Options
Can't tell if this dealer is stupid, a scam or both?
kenriles012
Posts: 170 ✭✭
1) If you thought you had a unique Overton you would post it on ebay for $395?
2) If it was unique it would be an R.8 not an R.7
3) The real kicker: it took me about 2 minutes to see confirm it is a 1795 O-113.
-1
Comments
Based on his other auctions I'd say he knows exactly what he is doing.
Successful Trades: Swampboy,
2) If it was unique it would be an R.8 not an R.7
not to be argumentative or call anyone stupid, but if you're using the Sheldon scale for rarity then a unique item is generally accepted as R-9.
carry on.
The seller is asking for help in this regard and there is a ? in the title. I don't think that constitutes a scam in any sense, especially when they ask that viewers look at the pictures and get back to them. Not every seller (or buyer) is an Overton and Sheldon expert.
A good test would be if you emailed him the correct information (give him/her the reasons too...so s/he can confirm independently). If the auction gets modified, then cool. If not, well then you know.
This seller in fact knows what he's doing. I've reported his auctions many times and the most recent was last Tuesday. He intersperses real and fakes. Scammer is appropriate as is thief.
bob
I think the only stupidity or ignorance here lies within his customers.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars
Well, just reported a 1893cc Morgan he has up just now.
bob
Then there's his "1822" dime and "1885" liberty nickel, neither of which are as claimed.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars
There is no way I would buy that coin I dont think I could give 10 bucks for that but I know its worth something. I just dont have the experience to dial it in.
I think the market supports around $200-$300 for a cull common variety flowing hair half. Dateless probably on the low side of that.
Pacific Northwest Numismatic Association
You would give $10 for a cull 1795 Half Dollar? Now THAT's a real "scam".
The lowest grades on eBay usually go for about $400 to $500 and a lot more if deemed a scarce or rare variety.
Since the seller clearly has two ? marks in the title alone seeking help, and says so further in the description below, clearly the seller is trying to do the right thing and obtain information. Surreal how so many people get bent out of shape without reading what's in black and white before them, even when the seller has hundreds of positives from other sellers who "know what they're doing".
The coin is a nice confederate grey...
The Mysterious Egyptian Magic Coin
Coins in Movies
Coins on Television
Yep. He mixes real and fake coins in there all the time. A sly tactic and one that commonly goes unnoticed. I can always chalk it up a few times as ignorance or a mistake but there have been many listings that are clear attempts to be deceptive.
This is one.
Don't fall for the "Oh we just didn't know routine". The dumbest coin dealer on the planet if they thought even 1% chance they had a currently unknown die marriage would go to solid lengths to check it.
They also said they looked at "hundreds" of examples of 1794 and 1795 half dollars to try and match it with this coin.
First, why go to that much effort and just give up and list it on Ebay?
Second, there are not even 100 die marriages of 1794 and 1795 half dollars total.
Third and most important, it took me minutes to easily match this with an O-113 and I won't come close to claiming to be a Overton expert so what is their excuse?
Any so-called dubious coins I can see listed are clearly listed under novelty, tokens and fantasy which are perfectly legitimate eBay-sanctioned categories. If it's an 0-113 why not just tell them? It's really warned down so what are your attributes for concluding it's an 0-113 when there are over a hundred varieties of this type?
The seller(s) are asking questions, two in fact in the title and more in the description. What is "dumb" is concluding the worse possible motives when answers are plainly invited, the coin is clearly pictured, and it's starting at a cull price so that more learned buyers can bid accordingly.
The seller didn't remotely claim that there are "100 die marriages", they said they looked at that many coins and couldn't find an exact match to Overton, which is why they're asking, not making definitive assertions such as yours. At that low price I plan to bid myself, 0-113 or not, but again, what are the characteristics that you see on such a worn-torn coin that makes it an 113?
They put up fake or mislabeled coins often.
If they could not find out this was an O-113 in less than 15 minutes that means they are dumb as rocks because a novice could figure it out.
No, not being able to 100% accurately attribute a cull Bust half in poor condition "in less than 15 minutes" does not make anyone "dumb as rocks". Such an over-the-top statement is "dumb" on it's face, because most people could not know the characteristics in "less than 15 minutes", so by such twisted logic, that would make most people "dumb as rocks".
Now, above and beyond name-calling, again, what are the distinct characteristics that made you ascertain so definitively that it was an 0-113 in "less than 15 minutes"? Simple question, and a simple answer would have taken a lot less time than the name calling that you seem to have a vested interest in doing so.
