Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
I give you credit for recognizing who I was referring to. I wonder why you fail to read what I am actually saying and instead abstract it in a way that justifies your meaningless post. My last post that you quotes was written tongue-in-cheek in case you want to know the truth. The little wink was not sufficient?
<< <i>The OP says he can't sell the 69's and below. Not even at a break-even price? I really find that hard to believe. >>
Look it up. 4 coin sets = $15.95 ($3.99 per coin) Grading at Bulk = $10.00 per coin
Fantasy Break even = Approx $14.00 per coin ($56 per 4 coin set)
Typical 4 coin set sells for between $32 (Open Bid) and $50 (BO)
Excluding Shipping To/From the US Mint, To/From PCGS, eBay fees (12%), and PayPal Fee's (.30 per trans + 3%), thats at least a $10 loss per set.
Bottom Line = PR69DCAM cannot be sold at a profit and are consistent losers for dealers. Kinda like giving out coffee mugs with your store name on them.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
Here's something for the "American Taxpayers" to consider.
The US Mint operates at a consistent profit and costs the US Tax Payers nothing to support.
"As required by Public Law 104-52, the United States Mint deposits all receipts from operations and programs into the United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund (PEF). Periodically throughout the year, the bureau transfers amounts in the PEF determined to be in excess of required financing sources to the Treasury General Fund. The PEF retains amounts required to support ongoing United States Mint operations and programs."
2009 saw a loss in orders but not a loss in revenue generation. I mean realistically speaking, how could you possibly lose money making something for .30 and then selling it for $1.00? Or, in the case of Proof Dollars, selling them for $4.00 each?
The US Mint is a money maker (no pun intended), they're just not making as much as they want. (Kinda like the Gasoline Producer's! )
As for the OP, from rereading his post, it appears that he's restricted from making returns but I think he can still order. Right Jeff?
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
As I understand the US Mint's intentions, I am not prevented from buying their products. Their statement was that if I return something they will refuse the return and if I challenge the return on my credit card, they will get their lawyers involved. For this reason, I really have to wonder if they would follow through - talking about wasting taxpayer money - hunting me down in an effort to take legal action because they have to restock a (50) 2010 presidential proof sets.
<< <i>I agree with the mint. Their return policy has been abused for years. I have returned only one coin (a Silver Eagle with a scratch) in all the years I have been buying coins. The mint produces proof coins, it is the market that assigns grades - NOT THE MINT. Having been in business for many years, I can assure you, a customer that sent back 50% of a product that met manufacturing standards, would not have been a customer for long. Cheers, RickO >>
I agree that it was abused. I'm sure I was in the top 10, but they were still making a LOT of profit. Sure people returned a lot, but they also KEPT a lot. An awful lot. Heck, I'm still selling them off, check my auctions.
I also disagree with the OP that PCGS platinums are not selling. These coins are so hard to get these days that I sell the 69s for a good bump above the spot price is. I try to base my pricing on other auctions or the lack of ANY auctions.
Man it must be nice to think you have the right to "Cherrypick" the US MInt. Next he will want a key to Ft. Knox. Why not ask for Taylor Swift's phone number while you are at it.
Edited to add: Maybe Budweiser will run a line to your kitchen sink.
Ron
Collect for the love of the hobby, the beauty of the coins, and enjoy the ride.
2009 saw a loss in orders but not a loss in revenue generation. I mean realistically speaking, how could you possibly lose money making something for .30 and then selling it for $1.00? Or, in the case of Proof Dollars, selling them for $4.00 each?
You got that right! The mint has been ripping us for years. Kudos to Jeff for as long as he got away with it!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
<< <i>2009 saw a loss in orders but not a loss in revenue generation. I mean realistically speaking, how could you possibly lose money making something for .30 and then selling it for $1.00? Or, in the case of Proof Dollars, selling them for $4.00 each?
You got that right! The mint has been ripping us for years. Kudos to Jeff for as long as he got away with it!
Leo >>
Kudos nothing. Drawn and quartered, thumb screws, and tarred and feathered come to mind. The rejects he is returning ends up in someones purchase. I think it was always my purchase. Might be why I don't purchase from the mint anymore.
He never said how many sets he purchased but if the returns were 50%, chances are at least half the Forum has one of his rejects in their order at some time or the other. This is one of the worse cases of abuse of the system I have heard of in ages.
There is a thread out there asking for the most dangerous term in numismatics. I think it might be Stckplunge.
Ron
Collect for the love of the hobby, the beauty of the coins, and enjoy the ride.
I think those that are offended by this seem to forget that:
A) The Mint was making a HUGE profit until mid to late 2008 Arguments about having received returns by cherry-picking customers is ridiculous prior to 2008
When my main focus was silver, gold and platinum eagles a few short years ago, I would place for example an order for say 10 platinum sets (30 total, unc,w,proof) at a time and end up keeping 10-20% which would be resold on the market. Once that process was complete another 30 sets would get ordered and go through the same process. This was the same for silver and gold and until 2008 and after at least 1,000+ sets processed, I NEVER say what I would suspect to have been a reprocessed return and that happened during the 2008/7 Silver Eagle error. Absolutely verified.
I think the bullion people here would agree to some degree.
C) Complaining about cherry-picking by ANY coin collector is actually funny. I mean really.
Complaining about cherry-picking in coin collecting is like complaining about the flavor of the jello during a food fight.
So, I contend that they was NO HARM, NO FOUL until the Mint changed from profit mode to just another government agency.
<< <i>Man it must be nice to think you have the right to "Cherrypick" the US MInt. Next he will want a key to Ft. Knox. Why not ask for Taylor Swift's phone number while you are at it.
Edited to add: Maybe Budweiser will run a line to your kitchen sink.
Ron >>
How do you return used beer?????
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Question for the OP: . If you saw a raw coins being sold as an MS-64+, and you thought it might make MS-65 so you bought it, but it came back from the grading service as an MS-64+, would you feel justified in returning it to the seller because you did not get more than you paid for? . That is what I feel that you are doing. I suspect others may agree with me. The Mint sells Proofs, period. You have the right to return defective Proofs, naturally, but I object to you wasting my government's money returning perfectly normal Proofs for no good reason.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
I'm going to shut up about this after this post. Suppose it's 1983 and you have heard about the "No S' dime. The only coins you can get from the mint are the OP's rejects and you know this. How do you feel about that. What's the point in even ordering them? I just wish there were some kind of charges the US Mint could bring this guy up on. He is stealing from the people that are receiving the coin sets he returns to the Mint, provided the Mint tries to recycle them to someone else. We order from the Mint at least hoping we have a fair chance at a quality set or an error. The stuff from the Mint is supposed to be unsearched. The problem is the playing field is no longer level.
