<< <i>while the question about where an auction houses loylities lay(with the buyer or consigner) and how honest is too honest when it starts to hurt the person who is paying you to maxamize the sale price. I fell this thread is in very poor taste as the OP makes disparaging remarks about an active auction that he is planning on bidding on. This is wrong just about any may you cut it >>
It depends upon how bad the problem is that was missed. If it is minor in nature, you comment has merrit. BUT I can remember auctions where expert reviewers found major problems like alterations that caused a lot to be withdrawn before it was put up for sale. Had those problems not be noted by those experts the coin would have been sold to an unsuspecting buyer. There are no absolute rules for this. >>
That is a good point as I remember the 1796 Half with the recut stars that got pulled due to this board. This just seams well short of that IMO
<< <i>There is the Finest looking 1864 "L" Proof Indian Cent graded PCGS PR 65 R/B in the Heritage auction tonight. I wanted it badly until a friend noticed a major facial scratch on this coin only visible when the coin was tilted between 12 and 6 o'clock. It is not visible when tilting the coin from 3 o'clock to 9 o'clock. It also has a CAC sticker. It is almost Full Red! This scratch is not mentioned in the auction description. Very interesting situation
What do you think ?
Stewart Blay >>
if you missed it I think its properly graded.
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Roadrunner - This is not about the grade of the coin. If the scratch was not on the coin I could easily grade it PF 65 red.EAC would grade this
coin PR 67 if the scratch was not on the coin.
I personally feel Heritage had an obligation to mention this scratch in the lot description. I find it hard to believe Ryan Carroll or Jim Halperin could have missed the scratch.
...you starting this thread to descibe a flaw on a coin that is about to go up for auction is just as bad as the auction company not describing the flaw to your satisfaction.
...you are being too picky. There's a reason the coin is a 65. It's not perfect.
...others, including the auction catalogers, may not have thought the scratch was as significant as you thought it was.
...the scratch is easy to see in the photos posted in this thread. I'm not sure why you didn't see it before your friend told you about it.
...the auction house has a greater obligation to the consignor than it does to you.
...posting an image of the coin and providing an opportunity to view the lots in person prior to the auction alleviates much of the responsibility for a detailed description.
...this coin is no different than any other coin offered at auction: caveat emptor.
It is the responsibility of the collector to know what he / she is buying. I have been looking for Liberty Nickels in MS 66 for years, and most of the coins I see in this grade, for one reason or other, do not measure up to my standards, so I don't buy them. In all of this time, I have only found TEN that met my standards.
I'm sure that most collectors, regardless of what they collect and its price range, have similar experiences. The only difference between my experience and yours is the price tag on the coin. Look at the coin. If you don't like it, don't bid. In the last six months, I must have viewed at least forty Liberty Nickels in MS 66; I liked TWO of them, and bought ONE.
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
Still, Stewart is right-the auction company should have mentioned it. At least people can then make a smater decision. All the major auction comanpies are slime in that respect. When have you ever seen them say a coin was conserved?
If one expects Heritage to list all the possible major flaws, then they should be allowed to list all the potential positives as well (ie the coin could be a PF65 RED or a PF67 RB EAC w/o the scr.) in all fairness to the consignor. I think that's a slippery slope that we don't want to go down. The coin is stickered so by implication means that they did not feel the facial hairline was a significant distraction in a prime focal area. While some of us might disagree, that's their opinion based on the sticker. And if Heritage is to list potential flaws, at what point do they stop listing them? Personally, I think they should list them all and put bidders on equal footing. But I'm sure dealers, expert graders, crack artists, etc. would have none of that....not to mention the auction house and consignor. I'm all for full disclosure, even if it's not realistic on a wide scale.
Roadrunner - I am glad you agree with me to the fact Heritage should have listed the scratch on the face as it is in a major viewing area And could easily have been missed. I missed the scratch on the first viewing as I was blind sided by the originality of the coin. Perhaps JA also missed the scratch ? This is a major rarity ! Heritage also did not list the fact that the 1893 S dollar was conserved until Laura Sperber persuaded them to list it.
You guys must have missed my earlier post in which a $10 gold coin graded by PCGS was consigned by me to Heritage and they properly described the scrape on the coin.
They were able to balance the description of the scrape along with the positive attributes of the coin to allow the bidder to decide what was more important.
I was satisfied with the proceeds.
I agree with Stew and roadrunner that the consignor and bidders alike should not have been upset with a balanced description of the scratch along with the positive attributes of such coin.
If there is a collector/investor out there who "owns at east 8", similar or better, I would wait and work on that deal, imagine the heartbreaking drop in price!-----------------BigE
If an auction house is going to share a description of a coin, it should take an objective view and include both good and bad points. Otherwise no description should be offered.
