Ideally, a coin graded 70 would not be spotted, but many are.
As a real life example from earlier today - a client wrote in, asking if any from a group of Proof 70 ASE’s were spotted. I glanced at them and replied (something to the effect) that a number of them did exhibit some spotting.
In answer to your question, Heritage shows images of the actual coins being auctioned or offered for sale.
For the record, I’m personally opposed to stock images with respect to coins where the quality and/or appearance matters. And I think the seller should absolutely give you a refund.
I am glad to hear you say that because I read your statements to mean that it is OK to sell an MS70 coin that is spotted as a MS70 and not mention it.
I realize sellers use stock photos because they believe coins are generic and an MS70 is an MS70. They sell hundreds of the same widgit so stock photos save them time. I understand that but when you send a coin with such obvious problems a return should be a given.
It doesn't matter if a MS70 coin develops spots after grading,,,,, at that point it is a spotted coin and selling as an MS70 at MS70 price is wrong.
Shipping out a coin in that state after using a stock photo of a MS70 is a lousy thing for any seller to do without upfront disclosure. I can't imagine any reasonable individual asserting otherwise.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
I plan to start another thread later tonight that will hopefully provide a possible improvement to spotting coins that happen after they are slabbed. I do this on all coins I send for grading and so far (years later) I have had no spotting problems. I know others out there do the same thing so I am not claiming to be some genuis or anything.
Ideally, a coin graded 70 would not be spotted, but many are.
As a real life example from earlier today - a client wrote in, asking if any from a group of Proof 70 ASE’s were spotted. I glanced at them and replied (something to the effect) that a number of them did exhibit some spotting.
In answer to your question, Heritage shows images of the actual coins being auctioned or offered for sale.
For the record, I’m personally opposed to stock images with respect to coins where the quality and/or appearance matters. And I think the seller should absolutely give you a refund.
I am glad to hear you say that because I read your statements to mean that it is OK to sell an MS70 coin that is spotted as a MS70 and not mention it.
I realize sellers use stock photos because they believe coins are generic and an MS70 is an MS70. They sell hundreds of the same widgit so stock photos save them time. I understand that but when you send a coin with such obvious problems a return should be a given.
It doesn't matter if a MS70 coin develops spots after grading,,,,, at that point it is a spotted coin and selling as an MS70 at MS70 price is wrong.
I’m glad we had our exchange and understand each other better.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@airplanenut said:
Oh boy, this is a fun one. I'm going to try to respond from two perspectives at the same time. First, I sell a ton on eBay and I do everything I can to make sure my listings are accurate, though I'm only human, and I know that limits my ability to achieve perfection. Second, I know well that it sucks to buy something and not get what was advertised. I hope what I say can be useful to this particular instance, and in general, as well.
By accepting the money the seller also accepted the buyers stipulations, if the seller failed to read those requests by the buyer then that is on the seller. SNAD is the right way to go, with the understanding that you might (for sure would by many sellers here) be blocked by the seller.
When a seller has an eBay store you go to your seller hub to print labels and invoices, It is easier and cheaper, buying shipping labels via eBay you get a significant discount. When you are looking at your list of items waiting to ship and the buyer has sent you a note it is highlighted in RED letters so if you don't see it you are using the "BRAILE" version of seller hub.
I have an eBay store, and I have never used the seller hub to print a label, and I've had my store for longer than the hub has existed. At a certain volume, there are outside tools that process orders in bulk far faster than anything the eBay website can do. When I've had to print 100 invoices and shipping labels together, I can click one button in the software I use and then just sit back for the printing to happen. The comments in my software are not big and red, and admittedly I don't always see them. I would not be surprised if your comment wasn't seen.
@GRANDAM said:
I am beside myself that ANYONE here would try to justify a seller sending spotted piece of crap like I got when selling a MS70 coin. I have sold spotted coins and I ALWAYS point that out and call attention to them as I don't want the hassel of dealing with an unhappy buyer,,,,,, maybe that is why I have 100% positive feedback and 5893 transactions and NO negatives ever. If the seller asks I would pay to ship it back myself and his PayPal fee's but I shouldn't have to.
@CoinJunkie said:
IMHO, the seller should be ashamed of himself for selling that coin with a stock photo and no written disclaimer of the spotting. And he should have his head examined if he's the least bit surprised or upset that a buyer would want a return. Flame away.
Let me play devil's advocate here. I have sold hundreds (thousands?) of graded silver bullion coins over the years, and every time I handle them, I'm afraid I'll miss haze or spotting somewhere (sometimes it's obvious, and sometimes it takes the right angle to see it, especially if it's a tiny spot, rather than something huge). That said, I don't sell with stock photos (I also don't carry an inventory where I have quantity of anything, and everything I sell is at auction, not fixed price), so the odds that I miss spotting/haze AND the photo doesn't show it is slim. That said, my experience has taught me that it's very easy to imagine having 500 of a generic coin like this, for which a stock photo is appropriate. And because it's generic, it would be treated as a commodity--when filling an order for X coins, just grab X coins. Especially given that many larger firms have shipping departments made of people who aren't coin experts, I'd be willing to bet no one saw the coin before it went out.
Now, to be clear, I am NOT saying the seller is off the hook as a result of this. I'm just trying to say that it's very easy to understand how this occurred, and I'll bet it has nothing to do with malice or unscrupulous behavior on the seller's part. From what Grandam wrote, I don't see anything that said the seller is surprised or upset about the return. Grandam emailed the seller and the seller said to open a return. I'd prefer to handle things outside of the eBay return system (and for that, I appreciate Grandam emailing the seller rather than just opening a case), but I can imagine that the return system may be easier for some to use, especially larger operations where multiple people/departments may be involved.
@roadrunner said:
If you specifically stated in a message to the seller, no spots.....then that's it. No spots. Ebay will accept the return since it doesn't match the agreed description. Stock photo is meaningless and irrelevant if you discussed what you wanted. If the seller doesn't cover your return, Ebay will.
Just out of curiosity, you stated no spots but did they ever agree to no spots? Or was that just your message to the seller at check-out.
By accepting the money the seller also accepted the buyers stipulations, if the seller failed to read those requests by the buyer then that is on the seller. SNAD is the right way to go, with the understanding that you might (for sure would by many sellers here) be blocked by the seller.
