I don't think so. No numerical grade is mentioned, and while it does say "original", it never mentions being "problem free". The photos clearly show a details holder, and it does clearly say the fact that it was Genuine graded and the problem is mentioned in the listing.
I think the beef some have, (which I share), is cherry picking adjectives for the title, while intentionally not using what is probably one of the most important pieces of information.
Now, you are correct that the pertinent information is plainly visible once you look at the entire listing. But if you aren't interested in scratched/cleaned/damaged coins, it's easy to feel used by the title.
So, a deceptive sale? Probably not, in the larger sense. Deceptive title? Yes.
Totally deceptive. If "DETAILS" or the problem is not mentioned in the main auction title, the seller is intentionally omitting information in order to get you to open the auction. A real scumbag tactic.
I have to disagree with the above. I don't see this as a deceptive listing, you don't have to scroll at all to see it is a details coin. Perhaps it isn't the best listing practice but not deceptive if it only takes a second to look at picture #3 and see "DETAILS" right on the holder. It should also be a red flag for a details coin any time a listing doesn't include a numerical grade in the title. As far as calling it original, well, it doesn't look cleaned and that seems to be an old scratch so I don't see too much wrong with saying that but they probably could have worded it differently.
I wonder how many people here realize that the SELLER is the one that pays for the listing, he pays the listing fees, the selling fees, the paypal fees and takes the risk of being ripped off. yet its the buyers who feel they should dictate how the listing is formatted.
regardless of how many posts I have, I don't consider myself an "expert" at anything
Originally posted by: Outhaul Totally deceptive. If "DETAILS" or the problem is not mentioned in the main auction title, the seller is intentionally omitting information in order to get you to open the auction. A real scumbag tactic.
Cheers
Bob
I agree with this. Nowhere does it mention the coin is actually not gradable with the exception of the picture. I believe the seller wants you to believe the coin is graded VF instead of not gradable. The seller is preying on collectors who are less knowledgeable.
"May the silver waves that bear you heavenward be filled with love’s whisperings"
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
Kinda sorta maybe --actually quite borderline. The damage should be noted in the title. While annoying it will probably turn more people off then on to buy it. It makes me not even want to look at his other coins. Thus he is only hurting himself with this type of listing. Plus, it is way overpriced also. If he says damaged in the listing I would feel better. It puts doubt in my mind. Yes, he is trying to get the most money that he can for it, which is ok, but any little negativity will turn people away.
not deceptive. Buyer knows exactly what will arrive in the mail. Titles are to get your attention. Descriptions are to describe. Anyone who buys without reading the description is a fool.
No Way Out: Stimulus and Money Printing Are the Only Path Left
the answers here should serve as proof that two people can look at something and see two very different things. I wouldn't mind adding a few to my blocked list just to avoid the headache that would likely result from selling anything to them
regardless of how many posts I have, I don't consider myself an "expert" at anything
Guys, how many ways or adjectives can you come up with describing a scratch and expressing the true facts? this seller did nothing wrong! (and NO, I am not the seller, nor do I know the seller) Perhaps time would be better spent giving the crooks a hard time who post coins made in China, describing them as rare, uncirculated and as an investment! sorry about the rant remember, buyer beware!!! If you do not like it, don't buy it.
By original, he is meaning not dipped or cleaned, and the details grade is the result of what appears to be accidental mechanical damage. So while it is damaged, I do think it is actually accurate in the sense that it wasn't doctored. I see no deception.
Originally posted by: Outhaul Totally deceptive. If "DETAILS" or the problem is not mentioned in the main auction title, the seller is intentionally omitting information in order to get you to open the auction. A real scumbag tactic.
Cheers
Bob
Annoying? Yes. Deceptive? No. The buyer knows exactly what he or she is getting. I don't like the omission of the word details in the title, but it does appear in the listing in big black letters.
Originally posted by: ebaybuyer the answers here should serve as proof that two people can look at something and see two very different things. I wouldn't mind adding a few to my blocked list just to avoid the headache that would likely result from selling anything to them
Do you start threads like this to bait people so you can add to your blocked bidders list.
