<< <i>Very interesting turn of events. I wonder if those coins are sent back to PCGS along with this thread...would PCGS buy them back? >>
I personally bought these coins from three different eBay sellers and spread out over about a year period of time. I bought the first one cause I thought it was cool and pretty cheap, considering the amazing colors, great pics already provided and in PCGS. Subsequently, I bought the other two since they were a date, Country and TPGS match to the first and I thought they made a cool set. My asking price was a lot but I didn't necessarily want to sell them as much as I enjoyed showing them off. >>
Hmmm.
Dig up the listing numbers where you purchased them, provide a date and a seller then provide that information to "professional grader" wannabee. It would be interesting to know what his specific background might be that qualifies him over the professionals at PCGS anyway!
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.
Maybe the guy should market "EWA - Ebay Watchdog Approved" stickers. You wouldn't even have to send your coins to him as he can tell what's what just from a picture. That's smoe (tip of the hat to the OFR) wicked good talent.
<< <i>Ideally, the TPGs would be doing more to take these coins off the market and the PNG / ANA would be more active in limiting the selling of doctored coins. >>
PCGS + NGC need to establish ebay accounts and start buying these up, pronto! J/K
<< <i>However, if PCGS changes their mind and no longer grades a coin, there's nothing wrong with agreeing with PCGS and removing it from the marketplace. >>
That would be reasonable, if PCGS was telling eBay to remove coins PCGS has identified as no longer gradeworthy. Is PCGS doing this? Or is it being done by people who are deciding for themselves what PCGS's opinion on the matter should be?
<< <i>However, if PCGS changes their mind and no longer grades a coin, there's nothing wrong with agreeing with PCGS and removing it from the marketplace. >>
That would be reasonable, if PCGS was telling eBay to remove coins PCGS has identified as no longer gradeworthy. Is PCGS doing this? Or is it being done by people who are deciding for themselves what PCGS's opinion on the matter should be? >>
Either way, eBay's priority seems to be in creating a safe marketplace so it would be good for eBay to be alerted when PCGS no longer grades a coin. If PCGS is not already alerting eBay themselves, there may be a good opportunity to do so.
<< <i>Either way, eBay's priority seems to be in creating a safe marketplace so it would be good for eBay to be alerted when PCGS no longer grades a coin. >>
So if someone thinks that PCGS doesn't grade something anymore, they should contact eBay to get the listings removed? And eBay should do it? O-kay.
Seems to me, unless you're a PCGS employee authorized to make these determinations on PCGS's behalf, you are not in a position to be making pronouncements on what PCGS graded coins are and are not appropriate for listing.
BTW, if you want to netcop, is there a reason you (in general, not directed at any specific poster) are not contacting PCGS to alert them to the "problems" you're finding so that they can take appropriate action?
I don't know what to tell some of the posters here...but I personally own several coins that are just as colorful as those posted here...AND practically all of them are either still in Mint sealed proof envelopes or were purchased or pulled from Treasury bags in a far less colorful condition decades ago by either my grandfather, my father or myself (since I rarely sell anything, I state this categorically).
But getting back to the matter at hand, why would PCGS actively want to highlight past "mistakes" by actively seeking out and asking eBay to cancel "suspect" auctions? Especially since they aren't likely going to use [only] a picture to over-rule their previous decisions. And how would you like to hear that PCGS disavowed one of their slabs now residing in your collection? Therefore, as far as they're concerned, as long as a coin isn't resubmitted to them (or NGC), it's probably considered out of sight, out of mind.
But in light of this new eBay consumer protection "activism"...even with slabbed items...what's to prevent somebody from buying a slabbed coin, cracking it out, resubmitting it for a higher grade...and having the TPG return it at either the same grade or lower...and then the buyer turns around and demands that the seller take back the now raw coin?!? In the brave new Bizarro Anything Goes eBay World, I can actually see this happening. The seller will claim that the act of cracking a slab is merely the same as "unwrapping" or "unboxing" it...and the supreme idiots at eBay will demand a refund or they'll dock your [mandatory] Paypal account.
Hey...if they're now rejecting authentic slabs based only on low res pictures and the complaints of a self-appointed coin cop...anything's possible!
<< <i>Hey...if they're now rejecting authentic slabs based only on low res pictures and the complaints of a self-appointed coin cop...anything's possible! >>
Maybe netcops should start reporting listings where the BIN/high bid is higher than what's reasonable (as determined by the netcops themselves) and insist that those listings be ended too- in the name creating a safe marketplace, of course.
<< <i>I don't know what to tell some of the posters here...but I personally own several coins that are just as colorful as those posted here...AND practically all of them are either still in Mint sealed proof envelopes or were purchased or pulled from Treasury bags in a far less colorful condition decades ago by either my grandfather, my father or myself (since I rarely sell anything, I state this categorically). >>
AT / NT is a tricky issue but we have the coin doctors to thank for this. Secure Plus, the sniffer and TrueView are good things.
<< <i>But getting back to the matter at hand, why would PCGS actively want to highlight past "mistakes" by actively seeking out and asking eBay to cancel "suspect" auctions? Especially since they aren't likely going to use [only] a picture to over-rule their previous decisions. And how would you like to hear that PCGS disavowed one of their slabs now residing in your collection? Therefore, as far as they're concerned, as long as a coin isn't resubmitted to them (or NGC), it's probably considered out of sight, out of mind. >>
Why would a top TPG want known AT coins or counterfeits to continue to reside in their slabs with their good name on it? Every time a disavowed coin sells with their name, their reputation is on the line, and so is that of the marketplace. Theoretically, PNG dealers should already be disclosing this information per their Code of Ethics. Is asking for disclosure such a bad thing?
<< <i>But in light of this new eBay consumer protection "activism"...even with slabbed items...what's to prevent somebody from buying a slabbed coin, cracking it out, resubmitting it for a higher grade...and having the TPG return it at either the same grade or lower...and then the buyer turns around and demands that the seller take back the now raw coin?!? >>
If the TPG returns it at the same grade or lower, why would the coin be raw?
<< <i>Very interesting turn of events. I wonder if those coins are sent back to PCGS along with this thread...would PCGS buy them back? >>
I'm not sure how the PCGS guarantee works on world coins, but let's hypothetically say that these conis were made by the U.S. The PCGS guarantee would apply, however, don't believe that it would cover any toning premium.
<< <i>What if an ebay seller were to list one of those contemporary O mint counterfeit Morgan dollars in a PCGS holder. What then? >>
Hmmm. Are you talking about a dodgy seller unscrupulously putting one of the contemporaries into a genuine slab, or do you mean a contemporary that's already been slabbed as such legitimately by PCGS? If the former, jerk the auction; if the latter, it stays imo. >>
You are missing the subtle connection to the current situation. The coins were slabbed legitimately by PCGS and subsequently determined to be counterfeit. One cannot state that' if it's good enough for PCGS then ebay has no business pulling a listing' without discussing a situation such as this. IMO, if it is shown subsequently that a coin is counterfeit, or AT, then ebay is certainly within its rights to police its site by pulling said listing - no matter what PCGS originally said about the coin. >>
<< <i>What if an ebay seller were to list one of those contemporary O mint counterfeit Morgan dollars in a PCGS holder. What then? >>
Hmmm. Are you talking about a dodgy seller unscrupulously putting one of the contemporaries into a genuine slab, or do you mean a contemporary that's already been slabbed as such legitimately by PCGS? If the former, jerk the auction; if the latter, it stays imo. >>
You are missing the subtle connection to the current situation. The coins were slabbed legitimately by PCGS and subsequently determined to be counterfeit. One cannot state that' if it's good enough for PCGS then ebay has no business pulling a listing' without discussing a situation such as this. IMO, if it is shown subsequently that a coin is counterfeit, or AT, then ebay is certainly within its rights to police its site by pulling said listing - no matter what PCGS originally said about the coin. >>
>>
If I may, the subtle connection described above is about a 1 in 10,000 chance in happening, at the most. The dilemma discussed in the OPost could occur 1 in 10 times on eBay, if PCGS or NGC numerically assigned grades on toned material can be trumped by those with no accountability and unknown agendas.
<< <i>The dilemma discussed in the OPost could occur 1 in 10 times on eBay, if PCGS or NGC numerically assigned grades on toned material can be trumped by those with no accountability and unknown agendas. >>
At the end of the day, eBay is accountable to their buyers. The "agenda" is creating a safe marketplace.
I do think there should be a way to identify and remove coins like 71765746. I'm not sure what's the best process but it's kind of silly for those coins to continue to be sold in top TPG plastic IMO.
<< <i>The dilemma discussed in the OPost could occur 1 in 10 times on eBay, if PCGS or NGC numerically assigned grades on toned material can be trumped by those with no accountability and unknown agendas. >>
At the end of the day, eBay is accountable to their buyers. The "agenda" is creating a safe marketplace. >>
In a perfect world agreed, but...how do you reasonably and effeciently apply this to eBay coins in PC and NGC?
So let me get this straight. There are clowns on ebay that believe they can determine whether a coin is AT'd from a photo that PCGS graders saw in person and determined was accetable? Sorry said clown, but there is a reason why PCGS grades millions of dollars of coins a month and you don't. If this clown is also a seller of coins I see a big conflict of interest and a possible defamation law suit especially if he is accusing you of being a coin doctor. Some of the outright fake crap you see daily on ebay and they want to police auctions by pulling coins that are in PCGS plastic.
Need a Barber Half with ANACS photo certificate. If you have one for sale please PM me. Current Ebay auctions
<< <i>The dilemma discussed in the OPost could occur 1 in 10 times on eBay, if PCGS or NGC numerically assigned grades on toned material can be trumped by those with no accountability and unknown agendas. >>
At the end of the day, eBay is accountable to their buyers. The "agenda" is creating a safe marketplace. >>
In a perfect world agreed, but...how do you reasonably and effeciently apply this to eBay coins in PC and NGC? >>
I think one possible solution would be for the top TPGs to publish more notices on coins they are no longer grading. This would help identify and get the coins off the market.
For example, PCGS published this Micro O article. They could do the same with the blue Jeffs and Indians, etc.