I can't remember the last time something in the "Hobby" (if you can call it that anymore) made me this upset.
Ron
Collect for the love of the hobby, the beauty of the coins, and enjoy the ride.
<< <i>Question for the OP: . If you saw a raw coins being sold as an MS-64+, and you thought it might make MS-65 so you bought it, but it came back from the grading service as an MS-64+, would you feel justified in returning it to the seller because you did not get more than you paid for? . That is what I feel that you are doing. I suspect others may agree with me. The Mint sells Proofs, period. You have the right to return defective Proofs, naturally, but I object to you wasting my government's money returning perfectly normal Proofs for no good reason.
TD >>
If this was part of the business plan of the dealer and the dealer was making a huge profit, I would content that the dealer is NOT unhappy.
As a businessman myself, it's all about your business plan. The Mint was set up with this as their plan. We ALL talked about it for years and the Mint continued to make money hands over fists. Now they have CHANGED their business model and alas, they no longer are making a profit. They no longer offer Eagle and Buffalo sets.
Somehow, I don't think their NEW business plan was a good idea.
I think people are getting a little too upset at the original poster than is fair. It was the mint which allowed this practice. It should have been stopped long ago. It should have been stopped not because it's unethical but because it's unfair to the seller and secondar- ily it's unfair to other mint customers (especially anyone who buys a discard).
I'm just glad the mint stopped it rather than encouraged it.
To be completely fair the mint should announce the highest allowable return rate and is- sue a statement about what is done with large returns. I would hope small returns are destroyed or reassembled.
<< <i>Question for the OP: . If you saw a raw coins being sold as an MS-64+, and you thought it might make MS-65 so you bought it, but it came back from the grading service as an MS-64+, would you feel justified in returning it to the seller because you did not get more than you paid for? . That is what I feel that you are doing. I suspect others may agree with me. The Mint sells Proofs, period. You have the right to return defective Proofs, naturally, but I object to you wasting my government's money returning perfectly normal Proofs for no good reason.
TD >>
Here is the deal. Many have accused me a justifying my past practices. That is simply not true. True, I engaged in returning what I believed were poor quality coins and did it in a way that did not violate the US Mint's return policy at that time. I have been doing this for years and at anytime I would have adhered to the Mint's demands if asked to do so. I now heard from the Mint and am suspending the practice I used to engage in. How is that justifying my actions - it is in fact the opposite, I heard the mint and I am complying. If I wanted to justify the actions, I would make up some story about how sad it is that I cant return product to the mint and start over with a different credit card/PO Box or even another partner - I have not and will not do this.
To answer the above question. No, I would not buy it and I would never even think about taking that chance since the MS64+ is supposedly a known quality. When I order from the mint I have no idea what the variation in quality is going to be. Now before people jump on me for that justification, remember that I can no longer return items to the mint so I wont be doing what I just wrote!
Another poster actually stated something about pressing charges - that made me laugh a little. I am sure that most people on their way drive to work did more legally wrong than I.
<< <i>2009 saw a loss in orders but not a loss in revenue generation. I mean realistically speaking, how could you possibly lose money making something for .30 and then selling it for $1.00? Or, in the case of Proof Dollars, selling them for $4.00 each?
You got that right! The mint has been ripping us for years. Kudos to Jeff for as long as he got away with it!
Leo >>
Kudos nothing. Drawn and quartered, thumb screws, and tarred and feathered come to mind. The rejects he is returning ends up in someones purchase. I think it was always my purchase. Might be why I don't purchase from the mint anymore.
He never said how many sets he purchased but if the returns were 50%, chances are at least half the Forum has one of his rejects in their order at some time or the other. This is one of the worse cases of abuse of the system I have heard of in ages.
There is a thread out there asking for the most dangerous term in numismatics. I think it might be Stckplunge.
Ron >>
Actually half of the forum may have purchased sets from me all graded PF69 that should have gone PF70 and paid way less than what it cost me. These people ended up getting premium quality PF69s for a fraction of the cost - in some cases the same price as the issue price - now there's some justification . Now I tried the winky thing again so lets see if the misinterpretations begin
The returns, I assume, were primarily done PRIOR to grading as the turnaround time from PCGS could be tricky and push you out the Mint return window. To me, this is not different from buying a box of rolled coins from the bank and then returning what I didn't want.
I also contend that until 2008, no one was getting rejects back on their orders. There's only a few people on this forum that bought more US Eagles than me and I NEVER saw a return come back until the 2008/7 Silver Eagle happened. Not a single one, so I think this is simply a straw man argument.
The bottom line is that was the Mint's business model and they fixed it. They no longer make a profit and now you have a new coin tax for 2012.
<< <i>The returns, I assume, were primarily done PRIOR to grading as the turnaround time from PCGS could be tricky and push you out the Mint return window. To me, this is not different from buying a box of rolled coins from the bank and then returning what I didn't want.
And how does the bank feel about it?
Gold and silver are valuable but wisdom is priceless.
<< <i>As I understand the US Mint's intentions, I am not prevented from buying their products. Their statement was that if I return something they will refuse the return and if I challenge the return on my credit card, they will get their lawyers involved. For this reason, I really have to wonder if they would follow through - talking about wasting taxpayer money - hunting me down in an effort to take legal action because they have to restock a (50) 2010 presidential proof sets.
Jeff >>
That does seem a little silly since there is literally "NO" repackaging involved here! Mint Sets on the other hand require them to leterally "repackage the set" in thos flimy Chinese boxes which I'm sure costs a lot of time and money.
So. What are you going to do? Seems to me, they'd have no legal grounds which to involve an attorney but should they decide to do so, it'll cost you in your own attorneys fee's as we already know that their funding is "prepaid" and pretty much limitless (as proven by the 1933 Saints Litigation). I'm guessing they'd have an attorney contact you and cancel your account on any future returns.
Just for the record, 50%+ is a bit steep on the return aspect and as a seller, I'd block you.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
<< <i>I also disagree with the OP that PCGS platinums are not selling. These coins are so hard to get these days that I sell the 69s for a good bump above the spot price is. I try to base my pricing on other auctions or the lack of ANY auctions. >>
Presidential Proof coins Griv, not Platinum. Platinum was never mention by the OP other than to point out that folks get multiple accounts to circumvent the US Mints purchase limits.