Yes. I beleive that it is the obigation of the auction house to accurately descibe the lot in question. Particularly a flaw that may result in serious buyer's remorse.
"Discipline is never an end in itself, only a means to an end."
I don't know, it's a 65, it's going to have some flaws, minor scratchs, etc. Any of which could have lead to it being graded 65, it's not a 67 or 69 after all. And looking at the large images shown everything looks pretty big.
The real question is did the bidders think it was a 65 when taking the whole coin into account, or it would have been a 65 without said scratch and should really be a 63 or 64?
<< <i>Yes. I beleive that it is the obigation of the auction house to accurately descibe the lot in question. Particularly a flaw that may result in serious buyer's remorse. >>
Agree. If the auction houses are going describe a coin, it should be accurate and fairly complete. It would be disingenuous to only describe the positive attributes and not mention the problems.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>while the question about where an auction houses loylities lay(with the buyer or consigner) and how honest is too honest when it starts to hurt the person who is paying you to maxamize the sale price. I fell this thread is in very poor taste as the OP makes disparaging remarks about an active auction that he is planning on bidding on. This is wrong just about any may you cut it >>
It depends upon how bad the problem is that was missed. If it is minor in nature, you comment has merrit. BUT I can remember auctions where expert reviewers found major problems like alterations that caused a lot to be withdrawn before it was put up for sale. Had those problems not be noted by those experts the coin would have been sold to an unsuspecting buyer. There are no absolute rules for this. >>
That is a good point as I remember the 1796 Half with the recut stars that got pulled due to this board. This just seams well short of that IMO
<< <i>
<< <i>
Gee could you make it any bigger!!
How's This?
The name is LEE!
<< <i>There is the Finest looking 1864 "L" Proof Indian Cent graded PCGS PR 65 R/B in the Heritage auction tonight. I wanted it badly until a friend noticed a major facial scratch on this coin only visible when the coin was tilted between 12 and 6 o'clock. It is not visible when tilting the coin from 3 o'clock to 9 o'clock. It also has a CAC sticker. It is almost Full Red!
This scratch is not mentioned in the auction description. Very interesting situation
What do you think ?
Stewart Blay >>
if you missed it I think its properly graded.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
Gee could you make it any bigger!!
How's This?
That's better. I can now see the DNA of the surface bacteria.
Hey, that scratch is now several inches across. Who doesn't think several inch long scratches should be mentioned in the description?
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Roadrunner - This is not about the grade of the coin. If the scratch was not on the coin I could easily grade it PF 65 red.EAC would grade this
coin PR 67 if the scratch was not on the coin.
I personally feel Heritage had an obligation to mention this scratch in the lot description. I find it hard to believe Ryan Carroll or Jim Halperin could have missed the scratch.
Stewart
<< <i>What do you think ? >>
I think...
...you starting this thread to descibe a flaw on a coin that is about to go up for auction is just as bad as the auction company not describing the flaw to your satisfaction.
...you are being too picky. There's a reason the coin is a 65. It's not perfect.
...others, including the auction catalogers, may not have thought the scratch was as significant as you thought it was.
...the scratch is easy to see in the photos posted in this thread. I'm not sure why you didn't see it before your friend told you about it.
...the auction house has a greater obligation to the consignor than it does to you.
...posting an image of the coin and providing an opportunity to view the lots in person prior to the auction alleviates much of the responsibility for a detailed description.
...this coin is no different than any other coin offered at auction: caveat emptor.
I'm sure that most collectors, regardless of what they collect and its price range, have similar experiences. The only difference between my experience and yours is the price tag on the coin. Look at the coin. If you don't like it, don't bid. In the last six months, I must have viewed at least forty Liberty Nickels in MS 66; I liked TWO of them, and bought ONE.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
It rots that it is always buyer beware.
roadrunner
And could easily have been missed. I missed the scratch on the first viewing as I was blind sided by the originality of the coin. Perhaps JA
also missed the scratch ? This is a major rarity !
Heritage also did not list the fact that the 1893 S dollar was conserved until Laura Sperber persuaded them to list it.
Stewart
They were able to balance the description of the scrape along with the positive attributes of the coin to allow the bidder to decide what was more important.
I was satisfied with the proceeds.
I agree with Stew and roadrunner that the consignor and bidders alike should not have been upset with a balanced description of the scratch along with the positive attributes of such coin.
K
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
The real question is did the bidders think it was a 65 when taking the whole coin into account, or it would have been a 65 without said scratch and should really be a 63 or 64?
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
<< <i>Yes. I beleive that it is the obigation of the auction house to accurately descibe the lot in question. Particularly a flaw that may result in serious buyer's remorse. >>
Agree. If the auction houses are going describe a coin, it should be accurate and fairly complete. It would be disingenuous to only describe the positive attributes and not mention the problems.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire