This buyer was ripped off bad!
 of 4-17-04 004.jpg)
UtahCoin
Posts: 5,354 ✭✭✭✭✭
We've all seen buyers ripped off by unscrupulous "dealers" and TV pitchmen. This is one of them.
I was shown this group of 11 proof sets. Pretty cool, 1936, 1937, 50, 51 etc.
I've purchased tons of 1950-1964 proof sets, but only a few 1936-42 sets. Of the 1936-1942 sets I've bought, most all been aftermarket holders. So, I open the 1937 box and this is what I saw.
Right away I'm thinking something is wrong. The coin sleeves look like the ones used in the Mint issued 1954 sets. Then I looked at the coins. Whizzed MS coins to look like proofs. Ouch! I did buy them, but at just a little over melt.
I used to be somebody, now I'm just a coin collector.
Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
0
Comments
Interesting
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
Is the way they are sealed the key to look for? Here's a 55 proof set in cello I had that does not have the same method of sealing the cellos. Does not look like your "railroad tracks" sealing.
bob:)
Buying those at a little over melt? Seems like the seller was ripped off also! They can't all be fakes right?
Fakes, no. Polished business strikes worth nothing more than melt, yes.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
But what if they were the real thing purchased a melt? Even with all the time "invested" in the doctoring, they are probably worth more than melt just as a teaching tool. Would make a nice display in a capital holder...."what to avoid."
Were there any legit proof sets in the boxes? All whizzed?
Click on this link to see my ebay listings.
What people won't do to make a buck!!!
The legit sets were 1950-1959 and I paid a fair market price for them. To be clear, I paid just over melt for the whizzed 36&37 sets.
Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
I would not have paid anything over melt for the 1936 and 1937 phony proof sets either. The coins are cleaned, polished dreck that will not be graded as problem-free by PCGS. They were processed and whizzed to fool and defraud an uneducated collector.
Here's a follow-up question. Did the $3,100 price tag some along with a sales receipt from an unscrupulous dealer? If not, then consider the possibility that the previous owner was the one who was trying to push them off on someone as a proof set. It looks like they were packaged up and priced at $3,100 to be sold in a shop or at a show, and nobody took the bait.
The mint did not ship sets in soft poly bags as shown in the images above. They used Cellophane, which is more rigid and becomes yellow and brittle with age. Thus both the op set and the 55 set pictured above are repackaged
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
This is not completely true. The poly bags shown above were introduced during 1954 and were also used in 1955 along with flat pack packaging. I know the cellophane sleeves were used for a portion of 1954 (and can yield some very vivid attractive toning). I don't believe the cellophane sleeves were used during 1955 at all.
@AUandAG I wouldn't personally have any concerns about your 1955 set being original or not, as I'd be cutting those two coins out in a heartbeat!
That is not original 1955 packaging, at least insofar as the bags are concerned. I have handled and owned 55 box sets with the coins in cello. Had that set been packaged using 1955-era poly bags the coins would be severely PVC damaged by now as there were no unplasticized bags at the time.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
Wow....very interesting.
I'm sure the OP would have much preferred that they were original authentic early Proof sets that he could have purchased for fair market value, rather than these deceptive fakes. It appears they chose nice Unc fairly well detailed coins to polish up. And I agree with others that slightly over melt was fair. The seller was not obligated to sell and could have shopped them around, but anyone knowledgeable likely would not have paid any more than the OP did.
The 36 and 37 proof sets I have seen had the hard crackly kinda yellowish cellophane that house the coins. No the soft one. Just my 2 cents..
Those two sets would make for an interesting display for coin shows. Educate the collector on what to look for. I take it the boxes though are real or are those also easily counterfeited?