Right now it appears to be generally known that top TPGs no longer grade certain types of coins but since there are no official announcements with photos and diagnostics for many, marketplaces like eBay are faced with tough decisions to try and eliminate them.
<< <i>So let me get this straight. There are clowns on ebay that believe they can determine whether a coin is AT'd from a photo that PCGS graders saw in person and determined was accetable? Sorry said clown, but there is a reason why PCGS grades millions of dollars of coins a month and you don't. If this clown is also a seller of coins I see a big conflict of interest and a possible defamation law suit especially if he is accusing you of being a coin doctor. Some of the outright fake crap you see daily on ebay and they want to police auctions by pulling coins that are in PCGS plastic. >>
I can, and have, identified occasionally a coin in a PCGS holder that is absolutely AT. PCGS's old standard was that if they weren't absolutely sure it was AT, then they would slab it. Several years back they changed their standard [as stated by HRH] to if they weren't absolutely sure it was NT then they wouldn't slab it. With a distinct change in standard, it is probable that there are coins in PCGS holders that aren't NT.
This is not to disparage PCGS, but rather to point out facts that fly in the face of the attitude that ebay simply must accept the holder
<< <i> I can, and have, identified occasionally a coin in a PCGS holder that is absolutely AT. PCGS's old standard was that if they weren't absolutely sure it was AT, then they would slab it. Several years back they changed their standard [as stated by HRH] to if they weren't absolutely sure it was NT then they wouldn't slab it. With a distinct change in standard, it is probable that there are coins in PCGS holders that aren't NT.
This is not to disparage PCGS, but rather to point out facts that fly in the face of the attitude that ebay simply must accept the holder >>
I agree Bruce and know you to be a true expert in our hobby/field - But based on the 10,000's PC and NGC toned coins sold on eBay each year, how is eBay to identify these coins efficiently, evenly and implement removal fairly so that all PC and NGC slabs are included?
<<The dilemma discussed in the OPost could occur 1 in 10 times on eBay, if PCGS or NGC numerically assigned grades on toned material can be trumped by those with no accountability and unknown agendas. >>
And that's exactly my point. This new eBay "policy" paints a potentially large bullseye on coins identified by an unknown Star Chamber-type Judge, with both unknown motives and undetermined credentials...all based on a photograph, while also providing an excellent opportunity for axe grinding/outright sabotage!
Now if PCGS and NGC want to implement their own proactive programs of searching through their own photo/computer records to attempt to retroactively identify and contact the owners of previously slabbed coins that they believe might now be in dispute...that's one thing (and an entirely different issue than the OP's situation). But here we're dealing with an immediate and arbitrary decision potentially impacting thousands of coins that may suddenly be deemed "colored abominations"...or was it "monstrosities"?
And, if I may suggest, I think the OP should rename this thread to be something more obvious...because I don't think based on the current thread title that many extremely senior forum members (or PCGS admin) have identified the full potential financial/business impact of what's being discussed here. I think something along the lines of "Newsflash: eBay Now Banning Some Authentic PCGS Slabs!"
<<To think a coin can not be manipulated AFTER being slabbed is amazing to me. Slabs are not airtight heat resistant chambers.>>
So...is eBay saying this happened? Do you know? Does anyone know? Does the OP know?
What I'm seeing here is another new previously unpublished eBay "policy" where they can now reject seemingly authentic top-tier TPG slabs based on the decision of an unknown party or parties lacking credentials.
And PS...for all the talk of AT or not-AT here...it's not like we (or anyone) can definitively say that our host would definitely sh*tcan those slabs if re-examined...because all of this is happening based on low res pictures! And those actions now include threatening to suspend the OP's account...for trying to sell coins housed in valid PCGS (until proven otherwise) slabs!
Half these people that are jumping all over the person or persons that reported OP's AT coins, have posted over and over how ebay should police their listings better. Stop scammers better. Clean ebay of sellers taking advantage of newbies better.
Unless of course, the guy selling AT carp is my buddy. Then it's "lay off you mean ebay nazi guys!!"
<<Half these people that are jumping all over the person or persons that reported OP's AT coins>>
Actually, unless I missed something...this IS entirely different...first, we don't seem to be dealing with fake or altered slabs here and second, we now know that eBay has seemingly formalized a person or group with the ability to trump (based on photos) a recognized top-tier TPG's hands-on evaluation.
It's one thing to report an obvious fake or counterfeit slab...that's been done many times...but it's completely another to report that a coin in a legit slab "just doesn't look/seem/smell/taste right" and to get it pulled on that basis alone. But that seems to be where we are now.
The key problem as I see it is the TPGs don't appear to have a way of removing disavowed coins from the market,
Because of this, coin doctors have created an environment where doctored coins continue to circulate in slabs, fooling buyers and potentially damaging the reputation and business of certain marketplaces.
Unfortunately, for far too long, the industry has looked the other way and the problem has just gotten worse,
It's gotten to the point where we need to rely on market acceptability (MA). If it's eBay's market, why can't they determine what's market acceptable for their market?
<<If it's eBay's market, why can't they determine what's market acceptable for their market? >>
Because it's eBay "venue" ... not market. It's the larger numismatic market that they'll be negatively influencing (quickly...toned is out...dip everything that might be "suspect")!