These statements are wrong. When a buyer pays, they have completed the transaction for the item described by the seller. In this case, it was a PCGS MS70 Krugerrand. There is no place for the buyer to change anything about the sale, in particular because if the seller doesn't agree to whatever stipulation the buyer throws in, the seller is out the full PayPal fee to refund the money for a sale that never even happened. Now, in this case, while the seller could argue that the coin sold was the coin received (I'm assuming the listing didn't say anything about hazing or spotting), it's a simple case to make that the coin is significantly different from what was shown in the stock photos, so the buyer is still right to say the coin isn't as described, but not because of a stipulation made in the order comments.
There have been many examples earlier in the thread that explain why these stipulations shouldn't hold weight, but I'll add one more that could be more appropriate for this transaction. Suppose the listing said "coin may have spotting." That would likely mean that the seller has many coins, some are spotted, and you'll get the first coin that's picked out of the box. A note that says "send a coin without spotting" does not entitle you to a SNAD when a coin with spotting arrives. The coin was as described by the seller, and if you don't agree to what the seller has put forth, you must either make an agreement with the seller PRIOR to the sale or buy somewhere else. Many times, sellers have various varieties of the same item (in particular, think about items that come in multiple colors). To save on the cost of treating each variety as different (stored in a unique place, fulfilled by variety, and no worries about stock levels of individual varieties) they treat them as the same and send a random one. It is unreasonable to expect that you could request something specific and get it. The price being charged is based on what the seller advertised, and writing a note to get something beyond what was advertised doesn't entitle you to automatically get what you asked for without paying the additional costs associated with the request, threatening a SNAD if your request isn't met.
Just out of curiosity, you stated no spots but did they ever agree to no spots? Or was that just your message to the seller at check-out.
By accepting the money the seller also accepted the buyers stipulations, if the seller failed to read those requests by the buyer then that is on the seller. SNAD is the right way to go, with the understanding that you might (for sure would by many sellers here) be blocked by the seller.
The seller showed a MS70 coin with no spots, stock photo with #00000000 serial number. We all know a MS70 with spots is no longer a MS70 coin, you can’t show a clean coin and send a spotted coin and expect a buyer to be happy, I am hoping the seller just didn’t notice the spots and all will work out, it is a BIG eBay seller, not a one guy operation.
I did put the no spots in the PayPal payment notes, regardless coin is not as described.
If a seller blocks me for this then the heck with him.
While it's obviously too late now, it would have been much better to message the seller before bidding, and see if he was willing/able to provide you with a spot-free example.
This is completely correct. Beyond its general application any time there is a stock photo or whenever you are not certain about an item, it's particularly appropriate with this type of item. So many silver bullion coins have turned and spotted (sometimes within a year--I've handled plenty of spotted 2019 coins already, some many months ago) that I would assume any coin will be spotted unless it is described as otherwise or there is a photo of the coin you will receive. If there's any question, ask prior to buying.
Jeremy, that was an excellent post!
And I’d say the same, even if we weren’t in agreement.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
OK, just to be clear, I would almost never purchase an eBay item with a stock photo and if I did, I would absolutely message the seller in advance to the effect of "Will you guarantee the coin I receive will be free of spots, haze, toning?"
That said, there is no possible way that the coin in question gets by whoever is shipping it unless they're wearing a blindfold, so I don't buy that the seller was likely unaware that the coin had spots.
As a final point, I see a lot of discussion of legalities, but very little about ethics. A coin that is no longer what the label says it is with no disclaimer from the seller is misrepresentation and a SNAD claim is perfectly legitimate under the circumstances. Whether the seller was aware of it prior to the sale is irrelevant.
@CoinJunkie said:
That said, there is no possible way that the coin in question gets by whoever is shipping it unless they're wearing a blindfold, so I don't buy that the seller was likely unaware that the coin had spots.
What's the highest number of packages you've ever assembled in one sitting, and how long did it take you?
@CoinJunkie said:
That said, there is no possible way that the coin in question gets by whoever is shipping it unless they're wearing a blindfold, so I don't buy that the seller was likely unaware that the coin had spots.
What's the highest number of packages you've ever assembled in one sitting, and how long did it take you?
Quite a few, and a while. I don't do bulk lots or stock photos, but if I did you can be sure I'd give each item a quick inspection prior to packaging it to make sure there was nothing obviously amiss. All that said, if the seller makes it right, I don't have as much of a problem with it. It's annoying for the buyer, but such is the nature of buying from stock photos sometimes.
@CoinJunkie said:
OK, just to be clear, I would almost never purchase an eBay item with a stock photo and if I did, I would absolutely message the seller in advance to the effect of "Will you guarantee the coin I receive will be free of spots, haze, toning?"
That said, there is no possible way that the coin in question gets by whoever is shipping it unless they're wearing a blindfold, so I don't buy that the seller was likely unaware that the coin had spots.
As a final point, I see a lot of discussion of legalities, but very little about ethics. A coin that is no longer what the label says it is with no disclaimer from the seller is misrepresentation and a SNAD claim is perfectly legitimate under the circumstances. Whether the seller was aware of it prior to the sale is irrelevant.
I think this is trickier than it sounds.
This is why stock photos are a bad idea and I don't think anyone is justifying that UNLESS it is a fixed price listing for multiple coins.
[If I do that, by the way, I always use the worst example to avoid getting returns.]
But "not what it says it is" is tricky. It is a PCGS 70 coin/holder. What if it weren't spots but just a coin that was one grade too high?
The seller here was wrong, but I think the buyer was also. They bought a coin from a stock photo without inquiring about the coin they would be getting. They were suspicious enough to make the point after purchase. So they clearly knew it was possible and really should have asked the question before purchase.
This is another one of those cases where I wonder how many of these opinions would have flipped if this thread was started by the seller instead of the buyer.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
@CoinJunkie said:
OK, just to be clear, I would almost never purchase an eBay item with a stock photo and if I did, I would absolutely message the seller in advance to the effect of "Will you guarantee the coin I receive will be free of spots, haze, toning?"
That said, there is no possible way that the coin in question gets by whoever is shipping it unless they're wearing a blindfold, so I don't buy that the seller was likely unaware that the coin had spots.
