Question About Coin Sellers: Is This Practice Negligent? Puffery? Misleading? Deceptive? Fraudulent?

RBinTex

OK. What am I talking about? Take for an example a seller that is selling a coin on eBay and touts the pop for it because the known pop for it from the TPG service it is currently holdered in (& being offered for sale in) is quite low.

Let's refine the example to assume the coin in question is a TPG graded coin where the pop is easily verified online and that the total number graded is less than 5 or 10 examples in total.

What if ANACS has graded over 100 or more of the same coin? Is it not in some way wrong to hype the coin as a VERY low pop when in fact it is really not? It's just that grading service A hasn't graded many of them but grading service B (say ANACS) has.

Isn't it somehow misleading at best to infer the coin is "rarer" than it actually is if one were to at least know & refer to ALL the known pops available?

Of course the key to this informational disparity is the fact that ANACS has not yet put it's pop online for coin buyers to check although one should probaly get a copy if you're going to be succumbing to seller auction claims alluded to above.

I'm just asking.

Nickelback

I think it's misleading, but I always check the PCGS pop report before I bid/buy a PCGS-graded coin. I'd do the same with others if they were available - otherwise I stick with the ones I know.

construct

It might be misleading, but it's just puffery because the pops are readily available for anyone to check in your hypothetical.

PuddlePirate

From my understanding of "pop" reports, they are only valid for the TPG that graded them. Just how valid are the pop reports anyway since many people do cross-overs of high pop coins - say ANACS or NGC to PCGS? Just because a pop says "10" it doesn't mean the other "9" are still holdered in the original TPG slab. It seems to me that the pop reports are just to give you an idea of what is out there in a certain grade and are not "definitive" on their own.

I get turned off by sellers that quote PCGS prices for cheaper TPG and RAW coins. That I think is fraud.

my opinion

construct

Yes, you're right about the crossovers, but it's not only the crossovers that make the pop reports less valuable. The fact that the pop reports don't account for most of the resubmissions to the same grading service also devalues them.

Still, if the seller identifies which grading services pop report he is refering to, I'd have a hard time calling it fraud. It's really just talking the coin up--calling attention to facts that are readily available to a knowledgable buyer in hopes of encouraging a sale. It may be misleading, but it's hardly fraud. And yes, I find it a turn-off, too.

IrishMike

No its not misleading, if anyone who has an ounce of sense believes the pop reports they don't have a clue to begin with. It's no more deceptive than listing PCGS price guide in your auction. It's puffery of course, but that is the American marketing strategy.

UncleJoe

Not misleading IMO.

If I had a POP 1, 2, or 3 PCGS MS-70 coin, would the MS-70 POP reports from NTC bother you as to the rarity of my coin?

The point is depending on the TPG, some consistently grade certain coins higher than other TPG's. Trying to compare different TPG POP reports is equivalent to saying that any coin graded by any TPG with the same grade should sell or be bought for the same price.

Joe.

MrEureka

Buyers already know that there are multiple services so I doubt that many people will be deceived. I think the practice has more to do with laziness than deception. It's time-consuming to look up multiple pops.

BillJones

Part of fallacy of POP reports is that a low number graded is ALWAYS and indicator of rarity. Some coins have low pop report numbers because getting them slabbed makes no economic sense. Other coins are very rare in low grade and will show few or no coins at all below a certain level.

Population reports are a flawed source for gauging rarity for many reasons. Because of that they should be used as only one part of an overall study approach when one is trying to determine if a given coin in a give grade is really scarce or rare.

BAJJERFAN

If collectors would do their part and properly notify the TPG's when coins in their holders have been cracked out it would help to keep the pop reports at least smoewhat close to accurate.

RYK

Take for an example a seller that is selling a coin on eBay and touts the pop for it because the known pop for it from the TPG service it is currently holdered in (& being offered for sale in) is quite low...

I think that this practice is common and acceptable. The informed buyer, including just about anyone who would be influenced by the pop number, knows the value of pop reports with respect to the series he/she collects and will likely not be misled by these claims.

mr1931S

"Some coins have low pop report numbers because getting them slabbed makes no economic sense. Other coins are very rare in low grade and will show few or no coins at all below a certain level...Population reports are a flawed source for gauging rarity for many reasons. "

If one actually searches for certain coins of interest, one gets a very good sense about their true rarity or scarcity.

CoinResource

A pop report is exactly that: a population report. Just because many of us have a preference for two pop reports (NGC and PCGS) doesn't mean others are invalid or fraudulent. Would I buy the coin? No. This is just puffery to make a sale. The buyer ultimately needs to become educated. -cr