<< <i>I sure would, ishop, like to disclose that I am not a member of the CCWGroup.
Now, ishop, can you show me where I have protested loudest?
I have not protested at all.
My outcries would be nice to read also.
You said you would like full disclosure, I agreed. If you likeI will take a look at your sales and buys and see if there is something to protest and or outcry about.
Diverting attention to the new guy probably wont work. If we're staying salient, that is. >>
Why do you continue to refer to him by his ebay handle, ishop, instead of his forum handle uofa1285 ?
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.
It's nice to find a place where users are secure enough in themselves that they are not chasing away new guys with stones and torches.
I did not know it was improper etiquette not to use someones forum name. He was the only one I saw on this thread with his ebay name at the bottom. Some would call it spam on other boards, but I guess it's OK here.
This thread was about ebay, so I used his ebay name that he has on every post he makes.
So to "uofa1285",
Please accept my sincere appologies for using other than your forum name.
It's nice to find a place where users are secure enough in themselves that they are not chasing away new guys with stones and torches.
I did not know it was improper etiquette not to use someones forum name. He was the only one I saw on this thread with his ebay name at the bottom. Some would call it spam on other boards, but I guess it's OK here.
This thread was about ebay, so I used his ebay name that he has on every post he makes.
So to "uofa1285",
Please accept my sincere appologies for using other than your forum name.
It will not happen again. >>
Well gosh, it's been a full year so whats the point of offering a Welcome.
As for the eBay links in the sig lines, they're only spam if you decide to click on them. Other than that, it's just a sig line.
As for forum etiquette? I had no idea who you were referring to since the complete name wasn't spelled out anyway and typically, when folks respond to posters, they respond to the forum handle on THIS forum, not some other venue.
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 for one would be very interested to hear how PCGS has confirmed that the coin was not doctored to achieve the rainbow colors. I would also like to know how PCGS determined that the coins that were the subject of the original post were not artificially toned. >>
PCGS only offers an OPINION. They do not "confirm" or "determine", they just give their opinion.
Other than that, you r post was well thought out, you should post more often.
Thanks for the feedback around this topic. We wanted to let you know that eBay received a professional opinion from PCGS and made the decision to reinstate the listing. We appreciate the community's feedback about this topic.
Thanks for the feedback around this topic. We wanted to let you know that eBay received a professional opinion from PCGS and made the decision to reinstate the listing. We appreciate the community's feedback about this topic.
eBay Collectibles Team >>
I assume that you are going to tell us how PCGS was able to determine that the coins were NT and not AT because so far, nobody here has been able to provide such an assurance.
Now that eBay is in a relationship with PCGS and PNG and I am told that the former will be the final arbiter for all reports about slabbed coins and not the eBay watch group, can you please explain to me how eBay is now a safer place.
Tell me, does the eBay Collectibles Team manage oversee the listings for antiques? Is that the reason why there is no policy about selling counterfeit antiques? Is that also why the Chinese have the run of eBay for selling the antiques they made yesterday? Is this the glorious future you see for coins?
We know from previous discussions on the CU forums that coins discussed here are often removed as the result of actions by the watch group. It is my understanding and from a reliable source that after this interference from eBay management, the group is reporting nothing and ignoring reports that it receives. So, anyone can post AT'd coins and nothing will happen, the Chinese can mount another bullion scam and nothing will happen and folks in the CU forum might report horrible counterfeits and nothing will happen but the press might well get hold of what is going on here and I for one hope so, because I love the hobby. Do you not agree that your cowardly actions have actually damaged the hobby? It achieves nothing to appease the grading companies because honest collectors who understand and respect the hobby are not fools.
I have taken a look at the many rainbow toned coins on eBay and saw listing number 221017725830. I then looked at the seller's other listings and until April they rarely sold a rainbow toned coin but are now offering 66 of them, 64 of them graded by NGC and PCGS; does anybody here actually believe that these are all NT? There is no need to report these listings - PCGS will tell you they are OK, an eBay apparatchik will tell you that everything is OK and nothing will happen.
In my opinion, your actions are entirely politically motivated - note that many here have condemned many of the original poster's rainbow toned coins - and your knowledge of coins is strictly limited to the fact that you understand that if you go into a shop and tender the correct change, you will receive goods in exchange.
I also suspect that you did not engage in a discussion with the original reporter of the coins in question nor did you involve anyone else from the watch group in a proper, open and unbiased discussion - perhaps you will assure us that I am incorrect. If I am correct, somebody reports suspect coins, the grading company is the only authority consulted and a decision is taken. Does anyone here truly believe that is reasonable? Is everyone rushing out to buy their slabbed coins? Are we all rushing over to eBay to buy coins?
I feel that this whole matter has been handled in a shoddy manner and unless the information passed to me is incorrect, we and our hobby have suffered a real disservice at the hands of politically motivated eBay managers.
It is not too late for sense to prevail here but it requires courage and honesty, particularly from eBay but I for one, am not holding my breath, expecting this to happen.
By the way, for those of you who became paranoid about suspected watch group members in this thread - as you may recall I for one said that did not bother me if they contributed in an honest and helpful fashion - well now you have some apologist from eBay spying here; I know which one I would rather have!
It is not unreasonable to assume that if that is what they could do in 2006, they have honed their skills in the intervening years.
I note that slabs are still not airtight ... >>
Wow! You found that one quick. I remember being on the boards and reading it as it unfolded.....I remember much of it, but didn't remember the title....would have taken me awhile to find it by a search.....
I am glad there is an ebay person who is on the boards, if legit, and I am glad things were reinstated. It seemed like some ebay assigned watchdog had it in for the coins/seller and went rogue on the attack...that was uncool. I hope they are chastised/removed from their "position of power".
I also think it is ok for PCGS to be brought into the loop if there are questionable PCGS coins on ebay and ebay asks. That should be part of what it means to be an approved TPGS for ebay auctions (ie....if it were in SEGS plastic, then one couldn't promote that fact, but being in PCGS plastic, one can promote it, including the PCGS grade).
Bochiman, I believe that many on this and other CU threads would be able to identify fake coins in slabs and fake slabs, where eBay photographs are good enough. It therefore follows that the watch group probably has the same skills.
My point is that I have yet to hear how PCGS and NGC can actually discriminate between AT and NT.
I also have considerable reservations about self regulation. PCGS is a corporate entity and exists to make profits for its shareholders. I suggest that it is not in its own interest for it to admit to its failings. I also have real concerns about its own ability to self-regulate. After all, when police are accused of an error or worse, when they tell us that actually everything is OK, do we just say, well that's OK then?
If there is evidence that the person who reported the coins was attacking the owner of the coins, let's hear it. If there is evidence that the original reporter from the watch group had some hidden motive, let's hear that too but above all let's hear why the reporter's opinion was wrong and I want to hear something more than "it's because PCGS says so".
