had a tantrum and went away. We haven't heard anything from him in a while. I also think it says a great deal that two forum members testified that all his listings have had a disclaimer for years.
Either way, I think this thread has become unseemly and gratuitous.
EXACTLY!
Reading, and reading comprehension, are important before posting.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
Did they use the word "all"? Or just that, in the threads THEY participated in to buy, it was there?
Did those "two forum members" see 100% of the selling posts by the person in question? If not, why make it like they are the end all on this?
Ponderit has stated that it was there, and wasn't communicated, to him.
While I value and trust the 2 forum members who said it was there in their transactions, I will also give Ponderit my trust (unless and until PROVEN otherwise...which hasn't happened...that would require a screenshot or an unedited post stating it).
I just don't get your digging in of your heels on this and all the "IF IF IFs"...I really don't.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
Before jumping on any flame-throwing bandwagon recall to mind a very young forum member with a freshly minted family. He was a real up and comer in numismatics when he got himself in very deep trouble and owed some money. Some forum members really turned up the heat and began a trashing campaign. I'm sure all you long-time forum veterans know what happened next. This poor young man couldn't take the pressure and took his own life.
You never truly know a person's mindset. Reaching out and offering help rather than flaming may be the better choice. There may be something going on behind the scenes you don't know about.
USAF (Ret) 1974 - 1994 - The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. Remembering RickO, a brother in arms.
Is it possible the seller isn't interested in arguing and has stopped following this thread or has even left this forum?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
The IF IF IF it's icky to emphasis that, like you only more humbly, I don't know the truth here. I'm willing to entertain the possibility that the truth lies in between the two stories.
Yes, @CoinHoarder said "always".
But this thread has gone beyond any usefulness and is just piling on.
I'd say it is likely, not just possible.
I can't read what isn't written.
Here, read this:
Sure, it’s possible. However, that doesn’t change the fact that he posted here (more than once) and on Coin Talk, as well. And he didn’t say anything that conflicted with the details provided by @ponderit.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
It's funny how members here act towards different people. The guy that lost out on $110 already has said he is just letting everyone know what happened and how.
I posted how a well know dealer canceled a done deal with me where he would of left about the same amount on the table, and some folks here got upset with me for naming the dealer.
This thread is looking like a 16th century witch trial.
4 pages of the same fluff is enough. I'm sure everyone has gotten the point by now.
He also didn't post anything that is inconsistent with the testimony of coinhoatder and others. All he posted here is something about not knowing what the postv office is doing.
I don't know the truth. But I also have no reason to doubt coinhoarder and others who testified that going back to at least 2019 silverpop had a shipping disclaimer. Since the listing had been deleted for 2 months, isn't it also possible that ponderit forgot the terms or ignored then at the time?
Whatever the truth, I'd like someone to explain how the TWO thread on this are at all productive. And dont tell me they are warning people to avoid the guy who left the forum. Once this thread finally dies, "nevermind" is not a search term that will warn anyone.
Whatever the truth, many threads here aren’t “productive”. Is that your suggested bar to set?😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Lol. Fair enough. Although most threads don't have a clone also getting bumped.
I defer. Please get your pitchforks and torches and continue.
.
I considered posting something similar to this yesterday, but hesitated because the circumstances are very different and this is surely a painful memory for many here.
But enough is enough. This is a lot of vitriol and has gone way beyond “warning” other buyers. Let’s save the “warnings” for the scammers that keep popping up here with no intention of ever sending a coin.
Simply a $110 lesson for us all, at the expense of another.