And I'd like to know what this policy action is actually responding to, exactly. Was somebody unable to cross or regrade a toned coin? Did somebody have buyer's remorse? I'd like to know why they're potentially pulling out an elephant gun to address what would appear to be a very uncommon event (namely proven AT coins housed in legit TPG slabs).
First last month, ANA slabs are kicked to the curb wholesale (alledgedly wthout any heads-up notice to ANA) and now some PCGS material is being called into question. I guess it'll be NGC's turn to be put under the gun next week!
<< <i><<If it's eBay's market, why can't they determine what's market acceptable for their market? >>
Because it's eBay "venue" ... not market. It's the numismatic market that they'll be negatively influencing.
And I'd like to know what this is action is responding to, exactly. Was somebody unable to crossover or regrade a toned coin? Did somebody have buyer's remorse?
I'd like to know why they're potentially pulling out an elephant gun to address what would appear to be a very uncommon event (namely proven AT coins housed in legit TPG slabs). First last month, ANA slabs are kicked to the curb wholesale and now some PCGS material is being called into question. I guess it'll be NGC's turn to be put under the gun next week? >>
I think they will actually positively influence the numismatic market by cleaning it up. Coin doctors have been having a run of the place, fooling collectors and TPGs for far too long. Without more action from the PNG and ANA, it's up to the marketplaces to protect consumers.
If you want eBay to take a step back, I'd ask what other solution do you propose for cleaning up all the doctored coins being sold on their marketplace, in the open, without disclosure and against the PNG Code of Ethics?
As for the ANA slabs, don't you mean Driving Force, LLC slabs?
<< <i>And if it's eBay's market, why can't they determine what's market acceptable for their market? >>
They can do whatever they want. They're not doing the market any favors, however, by telling people that they're restricting TPG slabs to PCGS/NGC only because they're the only companies that can be counted on to be reliable. Except that sometimes, they're not. So, in effect, you can't always trust them, either.
But you can trust eBay to tell you which TPG slabs are good and which aren't because of their extensive backgrond in numismatics (or something like that).
<< <i>And if it's eBay's market, why can't they determine what's market acceptable for their market? >>
They can do whatever they want. They're not doing the market any favors, however, by telling people that they're restricting TPG slabs to PCGS/NGC only because they're the only companies that can be counted on to be reliable. Except that sometimes, they're not. So, in effect, you can't always trust them, either. >>
I can tell you one benefit eBay is already having for collectors. ANACS will be launching an online cert verification service, which probably has been prioritized higher due to it being an eBay requirement for approved TPGs now. Once ANACS launches that service, they believe they will be approved again. That's a huge win for the market and collectors IMO.
As for the top TPGs, isn't it true certain coins have been disavowed and are still on the market, sold in the open, without disclosure per PNG Code of Ethics? What is your solution to that? I think it's also a benefit to the market and collectors to require disclosure per the PNG Code of Ethics.
If you don't want the marketplace to impose their rules, I think it's up to the industry to better clean up the market. Do you have any solutions for that?
<< <i>As for the top TPGs, isn't it true certain coins have been disavowed and are still on the market? What is your solution to that? >>
If there are coins the TPGs disavow, it is the TPGs' responsibility to deal with the issue. >>
That's an ideal first line of defense, however, certain coins have been disavowed and are still sold openly, without disclosure on their market.
The PNG has even come up with a Code of Ethics for dealers to follow. If the dealers cannot self-police and if such coins remain on their marketplace, then it ultimately falls to the marketplace to protect their buyers.
<< <i>And if it's eBay's market, why can't they determine what's market acceptable for their market? >>
They can do whatever they want. They're not doing the market any favors, however, by telling people that they're restricting TPG slabs to PCGS/NGC only because they're the only companies that can be counted on to be reliable. Except that sometimes, they're not. So, in effect, you can't always trust them, either. >>
I can tell you one benefit eBay is already having for collectors. ANACS will be launching an online cert verification service, which probably has been prioritized higher due to it being an eBay requirement for approved TPGs now. That's a huge win for that market and collectors IMO.
As for the top TPGs, isn't it true certain coins have been disavowed and are still on the market, sold in the open, without disclosure per PNG Code of Ethics? What is your solution to that? I think it's also a benefit to the market and collectors to require disclosure per the PNG Code of Ethics. >>
Actually they are creating an unfair marketplace when they assign a faceless group the task of applying unwritten policies to listings on a inconsistent basis.
The one benefit to which you refer was brought into being due to a well documented eBay policy change. Public policy change, time given to remedy, remedied. Worked great.
Conversely, it will be impossible for anyone to know exactly what any member of the black-box group considers a rainbow toned monstrosity, artificially toned, or dreck on any given sunday.
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>Very interesting turn of events. I wonder if those coins are sent back to PCGS along with this thread...would PCGS buy them back? >>
I personally bought these coins from three different eBay sellers and spread out over about a year period of time. I bought the first one cause I thought it was cool and pretty cheap, considering the amazing colors, great pics already provided and in PCGS. Subsequently, I bought the other two since they were a date, Country and TPGS match to the first and I thought they made a cool set. My asking price was a lot but I didn't necessarily want to sell them as much as I enjoyed showing them off. >>
Hmmm.