If this reporter has actually done good things for collectors or even for eBay, I want to hear about those before condemning him/her. Bochiman, you seem rather quick to condemn, so if you have further information about this person and their track record, please share it with us so that we too can decide what we think of them and their motives.
Again, I say that I am concerned that if my opinions have any basis in fact, this whole matter has effectively made the coin site a dangerous place for collectors but a lot safer for dishonest dealers and coin docs or will the graders and professional bodies assure us that these don't exist, in which case I will be duty bound to believe them because they have spoken.
<< <i>I also think it is ok for PCGS to be brought into the loop if there are questionable PCGS coins on ebay and ebay asks >>
I agree with you.
It appears however that eBay policy has changed, and PCGS will have the final word on these types of listings. On the face of it, that sounds like a good idea.
But the great part about the TPGs was the Third Party aspect. An unbiased opinion.
I think I would rather have a third party have the final say, instead of the possibility of a biased opinion.
Short of [having the TPG] break out any and all coins in question...and submit them for the latest round of state-of-the-art testing...what would ever be the ultimate solution to issues such as this?
And, if found to be legit, what would prevent the same scenario from playing out in the future when the testing methods have changed and the same colorful coin is ultimately offered for resale?
It's impossible to remove 100% of risk from any buy/sell transaction. But buying legit coins in legit top-tier TPG slabs do seem to remove a great amount of it. And that's about all anyone can/should hope to do.
PCGS Forum members do not report suspected listings to ebay, ebay members do. The fact that some forum members are also ebay members changes nothing. I applaud ebay members that participate in helping to keep ebay a safe place to do business.
I think there is very fine line in letting Ebay to side with CWG or for that matter buyers' opinions
I know people already brought this up in this thread but how far are we away from CWG questioning assigned grade
How do the seller respond to 2 nearly similar claims from the buyer;
- "This coin in TPG holder looks AT to me"
vs
- "This coin in TPG holder does not look MS70 to me"
In the end both are subjective opinions and as long as they are not misrepresented by the seller (such as genuine coin in the genuine holder) in my mind they have the same merits
The only solution for for this type of questions is to force return policy on the sellers.
However this opens another flood gate for the sellers of PM-based collectibles that may not suit all the sellers
Let us be very clear here, this is about the credibility of a substantial corporation and nothing less.
So far, nobody has come forward to explain how a multicolored coin in a holder can be certified because it has been identified as NT and not AT even though it looks just like other raw AT'd coins sold elsewhere on eBay and that is precisely why it went behind everyone's back and had discussions with eBay that have helped it keep its cosy position.
Then there is the seller with 69 rainbow toned but graded coins, how likely is that?
Make no mistake, you create a witch-hunt for watch group members but what about PCGS staff or PCGS authorized dealers? In my opinion, some of the posters in this thread are acting purely from self-interest.
We see sycophant messages to Don, eulogies about grading companies and a message of thanks and assurance from an eBay toady.
Read all the posts in this thread and in the other thread and answer me this, In what way is eBay now a better place? Who are the winners and who are the losers?
<< <i>PCGS Forum members do not report suspected listings to ebay, ebay members do. The fact that some forum members are also ebay members changes nothing. I applaud ebay members that participate in helping to keep ebay a safe place to do business. >>
I also applaud eBay members who report suspect listings and I have reported obvious fakes myself but sadly, if you read my recent posts in this thread and if the information I have been given is correct, these reports are now likely to be ignored.
<< <i>So far, nobody has come forward to explain how a multicolored coin in a holder can be certified because it has been identified as NT and not AT even though it looks just like other raw AT'd coins sold elsewhere on eBay... >>
So far, nobody has come forward to explain why someone who has only seen an image of a coin on his monitor is a better judge of its toning than someone who has held the coin in his hand, either.
<< <i>So far, nobody has come forward to explain why someone who has only seen an image of a coin on his monitor is a better judge of its toning than someone who has held the coin in his hand, either. >>
Well, thank you for that truly inspired, worthwhile and illuminating response that has certainly moved the discussion on.
I notice that some eBay sellers are now stating that their rainbow toned coins have been artificially toned. If they had not admitted that, and following your logic, should the coins have been reported as AT'd or should all the listings have been left alone because the report would have necessarily come from "someone who has only seen an image of a coin on his monitor"?
<< <i>Well, thank you for that truly inspired, worthwhile and illuminating response that has certainly moved the discussion on. >>
You're welcome! I thought it was a good question, but unfortunately, not important enough for you to respond to, I guess. Pity- the answer might have helped people understand better what's been going on here.
<< <i>I notice that some eBay sellers are now stating that their rainbow toned coins have been artificially toned. >>
Sounds like a good thing.
<< <i>If they had not admitted that, and following your logic, should the coins have been reported as AT'd or should all the listings have been left alone because the report would have necessarily come from "someone who has only seen an image of a coin on his monitor"? >>
I didn't say anything like that. My point involved the difference in opinion of a respected and well known grading company vs. an anonymous watchdog group regarding the condition of a coin one party has seen and one party hasn't. It should come as no surprise (I hope) to hear that the marketplace already places an increased value on coins evaluated by a TPG vs. ones graded by unknown entities.
OK, mrpotatoheadd, let's just step back a bit here and consider another country that has struck many silver coins, the UK. I conducted a search in ALL coins on UK eBay and found just six listings from UK sellers with "rainbow" in the listing header and if I include the description, I can push that up to 15.
I did the same on the US site for just US coins and the numbers are respectively 1,333 from listing headers and 3,961 from listing headers and description and of the latter, 1,820 are NGC graded and 1,566 are PCGS graded. If I search for all coins, the total for headers only is 1,546 and 4,820 of which 1,969 are NGC graded and 1,722 are PCGS graded.
Now, I am told that British collectors aren't usually interested in rainbow toning and the coins listed by British sellers are hardly spectacular but how do you explain these huge discrepancies? Trying to argue this on the basis of population size doesn't even get you close. In my opinion, as I have stated elsewhere, the numbers are driven by demand and not supply.
Also, in my opinion, coin doctoring has been going on for a very long time and I believe that a significant percentage of graded rainbow toned coins are AT coins, but which grading company will ever admit to this? In the same way, which grading companies will admit to being more generous to coins submitted by some people, as I have seen alleged elsewhere or indeed to adjusting grading standards as a result of market conditions because the profits of the grading companies are affected by the throughput of coins for grading? Most are in this same position and it is difficult for them.
I will continue to believe that a great many AT'd coins have been graded and am concerned that the practice probably continues until someone can satisfy me that the grading companies invariably detect chemically treated, heated or anodized coins and will not give them a grade. So far, I have heard a total silence from those who can issue such assurances. In my opinion, playing the percentages, if someone reports a graded rainbow toned coin as AT'd, I suspect they are more likely to be correct than many people in the two active threads would wish to believe themselves or have you believe.