Edited to Add: Unless you are quoting another thread.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
<< <i>The returns, I assume, were primarily done PRIOR to grading as the turnaround time from PCGS could be tricky and push you out the Mint return window. To me, this is not different from buying a box of rolled coins from the bank and then returning what I didn't want.
And how does the bank feel about it? >>
Not to beat this dead horse, but my bank as a change machine that members get to use for free. All the coins are sorted into Fed bags and the Fed send a truck by once a week. They don't mind a bit. In fact, several people I know have opened up accounts there for that very reason. Looks like it works for them.
I think the people that disagree are right, but that's a personal right that does not make someone else's actions wrong if the "supposed harmed" principal party is not in objection, but rather in agreement.
First, I'd like some proof that anyone here EVER received a verifiable return from the Mint for a US Eagle purchase. I know I did but like I said, it was the last year of the fractional Eagles Series.
Next, if I was a dealer that had a policy that if you bought a coin and were not happy with it, you could return it with a 25% restocking fee if in the same condition. So, if say a MS65+ was purchased for $500 that you thought would grade up to MS65 and it came back as an MS64+, the dealer would only have to refund you $450 and now has the coin back in a brand new holder. Another $10+shipping profit. If and I say if, this model was profitable for this dealer, why would their be outrage?
Why is there so much outrage in general over coin opinions? Sometimes I think we all get too hung up on these little discs of metal.
<< <i>I also disagree with the OP that PCGS platinums are not selling. These coins are so hard to get these days that I sell the 69s for a good bump above the spot price is. I try to base my pricing on other auctions or the lack of ANY auctions. >>
Presidential Proof coins Griv, not Platinum. Platinum was never mention by the OP other than to point out that folks get multiple accounts to circumvent the US Mints purchase limits.
Edited to Add: Unless you are quoting another thread. >>
I guess the platinum mention got the topic sideways and then I went ahead and slide with it.
Okay griv, reset.
I may have to agree on the Presidential Proofs. I have a bunch of the first 2 years in PR69DCAM and PR70DCAM and I have bothered to list but a few. I may have 50 or 60 of the proof sets just hanging around. I put some sets out for sale with fairly high prices to maybe help some of the other buyers hold some value, but it's slow if you ask me. I'm also not that involved with that stuff anyone so I wouldn't necessarily rely on my observation.
First, I'd like some proof that anyone here EVER received a verifiable return from the Mint for a US Eagle purchase. I know I did but like I said, it was the last year of the fractional Eagles Series.
I have not ever seen evidence of a return coming to me but I suspect they have people who inspect the returns and repackage them if they are not obviously damaged. Otherwise they will have to trash a lot of stuff and the costs really go up. So a small impefection like one that would make a 68 out of a 70 would probably pass their inspection since they don't have PCGS graders doing the inspections and don't care to. I have never heard of them having a scratch and dent sale at the Mint either so where do they go????
Gold and silver are valuable but wisdom is priceless.
<< <i>I also disagree with the OP that PCGS platinums are not selling. These coins are so hard to get these days that I sell the 69s for a good bump above the spot price is. I try to base my pricing on other auctions or the lack of ANY auctions. >>
Presidential Proof coins Griv, not Platinum. Platinum was never mention by the OP other than to point out that folks get multiple accounts to circumvent the US Mints purchase limits.
Edited to Add: Unless you are quoting another thread. >>
I guess the platinum mention got the topic sideways and then I went ahead and slide with it.
Okay griv, reset.
I may have to agree on the Presidential Proofs. I have a bunch of the first 2 years in PR69DCAM and PR70DCAM and I have bothered to list but a few. I may have 50 or 60 of the proof sets just hanging around. I put some sets out for sale with fairly high prices to maybe help some of the other buyers hold some value, but it's slow if you ask me. I'm also not that involved with that stuff anyone so I wouldn't necessarily rely on my observation. >>
Trust me Griv. You won't make a nickel on Presidential Proofs in MS69.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
<< <i>As I understand the US Mint's intentions, I am not prevented from buying their products. Their statement was that if I return something they will refuse the return and if I challenge the return on my credit card, they will get their lawyers involved. For this reason, I really have to wonder if they would follow through - talking about wasting taxpayer money - hunting me down in an effort to take legal action because they have to restock a (50) 2010 presidential proof sets.
Jeff >>
That does seem a little silly since there is literally "NO" repackaging involved here! Mint Sets on the other hand require them to leterally "repackage the set" in thos flimy Chinese boxes which I'm sure costs a lot of time and money.
So. What are you going to do? Seems to me, they'd have no legal grounds which to involve an attorney but should they decide to do so, it'll cost you in your own attorneys fee's as we already know that their funding is "prepaid" and pretty much limitless (as proven by the 1933 Saints Litigation). I'm guessing they'd have an attorney contact you and cancel your account on any future returns.
Just for the record, 50%+ is a bit steep on the return aspect and as a seller, I'd block you. >>
Since the Mint notified me that 50% was too high of a return rate, I will comply. As for what am I going to do now? I will follow their policy to the letter as I have done in the past. This may mean that I buy no more coins from the min or it may mean that any profit margin I had before this policy would necessarily be adjusted downward (that sucks a little).
I also wonder how they would determine their damages if lawyers were involved. Proving damages would be somewhat difficult as the money I spend at the mint is considerable. As pointed out by other posters, the only real source of damages seems to be the potential (but unprovable) loss of customers because of quality. This also would be difficult because the quality I am getting is pretty much the same quality as everyone else is getting.
Stockplunge, while I disagree with what you did in returning so many coins, it appears that you played by the rules/procedures which were in effect.
Whether deserved or not, you have taken a number of pretty good shots here. And I very much respect the way you have conducted yourself in such a forthright and gentlemanly manner while posting to this thread.
<< <i>I think you got all you could get out of that deal, time to find a new angle. I do not really have an issue with it but i can see how some would.
I was on the suspend list at Home Depot for a while. I never had my reciepts when i took some stuff back. Every time i did a return i would get hassled by the cashier, who then had to call a manager. Then a 20 year old would arrive and okay it. I could see my return histroy on the screen. I am talking about 12 to 15 return a year amounting from 150 to 1000 dollars. One little manager was snotty and i decided not to use Home depot for a while. Within 30 days i was being called from Home Depot about why i was not buying anything. I let them call a few times before i told them i did not like the way i was being treated on returns. ( i never returned anything that could not be resold as is, right now)
I no longer get hassled as they decided they like the fact i spend around 200k a year. I no longer even have to stand in line to do my returns. I just dump at the pro desk and they recredit my account. I even get some decent perks out of them from time to time now. >>
You're not much better than the op. All your returns cost us in the long run. Buy what you need the first time.
