An arrogant seller on ebay

tjkillian

I wrote this seller what the grade was on this eBay coin, and he wrote

<FONT size=2>"WHAT I CALL IT AND PCGS CALL IT ARE NOT THE SAME.
YOU GET TO GRADE IT OR PRICE IT WHAT EVER YOU FEEL.
GOOD LUCK!!!!"




To anyone who knows how to read a slab, it is clearly a AU-55.

Tom</FONT>

rainbowroosie

High bidder has "0" feedback and sunglasses?? What's that mean??

redhott

PCGS holder says 55, plainly visible

ksteelheader

I also looked it up, AU55...........Ken

sinin1

I don't see the grade on my photo of the slab, I do see the PCGS number which I verified as a AU55BN 1853 half cent.

danglen

For those forum members that may not know how to read the grade off a PCGS serial number, the two digit number after the 1227. tells the grade. (We learned that in ANA Summer Camp Advanced Grading last year when a couple of the "test" slab labels were not completely covered with tape)

Gilbert

I don't get the gist. Is he arrogant for not specifically saying PCGS graded it 55, or, did he make the comment "to anyone who knows how to read a slab ...".

Is it possible he is merely indicating he didn't agree with the number assigned, but using the PCGS as verification of authenticity to potential buyers?

I'm at a loss.

gemtone65

Rainbowroosie: I would infer we have a shill bidder in this auction.

K6AZ

I wouldn't be too upset with this. As someone else pointed out, the cert no. is clearly visible with the grade. Some people just do not like doing email.

tjkillian

I guess I was not clear. He does not say the grade in the auction, nor would he say the grade in an email. By looking at the slab I could tell that it was an AU-55. I thought it was arrogant by not saying the grade in either the auction or by email.

Tom

JJacks

Probably just another guy upset about the grade he got back. What did he expect, MS63?

I wouldn't buy from this guy myself. Why hide the info?

JJacks

dlshaw

I agree with JJacks, just from the tone of his opinon vs Pcgs opinon.

DCAMFranklin

Then don't bid.

FatMan

This is amazing. The guy markets his coin by saying it has been graded by PCGS, but he refuses to tell what the grade is. Now, anyone who has any knowledge of PCGS slabs knows what the grade is, but a buyer without that knowledge will not. His response to an email suggests that if you don't know how to read the label you should grade it yourself from the image. This is a total contradiction to his opening marketing volley of "in PCGS holder".

If, as others say, the seller disagrees with the grade why doesn't he just crack it out and sell it raw. He can then use his tactic of grade it yourself from the image. He can even offer his own opinion. This guy has me very confused but it appears this guy has really taken the concept of selling the Slab, not the coin (or the grade), to the ultimate.

g097103

The high bidder ID was created the same day the coin was listed. Coincidence of course.

Barry

<< <i>I guess I was not clear. He does not say the grade in the auction, nor would he say the grade in an email. By looking at the slab I could tell that it was an AU-55. I thought it was arrogant by not saying the grade in either the auction or by email.

Tom >>


I'd call it dumb. Makes it look like he's trying to pull something. If he didn't agree with the grade, he should have cracked it out and sold it raw. That coin is not one known to be counterfeited, so authenticity isn't the issue.

wingedliberty

Clear attempt at deception. This seller is now on my crap list.


Brian.

ms70

Looks like he pulled the pic that gave the grading answer away.

Dog97

If he took the time to PERSONALY SENT THIS COIN FOR 3RD PARTY GRADING
And take the time to PERSONALY REPLY TO EMAIL
Then he should take the time to PERSONALY LOAD A DECENT PICTURE YOU CAN JUDGE THE COIN WITH
Instead of one that's GOT A BIG BLACK SHADOW OVER MOST OF THE COIN OBSCURING IT
DO YOU EVER GET THE FEELING SOME EBAY SELLERS JUST HATE LIFE

Petescorner

I can remember a time when a forum member posted a PCGS coin for auction on eBay without showing the grade or label. His reasoning behind it was that he wanted bidders to "judge the coin for themselves" rather than what was on the holder. Something to the effect of "buy the coin, not the holder." Amazingly enough, he wasn't chastised by others on this forum, but rather lauded for the example he was setting. Does anybody else remember this?