I think that collectors need to take their head out of the sand or from wherever it has been carelessly inserted, accept that there may be a genuine cause for concern and try to address it properly. Sometimes cars develop faults that lead to a recall, well maybe this is another one of those times and then ultimately the brand will be the winner but in the short term, the driver is the loser, as is the manufacturer, in terms of straight costs.
<< <i>We see sycophant messages to Don, eulogies about grading companies and a message of thanks and assurance from an eBay toady.
Read all the posts in this thread and in the other thread and answer me this, In what way is eBay now a better place? Who are the winners and who are the losers? >>
I assume I'm the ebay toady you refer to so I'll answer your question. Ebay is a better place because it is able to offer great buyer and seller protection. It is able to do this by weeding out the bad listings and bad sellers. As one who has bought and sold on ebay for many years, I have experienced first hand their evolving effort to make it a good experience for the buyer and for the seller. The winners on ebay are the collectors (many of whom have little coin knowledge and are just starting out) and the reputable sellers who do provide their customers with great service and great product. The losers on ebay are the shady sellers who have their bogus listings removed and their accounts closed. Ebay realizes that the more it does to protect its customers the more successful it will be. If you don't like doing business on ebay, then don't do business on ebay. However, who are you to fault those that choose to take their business there and are pleased enough with their service to speak highly of it?
<< <i>I also applaud eBay members who report suspect listings and I have reported obvious fakes myself but sadly, if you read my recent posts in this thread and if the information I have been given is correct, these reports are now likely to be ignored. >>
Reports from ebay members continue to be the primary source for identifying listing violations. The watch group addressed in this thread was simply formed to have an experienced group to turn to, when deemed necessary by ebay, to determine technicial coin issues. Ebay does not depend on the watch group to identify violations (although they themselves can report violations). Ebay depends on the group's knowledge and experience to help make technical determinations. Will they make mistakes? Obviously so. Without the input from knowledgeable coin people I can gurantee you they would make many more mistakes as was evident before they developed the watch group.
Disclaimer: No, I am not a member of ebay's coin committee. I do however report obvious counterfeits to ebay and receive their replies that sometimes say "The CCW is our Coin Community Watch group made up of coin experts from around the world who help eBay spot counterfeit coins or misleading listings like the ones you reported. Because eBay does not employ or train its Trust & Safety Customer Support Representatives to be experts in the area of coins and currency, we rely on their expertise to assist us. When I received your report I sent it to them for review and then they replied stating that they agreed that . . "
Two threads on the same topic. Here are my posts from the original thread.
-------------------------------------------------
eBay's attempts to clean up its coin auctions are admirable and long overdue.
I am sure there are many instances where even a casual collector can alert eBay to a problem sale and for that reason the newly formed watch group can be helpful.
It's eBay's site and they can allow or not allow any auction they want. However for eBay to remove a PCGS (or NGC) graded coin because of some amateur grader's opinion demonstrates a real lack of knowledge on their part. Some people always like to second guess the grading services. We welcome any new competition who wants to offer the same service and same guarantee that we do.
If anyone has a PCGS graded coin removed by eBay because it is deemed to be a problem coin please contact me with the cert. # and any correspondence from eBay.
I was contacted by eBay for clarification of our policies prior to reading the original post. PCGS has worked with eBay whenever we are asked. After some correspondence I received the following email last week (partial content) -
"The removal of the coins graded by PCGS was an error on the part of the reporter and the eBay representative who removed them. We have since rectified the situation and changed our procedure for handling reports when it concerns coins graded by PCGS and other highly rated grading companies."
As the email said, this was simply a mistake. We should applaud eBay's efforts to monitor their coin listings and help them whenever we can.
Everything else that I have said in this post still stands.
<< <i>Now, I am told that British collectors aren't usually interested in rainbow toning and the coins listed by British sellers are hardly spectacular but how do you explain these huge discrepancies? >>
I don't. If I was insisting that eBay end listings based on conclusions I reached from that claim, I would accept that I would need to explain it. But I'm not the one who's trying to get eBay to end listings.
<< <i>Trying to argue this on the basis of population size doesn't even get you close. In my opinion, as I have stated elsewhere, the numbers are driven by demand and not supply. >>
The fact there is a demand is not proof that any particular toned coin has gotten that way intentionally. When prices for things go up, people start to look harder for them.
<< <i>Also, in my opinion, coin doctoring has been going on for a very long time and I believe that a significant percentage of graded rainbow toned coins are AT coins, but which grading company will ever admit to this? >>
Admit to your belief? Unless they agree, why would they? It sounds here like you're saying you are a better judge of coins you've never seen than PCGS is when they've actually had the coin in their possession for evaluation. To be honest, in the situation described, I would take PCGS's opinion over yours every day and twice on Sunday.
<< <i>In the same way, which grading companies will admit to being more generous to coins submitted by some people, as I have seen alleged elsewhere... >>
People say lots of things. A claim alleged is not necessarily a fact.
<< <i>...or indeed to adjusting grading standards as a result of market conditions because the profits of the grading companies are affected by the throughput of coins for grading? >>
Changing standards have been discussed forever. Different people have different opinions of why that might happen, and what the significance might be. Personally, I don't have a dog in that hunt, but for those who are concerned, if you disagree with a TPG's opinion, you are free to disregard it. You step out onto thin ice when you move from that position to one where you insist that everybody else ought to to abide by your conclusions.
<< <i>I will continue to believe that a great many AT'd coins have been graded and am concerned that the practice probably continues until someone can satisfy me that the grading companies invariably detect chemically treated, heated or anodized coins and will not give them a grade. >>
I have no interest in trying to convince you otherwise, but do you really think you are a better judge of a coin you have never seen than a company who's graded- what... millions of coins, and has seen the coin? You're losing me here.
<< <i>So far, I have heard a total silence from those who can issue such assurances. >>
I would suspect there is nobody who can invariably detect every sort of alteration made to a coin. Humans make errors- no way around it.
<< <i>In my opinion, playing the percentages, if someone reports a graded rainbow toned coin as AT'd, I suspect they are more likely to be correct than many people in the two active threads would wish to believe themselves or have you believe. >>
Belief isn't the same thing as proof and those making the claims are the ones who are obligated to provide the proof.
<< <i>I think that collectors need to take their head out of the sand or from wherever it has been carelessly inserted, accept that there may be a genuine cause for concern and try to address it properly. >>
Advocating that coins be prohibited from sale that you have never even seen, but have decided anyway that you don't like is not the way to properly address these concerns.