<< <i>First, I'd like some proof that anyone here EVER received a verifiable return from the Mint for a US Eagle purchase. I know I did but like I said, it was the last year of the fractional Eagles Series. >>
You actually verified that you received someone elase's returned coin?
Exactly how did you verify this?
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
<< <i>First, I'd like some proof that anyone here EVER received a verifiable return from the Mint for a US Eagle purchase. I know I did but like I said, it was the last year of the fractional Eagles Series. >>
You actually verified that you received someone elase's returned coin?
Exactly how did you verify this? >>
When I pulled it out of the box, under the packaging holding the coin was a sticker that said, "returned". I don't think it gets more obvious than that.
<< <i>2009 saw a loss in orders but not a loss in revenue generation. I mean realistically speaking, how could you possibly lose money making something for .30 and then selling it for $1.00? Or, in the case of Proof Dollars, selling them for $4.00 each?
You got that right! The mint has been ripping us for years. Kudos to Jeff for as long as he got away with it!
Leo >>
Kudos nothing. Drawn and quartered, thumb screws, and tarred and feathered come to mind. The rejects he is returning ends up in someones purchase. I think it was always my purchase. Might be why I don't purchase from the mint anymore.
He never said how many sets he purchased but if the returns were 50%, chances are at least half the Forum has one of his rejects in their order at some time or the other. This is one of the worse cases of abuse of the system I have heard of in ages.
There is a thread out there asking for the most dangerous term in numismatics. I think it might be Stckplunge.
Ron >>
That's quite an assumption you made there. But who knows, you might be right.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
I, too, think that a return rate of 50%+ is far to high and also believe that many of these returns end up being sent out to other customers.
It is true that there are sub standard coins being delivered, and I have returned coins to the mint (marking the slip - damaged - as I did not want them sent out again, or at least deserved a look to determine if they were suitable for any customer)
One thing though - my opinion is that you must order early for new products - just so you dont even have the chance of receiving "recycled" goods.
The second is submitting early. It is also my opinion, and only my opinion, while submissions early on to TPG's result in a fairly accurate dispersion of grades across the 69/70 grade level - as time goes on I have noticed that submissions have followed this split - even when I submitted "knock out" coins where the expectation was a higher percentage of 70's than the pop report 69/70 % suggested.
<< <i>I think people are getting a little too upset at the original poster than is fair. It was the mint which allowed this practice. It should have been stopped long ago. It should have been stopped not because it's unethical but because it's unfair to the seller and secondar- ily it's unfair to other mint customers (especially anyone who buys a discard).
I'm just glad the mint stopped it rather than encouraged it.
To be completely fair the mint should announce the highest allowable return rate and is- sue a statement about what is done with large returns. I would hope small returns are destroyed or reassembled. >>
<< <i>I, too, think that a return rate of 50%+ is far to high and also believe that many of these returns end up being sent out to other customers.
It is true that there are sub standard coins being delivered, and I have returned coins to the mint (marking the slip - damaged - as I did not want them sent out again, or at least deserved a look to determine if they were suitable for any customer). >>
Well, on the other hand, which no one to date has yet spoken about....
When people here send something back as damaged, and I always note the damage on the return form, then I hope they would take heed and not send it back out!
(Although, I recognize much of that 50%+ returns were probably 68s and 69s)
Here's a couple of returns: (that's a pit in the planchet and the other a large spot on the coin's surface)
the mint needs to start a restocking fee of say 10-20% to cut down on returns or tell everyone no returns
but apparently the original poster has been playing by the mints rules, and the mint decided to change them for that company
I think most people in business have at one time or another cut off or changed the relationship with someone they do business and they feel they are being taken advantage of
someone mentioned the mint should collaborate with a TPG and cut out a middleman -
doesn't PCGS (or NGC) do just that with the Australian mint?
People can play within rules but still exploit the system. It comes back to bite others (ie.....the move to a 7 day return because people played the precious metals game due to the volatility that the PMs were/are having).
Just because you stay within the rules doesn't make abuse of them right.
That said, I agree that Jeff has manned up and handled himself well in the thread. The above is NOT meant to ding on him again....more of a response to those that seem to think anything goes is fair.
The USMint, for its part, should start putting out better quality items (not saying 70 grades across the board, but definitely better than what they are doing in some of the mint sets and such). They should NOT do a return fee as that is punishing the people with legit problems because of people that exploited the system for their own profits.
The American Retail Marketing Association published a report a few months back about the billions lost in sale revenues by stores having return policies abused. What the Mint is doing is basically what is starting to happen with large retailers who now scrutinize a customers history of returns? Companies now record this information and red flag abusers.
While I am not a company the abuses of returns had disastrous repercussions for me. A couple of years ago I stopped selling certified coins on that auction site because of the abuse from a few buyers cherry picking coins? When people returned coins that were listed and sold as a PCGS MS63PL and then sent the coin back to me because they weren't actually MS65PL there was obviously a problem.
My average description on eBay went something like:
"PCGS MS63PL 1881 Morgan Dollar"
I would still receive complaints the coin wasn't as described? Go figure? So here I am with a box of certified Morgan's and because of the costs of unreasonable returns hesitant about now trying to sell them? While I have no opinion about the validity of the OP complaint in this thread I do appreciate the costs of doing business with someone who is very, very difficult to please.
<< <i>First, I'd like some proof that anyone here EVER received a verifiable return from the Mint for a US Eagle purchase. I know I did but like I said, it was the last year of the fractional Eagles Series. >>
You actually verified that you received someone elase's returned coin?
Exactly how did you verify this? >>
When I pulled it out of the box, under the packaging holding the coin was a sticker that said, "returned". I don't think it gets more obvious than that. >>
That does sound ominous.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
I don't blame the Mint one bit...why should they be offering you an approval service and pay the extra expense involved in processing all those returns? Of course, the Mint isn't going to absorb those expenses, they vare just going to pass on the additional cost to the buyer, so in essence you are costing all collectors money by doing what you do to such an excessive level..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
"Most of the "leftovers" are sold to the market in bulk." & "I return in excess of 50% of what I buy."