Dig up the listing numbers where you purchased them, provide a date and a seller then provide that information to "professional grader" wannabee.
It would be interesting to know what his specific background might be that qualifies him over the professionals at PCGS anyway!
The name is LEE!
So they pulled a listing it happens a lot
this one didn't get pulled
@@@@LOOOK@@@@
<< <i>So they pulled a listing it happens a lot
this one didn't get pulled
@@@@LOOOK@@@@ >>
Wow. 175 for a shake and bake special. Unreal.
<< <i>
<< <i>So they pulled a listing it happens a lot
this one didn't get pulled
@@@@LOOOK@@@@ >>
Wow. 175 for a shake and bake special. Unreal. >>
I'm guessing the TPGs didn't bite on this coin from the OP.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
ebays watchdogs aren't looking so bad
need more oil in your fry pan
<< <i>ebays watchdogs aren't looking so bad
need more oil in your fry pan >>
Another coin from the OP:
<< <i>ebays watchdogs aren't looking so bad
need more oil in your fry pan >>
See our other NT Rainbow Toned Coins now!
Surprised that statement didn't get watchdog attention.
<< <i>Ideally, the TPGs would be doing more to take these coins off the market and the PNG / ANA would be more active in limiting the selling of doctored coins. >>
PCGS + NGC need to establish ebay accounts and start buying these up, pronto! J/K
Hows that return policy?
franklin
same coin?
<< <i>They made a mistake. It should never have happened. A Community Watch Group member's opinion does not supersede PCGS's.
Lance. >>
However, if PCGS changes their mind and no longer grades a coin, there's nothing wrong with agreeing with PCGS and removing it from the marketplace.
<< <i>However, if PCGS changes their mind and no longer grades a coin, there's nothing wrong with agreeing with PCGS and removing it from the marketplace. >>
That would be reasonable, if PCGS was telling eBay to remove coins PCGS has identified as no longer gradeworthy. Is PCGS doing this? Or is it being done by people who are deciding for themselves what PCGS's opinion on the matter should be?
<< <i>
<< <i>However, if PCGS changes their mind and no longer grades a coin, there's nothing wrong with agreeing with PCGS and removing it from the marketplace. >>
That would be reasonable, if PCGS was telling eBay to remove coins PCGS has identified as no longer gradeworthy. Is PCGS doing this? Or is it being done by people who are deciding for themselves what PCGS's opinion on the matter should be? >>
Either way, eBay's priority seems to be in creating a safe marketplace so it would be good for eBay to be alerted when PCGS no longer grades a coin. If PCGS is not already alerting eBay themselves, there may be a good opportunity to do so.
<< <i>Either way, eBay's priority seems to be in creating a safe marketplace so it would be good for eBay to be alerted when PCGS no longer grades a coin. >>
So if someone thinks that PCGS doesn't grade something anymore, they should contact eBay to get the listings removed? And eBay should do it? O-kay.
Seems to me, unless you're a PCGS employee authorized to make these determinations on PCGS's behalf, you are not in a position to be making pronouncements on what PCGS graded coins are and are not appropriate for listing.
BTW, if you want to netcop, is there a reason you (in general, not directed at any specific poster) are not contacting PCGS to alert them to the "problems" you're finding so that they can take appropriate action?
Question 1: Who runs these forums and makes the rules?
Question 2: Who runs eBay and makes their rules?
I'll have to dip these before I try to sell them.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>So they pulled a listing it happens a lot
this one didn't get pulled
@@@@LOOOK@@@@ >>
Wow. 175 for a shake and bake special. Unreal. >>
I'm guessing the TPGs didn't bite on this coin from the OP.
I thought those coins are very pretty for what they were.
I do regret not seeing NT comment from those 2 Morgan auctions below the pics...it remained from a "sell similar item".
But getting back to the matter at hand, why would PCGS actively want to highlight past "mistakes" by actively seeking out and asking eBay to cancel "suspect" auctions? Especially since they aren't likely going to use [only] a picture to over-rule their previous decisions. And how would you like to hear that PCGS disavowed one of their slabs now residing in your collection? Therefore, as far as they're concerned, as long as a coin isn't resubmitted to them (or NGC), it's probably considered out of sight, out of mind.
But in light of this new eBay consumer protection "activism"...even with slabbed items...what's to prevent somebody from buying a slabbed coin, cracking it out, resubmitting it for a higher grade...and having the TPG return it at either the same grade or lower...and then the buyer turns around and demands that the seller take back the now raw coin?!? In the brave new Bizarro Anything Goes eBay World, I can actually see this happening. The seller will claim that the act of cracking a slab is merely the same as "unwrapping" or "unboxing" it...and the supreme idiots at eBay will demand a refund or they'll dock your [mandatory] Paypal account.
Hey...if they're now rejecting authentic slabs based only on low res pictures and the complaints of a self-appointed coin cop...anything's possible!