Originally posted by: derryb not deceptive. Buyer knows exactly what will arrive in the mail. Titles are to get your attention. Descriptions are to describe. Anyone who buys without reading the description is a fool.
Agreed. You would have to be incredibly careless to not see what you are getting. And I would hope at $1500 no one would be that careless.
Originally posted by: ebaybuyer I wonder how many people here realize that the SELLER is the one that pays for the listing, he pays the listing fees, the selling fees, the paypal fees and takes the risk of being ripped off. yet its the buyers who feel they should dictate how the listing is formatted.
To say that members who find the listing deceptive have a problem with "formatting" is a gross mischaracterization.
And it seems that those who call the listing deception believe the seller is being deceptive in getting a potential buyer to click on the listing. I don't see anyone saying that a buyer would be deceived in purchasing. Sellers in all sorts of venues use myriad tactics involving shading the truth or confusion to draw in consumers, such as "Everything 70% off" in size 3000 font and "up to" fit in between in size 12 font. You go in the store and there is a pair of size 18 women's maternity pants for 70% off and everything else is 5% off.
And I would say that if the scratch was put there in the 1860's, then it would be original...
ive no problem with the seller but that title gives the impression of problem free (pcgs very fine) and when you are scrolling listings, it would be easy to click on that one w/o seeing that it is detailed. calling it completely original is questionable too.
not the end of the world but it is obviously done to get more views.
i would not list pcgs, ngc etc with a technical worded grade and/or numerical w/o disclosing the fact a coin has a non-straight grade designation. you ever catch me slippin', please notify me.
i ALWAYS respond to inquiries about errors/mistakes in my listings unless someone appears to be attempting to be annoying. even then i am careful as some noobies ask some peculiar questions and it really isn't difficult to be patient and nice even in the face of inferred/purposeful stupidity.
personally, i like how i feel later having been patient when in the moment it may not feel as good or as easy to do so. the moment does pass.
like anything, ebay will be partly what you make it.
not deceptive. Buyer knows exactly what will arrive in the mail. Titles are to get your attention. Descriptions are to describe. Anyone who buys without reading the description is a fool.
I agree with Derryb.
I also don't think it's totally original. The obverse seems to generally have the "correct" look but the reverse is a bit lighter than I'd expect, esp. with all the dirt inside the eagle's shield. Considering the damage, originality/coloration is the least of your worries. And if I'm looking for an !860-s quarter where at most a couple dozen exist in VF or higher, I'd prefer to see all the listings and make my own judgement whether it's worthy enough. If it were me, I'd have added "details" to the description of "PCGS VF" in the title.
For a date like this that is almost always cleaned/ugly/nasty, it's refreshing to see surfaces like this that could pass for day 1 or at worst "day 2." It's got an overall pleasant look despite the obv hack. It's a good way to afford one with decent appeal without ending up with a scrubbed or corroded one. It spent a short time in a wooden drawer or something where some light reflective hairlines were added...very minor though. I see some positives in this coin as arm length appeal is not that bad. I've owned some lower grade examples of this date, but never one in VF, whether damaged or not.
i would also add that I've seen a VF25 of the "as rare" 1872-s 25c in a graded TPG holder than was burnt, with mostly crusty black surfaces, and an obvious old scratch across the central reverse that was about half to a third of the thickness of the hack on this 60-s. I didn't think that 72-s should have been graded. Last seen with a price tag of $4500. This 1860-s with the hack almost seems a fair deal in comparison at $1500....though I'm not recommending anywhere here buy it. That's up to the individual. Graded VF's are in the $3K-$5K range. This one is priced at $100 above G6 ($1400). What's deceptive about that? If I owned this and wanted to sell it I'd describe it basically the same way to highlight its best features....an original "looking" VF 1860-s that got a hack along the way. Hacked or not, I find the coin sort of appealing on this particular date.