If some are good, and most of the leftovers are sold to the market, how can you return in excess of 50%??? That would indicate not just most of the leftovers, but most of the total purchase is returned. Therefore less than half of the leftovers are sold in bulk, not most of them.
"Most of the "leftovers" are sold to the market in bulk." & "I return in excess of 50% of what I buy."
If some are good, and most of the leftovers are sold to the market, how can you return in excess of 50%??? That would indicate not just most of the leftovers, but most of the total purchase is returned. Therefore less than half of the leftovers are sold in bulk, not most of them. >>
Actually, I think he was saying that he would submit if he thought it was a 70. If he didn't, he would return (50% is where this number came in). The leftovers, I believe he meant, are from the submissions that didn't get 70 (they got 69).
<< <i>Stockplunge, while I disagree with what you did in returning so many coins, it appears that you played by the rules/procedures which were in effect.
Whether deserved or not, you have taken a number of pretty good shots here. And I very much respect the way you have conducted yourself in such a forthright and gentlemanly manner while posting to this thread. >>
This post is a good one, perhaps the mint is finally developing a brain and following the lead of most of corporate America and boosting their bottom line not by increasing sales but by decreasing expenses. Pretty smart to do this not thru layoffs but by ridding themselves of costly returns.
BTW stckplunge thanks for exposing your dark secret and for the laughs by making yourself the punching bag of the week----------------------BigE
Comments
<< <i>
Digging deeper, deeper.
I give you credit for recognizing who I was referring to. I wonder why you fail to read what I am actually saying and instead abstract it in a way that justifies your meaningless post. My last post that you quotes was written tongue-in-cheek in case you want to know the truth. The little wink was not sufficient?
Jeff
<< <i>The OP says he can't sell the 69's and below. Not even at a break-even price? I really find that hard to believe. >>
Look it up.
4 coin sets = $15.95 ($3.99 per coin)
Grading at Bulk = $10.00 per coin
Fantasy Break even = Approx $14.00 per coin ($56 per 4 coin set)
Typical 4 coin set sells for between $32 (Open Bid) and $50 (BO)
Excluding Shipping To/From the US Mint, To/From PCGS, eBay fees (12%), and PayPal Fee's (.30 per trans + 3%), thats at least a $10 loss per set.
Bottom Line = PR69DCAM cannot be sold at a profit and are consistent losers for dealers. Kinda like giving out coffee mugs with your store name on them.
The name is LEE!
The US Mint operates at a consistent profit and costs the US Tax Payers nothing to support.
"As required by Public Law 104-52, the United States Mint deposits all receipts from operations and programs into the United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund (PEF). Periodically throughout the year, the bureau transfers amounts in the PEF determined to be in excess of required financing sources to the Treasury General Fund. The PEF retains amounts required to support ongoing United States Mint operations and programs."
2009 saw a loss in orders but not a loss in revenue generation. I mean realistically speaking, how could you possibly lose money making something for .30 and then selling it for $1.00? Or, in the case of Proof Dollars, selling them for $4.00 each?
The US Mint is a money maker (no pun intended), they're just not making as much as they want. (Kinda like the Gasoline Producer's!
As for the OP, from rereading his post, it appears that he's restricted from making returns but I think he can still order. Right Jeff?
The name is LEE!
Jeff
<< <i>
I'd also be interested, even if I'm third in line! >>
Get it slabbed Smackagewea
--------T O M---------
-------------------------
<< <i>I agree with the mint. Their return policy has been abused for years. I have returned only one coin (a Silver Eagle with a scratch) in all the years I have been buying coins. The mint produces proof coins, it is the market that assigns grades - NOT THE MINT. Having been in business for many years, I can assure you, a customer that sent back 50% of a product that met manufacturing standards, would not have been a customer for long. Cheers, RickO >>
I agree that it was abused. I'm sure I was in the top 10, but they were still making a LOT of profit. Sure people returned a lot, but they also KEPT a lot. An awful lot. Heck, I'm still selling them off, check my auctions.
I also disagree with the OP that PCGS platinums are not selling. These coins are so hard to get these days that I sell the 69s for a good bump above the spot price is. I try to base my pricing on other auctions or the lack of ANY auctions.
Edited to add: Maybe Budweiser will run a line to your kitchen sink.
Ron
You got that right! The mint has been ripping us for years. Kudos to Jeff for as long as he got away with it!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>2009 saw a loss in orders but not a loss in revenue generation. I mean realistically speaking, how could you possibly lose money making something for .30 and then selling it for $1.00? Or, in the case of Proof Dollars, selling them for $4.00 each?
You got that right! The mint has been ripping us for years. Kudos to Jeff for as long as he got away with it!
Leo >>
Kudos nothing. Drawn and quartered, thumb screws, and tarred and feathered come to mind. The rejects he is returning ends up in someones purchase. I think it was always my purchase. Might be why I don't purchase from the mint anymore.
He never said how many sets he purchased but if the returns were 50%, chances are at least half the Forum has one of his rejects in their order at some time or the other. This is one of the worse cases of abuse of the system I have heard of in ages.
There is a thread out there asking for the most dangerous term in numismatics. I think it might be Stckplunge.
Ron
Camelot
A) The Mint was making a HUGE profit until mid to late 2008
When my main focus was silver, gold and platinum eagles a few short years ago, I would place for example an order for say 10 platinum sets (30 total, unc,w,proof) at a time and end up keeping 10-20% which would be resold on the market. Once that process was complete another 30 sets would get ordered and go through the same process. This was the same for silver and gold and until 2008 and after at least 1,000+ sets processed, I NEVER say what I would suspect to have been a reprocessed return and that happened during the 2008/7 Silver Eagle error. Absolutely verified.
I think the bullion people here would agree to some degree.
C) Complaining about cherry-picking by ANY coin collector is actually funny. I mean really.
Complaining about cherry-picking in coin collecting is like complaining about the flavor of the jello during a food fight.
So, I contend that they was NO HARM, NO FOUL until the Mint changed from profit mode to just another government agency.
<< <i>Man it must be nice to think you have the right to "Cherrypick" the US MInt. Next he will want a key to Ft. Knox. Why not ask for Taylor Swift's phone number while you are at it.
Edited to add: Maybe Budweiser will run a line to your kitchen sink.
Ron >>
How do you return used beer?????
.
If you saw a raw coins being sold as an MS-64+, and you thought it might make MS-65 so you bought it, but it came back from the grading service as an MS-64+, would you feel justified in returning it to the seller because you did not get more than you paid for?
.