<< <i>Hey...if they're now rejecting authentic slabs based only on low res pictures and the complaints of a self-appointed coin cop...anything's possible! >>
Maybe netcops should start reporting listings where the BIN/high bid is higher than what's reasonable (as determined by the netcops themselves) and insist that those listings be ended too- in the name creating a safe marketplace, of course.
<< <i>
I'll have to dip these before I try to sell them.
Very pretty.
<< <i>I don't know what to tell some of the posters here...but I personally own several coins that are just as colorful as those posted here...AND practically all of them are either still in Mint sealed proof envelopes or were purchased or pulled from Treasury bags in a far less colorful condition decades ago by either my grandfather, my father or myself (since I rarely sell anything, I state this categorically). >>
AT / NT is a tricky issue but we have the coin doctors to thank for this. Secure Plus, the sniffer and TrueView are good things.
<< <i>But getting back to the matter at hand, why would PCGS actively want to highlight past "mistakes" by actively seeking out and asking eBay to cancel "suspect" auctions? Especially since they aren't likely going to use [only] a picture to over-rule their previous decisions. And how would you like to hear that PCGS disavowed one of their slabs now residing in your collection? Therefore, as far as they're concerned, as long as a coin isn't resubmitted to them (or NGC), it's probably considered out of sight, out of mind. >>
Why would a top TPG want known AT coins or counterfeits to continue to reside in their slabs with their good name on it? Every time a disavowed coin sells with their name, their reputation is on the line, and so is that of the marketplace. Theoretically, PNG dealers should already be disclosing this information per their Code of Ethics. Is asking for disclosure such a bad thing?
<< <i>But in light of this new eBay consumer protection "activism"...even with slabbed items...what's to prevent somebody from buying a slabbed coin, cracking it out, resubmitting it for a higher grade...and having the TPG return it at either the same grade or lower...and then the buyer turns around and demands that the seller take back the now raw coin?!? >>
If the TPG returns it at the same grade or lower, why would the coin be raw?
<< <i>Very interesting turn of events. I wonder if those coins are sent back to PCGS along with this thread...would PCGS buy them back? >>
I'm not sure how the PCGS guarantee works on world coins, but let's hypothetically say that these conis were made by the U.S. The PCGS guarantee would apply, however, don't believe that it would cover any toning premium.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>What if an ebay seller were to list one of those contemporary O mint counterfeit Morgan dollars in a PCGS holder. What then? >>
Hmmm. Are you talking about a dodgy seller unscrupulously putting one of the contemporaries into a genuine slab, or do you mean a contemporary that's already been slabbed as such legitimately by PCGS? If the former, jerk the auction; if the latter, it stays imo. >>
You are missing the subtle connection to the current situation. The coins were slabbed legitimately by PCGS and subsequently determined to be counterfeit. One cannot state that' if it's good enough for PCGS then ebay has no business pulling a listing' without discussing a situation such as this. IMO, if it is shown subsequently that a coin is counterfeit, or AT, then ebay is certainly within its rights to police its site by pulling said listing - no matter what PCGS originally said about the coin. >>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>What if an ebay seller were to list one of those contemporary O mint counterfeit Morgan dollars in a PCGS holder. What then? >>
Hmmm. Are you talking about a dodgy seller unscrupulously putting one of the contemporaries into a genuine slab, or do you mean a contemporary that's already been slabbed as such legitimately by PCGS? If the former, jerk the auction; if the latter, it stays imo. >>
You are missing the subtle connection to the current situation. The coins were slabbed legitimately by PCGS and subsequently determined to be counterfeit. One cannot state that' if it's good enough for PCGS then ebay has no business pulling a listing' without discussing a situation such as this. IMO, if it is shown subsequently that a coin is counterfeit, or AT, then ebay is certainly within its rights to police its site by pulling said listing - no matter what PCGS originally said about the coin. >>
If I may, the subtle connection described above is about a 1 in 10,000 chance in happening, at the most. The dilemma discussed in the OPost could occur 1 in 10 times on eBay, if PCGS or NGC numerically assigned grades on toned material can be trumped by those with no accountability and unknown agendas.
<< <i>The dilemma discussed in the OPost could occur 1 in 10 times on eBay, if PCGS or NGC numerically assigned grades on toned material can be trumped by those with no accountability and unknown agendas. >>
At the end of the day, eBay is accountable to their buyers. The "agenda" is creating a safe marketplace.
I do think there should be a way to identify and remove coins like 71765746. I'm not sure what's the best process but it's kind of silly for those coins to continue to be sold in top TPG plastic IMO.
<< <i>
<< <i>The dilemma discussed in the OPost could occur 1 in 10 times on eBay, if PCGS or NGC numerically assigned grades on toned material can be trumped by those with no accountability and unknown agendas. >>
At the end of the day, eBay is accountable to their buyers. The "agenda" is creating a safe marketplace. >>
In a perfect world agreed, but...how do you reasonably and effeciently apply this to eBay coins in PC and NGC?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>The dilemma discussed in the OPost could occur 1 in 10 times on eBay, if PCGS or NGC numerically assigned grades on toned material can be trumped by those with no accountability and unknown agendas. >>
At the end of the day, eBay is accountable to their buyers. The "agenda" is creating a safe marketplace. >>
In a perfect world agreed, but...how do you reasonably and effeciently apply this to eBay coins in PC and NGC? >>
I think one possible solution would be for the top TPGs to publish more notices on coins they are no longer grading. This would help identify and get the coins off the market.
