Auction Catalog Pet Peeves - What to do???

MrEureka

There are some really annoying new trends in auction catalog descriptions in the way pop data is twisted to deceive buyers. For example:

1. Proclamations that the coin is the finest graded of a given designation without mentioning that many coins have been graded higher with better designations. For example: "This pop one MS-64 PL 1852-W Gold Dollar is the finest PL by two full grades!", when in fact many DMPL's have been graded higher.

2. Proclamations that the coin is the "only one graded by TPG A in any grade!" when half a dozen have been graded by TPG B.

These proclamations go beyond puffery and border on deception. Does this bother anyone else? Is it worth trying to do anything about this?

Catch22

The rare coin industry is ripe for some legal action under the deceptive trade practices statutes. In Texas, the Act provides for treble damages and is one of the most consumer friendly in the nation. Of course, getting the Attorney General to pursue something would be an uphill battle.

shylock

It's gotten almost as bad as the car industry. "Highest Rated American Made Subcompact AWD SUV!" doesn't mean much if only two manufacturers make vehicles in that class.

MrEureka

Of course, getting the Attorney General to pursue something would be an uphill battle.

No need. If enough people made it known that they cared, I'm sure the PNG would issue guidelines that would prevent such abuses.

idocoins

These proclamations go beyond puffery and border on deception. Does this bother anyone else? Is it worth trying to do anything about this? >>


Yes it bothers me also......

FrattLaw

<< <i>These proclamations go beyond puffery and border on deception. Does this bother anyone else? Is it worth trying to do anything about this? >>



Andy -- I agree -- let's sue'em!!!!

Actually, it would surprise me if the catalogs and the descriptions are not passed by an attorney before they go to print. Every large car dealership insures that their ads are legally approved before printing. And if not, it could cause some real headaches for the dealership.

While I agree the statements border on puffery/fraud, they might still be okay. But specific examples would need to be shown. Also remember that the catalog goes to the printer well before the auction and the POPs could easily change by the auction.

And there are disclaimers in all of the catalogs. Here's the one from Heritage;

NO WARRANTY, WHETHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WITH RESPECT TO ANY DESCRIPTION CONTAINED IN THIS AUCTION. Any description of the coins contained in this auction is for the sole purpose of identifying the coins, and no description of coins has been made part of the basis of the bargain or has created any express warranty that the goods would confirm to any description made by the Auctioneer.

Even if they messed one up -- really bad -- they are still protected. But they would probably allow a return of the coin in order to satisfy their customer.

Michael

RYK

Andy,

For some reason, these claims do not bother me. I guess I am numb to them. I assume that the descriptions are written for the benefit of the seller, not the buyer, and I verify all population data rather than accepting it as fact.

nwcs

It bothers me, and it's intentionally misleading. There is probably no way to stop it, though.

kranky

I agree with Andy's observations - those types of auction descriptions are, to me, quite misleading. It's telling the truth, but not the whole truth. Most coins in auction catalogs are nice enough that they aren't going to be shunned by having the whole story told.

Maybe if everyone who saw such statements called the auction company to ask about the rest of the information, they would quickly tire of the calls and tell the whole story.

Coinosaurus

Andy--

I think if you posted some of the more egregious offenses here and asked forum members to write the auction companies about them we might be able to influence their behavior.

Most of the cataloging you are talking about is done by perhaps a dozen or so individuals. It should not be too hard to make them realize that we do not appreciate such behavior.

MrEureka

I think if you posted some of the more egregious offenses here and asked forum members to write the auction companies about them...

Not me. Sorry. But I would be glad to push for industry guidelines if I thought enough buyers really cared.

Shamika

Does it bother me? It all depends on my mood at the time.

Sometimes the auction descriptions make me laugh. The adjectives that some of these catalogers come up with are comical. What exactly does a "tastey gem" look like?

However, there are days I have half a mind to call the auction house and give them a piece of my mind.

And what exactly does "registry quality" mean anyway? Are you telling me I can only use coins that meet a minimum grade? Rediculous!

lava

So far it is unanimous.

gemtone65

Andy: I agree with your points. On eof my own pet peeves is when the catalog says something like "Only 2 graded in cameo", when the particular designation, such as "cameo", might have been available for only a relatively short period of time.

But, by far my number one annoyance is the virtual absence of any negative comments about the items. Since there aren't too many MS70 coins, the others must have something about them that reduced the grade from perfection. just try learning what those characteristics are from an auction catalogue.

mrearlygold

It should bother anyone who wants the facts.

Rgrds
Tom

Lakesammman

I started a similar thread some time ago re: proofs and cam proofs. I was told that they are different and that it IS appropriate to call a non-Cam coin finest, even if there are finer cameos out there. Go figure.....

Link to earlier thread