As a final point, I see a lot of discussion of legalities, but very little about ethics. A coin that is no longer what the label says it is with no disclaimer from the seller is misrepresentation and a SNAD claim is perfectly legitimate under the circumstances. Whether the seller was aware of it prior to the sale is irrelevant.
I think this is trickier than it sounds.
This is why stock photos are a bad idea and I don't think anyone is justifying that UNLESS it is a fixed price listing for multiple coins.
[If I do that, by the way, I always use the worst example to avoid getting returns.]
But "not what it says it is" is tricky. It is a PCGS 70 coin/holder. What if it weren't spots but just a coin that was one grade too high?
The seller here was wrong, but I think the buyer was also. They bought a coin from a stock photo without inquiring about the coin they would be getting. They were suspicious enough to make the point after purchase. So they clearly knew it was possible and really should have asked the question before purchase.
This is another one of those cases where I wonder how many of these opinions would have flipped if this thread was started by the seller instead of the buyer.
@CoinJunkie said:
That said, there is no possible way that the coin in question gets by whoever is shipping it unless they're wearing a blindfold, so I don't buy that the seller was likely unaware that the coin had spots.
What's the highest number of packages you've ever assembled in one sitting, and how long did it take you?
Quite a few, and a while. I don't do bulk lots or stock photos, but if I did you can be sure I'd give each item a quick inspection prior to packaging it to make sure there was nothing obviously amiss. All that said, if the seller makes it right, I don't have as much of a problem with it. It's annoying for the buyer, but such is the nature of buying from stock photos sometimes.
You need to define quite a few, because I'm guessing you don't mean many hundreds. It is very easy to see how things are impossible until you actually do them and realize how possible they are.
But "not what it says it is" is tricky. It is a PCGS 70 coin/holder. What if it weren't spots but just a coin that was one grade too high?
The seller here was wrong, but I think the buyer was also. They bought a coin from a stock photo without inquiring about the coin they would be getting. They were suspicious enough to make the point after purchase. So they clearly knew it was possible and really should have asked the question before purchase.
This is another one of those cases where I wonder how many of these opinions would have flipped if this thread was started by the seller instead of the buyer.
If I had to draw a line, it would be based on whether the issue was obviously there before or after the coin got graded. There is 0 chance anyone would ever grade a spotted coin like the OP's a 70, and particularly knowing the nature of such a coin, we all know it turned in the holder. But if the argument is over, say, a small mark somewhere? At that point I'd leave it to the grade guarantee. Something like that was present when the coin was graded, so the grading company's opinion is that it didn't preclude a 70. Even then you get into the grey areas where some modern coin have "ticks" that are as-made and not post-minting marks. The coin might not look "perfect" but it could still be full acceptable as a 70. But again, that's something the graders would have seen.
This thread is about spots,,,,, not grading. Grading is an opinion,,,,,,, spots aren't.
I put the note about no spots to get the seller to hopefully look at the coin. In the past I have had sellers reply they found spots that they didn't notice before looking, It was to help the seller as much as myself asking for this.
@CoinJunkie said:
That said, there is no possible way that the coin in question gets by whoever is shipping it unless they're wearing a blindfold, so I don't buy that the seller was likely unaware that the coin had spots.
What's the highest number of packages you've ever assembled in one sitting, and how long did it take you?
Quite a few, and a while. I don't do bulk lots or stock photos, but if I did you can be sure I'd give each item a quick inspection prior to packaging it to make sure there was nothing obviously amiss. All that said, if the seller makes it right, I don't have as much of a problem with it. It's annoying for the buyer, but such is the nature of buying from stock photos sometimes.
You need to define quite a few, because I'm guessing you don't mean many hundreds. It is very easy to see how things are impossible until you actually do them and realize how possible they are.
I was being intentionally vague partially because I considered the question immaterial in this instance. How long or hard would you have to look at the coin in question to see those spots? Less than a second, I'd guess.
You've made your point that it's possible the seller was unaware of the spots, and I will concede that it is indeed in the realm of possibility, however improbable I find it. It really doesn't matter one way or the other if the seller makes it right. And that's really the bottom line from my perspective.
I never said that the coin didn't look terrible with the spots, it does. However, if PCGS graded the coin then technically the coin is MS70 with or without spots. Without seeing the auction listing, how can you blast the seller? I believe he mentioned that it was a stock photo and it is graded MS70.
There again, I'm not siding with the seller, if I received something like that I'd be pissed. There is legally right and then there's morally right, maybe the seller has no morals but legally...
Wisdom has been chasing you but, you've always been faster
None of the reasons or excuses really matter, the coin is not as advertised and not what I bought. All that matters is how the seller handles it. Still no word back from the seller since he told me to open a return. I have to believe by them telling me this that they will make it right. Otherwise why not just tell me "TOUGH"
I started the thread because the last time I started a return there was an option for SNAD and I don't see it now. I was not asking if I was right or the seller was right,,,,,, I know the answer to that question.
Maybe stating "I just don't like it" on the return form as I have several times might work. When I've done that, ebay asked for a description and I would write something like " Too much chatter in the mirrors and a contact mark that's more pronounced in hand than the photo". From there the process
was painless and my money was refunded as soon as the item arrived at the sellers address.
This is why always ship through ebays return label so it gets tracked. A must if you want security!
@GRANDAM said:
This thread is about spots,,,,, not grading. Grading is an opinion,,,,,,, spots aren't.
I put the note about no spots to get the seller to hopefully look at the coin. In the past I have had sellers reply they found spots that they didn't notice before looking, It was to help the seller as much as myself asking for this.
I don't think you can separate the two here. Your contention is that the coin is not a 70 because of the spots. So, grade is the factor. If the coin is a spotted 70, then you got what you bought: a 70. If the coin is now a 69 because of the spots, then you didn't get a 70.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
I'm just going to address your shipping model! You can bulk print labels on ebay also! There is no way I'm doing that as it's too easy to mix up packages and ship the wrong coin or whatever!
@airplanenut said:
Oh boy, this is a fun one. I'm going to try to respond from two perspectives at the same time. First, I sell a ton on eBay and I do everything I can to make sure my listings are accurate, though I'm only human, and I know that limits my ability to achieve perfection. Second, I know well that it sucks to buy something and not get what was advertised. I hope what I say can be useful to this particular instance, and in general, as well.