Now this is getting interesting, I would also like to know what you could see in this very worn example that it's a definitive example of a 0-113?. Not saying it isn't, I just didn't spend enough time on it. (It would take me longer than 15 min. As I'm no expert)
And I'll add. If its genuine example I think it's worth 400 all day long.
eBay ID-bruceshort978
Successful BST:here and ATS, bumanchu, wdrob, hashtag, KeeNoooo, mikej61, Yonico, Meltdown, BAJJERFAN, Excaliber, lordmarcovan, cucamongacoin, robkool, bradyc, tonedcointrader, mumu, Windycity, astrotrain, tizofthe, overdate, rwyarmch, mkman123, Timbuk3,GBurger717, airplanenut, coinkid855 ,illini420, michaeldixon, Weiss, Morpheus, Deepcoin, Collectorcoins, AUandAG, D.Schwager.
"No, not being able to 100% accurately attribute a cull Bust half in poor condition "in less than 15 minutes" does not make anyone "dumb as rocks".:
The dealer specifically mentions the first curl placement and how he had never seen any like it in the HUNDREDS he has seen.
http://www.maibockaddict.com/1795-flowing-hair-half-dollars.shtml
Just going down the line could spot it easily.
You can keep defending this guy who has a long history (including multiple other fake or deceptive listings at this VERY MOMENT up) all you want but the rest of us here down on planet Earth will call out bad dealers as it hurts the hobby.
Who's defending him? For those who don't track him, we won't know.
For those who don't collect that stuff, it's not intuitively obvious what the correct attribution is.
95% of the time (random number but it sounds right) when someone calls out a bad eBay seller here they are onto something. The other 5% there are some otherwise decent folks who get overly slammed.
From what AUandAG says it sure looks like you are onto something and calling out the bad sellers is a great community service.
However, no need to slam people for asking questions or calling everyone who doesn't have a reference handy 'dumb as rocks'. Not everyone has the same collection direction and thus not everyone has the same knowledge base.
I'm defending no one, I'm asking how you arrived at 0-113 and how the seller asking for help in that regard is a con when it is starting at a very low price as a cull and anyone can see the pictures and decide value for themselves? You're the one who is losing credibility. First you start with what is apparently a vindictive thread the false assumption that someone is a con because they're asking several questions about attribution, which you still don't bother to answer when you're publicly asked how your arrived at 0-113 say that everyone who can't see it's an "Overton 113" is somehow "dumber than a rock".
You're unwittingly insulting a lot of people who find it hard to attribute very low-grade coins that we cannot see all the defining characteristics of, which is probably why the seller is actually asking for help.
Instead, you chime in with more vindictive insults instead of real answers here on "planet Earth".
And no once again, the seller did not just address only the first curl, but rather both curls. So yet again you've made a dishonest statement about what is written before our vary eyes and then chide people for being "dumber than rocks".
Well said. If you read through this thread from the beginning it's apparent that @kenriles012 has a vindictive streak going from someone he apparently never purchased from himself. It's all too easy for people on the side lines to besmirch other sellers, especially if they are sellers themselves. I hear it at Coin Conventions all the time. This particular sellers feed back is almost 100% after almost 12 years. Judging from what they got hundreds of positives on, I think a lot of their repeat buyers are other dealers, so I have no hesitation bidding on this coin myself. It's the cheapest I've seen for this grade in years.
um.... is this the new joke thread?
LOL, seems to be, since the Flowing Hair Half Dollar only starts at a cull price of $395, and the seller is clearly looking for answers. I quote the actual eBay post which @kenriles012 keeps misquoting with lots of time on this thread, but not a moment to email the seller his alleged "O-103 attribution":
<< 1794 or 95? Rare? Please decide from the pictures and please email us your feedback. We do not have an Overton book.
1. The lower two hair curls do not match of about 1794 and 1795 pictures we've examined on the internet.
2. There are two leaves below the wing, with very short stems for each leave, and the wing above the two leaves on the viewer's left side extends much lower than others we've seen.
3. Please view the picture carefully. We do not know what Overton number this is, so any help you can email us would be kindly appreciated. >>
Not if you're using the Sheldon scale as originally designed. And I believe Overton (halves), Wiley/Bugert (halves), and Breen also end at R8 in their reference books. R8 was originally designed to mean 1, 2, or 3 known. While there are some limitations with that, that's the way it was or is. Some other systems have modified Sheldon to include R9 and other variations. It doesn't change the fact that R8 was the top end. Before today, I had never heard anyone mention 'R9' as unique.
ANA LM
USAF Retired — 34 years of active military service! 🇺🇸
There is this one that sold recently (Sept. 26) for $235 in spite of its charming reverse graffiti.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1795-50C-Flowing-Hair-Half-Dollar-/282661047627?hash=item41cfe94d4b:g:RHIAAOSw8FRZsYgb&nma=true&si=SkaA9CBpAogh361mbLwou%2BNH2Kg%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557
But I am more interested to see how this recent listing sells, since it is a fairly rare O-106
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1795-50C-Flowing-Hair-Half-Dollar-/192328350844?hash=item2cc7a9bc7c:g:AwUAAOSwuLFZu9Oh
Pacific Northwest Numismatic Association