I thought it was worth a trip to the archives to see just how many of these lack original surfaces. Except for the occasional AG-VG coin, I'd say it's pretty darn hard to find one original in Fine-XF. The majority of graded ones are cleaned in some respect.
There's a Fine 15 with an obv scratch similar to this coin, though not as pleasing. That sold for $940. A VF details with large obv "X" in one field and graffitti across the entire upper reverse field went for $805. It seems a graded VG08 brings about the $1500-$1600. How many pleasing orig VF coins did I see here? Not many...maybe none. In looking at all those other coins, calling this one a VF details could be a slight stretch. If it's VF-20.0 details it's right on the line, reverse looks more like F15 to me.
the picture of the coin shows the problems clearly the title may not have details in the title, but one just need to look and read everything is there.
Pat Vetter,Mercury Dime registry set,1938 Proof set registry,Pat & BJ Coins:724-325-7211
It stinks. Title should ALWAYS, verbatim, state what is on the holder. He can comment about original skin in the description (which it is not) but this AD is deceptive.
MLAeBayNumismatics: "The greatest hobby in the world!"
"Do you start threads like this to bait people so you can add to your blocked bidders list"
im not baiting anyone into anything. although, if everyone had their ebay ID in their post, I would certainly update my list. anyone that finds that listing deceiving is a person id rather not sell to, for their own protection from their own self
regardless of how many posts I have, I don't consider myself an "expert" at anything
Disclosure is best. Although with that said, we do tend to hide our flaws. Most women I've been with were beautiful, but they still wanted to cover their face with ______.
"Do you start threads like this to bait people so you can add to your blocked bidders list"
im not baiting anyone into anything. although, if everyone had their ebay ID in their post, I would certainly update my list. anyone that finds that listing deceiving is a person id rather not sell to, for their own protection from their own self
I'll save you the trouble. I don't have an eBay ID because I got tired of the games on eBay long, long ago. No need to block me.
And really, I would think this is a good discussion for active sellers to learn what at least a segment of buyers think listings should and shouldn't look like. If you are baiting them into looking at lots they really aren't interested in, maybe the effort just isn't worth it? Maybe the goal should be 100% transparency?
I've said it before, but I REALLY like it when I look through a dealers web site, and see at least one coin described as "over graded", or they go out of their way to point out defects. It gives me a warm feeling that the dealer really is honest, and maybe I can actually believe him when he calls another coin PQ.
When I've gone out of my way to point out defects (ie full disclosure), I couldn't sell the coins. On one particular PCGS VG8 OGH flowing hair half I listed approx 50 "defects" with the coin to an interested buyer. I didn't want to risk a return or have a seller say it was "overgraded." Based on that description they said don't bother sending it. A few weeks later it went to a show and I sold it to a leading national dealer for 5% more than I quoted the collector. They loved the coin. To them it was essentially problem-free.
When I've gone out of my way to point out defects (ie full disclosure), I couldn't sell the coins. On one particular PCGS VG8 OGH flowing hair half I listed approx 50 "defects" with the coin to an interested buyer. I didn't want to risk a return or have a seller say it was "overgraded." Based on that description they said don't bother sending it. A few weeks later it went to a show and I sold it to a leading national dealer for 5% more than I quoted the collector. They loved the coin. To them it was essentially problem-free.
Guess maybe you can't win.
But listing 50 individual defects might have been overkill. "Scuffing and scratches appropriate for the wear and grade are noted. See the photo." might have been good enough...
And not being a seller, this may all be very easy for me to say. Take my advice with my level of selling experience in mind.
Comments
-Paul
I think the beef some have, (which I share), is cherry picking adjectives for the title, while intentionally not using what is probably one of the most important pieces of information.
Now, you are correct that the pertinent information is plainly visible once you look at the entire listing. But if you aren't interested in scratched/cleaned/damaged coins, it's easy to feel used by the title.
So, a deceptive sale? Probably not, in the larger sense. Deceptive title? Yes.
I for one don't think completely original and damage go together.
+1. I would agree with that sentiment.