<< <i>Sometimes cars develop faults that lead to a recall, well maybe this is another one of those times and then ultimately the brand will be the winner but in the short term, the driver is the loser, as is the manufacturer, in terms of straight costs. >>
PCGS has a system in place for recalling coins. If you believe strongly enough in the issue, why not buy the coins and submit them to PCGS under their guarantee?
<< <i>However for eBay to remove a PCGS (or NGC) graded coin because of some amateur grader's opinion demonstrates a real lack of knowledge on their part. >>
With all due respect,
Are you kidding me?
Did you look at the link of fake slabs. Many are on that site because of these so called amateurs. I'm not even going to mention the fake coins these amateurs have kept from being sold on eBay.
<< <i>However for eBay to remove a PCGS (or NGC) graded coin because of some amateur grader's opinion demonstrates a real lack of knowledge on their part. >>
With all due respect,
Are you kidding me?
Did you look at the link of fake slabs. Many are on that site because of these so called amateurs. I'm not even going to mention the fake coins these amateurs have kept from being sold on eBay.
Talk about a lack of knowledge.
WOW, I would've expected more from you.
Oh well, live and learn. >>
I believe the author was talking about my legit PCGS slabs and other non-counterfeit slabs. Everyone agrees that proven counterfeit slab auctions should be nixed, I think.
For my part, I would appreciate an apology from the ECCWG for their personalized and unfounded attacks on my auctions and my eBay character, as outlined at various points in this post. After all, I was the one directly affected by the groups brazen, unprofessional and out-of-line comments and actions heretofor.
There are bad fakes...and there are better fakes...but I've yet to see a very good fake slab.
So arbitrarily fingering pulling auctions isn't a solution (right now there is a "suspect" 16-D Slabbed Mercury in another thread...and for every one person who is suspicious...another is not). Other than a physical exam...there is no way to be absolutely be sure.
AND, my I ask, is there a similar activism in place at major shows? Does anyone go from table to table scrutinizing every slab...or every colorful slabbed coin? Or even better, fingering a dealer as a fraudster?
I think the answer is no...because I haven't seem a good fistfight on the bourse floor lately.
<< <i>For my part, I would appreciate an apology from the ECCWG for their personalized and unfounded attacks on my auctions and my eBay character, as outlined at various points in this post. After all, I was the one directly affected by the groups brazen, unprofessional and out-of-line comments and actions heretofor. >>
So I don't have to search the thread, what comments did the group make towards you and have you not been contacted at all?
If you didn't bring this to the attention of the board, no one else would've known. >>
I beg to differ.....
"From Lapidary2:
These were the coins I reported twice.
In my opinion, since any sign of cleaning is noted on a slab's label, these rainbow toned monstrosities should be described as artificially toned.
I note that the three South African dreck have been relisted as "electric toned". Since this could be interpreted as a description of the toning rather than the method used, I am reporting them again:
With regard to the OP, I have read the bleatings in the CU thread but not one of these nincompoops seems to have looked at the seller's feedback history and noted the number of rainbow toned coins the coin doc has sold. I apologise if there were members there arguing against the coin doc and his supporters."
<< <i>Did you look at the link of fake slabs. Many are on that site because of these so called amateurs. I'm not even going to mention the fake coins these amateurs have kept from being sold on eBay. >>
I can't speak for others, but I see nothing wrong with reporting fakes that you can identify from an image. My posts on this topic have been related to getting listings for toned coins pulled when the people doing the reporting have never even seen the coin.
<< <i>relisted as "electric toned". Since this could be interpreted as a description of the toning rather than the method used, I am reporting them again >>
Is using "electric toned" disallowed unless the toning was created by electrifying the coin (regardless of the slab it is in, or not)?
<< <i>relisted as "electric toned". Since this could be interpreted as a description of the toning rather than the method used, I am reporting them again >>
Is using "electric toned" disallowed unless the toning was created by electrifying the coin (regardless of the slab it is in, or not)? >>
See? This is why we've taken two steps forward and five steps back.
<< <i>relisted as "electric toned". Since this could be interpreted as a description of the toning rather than the method used, I am reporting them again >>
Is using "electric toned" disallowed unless the toning was created by electrifying the coin (regardless of the slab it is in, or not)? >>
See? This is why we've taken two steps forward and five steps back. >>
This is interesting because it sounds like the seller would have to disclose the electrification used and I'm not sure top TPGs would knowingly slab a coin whose toning was created via electrification.
Bronco , can i ask you , is your avatar a 3rd baseman named Ken Mullen from the late 70's era ? >>
I have no idea who it is I picked it at random . I have tried to upload a pic of my Ford bronco but shrinking it down enough pixelates it into a blue blob
Since I joined I seem to miss upload day every time.
Comments
Damned if you don't.
peacockcoins
<< <i> "Similarly, if holders are not airtight, it is theoretically possible that a gaseous agent could tone a coin within a holder."
This was the only point I was originally trying to make.
I kept reading," well it's in a slab, the slabber saw it in hand, blah, blah, blah"
Could've happened after.
Great post becareful. >>
<< <i>I sure would, ishop, like to disclose that I am not a member of the CCWGroup.
Now, ishop, can you show me where I have protested loudest?
I have not protested at all.
My outcries would be nice to read also.
You said you would like full disclosure, I agreed. If you likeI will take a look at your sales and buys and see if there is something to protest and or outcry about.
Diverting attention to the new guy probably wont work. If we're staying salient, that is. >>
Why do you continue to refer to him by his ebay handle, ishop, instead of his forum handle uofa1285 ?
The name is LEE!
Thank you welcoming me to the forum!
It's nice to find a place where users are secure enough in themselves that they are not chasing away new guys with stones and torches.
I did not know it was improper etiquette not to use someones forum name. He was the only one I saw on this thread with his ebay name at the bottom.
Some would call it spam on other boards, but I guess it's OK here.
This thread was about ebay, so I used his ebay name that he has on every post he makes.
So to "uofa1285",
Please accept my sincere appologies for using other than your forum name.
It will not happen again.
<< <i> "Similarly, if holders are not airtight, it is theoretically possible that a gaseous agent could tone a coin within a holder." >>
Is it really still theoretical?
TPG photos of certified coins with online cert lookup are a good thing.
<< <i>Hi 19Lyds,
Thank you welcoming me to the forum!
It's nice to find a place where users are secure enough in themselves that they are not chasing away new guys with stones and torches.
I did not know it was improper etiquette not to use someones forum name. He was the only one I saw on this thread with his ebay name at the bottom.
Some would call it spam on other boards, but I guess it's OK here.
This thread was about ebay, so I used his ebay name that he has on every post he makes.
So to "uofa1285",
Please accept my sincere appologies for using other than your forum name.
It will not happen again. >>
Well gosh, it's been a full year so whats the point of offering a Welcome.
As for the eBay links in the sig lines, they're only spam if you decide to click on them. Other than that, it's just a sig line.