That is what I feel that you are doing. I suspect others may agree with me. The Mint sells Proofs, period. You have the right to return defective Proofs, naturally, but I object to you wasting my government's money returning perfectly normal Proofs for no good reason.
TD
I can't remember the last time something in the "Hobby" (if you can call it that anymore) made me this upset.
Ron
<< <i>Question for the OP:
.
If you saw a raw coins being sold as an MS-64+, and you thought it might make MS-65 so you bought it, but it came back from the grading service as an MS-64+, would you feel justified in returning it to the seller because you did not get more than you paid for?
.
That is what I feel that you are doing. I suspect others may agree with me. The Mint sells Proofs, period. You have the right to return defective Proofs, naturally, but I object to you wasting my government's money returning perfectly normal Proofs for no good reason.
TD >>
If this was part of the business plan of the dealer and the dealer was making a huge profit, I would content that the dealer is NOT unhappy.
As a businessman myself, it's all about your business plan. The Mint was set up with this as their plan. We ALL talked about it for years and the Mint continued to make money hands over fists. Now they have CHANGED their business model and alas, they no longer are making a profit. They no longer offer Eagle and Buffalo sets.
Somehow, I don't think their NEW business plan was a good idea.
mint which allowed this practice. It should have been stopped long ago. It should have
been stopped not because it's unethical but because it's unfair to the seller and secondar-
ily it's unfair to other mint customers (especially anyone who buys a discard).
I'm just glad the mint stopped it rather than encouraged it.
To be completely fair the mint should announce the highest allowable return rate and is-
sue a statement about what is done with large returns. I would hope small returns are
destroyed or reassembled.
<< <i>Question for the OP:
.
If you saw a raw coins being sold as an MS-64+, and you thought it might make MS-65 so you bought it, but it came back from the grading service as an MS-64+, would you feel justified in returning it to the seller because you did not get more than you paid for?
.
That is what I feel that you are doing. I suspect others may agree with me. The Mint sells Proofs, period. You have the right to return defective Proofs, naturally, but I object to you wasting my government's money returning perfectly normal Proofs for no good reason.
TD >>
Here is the deal. Many have accused me a justifying my past practices. That is simply not true. True, I engaged in returning what I believed were poor quality coins and did it in a way that did not violate the US Mint's return policy at that time. I have been doing this for years and at anytime I would have adhered to the Mint's demands if asked to do so. I now heard from the Mint and am suspending the practice I used to engage in. How is that justifying my actions - it is in fact the opposite, I heard the mint and I am complying. If I wanted to justify the actions, I would make up some story about how sad it is that I cant return product to the mint and start over with a different credit card/PO Box or even another partner - I have not and will not do this.
To answer the above question. No, I would not buy it and I would never even think about taking that chance since the MS64+ is supposedly a known quality. When I order from the mint I have no idea what the variation in quality is going to be. Now before people jump on me for that justification, remember that I can no longer return items to the mint so I wont be doing what I just wrote!
Another poster actually stated something about pressing charges - that made me laugh a little. I am sure that most people on their way drive to work did more legally wrong than I.
Jeff
<< <i>Sorry dude, no sympathy for the forum. Trying to justify your actions, well.......nothing more to say. >>
Never tried to justify my actions.
<< <i>
<< <i>2009 saw a loss in orders but not a loss in revenue generation. I mean realistically speaking, how could you possibly lose money making something for .30 and then selling it for $1.00? Or, in the case of Proof Dollars, selling them for $4.00 each?
You got that right! The mint has been ripping us for years. Kudos to Jeff for as long as he got away with it!
Leo >>
Kudos nothing. Drawn and quartered, thumb screws, and tarred and feathered come to mind. The rejects he is returning ends up in someones purchase. I think it was always my purchase. Might be why I don't purchase from the mint anymore.
He never said how many sets he purchased but if the returns were 50%, chances are at least half the Forum has one of his rejects in their order at some time or the other. This is one of the worse cases of abuse of the system I have heard of in ages.
There is a thread out there asking for the most dangerous term in numismatics. I think it might be Stckplunge.
Ron >>
Actually half of the forum may have purchased sets from me all graded PF69 that should have gone PF70 and paid way less than what it cost me. These people ended up getting premium quality PF69s for a fraction of the cost - in some cases the same price as the issue price - now there's some justification
Jeff
I also contend that until 2008, no one was getting rejects back on their orders. There's only a few people on this forum that bought more US Eagles than me and I NEVER saw a return come back until the 2008/7 Silver Eagle happened. Not a single one, so I think this is simply a straw man argument.
The bottom line is that was the Mint's business model and they fixed it. They no longer make a profit and now you have a new coin tax for 2012.
You happy now?
<< <i>The returns, I assume, were primarily done PRIOR to grading as the turnaround time from PCGS could be tricky and push you out the Mint return window. To me, this is not different from buying a box of rolled coins from the bank and then returning what I didn't want.
And how does the bank feel about it?
<< <i>As I understand the US Mint's intentions, I am not prevented from buying their products. Their statement was that if I return something they will refuse the return and if I challenge the return on my credit card, they will get their lawyers involved. For this reason, I really have to wonder if they would follow through - talking about wasting taxpayer money - hunting me down in an effort to take legal action because they have to restock a (50) 2010 presidential proof sets.
Jeff >>
That does seem a little silly since there is literally "NO" repackaging involved here! Mint Sets on the other hand require them to leterally "repackage the set" in thos flimy Chinese boxes which I'm sure costs a lot of time and money.
So. What are you going to do? Seems to me, they'd have no legal grounds which to involve an attorney but should they decide to do so, it'll cost you in your own attorneys fee's as we already know that their funding is "prepaid" and pretty much limitless (as proven by the 1933 Saints Litigation). I'm guessing they'd have an attorney contact you and cancel your account on any future returns.
Just for the record, 50%+ is a bit steep on the return aspect and as a seller, I'd block you.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>I also disagree with the OP that PCGS platinums are not selling. These coins are so hard to get these days that I sell the 69s for a good bump above the spot price is. I try to base my pricing on other auctions or the lack of ANY auctions. >>
Presidential Proof coins Griv, not Platinum. Platinum was never mention by the OP other than to point out that folks get multiple accounts to circumvent the US Mints purchase limits.
Edited to Add: Unless you are quoting another thread.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>The returns, I assume, were primarily done PRIOR to grading as the turnaround time from PCGS could be tricky and push you out the Mint return window. To me, this is not different from buying a box of rolled coins from the bank and then returning what I didn't want.