By accepting the money the seller also accepted the buyers stipulations, if the seller failed to read those requests by the buyer then that is on the seller. SNAD is the right way to go, with the understanding that you might (for sure would by many sellers here) be blocked by the seller.
When a seller has an eBay store you go to your seller hub to print labels and invoices, It is easier and cheaper, buying shipping labels via eBay you get a significant discount. When you are looking at your list of items waiting to ship and the buyer has sent you a note it is highlighted in RED letters so if you don't see it you are using the "BRAILE" version of seller hub.
I have an eBay store, and I have never used the seller hub to print a label, and I've had my store for longer than the hub has existed. At a certain volume, there are outside tools that process orders in bulk far faster than anything the eBay website can do. When I've had to print 100 invoices and shipping labels together, I can click one button in the software I use and then just sit back for the printing to happen. The comments in my software are not big and red, and admittedly I don't always see them. I would not be surprised if your comment wasn't seen.
@GRANDAM said:
I am beside myself that ANYONE here would try to justify a seller sending spotted piece of crap like I got when selling a MS70 coin. I have sold spotted coins and I ALWAYS point that out and call attention to them as I don't want the hassel of dealing with an unhappy buyer,,,,,, maybe that is why I have 100% positive feedback and 5893 transactions and NO negatives ever. If the seller asks I would pay to ship it back myself and his PayPal fee's but I shouldn't have to.
@CoinJunkie said:
IMHO, the seller should be ashamed of himself for selling that coin with a stock photo and no written disclaimer of the spotting. And he should have his head examined if he's the least bit surprised or upset that a buyer would want a return. Flame away.
Let me play devil's advocate here. I have sold hundreds (thousands?) of graded silver bullion coins over the years, and every time I handle them, I'm afraid I'll miss haze or spotting somewhere (sometimes it's obvious, and sometimes it takes the right angle to see it, especially if it's a tiny spot, rather than something huge). That said, I don't sell with stock photos (I also don't carry an inventory where I have quantity of anything, and everything I sell is at auction, not fixed price), so the odds that I miss spotting/haze AND the photo doesn't show it is slim. That said, my experience has taught me that it's very easy to imagine having 500 of a generic coin like this, for which a stock photo is appropriate. And because it's generic, it would be treated as a commodity--when filling an order for X coins, just grab X coins. Especially given that many larger firms have shipping departments made of people who aren't coin experts, I'd be willing to bet no one saw the coin before it went out.
Now, to be clear, I am NOT saying the seller is off the hook as a result of this. I'm just trying to say that it's very easy to understand how this occurred, and I'll bet it has nothing to do with malice or unscrupulous behavior on the seller's part. From what Grandam wrote, I don't see anything that said the seller is surprised or upset about the return. Grandam emailed the seller and the seller said to open a return. I'd prefer to handle things outside of the eBay return system (and for that, I appreciate Grandam emailing the seller rather than just opening a case), but I can imagine that the return system may be easier for some to use, especially larger operations where multiple people/departments may be involved.
@roadrunner said:
If you specifically stated in a message to the seller, no spots.....then that's it. No spots. Ebay will accept the return since it doesn't match the agreed description. Stock photo is meaningless and irrelevant if you discussed what you wanted. If the seller doesn't cover your return, Ebay will.
Just out of curiosity, you stated no spots but did they ever agree to no spots? Or was that just your message to the seller at check-out.
By accepting the money the seller also accepted the buyers stipulations, if the seller failed to read those requests by the buyer then that is on the seller. SNAD is the right way to go, with the understanding that you might (for sure would by many sellers here) be blocked by the seller.
These statements are wrong. When a buyer pays, they have completed the transaction for the item described by the seller. In this case, it was a PCGS MS70 Krugerrand. There is no place for the buyer to change anything about the sale, in particular because if the seller doesn't agree to whatever stipulation the buyer throws in, the seller is out the full PayPal fee to refund the money for a sale that never even happened. Now, in this case, while the seller could argue that the coin sold was the coin received (I'm assuming the listing didn't say anything about hazing or spotting), it's a simple case to make that the coin is significantly different from what was shown in the stock photos, so the buyer is still right to say the coin isn't as described, but not because of a stipulation made in the order comments.
There have been many examples earlier in the thread that explain why these stipulations shouldn't hold weight, but I'll add one more that could be more appropriate for this transaction. Suppose the listing said "coin may have spotting." That would likely mean that the seller has many coins, some are spotted, and you'll get the first coin that's picked out of the box. A note that says "send a coin without spotting" does not entitle you to a SNAD when a coin with spotting arrives. The coin was as described by the seller, and if you don't agree to what the seller has put forth, you must either make an agreement with the seller PRIOR to the sale or buy somewhere else. Many times, sellers have various varieties of the same item (in particular, think about items that come in multiple colors). To save on the cost of treating each variety as different (stored in a unique place, fulfilled by variety, and no worries about stock levels of individual varieties) they treat them as the same and send a random one. It is unreasonable to expect that you could request something specific and get it. The price being charged is based on what the seller advertised, and writing a note to get something beyond what was advertised doesn't entitle you to automatically get what you asked for without paying the additional costs associated with the request, threatening a SNAD if your request isn't met.
Just out of curiosity, you stated no spots but did they ever agree to no spots? Or was that just your message to the seller at check-out.
By accepting the money the seller also accepted the buyers stipulations, if the seller failed to read those requests by the buyer then that is on the seller. SNAD is the right way to go, with the understanding that you might (for sure would by many sellers here) be blocked by the seller.
The seller showed a MS70 coin with no spots, stock photo with #00000000 serial number. We all know a MS70 with spots is no longer a MS70 coin, you can’t show a clean coin and send a spotted coin and expect a buyer to be happy, I am hoping the seller just didn’t notice the spots and all will work out, it is a BIG eBay seller, not a one guy operation.
I did put the no spots in the PayPal payment notes, regardless coin is not as described.
If a seller blocks me for this then the heck with him.
While it's obviously too late now, it would have been much better to message the seller before bidding, and see if he was willing/able to provide you with a spot-free example.
This is completely correct. Beyond its general application any time there is a stock photo or whenever you are not certain about an item, it's particularly appropriate with this type of item. So many silver bullion coins have turned and spotted (sometimes within a year--I've handled plenty of spotted 2019 coins already, some many months ago) that I would assume any coin will be spotted unless it is described as otherwise or there is a photo of the coin you will receive. If there's any question, ask prior to buying.
@airplanenut said:
Oh boy, this is a fun one. I'm going to try to respond from two perspectives at the same time. First, I sell a ton on eBay and I do everything I can to make sure my listings are accurate, though I'm only human, and I know that limits my ability to achieve perfection. Second, I know well that it sucks to buy something and not get what was advertised. I hope what I say can be useful to this particular instance, and in general, as well.
By accepting the money the seller also accepted the buyers stipulations, if the seller failed to read those requests by the buyer then that is on the seller. SNAD is the right way to go, with the understanding that you might (for sure would by many sellers here) be blocked by the seller.
When a seller has an eBay store you go to your seller hub to print labels and invoices, It is easier and cheaper, buying shipping labels via eBay you get a significant discount. When you are looking at your list of items waiting to ship and the buyer has sent you a note it is highlighted in RED letters so if you don't see it you are using the "BRAILE" version of seller hub.
I have an eBay store, and I have never used the seller hub to print a label, and I've had my store for longer than the hub has existed. At a certain volume, there are outside tools that process orders in bulk far faster than anything the eBay website can do. When I've had to print 100 invoices and shipping labels together, I can click one button in the software I use and then just sit back for the printing to happen. The comments in my software are not big and red, and admittedly I don't always see them. I would not be surprised if your comment wasn't seen.
@GRANDAM said:
I am beside myself that ANYONE here would try to justify a seller sending spotted piece of crap like I got when selling a MS70 coin. I have sold spotted coins and I ALWAYS point that out and call attention to them as I don't want the hassel of dealing with an unhappy buyer,,,,,, maybe that is why I have 100% positive feedback and 5893 transactions and NO negatives ever. If the seller asks I would pay to ship it back myself and his PayPal fee's but I shouldn't have to.
@CoinJunkie said:
IMHO, the seller should be ashamed of himself for selling that coin with a stock photo and no written disclaimer of the spotting. And he should have his head examined if he's the least bit surprised or upset that a buyer would want a return. Flame away.
Let me play devil's advocate here. I have sold hundreds (thousands?) of graded silver bullion coins over the years, and every time I handle them, I'm afraid I'll miss haze or spotting somewhere (sometimes it's obvious, and sometimes it takes the right angle to see it, especially if it's a tiny spot, rather than something huge). That said, I don't sell with stock photos (I also don't carry an inventory where I have quantity of anything, and everything I sell is at auction, not fixed price), so the odds that I miss spotting/haze AND the photo doesn't show it is slim. That said, my experience has taught me that it's very easy to imagine having 500 of a generic coin like this, for which a stock photo is appropriate. And because it's generic, it would be treated as a commodity--when filling an order for X coins, just grab X coins. Especially given that many larger firms have shipping departments made of people who aren't coin experts, I'd be willing to bet no one saw the coin before it went out.
Now, to be clear, I am NOT saying the seller is off the hook as a result of this. I'm just trying to say that it's very easy to understand how this occurred, and I'll bet it has nothing to do with malice or unscrupulous behavior on the seller's part. From what Grandam wrote, I don't see anything that said the seller is surprised or upset about the return. Grandam emailed the seller and the seller said to open a return. I'd prefer to handle things outside of the eBay return system (and for that, I appreciate Grandam emailing the seller rather than just opening a case), but I can imagine that the return system may be easier for some to use, especially larger operations where multiple people/departments may be involved.
@roadrunner said:
If you specifically stated in a message to the seller, no spots.....then that's it. No spots. Ebay will accept the return since it doesn't match the agreed description. Stock photo is meaningless and irrelevant if you discussed what you wanted. If the seller doesn't cover your return, Ebay will.
Just out of curiosity, you stated no spots but did they ever agree to no spots? Or was that just your message to the seller at check-out.
By accepting the money the seller also accepted the buyers stipulations, if the seller failed to read those requests by the buyer then that is on the seller. SNAD is the right way to go, with the understanding that you might (for sure would by many sellers here) be blocked by the seller.
These statements are wrong. When a buyer pays, they have completed the transaction for the item described by the seller. In this case, it was a PCGS MS70 Krugerrand. There is no place for the buyer to change anything about the sale, in particular because if the seller doesn't agree to whatever stipulation the buyer throws in, the seller is out the full PayPal fee to refund the money for a sale that never even happened. Now, in this case, while the seller could argue that the coin sold was the coin received (I'm assuming the listing didn't say anything about hazing or spotting), it's a simple case to make that the coin is significantly different from what was shown in the stock photos, so the buyer is still right to say the coin isn't as described, but not because of a stipulation made in the order comments.
There have been many examples earlier in the thread that explain why these stipulations shouldn't hold weight, but I'll add one more that could be more appropriate for this transaction. Suppose the listing said "coin may have spotting." That would likely mean that the seller has many coins, some are spotted, and you'll get the first coin that's picked out of the box. A note that says "send a coin without spotting" does not entitle you to a SNAD when a coin with spotting arrives. The coin was as described by the seller, and if you don't agree to what the seller has put forth, you must either make an agreement with the seller PRIOR to the sale or buy somewhere else. Many times, sellers have various varieties of the same item (in particular, think about items that come in multiple colors). To save on the cost of treating each variety as different (stored in a unique place, fulfilled by variety, and no worries about stock levels of individual varieties) they treat them as the same and send a random one. It is unreasonable to expect that you could request something specific and get it. The price being charged is based on what the seller advertised, and writing a note to get something beyond what was advertised doesn't entitle you to automatically get what you asked for without paying the additional costs associated with the request, threatening a SNAD if your request isn't met.
Just out of curiosity, you stated no spots but did they ever agree to no spots? Or was that just your message to the seller at check-out.
By accepting the money the seller also accepted the buyers stipulations, if the seller failed to read those requests by the buyer then that is on the seller. SNAD is the right way to go, with the understanding that you might (for sure would by many sellers here) be blocked by the seller.
The seller showed a MS70 coin with no spots, stock photo with #00000000 serial number. We all know a MS70 with spots is no longer a MS70 coin, you can’t show a clean coin and send a spotted coin and expect a buyer to be happy, I am hoping the seller just didn’t notice the spots and all will work out, it is a BIG eBay seller, not a one guy operation.