As for forum etiquette? I had no idea who you were referring to since the complete name wasn't spelled out anyway and typically, when folks respond to posters, they respond to the forum handle on THIS forum, not some other venue.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>...I for one would be very interested to hear how PCGS has confirmed that the coin was not doctored to achieve the rainbow colors. I would also like to know how PCGS determined that the coins that were the subject of the original post were not artificially toned. >>
PCGS only offers an OPINION. They do not "confirm" or "determine", they just give their opinion.
Other than that, you r post was well thought out, you should post more often.
It's hard to figure a new site out when you are being chased around the room with pitchforks.
A year ago both my parents started showing severe signs of Alzheimers. I did not want to put them in a home and have been very busy with that.
For some reason my absense makes me the leader of a secret society that is hell bent on infiltrating your guys little corner of the world.
I will be here and than gone for months at a time.
I'm sorry if this has caused all of you undue stress. I can't imagine what it must be like for you all.
<< <i>Thank you 19Lyds for showing me some of the ropes.
It's hard to figure a new site out when you are being chased around the room with pitchforks.
A year ago both my parents started showing severe signs of Alzheimers. I did not want to put them in a home and have been very busy with that.
For some reason my absense makes me the leader of a secret society that is hell bent on infiltrating your guys little corner of the world.
I will be here and than gone for months at a time.
I'm sorry if this has caused all of you undue stress. I can't imagine what it must be like for you all. >>
Zanax helps,or is it Xanax?!
<< <i>
<< <i>Thank you 19Lyds for showing me some of the ropes.
It's hard to figure a new site out when you are being chased around the room with pitchforks.
A year ago both my parents started showing severe signs of Alzheimers. I did not want to put them in a home and have been very busy with that.
For some reason my absense makes me the leader of a secret society that is hell bent on infiltrating your guys little corner of the world.
I will be here and than gone for months at a time.
I'm sorry if this has caused all of you undue stress. I can't imagine what it must be like for you all. >>
Zanax helps,or is it Xanax?!
And, if you prefer to stay drug free, trying watching ten minutes of this movie instead (that will knock you out):
peacockcoins
Thanks for the feedback around this topic. We wanted to let you know that eBay received a professional opinion from PCGS and made the decision to reinstate the listing. We appreciate the community's feedback about this topic.
eBay Collectibles Team
<< <i> "Similarly, if holders are not airtight, it is theoretically possible that a gaseous agent could tone a coin within a holder."
This was the only point I was originally trying to make.
I kept reading," well it's in a slab, the slabber saw it in hand, blah, blah, blah"
Could've happened after.
Great post becareful. >>
Stairman- A few years back someone here was gassing coins.
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
Oh I'm sure it happens time to time.
Edited because becareful did it better!
<< <i>Hi all,
Thanks for the feedback around this topic. We wanted to let you know that eBay received a professional opinion from PCGS and made the decision to reinstate the listing. We appreciate the community's feedback about this topic.
eBay Collectibles Team >>
I assume that you are going to tell us how PCGS was able to determine that the coins were NT and not AT because so far, nobody here has been able to provide such an assurance.
Now that eBay is in a relationship with PCGS and PNG and I am told that the former will be the final arbiter for all reports about slabbed coins and not the eBay watch group, can you please explain to me how eBay is now a safer place.
Tell me, does the eBay Collectibles Team manage oversee the listings for antiques? Is that the reason why there is no policy about selling counterfeit antiques? Is that also why the Chinese have the run of eBay for selling the antiques they made yesterday? Is this the glorious future you see for coins?
We know from previous discussions on the CU forums that coins discussed here are often removed as the result of actions by the watch group. It is my understanding and from a reliable source that after this interference from eBay management, the group is reporting nothing and ignoring reports that it receives. So, anyone can post AT'd coins and nothing will happen, the Chinese can mount another bullion scam and nothing will happen and folks in the CU forum might report horrible counterfeits and nothing will happen but the press might well get hold of what is going on here and I for one hope so, because I love the hobby. Do you not agree that your cowardly actions have actually damaged the hobby? It achieves nothing to appease the grading companies because honest collectors who understand and respect the hobby are not fools.
I have taken a look at the many rainbow toned coins on eBay and saw listing number 221017725830. I then looked at the seller's other listings and until April they rarely sold a rainbow toned coin but are now offering 66 of them, 64 of them graded by NGC and PCGS; does anybody here actually believe that these are all NT? There is no need to report these listings - PCGS will tell you they are OK, an eBay apparatchik will tell you that everything is OK and nothing will happen.
In my opinion, your actions are entirely politically motivated - note that many here have condemned many of the original poster's rainbow toned coins - and your knowledge of coins is strictly limited to the fact that you understand that if you go into a shop and tender the correct change, you will receive goods in exchange.
I also suspect that you did not engage in a discussion with the original reporter of the coins in question nor did you involve anyone else from the watch group in a proper, open and unbiased discussion - perhaps you will assure us that I am incorrect. If I am correct, somebody reports suspect coins, the grading company is the only authority consulted and a decision is taken. Does anyone here truly believe that is reasonable? Is everyone rushing out to buy their slabbed coins? Are we all rushing over to eBay to buy coins?
I feel that this whole matter has been handled in a shoddy manner and unless the information passed to me is incorrect, we and our hobby have suffered a real disservice at the hands of politically motivated eBay managers.
It is not too late for sense to prevail here but it requires courage and honesty, particularly from eBay but I for one, am not holding my breath, expecting this to happen.
By the way, for those of you who became paranoid about suspected watch group members in this thread - as you may recall I for one said that did not bother me if they contributed in an honest and helpful fashion - well now you have some apologist from eBay spying here; I know which one I would rather have!
<< <i>
<< <i> "Similarly, if holders are not airtight, it is theoretically possible that a gaseous agent could tone a coin within a holder."
This was the only point I was originally trying to make.
I kept reading," well it's in a slab, the slabber saw it in hand, blah, blah, blah"
Could've happened after.
Great post becareful. >>
Stairman- A few years back someone here was gassing coins. >>
Here is the thread:
http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=535409&STARTPAGE=1
It is not unreasonable to assume that if that is what they could do in 2006, they have honed their skills in the intervening years.
I note that slabs are still not airtight ...
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> "Similarly, if holders are not airtight, it is theoretically possible that a gaseous agent could tone a coin within a holder."
This was the only point I was originally trying to make.
I kept reading," well it's in a slab, the slabber saw it in hand, blah, blah, blah"
Could've happened after.
Great post becareful. >>
Stairman- A few years back someone here was gassing coins. >>
Here is the thread:
http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=535409&STARTPAGE=1
It is not unreasonable to assume that if that is what they could do in 2006, they have honed their skills in the intervening years.