If we were all the same, the world would be an incredibly boring place.
Tommy
Cheers
Bob
Collector, occasional seller
Completely Original is more puffing than fact.
Other than that, there only two minor, minor things I see for the OP to question it is:
1) The word "Details" does not appear in the title.
2) The first photo is the coin without the holder.
Totally deceptive. If "DETAILS" or the problem is not mentioned in the main auction title, the seller is intentionally omitting information in order to get you to open the auction. A real scumbag tactic.
Cheers
Bob
I agree with this. Nowhere does it mention the coin is actually not gradable with the exception of the picture. I believe the seller wants you to believe the coin is graded VF instead of not gradable. The seller is preying on collectors who are less knowledgeable.
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
No Way Out: Stimulus and Money Printing Are the Only Path Left
"completely original" The coin is not.
Guys, how many ways or adjectives can you come up with describing a scratch and expressing the true facts?
this seller did nothing wrong! (and NO, I am not the seller, nor do I know the seller)
Perhaps time would be better spent giving the crooks a hard time who post coins made in China, describing them as rare, uncirculated and as an investment!
sorry about the rant
remember, buyer beware!!! If you do not like it, don't buy it.
Totally deceptive. If "DETAILS" or the problem is not mentioned in the main auction title, the seller is intentionally omitting information in order to get you to open the auction. A real scumbag tactic.
Cheers
Bob
Annoying? Yes. Deceptive? No. The buyer knows exactly what he or she is getting. I don't like the omission of the word details in the title, but it does appear in the listing in big black letters.
the answers here should serve as proof that two people can look at something and see two very different things. I wouldn't mind adding a few to my blocked list just to avoid the headache that would likely result from selling anything to them
Do you start threads like this to bait people so you can add to your blocked bidders list.
not deceptive. Buyer knows exactly what will arrive in the mail. Titles are to get your attention. Descriptions are to describe. Anyone who buys without reading the description is a fool.
Agreed. You would have to be incredibly careless to not see what you are getting. And I would hope at $1500 no one would be that careless.
I wonder how many people here realize that the SELLER is the one that pays for the listing, he pays the listing fees, the selling fees, the paypal fees and takes the risk of being ripped off. yet its the buyers who feel they should dictate how the listing is formatted.
To say that members who find the listing deceptive have a problem with "formatting" is a gross mischaracterization.
And it seems that those who call the listing deception believe the seller is being deceptive in getting a potential buyer to click on the listing. I don't see anyone saying that a buyer would be deceived in purchasing. Sellers in all sorts of venues use myriad tactics involving shading the truth or confusion to draw in consumers, such as "Everything 70% off" in size 3000 font and "up to" fit in between in size 12 font. You go in the store and there is a pair of size 18 women's maternity pants for 70% off and everything else is 5% off.
And I would say that if the scratch was put there in the 1860's, then it would be original...
ive no problem with the seller but that title gives the impression of problem free (pcgs very fine) and when you are scrolling listings, it would be easy to click on that one w/o seeing that it is detailed. calling it completely original is questionable too.
not the end of the world but it is obviously done to get more views.
i would not list pcgs, ngc etc with a technical worded grade and/or numerical w/o disclosing the fact a coin has a non-straight grade designation. you ever catch me slippin', please notify me.
i ALWAYS respond to inquiries about errors/mistakes in my listings unless someone appears to be attempting to be annoying. even then i am careful as some noobies ask some peculiar questions and it really isn't difficult to be patient and nice even in the face of inferred/purposeful stupidity.
personally, i like how i feel later having been patient when in the moment it may not feel as good or as easy to do so. the moment does pass.
like anything, ebay will be partly what you make it.
.
not deceptive. Buyer knows exactly what will arrive in the mail. Titles are to get your attention. Descriptions are to describe. Anyone who buys without reading the description is a fool.
I agree with Derryb.