I did put the no spots in the PayPal payment notes, regardless coin is not as described.
If a seller blocks me for this then the heck with him.
While it's obviously too late now, it would have been much better to message the seller before bidding, and see if he was willing/able to provide you with a spot-free example.
This is completely correct. Beyond its general application any time there is a stock photo or whenever you are not certain about an item, it's particularly appropriate with this type of item. So many silver bullion coins have turned and spotted (sometimes within a year--I've handled plenty of spotted 2019 coins already, some many months ago) that I would assume any coin will be spotted unless it is described as otherwise or there is a photo of the coin you will receive. If there's any question, ask prior to buying.
In all my infinite wisdom I am now going to answer my own original question,,,,
How do I file a significantly not as described claim on eBay?
I just opened my packages today and noticed that I didn't get what I ordered. I purchased a PCGS PR69 DCAM 2020-S Cent & Nickel from the same seller. Not the Krugerrand seller,,,Both coins are fine,,,,,,,, but they sent me (2) cents and no nickel so I clicked on the nickel link to report the error and I found this:
So I guess I went thru a different link because the option was not there when I was looking for it on the Spotted Krugerrand. That was the answer that I was looking for to begin with. I was concerned that if not phrased properly eBay would not OK the return if the seller didn't do it voluntarily.
BTW,,,, I did NOT file it that way,,,,,, as before I sent the seller a direct message to see if he settles it on his own which I am sure he will.
@amwldcoin said:
I'm just going to address your shipping model! You can bulk print labels on ebay also! There is no way I'm doing that as it's too easy to mix up packages and ship the wrong coin or whatever!
I've got a system that prints my packing slips and labels at the same time. I end up with a giant strip of thermal labels that lines up with a stack of packing slips. Easy.
Here is the sellers photo of the coin he was selling.
Here is what I received:
They both look the same,,,,, both are MS70's. Any buyer should be equally pleased with either coin. Both coins will sell for the same money when sold. Both coins are equally pleasing to the eye. A seller should be able to advertise the 1st coin and send the 2nd coin. The buyer should keep the 2nd coin and keep his big mouth shut,
This is what several of you are saying,,,,, you know that is wrong.
Still no word back from the seller.
UPDATE, just received the following message from the seller.
Good afternoon and thank you for reaching out to us at Joe Blow's Coins. It is a frustrating and unsatisfactory experience when your coin does not arrive as expected. We know that we have let you down, and for that, we are very sorry. Each and every member of the team at Joe Blow's Coins strives to provide the best possible service. We would like to offer you an exchange. Please contact us with any further concerns or questions you may have.
Joe Blow's Coins is sending me a return label so I guess that they don't blow after all.
@GRANDAM said:
Here is the sellers photo of the coin he was selling.
In the first post, you said the photo in the listing was a stock photo.
Don't you call this a stock photo? I do,,,, the obverse side has a serial number of 0000000 this is normally done when items are listed before they get them back from grading, however this wasn't a pre-sale and coins shipped the next day so I am guessing this BIN has been up a long time. In checking they have sold over 25 of these and 2 more pcs after I bought mine.
I have no problem buying a generic coin from a stock photo but make sure the coin is the quality of the stock photo.
@MasonG said:
If it's a stock photo, then the pictured coin is not the one being sold.
No chit Sherlock,,,,,, great detective work,,,,,, I need to put you on retainer.
That's a little rude.
Your posting of the photos is entitled "here's the seller's photo of the coin he was selling" I think @MasonG was making the point that a "stock photo" is never the picture of the coin he was selling.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
... They both look the same,,,,, both are MS70's. Any buyer should be equally pleased with either coin. Both coins will sell for the same money when sold. Both coins are equally pleasing to the eye. A seller should be able to advertise the 1st coin and send the 2nd coin. The buyer should keep the 2nd coin and keep his big mouth shut,
This is what several of you are saying,,,,, you know that is wrong....
Please show us where even one poster to this thread said something like that.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@GRANDAM said:
I have no problem buying a generic coin from a stock photo but make sure the coin is the quality of the stock photo.
Sounds like a good thing to confirm with the seller before clicking the "Buy It Now" button.
ouch...
Personally, I would never buy anything but bullion from a stock photo. Even without spots like that one, you could have toning that you don't like or you might think the coin is overgraded. Nothing good comes from a stock photo.
We even had a thread a couple years ago (same seller) where the buyer was mad that it was a different generation holder than the stock photo.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
@MasonG said:
If it's a stock photo, then the pictured coin is not the one being sold.
No chit Sherlock,,,,,, great detective work,,,,,, I need to put you on retainer.
That's a little rude.
I think the point is that if you buy off a stock photo you have no idea what the coin looks like.
Forget the spots. What if it was gently toned in golden hues and you prefer blast white? A golden 70 and a blast white 70 are ostensibly the same coin, are they not?
The seller is wrong to use a stock photo unless they mention the possibility of spotting. We all agree on that.
But it is a stock photo and so a buyer should put zero stock in the image. [In my humble opinion.]
That's a little rude.
Maybe so but it is very frustrating listening to all the answers trying to justify the spotted coin as being ok to ship in place of the photo or (image) they showed of the coin in the BIN. As I have said before the photos show a BLAST WHITE no problem no spots coin. Sending a spotted or toned or finger printed coin when showing that image is unacceptable.
I have heard many people on here moan & groan when they buy a coin off of one of the largest bullion dealers around and the coin they get is not the same coin as shown in their photo. That is not right either unless they call that out and say so.
@MasonG said:
If it's a stock photo, then the pictured coin is not the one being sold.
No chit Sherlock,,,,,, great detective work,,,,,, I need to put you on retainer.
If you know that, why did you post the picture above with the comment "Here is the sellers photo of the coin he was selling"?
OK if we want to pick at fly chit the photo or image the seller posted is what he was offering for sale. Sending anything other than a BLAST WHITE no problem PCGS MS70 1st Day of Issue Label Krugerrand would be unacceptable. If the seller wants the convience of not talking 50 photos of 50 different coins then make sure they are the same quality as the photo shows.
How many times do you read on here about Modern Widgets? This coin is a Modern Widget and as such all within the MS70 grade should be pretty much the same. No visible marks and no problems such as the spots. If you have MS70 coins that have different issues then you must post photos of the exact coins with issues.