I note that slabs are still not airtight ... >>
Wow! You found that one quick. I remember being on the boards and reading it as it unfolded.....I remember much of it, but didn't remember the title....would have taken me awhile to find it by a search.....
I am glad there is an ebay person who is on the boards, if legit, and I am glad things were reinstated. It seemed like some ebay assigned watchdog had it in for the coins/seller and went rogue on the attack...that was uncool. I hope they are chastised/removed from their "position of power".
I also think it is ok for PCGS to be brought into the loop if there are questionable PCGS coins on ebay and ebay asks. That should be part of what it means to be an approved TPGS for ebay auctions (ie....if it were in SEGS plastic, then one couldn't promote that fact, but being in PCGS plastic, one can promote it, including the PCGS grade).
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>It seemed like some ebay assigned watchdog had it in for the coins/seller and went rogue on the attack... >>
Actually it seemed like a member of this forum (that is also a member of the watchgroup) had it in for the "watchdog" and wanted to take him down.
<< <i>but being in PCGS plastic, one can promote it, including the PCGS grade). >>
I'm reposting the link. A lot of these are in NGC slabs.
Promote?
My point is that I have yet to hear how PCGS and NGC can actually discriminate between AT and NT.
I also have considerable reservations about self regulation. PCGS is a corporate entity and exists to make profits for its shareholders. I suggest that it is not in its own interest for it to admit to its failings. I also have real concerns about its own ability to self-regulate. After all, when police are accused of an error or worse, when they tell us that actually everything is OK, do we just say, well that's OK then?
If there is evidence that the person who reported the coins was attacking the owner of the coins, let's hear it. If there is evidence that the original reporter from the watch group had some hidden motive, let's hear that too but above all let's hear why the reporter's opinion was wrong and I want to hear something more than "it's because PCGS says so".
If this reporter has actually done good things for collectors or even for eBay, I want to hear about those before condemning him/her. Bochiman, you seem rather quick to condemn, so if you have further information about this person and their track record, please share it with us so that we too can decide what we think of them and their motives.
Again, I say that I am concerned that if my opinions have any basis in fact, this whole matter has effectively made the coin site a dangerous place for collectors but a lot safer for dishonest dealers and coin docs or will the graders and professional bodies assure us that these don't exist, in which case I will be duty bound to believe them because they have spoken.
<< <i>I also think it is ok for PCGS to be brought into the loop if there are questionable PCGS coins on ebay and ebay asks >>
I agree with you.
It appears however that eBay policy has changed, and PCGS will have the final word on these types of listings. On the face of it, that sounds like a good idea.
But the great part about the TPGs was the Third Party aspect. An unbiased opinion.
I think I would rather have a third party have the final say, instead of the possibility of a biased opinion.
JMO
And, if found to be legit, what would prevent the same scenario from playing out in the future when the testing methods have changed and the same colorful coin is ultimately offered for resale?
It's impossible to remove 100% of risk from any buy/sell transaction. But buying legit coins in legit top-tier TPG slabs do seem to remove a great amount of it. And that's about all anyone can/should hope to do.
Capital investment depends on confidence. - Martin Armstrong
I know people already brought this up in this thread but how far are we away from CWG questioning assigned grade
How do the seller respond to 2 nearly similar claims from the buyer;
- "This coin in TPG holder looks AT to me"
vs
- "This coin in TPG holder does not look MS70 to me"
In the end both are subjective opinions and as long as they are not misrepresented by the seller (such as genuine coin in the genuine holder) in my mind they have the same merits
The only solution for for this type of questions is to force return policy on the sellers.
However this opens another flood gate for the sellers of PM-based collectibles that may not suit all the sellers
So far, nobody has come forward to explain how a multicolored coin in a holder can be certified because it has been identified as NT and not AT even though it looks just like other raw AT'd coins sold elsewhere on eBay and that is precisely why it went behind everyone's back and had discussions with eBay that have helped it keep its cosy position.
Then there is the seller with 69 rainbow toned but graded coins, how likely is that?
Make no mistake, you create a witch-hunt for watch group members but what about PCGS staff or PCGS authorized dealers? In my opinion, some of the posters in this thread are acting purely from self-interest.
We see sycophant messages to Don, eulogies about grading companies and a message of thanks and assurance from an eBay toady.
Read all the posts in this thread and in the other thread and answer me this, In what way is eBay now a better place? Who are the winners and who are the losers?
<< <i>PCGS Forum members do not report suspected listings to ebay, ebay members do. The fact that some forum members are also ebay members changes nothing. I applaud ebay members that participate in helping to keep ebay a safe place to do business. >>
I also applaud eBay members who report suspect listings and I have reported obvious fakes myself but sadly, if you read my recent posts in this thread and if the information I have been given is correct, these reports are now likely to be ignored.
<< <i>So far, nobody has come forward to explain how a multicolored coin in a holder can be certified because it has been identified as NT and not AT even though it looks just like other raw AT'd coins sold elsewhere on eBay... >>
So far, nobody has come forward to explain why someone who has only seen an image of a coin on his monitor is a better judge of its toning than someone who has held the coin in his hand, either.
<< <i>So far, nobody has come forward to explain why someone who has only seen an image of a coin on his monitor is a better judge of its toning than someone who has held the coin in his hand, either. >>
Well, thank you for that truly inspired, worthwhile and illuminating response that has certainly moved the discussion on.
I notice that some eBay sellers are now stating that their rainbow toned coins have been artificially toned. If they had not admitted that, and following your logic, should the coins have been reported as AT'd or should all the listings have been left alone because the report would have necessarily come from "someone who has only seen an image of a coin on his monitor"?
<< <i>Well, thank you for that truly inspired, worthwhile and illuminating response that has certainly moved the discussion on. >>
You're welcome! I thought it was a good question, but unfortunately, not important enough for you to respond to, I guess. Pity- the answer might have helped people understand better what's been going on here.
<< <i>I notice that some eBay sellers are now stating that their rainbow toned coins have been artificially toned. >>
Sounds like a good thing.
<< <i>If they had not admitted that, and following your logic, should the coins have been reported as AT'd or should all the listings have been left alone because the report would have necessarily come from "someone who has only seen an image of a coin on his monitor"? >>
I didn't say anything like that. My point involved the difference in opinion of a respected and well known grading company vs. an anonymous watchdog group regarding the condition of a coin one party has seen and one party hasn't. It should come as no surprise (I hope) to hear that the marketplace already places an increased value on coins evaluated by a TPG vs. ones graded by unknown entities.
I did the same on the US site for just US coins and the numbers are respectively 1,333 from listing headers and 3,961 from listing headers and description and of the latter, 1,820 are NGC graded and 1,566 are PCGS graded. If I search for all coins, the total for headers only is 1,546 and 4,820 of which 1,969 are NGC graded and 1,722 are PCGS graded.
