Do you consider this immoral?

GoldenEyeNumismatics

Before I say anything, let me tell you that I have no intentions to do anything even remotely close to what I am about to talk about.

Let's say that some expert coin doctor artifically tones some ASE's. They look great--very colorful and attractive. He tones 100 of them. He puts them all on eBay, stating in the auction that they are AT. Nevertheless they sell for $50-$100 a piece just because they are so attractive. Is this immoral? The seller states in his auction that they are AT

JoeLewis

What could possibly be immoral about that?

DJCoinz

Perfectly fine.

clw54

It's not immoral, but if they go for that much money it's because the buyers want to get them holdered and pass them off as NT.

BobaFett72

he's being honest with the description. thats not immoral.
its not a crime to tone them. it would be a crime to SLAB them lol.
oh wait... nevermind.

ccmorgan

Another no vote, just like littleton(I hate them)gold plates the state quarters for eye appeal and is honest about it. It's always been a buyer beware thing. One mans junk has always been anothers treasure.

thisnamztaken

No it's not immoral or unethical.

Coxe

If they were real coins, of appreciable age, I would think the problem becomes one where subsequent owners would likely misrepresent them as NT. However, we are discussing bullion with obviously accelerated toning. Anyone who puts premiums on them either has to not care how they were gotten that state or so hopelessly ignorant and mezmerized by the purty kullerz that we should hardly care. If they make their own market, fine. I would expect it to be loaded with risk regardless. In any event, plastic Mint tubes won't give you endroll toners and none of them have been lodged in Wayte Raymond albums for 30 years.

DieClash

I concur with the majority. Seller has indicated they are AT and so it's not immoral. I equate it with the mass marketers who color the SAEs red, white and blue enamel and then sell them for a premium to non-collectors. It's not immoral if you don't misrepresent it. But, it is not an authentic coin surface if it has been altered intentionally, either by ATing it or else applying the colorful acrylic enamel that so many snake oil salemen seem to prefer.

ipmman

Full disclosure equals not immoral. Too bad there don't seem to be too many sellers like that.

bluespaceant

curly

Just givin' the people what they want. That's the American way.

droopyd

Not "immoral." Just "creepy."

ttown

It seems ok to me.

poorguy

Sounds like the road to hell is paved with good intention$. Someone is introducing AT coins into the market. That is the bottom line. It doesn't matter if it was disclosed the first time they sold or not. The seller HAS to know that these coins will be turned around by those who bought them with many being called NT (if the toning is good enough) when they go to sell. If the seller doesn't realize this then he/she is either mentally handicapped or dense. With the seller knowing this sad fact, he/she is making their intentions clear, he/she offering AT coins for sale is directly and knowingly contributing to what EVERYONE here b1tches about nearly every day. AT? NT? Ooh, look at this AT crap on eBay, Oh, how could they sell an AT coin that blatant ect.

Flyfishguy

How about if the back of the coin is stamped "AT", just like "COPY" is stamped on a replica....

ricko

The immorality would be for a buyer to sell them as NT.... The original seller, while aware there could be nefarious intentions by some of the buyers, is not responsible for their actions. Should a car dealer be sued if a drunk kills someone in a car he sold? And that is just one of many examples... It may seem wrong to collectors, but there are many who just go for the 'eye appeal'.. like jewelry (it may be costume jewelry - but many women wear it). Cheers, RickO

poorguy

Should a car dealer be sued if a drunk kills someone in a car he sold? And that is just one of many examples...

No, that legal responsibility would be in the hands of the bar owner selling the guy too many drinks and then allowing him to leave drunk.

Writersblock

<< <i>It doesn't matter if it was disclosed the first time they sold or not. The seller HAS to know that these coins will be turned around by those who bought them with many being called NT (if the toning is good enough) when they go to sell. If the seller doesn't realize this then he/she is either mentally handicapped or dense. With the seller knowing this sad fact, he/she is making their intentions clear, he/she offering AT coins for sale is directly and knowingly contributing to what EVERYONE here b1tches about nearly every day >>


And the maker of handguns HAS to know that some of them will be used to commit crimes and/or kill people. Same goes for the makers of knives, baseball bats, tire irons etc. Makers of cameras have to know that some will be used in the creation of ponography, even child pornography. Makers of computers and ISP's know that some of them will be used to view child porn. and so on and so on.

It is fine to condemn someone who actually commits crimes or unethical acts, but condemning the people who create thinge that the unethical then use to their own ends is going a little too far.

Shamika

<< <i>The immorality would be for a buyer to sell them as NT... >>


What Ricko said.

13PacesEast

and remember....

it's not illegal or immoral if it is done for PROFIT ™

P R O F I T ™

jmj3esq

If there is full disclosure there is nothing wrong with it. Thats how I sell cleaned coins on ebay. Just disclose the facts of the situation and all is fine.

19Lyds

Nope.

Not immoral.

However, the possibility does exist that the buyer would have or attempt to have them slabbed.

Moose1913

<< <i>Should a car dealer be sued if a drunk kills someone in a car he sold? And that is just one of many examples...

No, that legal responsibility would be in the hands of the bar owner selling the guy too many drinks and then allowing him to leave drunk. >>

Because nobody drinks at home, right?

fc

sigh.

no.

garsmith

Stating in the auction that they are AT'd is not immoral, but to me AT'ing them in the first place is immoral!

drwstr123

Several years ago there was a person on eBay selling Lincolns. The name was ARTICENTS. They are AT. Pretty colors, pastels. I bought 3 and still have them. They're still pretty. I have them in the original holders with the ARTICENTS logo on them. If there is any harm, evil, deceit, or bad poo-poo, please explain. Mike