The photo (image) shows a BLAST WHITE no problem coin and that is what I ordered and expected. I called the seller after receiving his latest message and they will send me a return label and a replacement coin. That is all I wanted and that is what I got. My original question was asking about the proper way to dispute the coin so IF I had a jerk for a seller that I would not get stuck with the coin.
Since that question has been answered to my satisfaction I will have no further comments on this subject after this posting!!!
@MasonG said:
If it's a stock photo, then the pictured coin is not the one being sold.
No chit Sherlock,,,,,, great detective work,,,,,, I need to put you on retainer.
If you know that, why did you post the picture above with the comment "Here is the sellers photo of the coin he was selling"?
I'm not sure that's even a stock photo. It looks more like the kind of artist's rendering of a coin that the U.S. Mint uses on its website.
DOES NOT MATTER,,,,, the image implies a BLAST WHITE no problem coin will be shipped. It was not.
I also purchased a 2019 coin from them from another listing using the same type of photo (image) and description and it is PERFECT and believe me I have went over it with a fine tooth comb.
I hope my adding the word (image) in addition to photo will be of great comfort to some.
Late to the thread. Seems like GrandAm is satisfied and will have no further comment. Glad it worked out between him and the seller. I know if I received a spotted coin such as he did, stock photo or not, I'd not be happy and do everything to have it made right.
Interesting thread. I've seen many bullion coins on Ebay with stock photos, but no decent seller should be sending out blatantly spotted coins like this - you can look at the coin and see the problem in a split second. Maybe it's packed by bots?
For low priced bullion, stock photos should suffice. But I'm leery of them for higher priced items, especially for common date $20 Libs and Saints. I've seen stock photos of nice MS-62 gold, but I'm betting that's not what you get.
Due to volume, the seller may well have been unaware of the spotting (benefit of the doubt). And the buyer here may (hopefully) work out things cordially by virtue of the direct communication with the seller (the right move).
Still, though, the seller, I assume, did NOT list the item as "a coin in an MS70 slab." He was was selling an "MS70" coin, presumably for MS70 prices. The coin the OP received was NOT an "MS70" coin.
I've certainly sold coins on eBay I found were spotted when I went to list them. In the listing headline, I will SAY the coin has spots, and would locate and describe the spotting in the listing description. Also: I'll start them as $.99 start auctions, and let the market play out, based on the pictures and that info. The results usually were satisfactory, with no hassles, no returns.
I get it that technically, pushing the BUY button is a "contract," but holding the buyer to such a contract under this circumstances is fraudulent, IMHO, and worthy of taking issue.
I don't usually disagree with you David! But I do here. The majority of sellers who use stock photos always use the best they have ever had or can find pictures of. Ebay should absolutely ban Stock Photos in the coin category! All coins are unique, unlike a pair of shoes or a blouse.
@dpoole said:
Due to volume, the seller may well have been unaware of the spotting (benefit of the doubt). And the buyer here may (hopefully) work out things cordially by virtue of the direct communication with the seller (the right move).
Still, though, the seller, I assume, did NOT list the item as "a coin in an MS70 slab." He was was selling an "MS70" coin, presumably for MS70 prices. The coin the OP received was NOT an "MS70" coin.
I've certainly sold coins on eBay I found were spotted when I went to list them. In the listing headline, I will SAY the coin has spots, and would locate and describe the spotting in the listing description. Also: I'll start them as $.99 start auctions, and let the market play out, based on the pictures and that info. The results usually were satisfactory, with no hassles, no returns.
I get it that technically, pushing the BUY button is a "contract," but holding the buyer to such a contract under this circumstances is fraudulent, IMHO, and worthy of taking issue.
If it could have spotted since grading, it could have spotted in transit. Not likely, but seller deserves the benefit of the doubt. Send it back and get your refund!
SNAD. Spots need a dip. Send it back. eBay and the seller (in spite of his or her policy) must make it right when stock photos are used and items are not as described or shown in the photo.
@TwoSides2aCoin said:
SNAD. Spots need a dip. Send it back. eBay and the seller (in spite of his or her policy) must make it right when stock photos are used and items are not as described or shown in the photo.
Dipping coins with milk spots doesn't work.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Well, I'm glad the coin dealer is stepping up to do the right thing....... so crisis averted via normal communication channels.
As for grading, we all know that the spotted coin would never grade 70 if tried again, but that is meaningless to eBay, PayPal, the courts (subject to expert opinion), and just about anyone else who would arbitrate a disagreement. If you bought a 70 and the thing sold to you was professionally graded MS70 by a well-recognized grading service, that's what it is. Arguments about that will be referred back to the grading service - and there's no grade guarantee there.
@BryceM said:
Well, I'm glad the coin dealer is stepping up to do the right thing....... so crisis averted via normal communication channels.
As for grading, we all know that the spotted coin would never grade 70 if tried again, but that is meaningless to eBay, PayPal, the courts (subject to expert opinion), and just about anyone else who would arbitrate a disagreement. If you bought a 70 and the thing sold to you was professionally graded MS70 by a well-recognized grading service, that's what it is. Arguments about that will be referred back to the grading service - and there's no grade guarantee there.
If the grading service gives it a 70 and the coin is subsequently damaged, the grading service considers the grade guarantee to be null and void. Milk spots are damage as far a the marketplace is concerned.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@BryceM said:
I know that, and you know that, but try getting non-coin folks to understand it. Gunna be an uphill fight.
Personally, I'm not 100% convinced that spotting should change the grade, and I'm a coin person. LOL. Why are milk spots worse than toning? I mean, they are generally uglier, but not always.
I had a complete set of silver eagles in original holders recently. A number of them had very faint, barely visible milky shadows in the fields. Barely noticeable without magnification in a couple cases. Am I to assume those coins are only 69s now? Meanwhile, I can have a rainbow toned coin grade 70? Which one has more "surface damage"?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
Comments
I am glad to hear you say that because I read your statements to mean that it is OK to sell an MS70 coin that is spotted as a MS70 and not mention it.
I realize sellers use stock photos because they believe coins are generic and an MS70 is an MS70. They sell hundreds of the same widgit so stock photos save them time. I understand that but when you send a coin with such obvious problems a return should be a given.