And how does the bank feel about it? >>
Not to beat this dead horse, but my bank as a change machine that members get to use for free. All the coins are sorted into Fed bags and the Fed send a truck by once a week. They don't mind a bit. In fact, several people I know have opened up accounts there for that very reason. Looks like it works for them.
I think the people that disagree are right, but that's a personal right that does not make someone else's actions wrong if the "supposed harmed" principal party is not in objection, but rather in agreement.
First, I'd like some proof that anyone here EVER received a verifiable return from the Mint for a US Eagle purchase. I know I did but like I said, it was the last year of the fractional Eagles Series.
Next, if I was a dealer that had a policy that if you bought a coin and were not happy with it, you could return it with a 25% restocking fee if in the same condition. So, if say a MS65+ was purchased for $500 that you thought would grade up to MS65 and it came back as an MS64+, the dealer would only have to refund you $450 and now has the coin back in a brand new holder. Another $10+shipping profit. If and I say if, this model was profitable for this dealer, why would their be outrage?
Why is there so much outrage in general over coin opinions? Sometimes I think we all get too hung up on these little discs of metal.
<< <i>
<< <i>I also disagree with the OP that PCGS platinums are not selling. These coins are so hard to get these days that I sell the 69s for a good bump above the spot price is. I try to base my pricing on other auctions or the lack of ANY auctions. >>
Presidential Proof coins Griv, not Platinum. Platinum was never mention by the OP other than to point out that folks get multiple accounts to circumvent the US Mints purchase limits.
Edited to Add: Unless you are quoting another thread. >>
I guess the platinum mention got the topic sideways and then I went ahead and slide with it.
Okay griv, reset.
I may have to agree on the Presidential Proofs. I have a bunch of the first 2 years in PR69DCAM and PR70DCAM and I have bothered to list but a few. I may have 50 or 60 of the proof sets just hanging around. I put some sets out for sale with fairly high prices to maybe help some of the other buyers hold some value, but it's slow if you ask me. I'm also not that involved with that stuff anyone so I wouldn't necessarily rely on my observation.
I have not ever seen evidence of a return coming to me but I suspect they have people who inspect the returns and repackage them if they are not obviously damaged. Otherwise they will have to trash a lot of stuff and the costs really go up. So a small impefection like one that would make a 68 out of a 70 would probably pass their inspection since they don't have PCGS graders doing the inspections and don't care to. I have never heard of them having a scratch and dent sale at the Mint either so where do they go????
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I also disagree with the OP that PCGS platinums are not selling. These coins are so hard to get these days that I sell the 69s for a good bump above the spot price is. I try to base my pricing on other auctions or the lack of ANY auctions. >>
Presidential Proof coins Griv, not Platinum. Platinum was never mention by the OP other than to point out that folks get multiple accounts to circumvent the US Mints purchase limits.
Edited to Add: Unless you are quoting another thread. >>
I guess the platinum mention got the topic sideways and then I went ahead and slide with it.
Okay griv, reset.
I may have to agree on the Presidential Proofs. I have a bunch of the first 2 years in PR69DCAM and PR70DCAM and I have bothered to list but a few. I may have 50 or 60 of the proof sets just hanging around. I put some sets out for sale with fairly high prices to maybe help some of the other buyers hold some value, but it's slow if you ask me. I'm also not that involved with that stuff anyone so I wouldn't necessarily rely on my observation. >>
Trust me Griv. You won't make a nickel on Presidential Proofs in MS69.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>As I understand the US Mint's intentions, I am not prevented from buying their products. Their statement was that if I return something they will refuse the return and if I challenge the return on my credit card, they will get their lawyers involved. For this reason, I really have to wonder if they would follow through - talking about wasting taxpayer money - hunting me down in an effort to take legal action because they have to restock a (50) 2010 presidential proof sets.
Jeff >>
That does seem a little silly since there is literally "NO" repackaging involved here! Mint Sets on the other hand require them to leterally "repackage the set" in thos flimy Chinese boxes which I'm sure costs a lot of time and money.
So. What are you going to do? Seems to me, they'd have no legal grounds which to involve an attorney but should they decide to do so, it'll cost you in your own attorneys fee's as we already know that their funding is "prepaid" and pretty much limitless (as proven by the 1933 Saints Litigation). I'm guessing they'd have an attorney contact you and cancel your account on any future returns.
Just for the record, 50%+ is a bit steep on the return aspect and as a seller, I'd block you. >>
Since the Mint notified me that 50% was too high of a return rate, I will comply. As for what am I going to do now? I will follow their policy to the letter as I have done in the past. This may mean that I buy no more coins from the min or it may mean that any profit margin I had before this policy would necessarily be adjusted downward (that sucks a little).
I also wonder how they would determine their damages if lawyers were involved. Proving damages would be somewhat difficult as the money I spend at the mint is considerable. As pointed out by other posters, the only real source of damages seems to be the potential (but unprovable) loss of customers because of quality. This also would be difficult because the quality I am getting is pretty much the same quality as everyone else is getting.
Whether deserved or not, you have taken a number of pretty good shots here. And I very much respect the way you have conducted yourself in such a forthright and gentlemanly manner while posting to this thread.
<< <i>I think you got all you could get out of that deal, time to find a new angle. I do not really have an issue with it but i can see how some would.
I was on the suspend list at Home Depot for a while. I never had my reciepts when i took some stuff back. Every time i did a return i would get hassled by the cashier, who then had to call a manager. Then a 20 year old would arrive and okay it. I could see my return histroy on the screen. I am talking about 12 to 15 return a year amounting from 150 to 1000 dollars. One little manager was snotty and i decided not to use Home depot for a while. Within 30 days i was being called from Home Depot about why i was not buying anything. I let them call a few times before i told them i did not like the way i was being treated on returns. ( i never returned anything that could not be resold as is, right now)
I no longer get hassled as they decided they like the fact i spend around 200k a year. I no longer even have to stand in line to do my returns. I just dump at the pro desk and they recredit my account. I even get some decent perks out of them from time to time now. >>
You're not much better than the op. All your returns cost us in the long run. Buy what you need the first time.
<< <i>First, I'd like some proof that anyone here EVER received a verifiable return from the Mint for a US Eagle purchase. I know I did but like I said, it was the last year of the fractional Eagles Series. >>
You actually verified that you received someone elase's returned coin?
Exactly how did you verify this?