For example, PCGS published this Micro O article. They could do the same with the blue Jeffs and Indians, etc.
Right now it appears to be generally known that top TPGs no longer grade certain types of coins but since there are no official announcements with photos and diagnostics for many, marketplaces like eBay are faced with tough decisions to try and eliminate them.
<< <i>So let me get this straight. There are clowns on ebay that believe they can determine whether a coin is AT'd from a photo that PCGS graders saw in person and determined was accetable? Sorry said clown, but there is a reason why PCGS grades millions of dollars of coins a month and you don't. If this clown is also a seller of coins I see a big conflict of interest and a possible defamation law suit especially if he is accusing you of being a coin doctor. Some of the outright fake crap you see daily on ebay and they want to police auctions by pulling coins that are in PCGS plastic. >>
I can, and have, identified occasionally a coin in a PCGS holder that is absolutely AT. PCGS's old standard was that if they weren't absolutely sure it was AT, then they would slab it. Several years back they changed their standard [as stated by HRH] to if they weren't absolutely sure it was NT then they wouldn't slab it. With a distinct change in standard, it is probable that there are coins in PCGS holders that aren't NT.
This is not to disparage PCGS, but rather to point out facts that fly in the face of the attitude that ebay simply must accept the holder
<< <i>
I can, and have, identified occasionally a coin in a PCGS holder that is absolutely AT. PCGS's old standard was that if they weren't absolutely sure it was AT, then they would slab it. Several years back they changed their standard [as stated by HRH] to if they weren't absolutely sure it was NT then they wouldn't slab it. With a distinct change in standard, it is probable that there are coins in PCGS holders that aren't NT.
This is not to disparage PCGS, but rather to point out facts that fly in the face of the attitude that ebay simply must accept the holder >>
I agree Bruce and know you to be a true expert in our hobby/field - But based on the 10,000's PC and NGC toned coins sold on eBay each year, how is eBay to identify these coins efficiently, evenly and implement removal fairly so that all PC and NGC slabs are included?
And that's exactly my point. This new eBay "policy" paints a potentially large bullseye on coins identified by an unknown Star Chamber-type Judge, with both unknown motives and undetermined credentials...all based on a photograph, while also providing an excellent opportunity for axe grinding/outright sabotage!
Now if PCGS and NGC want to implement their own proactive programs of searching through their own photo/computer records to attempt to retroactively identify and contact the owners of previously slabbed coins that they believe might now be in dispute...that's one thing (and an entirely different issue than the OP's situation). But here we're dealing with an immediate and arbitrary decision potentially impacting thousands of coins that may suddenly be deemed "colored abominations"...or was it "monstrosities"?
And, if I may suggest, I think the OP should rename this thread to be something more obvious...because I don't think based on the current thread title that many extremely senior forum members (or PCGS admin) have identified the full potential financial/business impact of what's being discussed here. I think something along the lines of "Newsflash: eBay Now Banning Some Authentic PCGS Slabs!"
Some were bought that way.
To think a coin can not be manipulated AFTER being slabbed is amazing to me. Slabs are not airtight heat resistant chambers.
Wake up, pull your heads out, and take a look at OP's AT coins.
So...is eBay saying this happened? Do you know? Does anyone know? Does the OP know?
What I'm seeing here is another new previously unpublished eBay "policy" where they can now reject seemingly authentic top-tier TPG slabs based on the decision of an unknown party or parties lacking credentials.
And PS...for all the talk of AT or not-AT here...it's not like we (or anyone) can definitively say that our host would definitely sh*tcan those slabs if re-examined...because all of this is happening based on low res pictures! And those actions now include threatening to suspend the OP's account...for trying to sell coins housed in valid PCGS (until proven otherwise) slabs!
Half these people that are jumping all over the person or persons that reported OP's AT coins, have posted over and over how ebay should police their listings better. Stop scammers better. Clean ebay of sellers taking advantage of newbies better.
Unless of course, the guy selling AT carp is my buddy. Then it's "lay off you mean ebay nazi guys!!"
Actually, unless I missed something...this IS entirely different...first, we don't seem to be dealing with fake or altered slabs here and second, we now know that eBay has seemingly formalized a person or group with the ability to trump (based on photos) a recognized top-tier TPG's hands-on evaluation.
It's one thing to report an obvious fake or counterfeit slab...that's been done many times...but it's completely another to report that a coin in a legit slab "just doesn't look/seem/smell/taste right" and to get it pulled on that basis alone. But that seems to be where we are now.
And what would that be? That the OP has a "history" of selling colorful coins, not all of which are slabbed?
<< <i>They're testing the waters for Ebay Grading Service. >>
Because of this, coin doctors have created an environment where doctored coins continue to circulate in slabs, fooling buyers and potentially damaging the reputation and business of certain marketplaces.
Unfortunately, for far too long, the industry has looked the other way and the problem has just gotten worse,
It's gotten to the point where we need to rely on market acceptability (MA). If it's eBay's market, why can't they determine what's market acceptable for their market?