I also don't think it's totally original. The obverse seems to generally have the "correct" look but the reverse is a bit lighter than I'd expect, esp. with all the dirt inside the eagle's shield. Considering the damage, originality/coloration is the least of your worries. And if I'm looking for an !860-s quarter where at most a couple dozen exist in VF or higher, I'd prefer to see all the listings and make my own judgement whether it's worthy enough. If it were me, I'd have added "details" to the description of "PCGS VF" in the title.
For a date like this that is almost always cleaned/ugly/nasty, it's refreshing to see surfaces like this that could pass for day 1 or at worst "day 2." It's got an overall pleasant look despite the obv hack. It's a good way to afford one with decent appeal without ending up with a scrubbed or corroded one. It spent a short time in a wooden drawer or something where some light reflective hairlines were added...very minor though. I see some positives in this coin as arm length appeal is not that bad. I've owned some lower grade examples of this date, but never one in VF, whether damaged or not.
i would also add that I've seen a VF25 of the "as rare" 1872-s 25c in a graded TPG holder than was burnt, with mostly crusty black surfaces, and an obvious old scratch across the central reverse that was about half to a third of the thickness of the hack on this 60-s. I didn't think that 72-s should have been graded. Last seen with a price tag of $4500. This 1860-s with the hack almost seems a fair deal in comparison at $1500....though I'm not recommending anywhere here buy it. That's up to the individual. Graded VF's are in the $3K-$5K range. This one is priced at $100 above G6 ($1400). What's deceptive about that? If I owned this and wanted to sell it I'd describe it basically the same way to highlight its best features....an original "looking" VF 1860-s that got a hack along the way. Hacked or not, I find the coin sort of appealing on this particular date.
I thought it was worth a trip to the archives to see just how many of these lack original surfaces. Except for the occasional AG-VG coin, I'd say it's pretty darn hard to find one original in Fine-XF. The majority of graded ones are cleaned in some respect.
There's a Fine 15 with an obv scratch similar to this coin, though not as pleasing. That sold for $940. A VF details with large obv "X" in one field and graffitti across the entire upper reverse field went for $805. It seems a graded VG08 brings about the $1500-$1600. How many pleasing orig VF coins did I see here? Not many...maybe none. In looking at all those other coins, calling this one a VF details could be a slight stretch. If it's VF-20.0 details it's right on the line, reverse looks more like F15 to me.
Fine with obv scratch - genuine/details
im not baiting anyone into anything. although, if everyone had their ebay ID in their post, I would certainly update my list. anyone that finds that listing deceiving is a person id rather not sell to, for their own protection from their own self
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
"Do you start threads like this to bait people so you can add to your blocked bidders list"
im not baiting anyone into anything. although, if everyone had their ebay ID in their post, I would certainly update my list. anyone that finds that listing deceiving is a person id rather not sell to, for their own protection from their own self
I'll save you the trouble. I don't have an eBay ID because I got tired of the games on eBay long, long ago. No need to block me.
And really, I would think this is a good discussion for active sellers to learn what at least a segment of buyers think listings should and shouldn't look like. If you are baiting them into looking at lots they really aren't interested in, maybe the effort just isn't worth it? Maybe the goal should be 100% transparency?
I've said it before, but I REALLY like it when I look through a dealers web site, and see at least one coin described as "over graded", or they go out of their way to point out defects. It gives me a warm feeling that the dealer really is honest, and maybe I can actually believe him when he calls another coin PQ.
Just a thought.
When I've gone out of my way to point out defects (ie full disclosure), I couldn't sell the coins. On one particular PCGS VG8 OGH flowing hair half I listed approx 50 "defects" with the coin to an interested buyer. I didn't want to risk a return or have a seller say it was "overgraded." Based on that description they said don't bother sending it. A few weeks later it went to a show and I sold it to a leading national dealer for 5% more than I quoted the collector. They loved the coin. To them it was essentially problem-free.
Guess maybe you can't win.
But listing 50 individual defects might have been overkill. "Scuffing and scratches appropriate for the wear and grade are noted. See the photo." might have been good enough...
And not being a seller, this may all be very easy for me to say. Take my advice with my level of selling experience in mind.