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>First, I'd like some proof that anyone here EVER received a verifiable return from the Mint for a US Eagle purchase. I know I did but like I said, it was the last year of the fractional Eagles Series. >>
You actually verified that you received someone elase's returned coin?
Exactly how did you verify this? >>
When I pulled it out of the box, under the packaging holding the coin was a sticker that said, "returned". I don't think it gets more obvious than that.
<< <i>
<< <i>2009 saw a loss in orders but not a loss in revenue generation. I mean realistically speaking, how could you possibly lose money making something for .30 and then selling it for $1.00? Or, in the case of Proof Dollars, selling them for $4.00 each?
You got that right! The mint has been ripping us for years. Kudos to Jeff for as long as he got away with it!
Leo >>
Kudos nothing. Drawn and quartered, thumb screws, and tarred and feathered come to mind. The rejects he is returning ends up in someones purchase. I think it was always my purchase. Might be why I don't purchase from the mint anymore.
He never said how many sets he purchased but if the returns were 50%, chances are at least half the Forum has one of his rejects in their order at some time or the other. This is one of the worse cases of abuse of the system I have heard of in ages.
There is a thread out there asking for the most dangerous term in numismatics. I think it might be Stckplunge.
Ron >>
That's quite an assumption you made there. But who knows, you might be right.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>Somebody git a rope.
Come on... that is a little harsh, the Mint is only doing what is in it's best interest.
It is true that there are sub standard coins being delivered, and I have returned coins to the mint (marking the slip - damaged - as I did not want them sent out again, or at least deserved a look to determine if they were suitable for any customer)
One thing though - my opinion is that you must order early for new products - just so you dont even have the chance of receiving "recycled" goods.
The second is submitting early. It is also my opinion, and only my opinion, while submissions early on to TPG's result in a fairly accurate dispersion of grades across the 69/70 grade level - as time goes on I have noticed that submissions have followed this split - even when I submitted "knock out" coins where the expectation was a higher percentage of 70's than the pop report 69/70 % suggested.
<< <i>I think people are getting a little too upset at the original poster than is fair. It was the
mint which allowed this practice. It should have been stopped long ago. It should have
been stopped not because it's unethical but because it's unfair to the seller and secondar-
ily it's unfair to other mint customers (especially anyone who buys a discard).
I'm just glad the mint stopped it rather than encouraged it.
To be completely fair the mint should announce the highest allowable return rate and is-
sue a statement about what is done with large returns. I would hope small returns are
destroyed or reassembled. >>
I agree.
He was abiding by the Mint's rules.
Now he got called out by them on it.
He's not whining about being called out, either.
Let it go.
(I can't help but think a single major player in the PR70 pres. dollar biz is gone.... what will happen to prices?)
<< <i>I, too, think that a return rate of 50%+ is far to high and also believe that many of these returns end up being sent out to other customers.
It is true that there are sub standard coins being delivered, and I have returned coins to the mint (marking the slip - damaged - as I did not want them sent out again, or at least deserved a look to determine if they were suitable for any customer). >>
Well, on the other hand, which no one to date has yet spoken about....
When people here send something back as damaged, and I always note the damage on the return form, then I hope they would take heed and not send it back out!
(Although, I recognize much of that 50%+ returns were probably 68s and 69s)
Here's a couple of returns:
(that's a pit in the planchet and the other a large spot on the coin's surface)
but apparently the original poster has been playing by the mints rules, and the mint decided to change them for that company
I think most people in business have at one time or another cut off or changed the relationship with someone they do business
and they feel they are being taken advantage of
someone mentioned the mint should collaborate with a TPG and cut out a middleman -
doesn't PCGS (or NGC) do just that with the Australian mint?
Just because you stay within the rules doesn't make abuse of them right.
That said, I agree that Jeff has manned up and handled himself well in the thread. The above is NOT meant to ding on him again....more of a response to those that seem to think anything goes is fair.
The USMint, for its part, should start putting out better quality items (not saying 70 grades across the board, but definitely better than what they are doing in some of the mint sets and such).
They should NOT do a return fee as that is punishing the people with legit problems because of people that exploited the system for their own profits.
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
While I am not a company the abuses of returns had disastrous repercussions for me. A couple of years ago I stopped selling certified coins on that auction site because of the abuse from a few buyers cherry picking coins? When people returned coins that were listed and sold as a PCGS MS63PL and then sent the coin back to me because they weren't actually MS65PL there was obviously a problem.
My average description on eBay went something like:
"PCGS MS63PL 1881 Morgan Dollar"
I would still receive complaints the coin wasn't as described? Go figure? So here I am with a box of certified Morgan's and because of the costs of unreasonable returns hesitant about now trying to sell them? While I have no opinion about the validity of the OP complaint in this thread I do appreciate the costs of doing business with someone who is very, very difficult to please.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>First, I'd like some proof that anyone here EVER received a verifiable return from the Mint for a US Eagle purchase. I know I did but like I said, it was the last year of the fractional Eagles Series. >>
You actually verified that you received someone elase's returned coin?
Exactly how did you verify this? >>
When I pulled it out of the box, under the packaging holding the coin was a sticker that said, "returned". I don't think it gets more obvious than that. >>
The name is LEE!
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
"Most of the "leftovers" are sold to the market in bulk."
&
"I return in excess of 50% of what I buy."
If some are good, and most of the leftovers are sold to the market, how can you return in excess of 50%??? That would indicate not just most of the leftovers, but most of the total purchase is returned. Therefore less than half of the leftovers are sold in bulk, not most of them.
<< <i>You've contradicted yourself.
"Most of the "leftovers" are sold to the market in bulk."
&
"I return in excess of 50% of what I buy."
If some are good, and most of the leftovers are sold to the market, how can you return in excess of 50%??? That would indicate not just most of the leftovers, but most of the total purchase is returned. Therefore less than half of the leftovers are sold in bulk, not most of them. >>
Actually, I think he was saying that he would submit if he thought it was a 70. If he didn't, he would return (50% is where this number came in).
The leftovers, I believe he meant, are from the submissions that didn't get 70 (they got 69).
At least, that was my interpretation.
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
<< <i>Stockplunge, while I disagree with what you did in returning so many coins, it appears that you played by the rules/procedures which were in effect.
Whether deserved or not, you have taken a number of pretty good shots here. And I very much respect the way you have conducted yourself in such a forthright and gentlemanly manner while posting to this thread. >>
BTW stckplunge thanks for exposing your dark secret and for the laughs by making yourself the punching bag of the week----------------------BigE