Now, I am told that British collectors aren't usually interested in rainbow toning and the coins listed by British sellers are hardly spectacular but how do you explain these huge discrepancies? Trying to argue this on the basis of population size doesn't even get you close. In my opinion, as I have stated elsewhere, the numbers are driven by demand and not supply.
Also, in my opinion, coin doctoring has been going on for a very long time and I believe that a significant percentage of graded rainbow toned coins are AT coins, but which grading company will ever admit to this? In the same way, which grading companies will admit to being more generous to coins submitted by some people, as I have seen alleged elsewhere or indeed to adjusting grading standards as a result of market conditions because the profits of the grading companies are affected by the throughput of coins for grading? Most are in this same position and it is difficult for them.
I will continue to believe that a great many AT'd coins have been graded and am concerned that the practice probably continues until someone can satisfy me that the grading companies invariably detect chemically treated, heated or anodized coins and will not give them a grade. So far, I have heard a total silence from those who can issue such assurances. In my opinion, playing the percentages, if someone reports a graded rainbow toned coin as AT'd, I suspect they are more likely to be correct than many people in the two active threads would wish to believe themselves or have you believe.
I think that collectors need to take their head out of the sand or from wherever it has been carelessly inserted, accept that there may be a genuine cause for concern and try to address it properly. Sometimes cars develop faults that lead to a recall, well maybe this is another one of those times and then ultimately the brand will be the winner but in the short term, the driver is the loser, as is the manufacturer, in terms of straight costs.
<< <i>We see sycophant messages to Don, eulogies about grading companies and a message of thanks and assurance from an eBay toady.
Read all the posts in this thread and in the other thread and answer me this, In what way is eBay now a better place? Who are the winners and who are the losers? >>
I assume I'm the ebay toady you refer to so I'll answer your question. Ebay is a better place because it is able to offer great buyer and seller protection. It is able to do this by weeding out the bad listings and bad sellers. As one who has bought and sold on ebay for many years, I have experienced first hand their evolving effort to make it a good experience for the buyer and for the seller. The winners on ebay are the collectors (many of whom have little coin knowledge and are just starting out) and the reputable sellers who do provide their customers with great service and great product. The losers on ebay are the shady sellers who have their bogus listings removed and their accounts closed. Ebay realizes that the more it does to protect its customers the more successful it will be. If you don't like doing business on ebay, then don't do business on ebay. However, who are you to fault those that choose to take their business there and are pleased enough with their service to speak highly of it?
<< <i>I also applaud eBay members who report suspect listings and I have reported obvious fakes myself but sadly, if you read my recent posts in this thread and if the information I have been given is correct, these reports are now likely to be ignored. >>
Reports from ebay members continue to be the primary source for identifying listing violations. The watch group addressed in this thread was simply formed to have an experienced group to turn to, when deemed necessary by ebay, to determine technicial coin issues. Ebay does not depend on the watch group to identify violations (although they themselves can report violations). Ebay depends on the group's knowledge and experience to help make technical determinations. Will they make mistakes? Obviously so. Without the input from knowledgeable coin people I can gurantee you they would make many more mistakes as was evident before they developed the watch group.
Disclaimer: No, I am not a member of ebay's coin committee. I do however report obvious counterfeits to ebay and receive their replies that sometimes say "The CCW is our Coin Community Watch group made up of coin experts from around the world who help eBay spot counterfeit coins or misleading listings like the ones you reported. Because eBay does not employ or train its Trust & Safety Customer Support Representatives to be experts in the area of coins and currency, we rely on their expertise to assist us. When I received your report I sent it to them for review and then they replied stating that they agreed that . . "
PS: Welcome to the forum!
Capital investment depends on confidence. - Martin Armstrong
-------------------------------------------------
eBay's attempts to clean up its coin auctions are admirable and long overdue.
I am sure there are many instances where even a casual collector can alert eBay to a problem sale and for that reason the newly formed watch group can be helpful.
It's eBay's site and they can allow or not allow any auction they want. However for eBay to remove a PCGS (or NGC) graded coin because of some amateur grader's opinion demonstrates a real lack of knowledge on their part. Some people always like to second guess the grading services. We welcome any new competition who wants to offer the same service and same guarantee that we do.
If anyone has a PCGS graded coin removed by eBay because it is deemed to be a problem coin please contact me with the cert. # and any correspondence from eBay.
thanks.
---------------------------------------------------
If anyone has PCGS certified coins rejected by eBay, or any other site for that matter, please send them to my attention at PCGS.
We will either confirm our grade or we will buy the coins back.
Just like we have for the past 26 years.
---------------------------------------------------------
I was contacted by eBay for clarification of our policies prior to reading the original post. PCGS has worked with eBay whenever we are asked. After some correspondence I received the following email last week (partial content) -
"The removal of the coins graded by PCGS was an error on the part of the reporter and the eBay representative who removed them. We have since rectified the situation and changed our procedure for handling reports when it concerns coins graded by PCGS and other highly rated grading companies."
As the email said, this was simply a mistake. We should applaud eBay's efforts to monitor their coin listings and help them whenever we can.
Everything else that I have said in this post still stands.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
<< <i>Now, I am told that British collectors aren't usually interested in rainbow toning and the coins listed by British sellers are hardly spectacular but how do you explain these huge discrepancies? >>
I don't. If I was insisting that eBay end listings based on conclusions I reached from that claim, I would accept that I would need to explain it. But I'm not the one who's trying to get eBay to end listings.
<< <i>Trying to argue this on the basis of population size doesn't even get you close. In my opinion, as I have stated elsewhere, the numbers are driven by demand and not supply. >>
The fact there is a demand is not proof that any particular toned coin has gotten that way intentionally. When prices for things go up, people start to look harder for them.
<< <i>Also, in my opinion, coin doctoring has been going on for a very long time and I believe that a significant percentage of graded rainbow toned coins are AT coins, but which grading company will ever admit to this? >>
Admit to your belief? Unless they agree, why would they? It sounds here like you're saying you are a better judge of coins you've never seen than PCGS is when they've actually had the coin in their possession for evaluation. To be honest, in the situation described, I would take PCGS's opinion over yours every day and twice on Sunday.
<< <i>In the same way, which grading companies will admit to being more generous to coins submitted by some people, as I have seen alleged elsewhere... >>
People say lots of things. A claim alleged is not necessarily a fact.
<< <i>...or indeed to adjusting grading standards as a result of market conditions because the profits of the grading companies are affected by the throughput of coins for grading? >>
Changing standards have been discussed forever. Different people have different opinions of why that might happen, and what the significance might be. Personally, I don't have a dog in that hunt, but for those who are concerned, if you disagree with a TPG's opinion, you are free to disregard it. You step out onto thin ice when you move from that position to one where you insist that everybody else ought to to abide by your conclusions.