Because it's eBay "venue" ... not market. It's the larger numismatic market that they'll be negatively influencing (quickly...toned is out...dip everything that might be "suspect")!
And I'd like to know what this policy action is actually responding to, exactly. Was somebody unable to cross or regrade a toned coin? Did somebody have buyer's remorse? I'd like to know why they're potentially pulling out an elephant gun to address what would appear to be a very uncommon event (namely proven AT coins housed in legit TPG slabs).
First last month, ANA slabs are kicked to the curb wholesale (alledgedly wthout any heads-up notice to ANA) and now some PCGS material is being called into question. I guess it'll be NGC's turn to be put under the gun next week!
<< <i><<If it's eBay's market, why can't they determine what's market acceptable for their market? >>
Because it's eBay "venue" ... not market. It's the numismatic market that they'll be negatively influencing.
And I'd like to know what this is action is responding to, exactly. Was somebody unable to crossover or regrade a toned coin? Did somebody have buyer's remorse?
I'd like to know why they're potentially pulling out an elephant gun to address what would appear to be a very uncommon event (namely proven AT coins housed in legit TPG slabs). First last month, ANA slabs are kicked to the curb wholesale and now some PCGS material is being called into question. I guess it'll be NGC's turn to be put under the gun next week? >>
I think they will actually positively influence the numismatic market by cleaning it up. Coin doctors have been having a run of the place, fooling collectors and TPGs for far too long. Without more action from the PNG and ANA, it's up to the marketplaces to protect consumers.
If you want eBay to take a step back, I'd ask what other solution do you propose for cleaning up all the doctored coins being sold on their marketplace, in the open, without disclosure and against the PNG Code of Ethics?
As for the ANA slabs, don't you mean Driving Force, LLC slabs?
<< <i>And if it's eBay's market, why can't they determine what's market acceptable for their market? >>
They can do whatever they want. They're not doing the market any favors, however, by telling people that they're restricting TPG slabs to PCGS/NGC only because they're the only companies that can be counted on to be reliable. Except that sometimes, they're not. So, in effect, you can't always trust them, either.
But you can trust eBay to tell you which TPG slabs are good and which aren't because of their extensive backgrond in numismatics (or something like that).
<< <i>
<< <i>And if it's eBay's market, why can't they determine what's market acceptable for their market? >>
They can do whatever they want. They're not doing the market any favors, however, by telling people that they're restricting TPG slabs to PCGS/NGC only because they're the only companies that can be counted on to be reliable. Except that sometimes, they're not. So, in effect, you can't always trust them, either. >>
I can tell you one benefit eBay is already having for collectors. ANACS will be launching an online cert verification service, which probably has been prioritized higher due to it being an eBay requirement for approved TPGs now. Once ANACS launches that service, they believe they will be approved again. That's a huge win for the market and collectors IMO.
As for the top TPGs, isn't it true certain coins have been disavowed and are still on the market, sold in the open, without disclosure per PNG Code of Ethics? What is your solution to that? I think it's also a benefit to the market and collectors to require disclosure per the PNG Code of Ethics.
If you don't want the marketplace to impose their rules, I think it's up to the industry to better clean up the market. Do you have any solutions for that?
<< <i>As for the top TPGs, isn't it true certain coins have been disavowed and are still on the market? What is your solution to that? >>
If there are coins the TPGs disavow, it is the TPGs' responsibility to deal with the issue.
<< <i>
<< <i>As for the top TPGs, isn't it true certain coins have been disavowed and are still on the market? What is your solution to that? >>
If there are coins the TPGs disavow, it is the TPGs' responsibility to deal with the issue. >>
That's an ideal first line of defense, however, certain coins have been disavowed and are still sold openly, without disclosure on their market.
The PNG has even come up with a Code of Ethics for dealers to follow. If the dealers cannot self-police and if such coins remain on their marketplace, then it ultimately falls to the marketplace to protect their buyers.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>And if it's eBay's market, why can't they determine what's market acceptable for their market? >>
They can do whatever they want. They're not doing the market any favors, however, by telling people that they're restricting TPG slabs to PCGS/NGC only because they're the only companies that can be counted on to be reliable. Except that sometimes, they're not. So, in effect, you can't always trust them, either. >>
I can tell you one benefit eBay is already having for collectors. ANACS will be launching an online cert verification service, which probably has been prioritized higher due to it being an eBay requirement for approved TPGs now. That's a huge win for that market and collectors IMO.
As for the top TPGs, isn't it true certain coins have been disavowed and are still on the market, sold in the open, without disclosure per PNG Code of Ethics? What is your solution to that? I think it's also a benefit to the market and collectors to require disclosure per the PNG Code of Ethics. >>
Actually they are creating an unfair marketplace when they assign a faceless group the task of applying unwritten policies to listings on a inconsistent basis.
The one benefit to which you refer was brought into being due to a well documented eBay policy change. Public policy change, time given to remedy, remedied. Worked great.
Conversely, it will be impossible for anyone to know exactly what any member of the black-box group considers a rainbow toned monstrosity, artificially toned, or dreck on any given sunday.