<< <i>I will continue to believe that a great many AT'd coins have been graded and am concerned that the practice probably continues until someone can satisfy me that the grading companies invariably detect chemically treated, heated or anodized coins and will not give them a grade. >>
I have no interest in trying to convince you otherwise, but do you really think you are a better judge of a coin you have never seen than a company who's graded- what... millions of coins, and has seen the coin? You're losing me here.
<< <i>So far, I have heard a total silence from those who can issue such assurances. >>
I would suspect there is nobody who can invariably detect every sort of alteration made to a coin. Humans make errors- no way around it.
<< <i>In my opinion, playing the percentages, if someone reports a graded rainbow toned coin as AT'd, I suspect they are more likely to be correct than many people in the two active threads would wish to believe themselves or have you believe. >>
Belief isn't the same thing as proof and those making the claims are the ones who are obligated to provide the proof.
<< <i>I think that collectors need to take their head out of the sand or from wherever it has been carelessly inserted, accept that there may be a genuine cause for concern and try to address it properly. >>
Advocating that coins be prohibited from sale that you have never even seen, but have decided anyway that you don't like is not the way to properly address these concerns.
<< <i>Sometimes cars develop faults that lead to a recall, well maybe this is another one of those times and then ultimately the brand will be the winner but in the short term, the driver is the loser, as is the manufacturer, in terms of straight costs. >>
PCGS has a system in place for recalling coins. If you believe strongly enough in the issue, why not buy the coins and submit them to PCGS under their guarantee?
<< <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.
Someone just got hosed! $175 for that POS! WOW, there's a sucker born every second on ebay
<< <i>Hows that return policy?
franklin
same coin? >>
Yes, same coin. The original purchaser paid $300 for that one, and returned it. Now the seller would be happy with his $150 BIN ... LOL
Thank you for responding.
<< <i>However for eBay to remove a PCGS (or NGC) graded coin because of some amateur grader's opinion demonstrates a real lack of knowledge on their part. >>
With all due respect,
Are you kidding me?
Did you look at the link of fake slabs. Many are on that site because of these so called amateurs. I'm not even going to mention the fake coins these amateurs have kept from being sold on eBay.
Talk about a lack of knowledge.
WOW, I would've expected more from you.
Oh well, live and learn.
<< <i>Mr. Willis,
Thank you for responding.
<< <i>However for eBay to remove a PCGS (or NGC) graded coin because of some amateur grader's opinion demonstrates a real lack of knowledge on their part. >>
With all due respect,
Are you kidding me?
Did you look at the link of fake slabs. Many are on that site because of these so called amateurs. I'm not even going to mention the fake coins these amateurs have kept from being sold on eBay.
Talk about a lack of knowledge.
WOW, I would've expected more from you.
Oh well, live and learn. >>
I believe the author was talking about my legit PCGS slabs and other non-counterfeit slabs. Everyone agrees that proven counterfeit slab auctions should be nixed, I think.
You're being melodramatic.
If you didn't bring this to the attention of the board, no one else would've known.
Or the wolf in charge of the chicken coup.
Add 500 Pounds of Gorilla _ _ _ _
About enough to compromise it.
So arbitrarily fingering pulling auctions isn't a solution (right now there is a "suspect" 16-D Slabbed Mercury in another thread...and for every one person who is suspicious...another is not). Other than a physical exam...there is no way to be absolutely be sure.
AND, my I ask, is there a similar activism in place at major shows? Does anyone go from table to table scrutinizing every slab...or every colorful slabbed coin? Or even better, fingering a dealer as a fraudster?
I think the answer is no...because I haven't seem a good fistfight on the bourse floor lately.
<< <i>For my part, I would appreciate an apology from the ECCWG for their personalized and unfounded attacks on my auctions and my eBay character, as outlined at various points in this post. After all, I was the one directly affected by the groups brazen, unprofessional and out-of-line comments and actions heretofor. >>
So I don't have to search the thread, what comments did the group make towards you and have you not been contacted at all?
<< <i>There was no attack on your character.
You're being melodramatic.
If you didn't bring this to the attention of the board, no one else would've known. >>
I beg to differ.....
"From Lapidary2:
These were the coins I reported twice.
In my opinion, since any sign of cleaning is noted on a slab's label, these rainbow toned monstrosities should be described as artificially toned.
I note that the three South African dreck have been relisted as "electric toned". Since this could be interpreted as a description of the toning rather than the method used, I am reporting them again:
http://www.ebay.com/sch/ishopcoinshows4you/m.html
From Lapidary2:
With regard to the OP, I have read the bleatings in the CU thread but not one of these nincompoops seems to have looked at the seller's feedback history and noted the number of rainbow toned coins the coin doc has sold. I apologise if there were members there arguing against the coin doc and his supporters."
<< <i>Did you look at the link of fake slabs. Many are on that site because of these so called amateurs. I'm not even going to mention the fake coins these amateurs have kept from being sold on eBay. >>
I can't speak for others, but I see nothing wrong with reporting fakes that you can identify from an image. My posts on this topic have been related to getting listings for toned coins pulled when the people doing the reporting have never even seen the coin.
<< <i>relisted as "electric toned". Since this could be interpreted as a description of the toning rather than the method used, I am reporting them again >>
Is using "electric toned" disallowed unless the toning was created by electrifying the coin (regardless of the slab it is in, or not)?
<< <i>
<< <i>relisted as "electric toned". Since this could be interpreted as a description of the toning rather than the method used, I am reporting them again >>
Is using "electric toned" disallowed unless the toning was created by electrifying the coin (regardless of the slab it is in, or not)? >>
See? This is why we've taken two steps forward and five steps back.
peacockcoins
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>relisted as "electric toned". Since this could be interpreted as a description of the toning rather than the method used, I am reporting them again >>
Is using "electric toned" disallowed unless the toning was created by electrifying the coin (regardless of the slab it is in, or not)? >>
See? This is why we've taken two steps forward and five steps back. >>
This is interesting because it sounds like the seller would have to disclose the electrification used and I'm not sure top TPGs would knowingly slab a coin whose toning was created via electrification.
I don't think you would need to make a point to disclose it if you tapped it with a stick welder.
<< <i>I don't think you would need to make a point to disclose it if you tapped it with a stick welder.
Bronco , can i ask you , is your avatar a 3rd baseman named Ken Mullen from the late 70's era ?
I would have guessed Goose Gossage or Catfish Hunter...since I still haven't gotten over the A's beating the Mets in '73!
<< <i>
Bronco , can i ask you , is your avatar a 3rd baseman named Ken Mullen from the late 70's era ? >>
I have no idea who it is I picked it at random . I have tried to upload a pic of my Ford bronco but shrinking it down enough pixelates it into a blue blob
Since I joined I seem to miss upload day every time.