It doesn't matter if a MS70 coin develops spots after grading,,,,, at that point it is a spotted coin and selling as an MS70 at MS70 price is wrong.
Shipping out a coin in that state after using a stock photo of a MS70 is a lousy thing for any seller to do without upfront disclosure. I can't imagine any reasonable individual asserting otherwise.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
I plan to start another thread later tonight that will hopefully provide a possible improvement to spotting coins that happen after they are slabbed. I do this on all coins I send for grading and so far (years later) I have had no spotting problems. I know others out there do the same thing so I am not claiming to be some genuis or anything.
I’m glad we had our exchange and understand each other better.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Jeremy, that was an excellent post!
And I’d say the same, even if we weren’t in agreement.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
OK, just to be clear, I would almost never purchase an eBay item with a stock photo and if I did, I would absolutely message the seller in advance to the effect of "Will you guarantee the coin I receive will be free of spots, haze, toning?"
That said, there is no possible way that the coin in question gets by whoever is shipping it unless they're wearing a blindfold, so I don't buy that the seller was likely unaware that the coin had spots.
As a final point, I see a lot of discussion of legalities, but very little about ethics. A coin that is no longer what the label says it is with no disclaimer from the seller is misrepresentation and a SNAD claim is perfectly legitimate under the circumstances. Whether the seller was aware of it prior to the sale is irrelevant.
What's the highest number of packages you've ever assembled in one sitting, and how long did it take you?
Quite a few, and a while.
I don't do bulk lots or stock photos, but if I did you can be sure I'd give each item a quick inspection prior to packaging it to make sure there was nothing obviously amiss. All that said, if the seller makes it right, I don't have as much of a problem with it. It's annoying for the buyer, but such is the nature of buying from stock photos sometimes.
I think this is trickier than it sounds.
This is why stock photos are a bad idea and I don't think anyone is justifying that UNLESS it is a fixed price listing for multiple coins.
[If I do that, by the way, I always use the worst example to avoid getting returns.]
But "not what it says it is" is tricky. It is a PCGS 70 coin/holder. What if it weren't spots but just a coin that was one grade too high?
The seller here was wrong, but I think the buyer was also. They bought a coin from a stock photo without inquiring about the coin they would be getting. They were suspicious enough to make the point after purchase. So they clearly knew it was possible and really should have asked the question before purchase.
This is another one of those cases where I wonder how many of these opinions would have flipped if this thread was started by the seller instead of the buyer.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
100% agree.
You need to define quite a few, because I'm guessing you don't mean many hundreds. It is very easy to see how things are impossible until you actually do them and realize how possible they are.
If I had to draw a line, it would be based on whether the issue was obviously there before or after the coin got graded. There is 0 chance anyone would ever grade a spotted coin like the OP's a 70, and particularly knowing the nature of such a coin, we all know it turned in the holder. But if the argument is over, say, a small mark somewhere? At that point I'd leave it to the grade guarantee. Something like that was present when the coin was graded, so the grading company's opinion is that it didn't preclude a 70. Even then you get into the grey areas where some modern coin have "ticks" that are as-made and not post-minting marks. The coin might not look "perfect" but it could still be full acceptable as a 70. But again, that's something the graders would have seen.
This thread is about spots,,,,, not grading. Grading is an opinion,,,,,,, spots aren't.
I put the note about no spots to get the seller to hopefully look at the coin. In the past I have had sellers reply they found spots that they didn't notice before looking, It was to help the seller as much as myself asking for this.
I was being intentionally vague partially because I considered the question immaterial in this instance. How long or hard would you have to look at the coin in question to see those spots? Less than a second, I'd guess.
You've made your point that it's possible the seller was unaware of the spots, and I will concede that it is indeed in the realm of possibility, however improbable I find it. It really doesn't matter one way or the other if the seller makes it right. And that's really the bottom line from my perspective.
I never said that the coin didn't look terrible with the spots, it does. However, if PCGS graded the coin then technically the coin is MS70 with or without spots. Without seeing the auction listing, how can you blast the seller? I believe he mentioned that it was a stock photo and it is graded MS70.
There again, I'm not siding with the seller, if I received something like that I'd be pissed. There is legally right and then there's morally right, maybe the seller has no morals but legally...
Wisdom has been chasing you but, you've always been faster
None of the reasons or excuses really matter, the coin is not as advertised and not what I bought. All that matters is how the seller handles it. Still no word back from the seller since he told me to open a return. I have to believe by them telling me this that they will make it right. Otherwise why not just tell me "TOUGH"
I started the thread because the last time I started a return there was an option for SNAD and I don't see it now. I was not asking if I was right or the seller was right,,,,,, I know the answer to that question.
If he hasn't accepted the return yet, maybe he is telling you "TOUGH"
Wisdom has been chasing you but, you've always been faster
Maybe, maybe not?
I was just teasing, I'm sure he'll accept it in the morning.
Wisdom has been chasing you but, you've always been faster
Maybe stating "I just don't like it" on the return form as I have several times might work. When I've done that, ebay asked for a description and I would write something like " Too much chatter in the mirrors and a contact mark that's more pronounced in hand than the photo". From there the process
was painless and my money was refunded as soon as the item arrived at the sellers address.
This is why always ship through ebays return label so it gets tracked. A must if you want security!
I don't think you can separate the two here. Your contention is that the coin is not a 70 because of the spots. So, grade is the factor. If the coin is a spotted 70, then you got what you bought: a 70. If the coin is now a 69 because of the spots, then you didn't get a 70.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
Where is Coinstartled when you need him?
I'm just going to address your shipping model! You can bulk print labels on ebay also! There is no way I'm doing that as it's too easy to mix up packages and ship the wrong coin or whatever!
In all my infinite wisdom I am now going to answer my own original question,,,,
How do I file a significantly not as described claim on eBay?
I just opened my packages today and noticed that I didn't get what I ordered. I purchased a PCGS PR69 DCAM 2020-S Cent & Nickel from the same seller. Not the Krugerrand seller,,,Both coins are fine,,,,,,,, but they sent me (2) cents and no nickel so I clicked on the nickel link to report the error and I found this:
So I guess I went thru a different link because the option was not there when I was looking for it on the Spotted Krugerrand. That was the answer that I was looking for to begin with. I was concerned that if not phrased properly eBay would not OK the return if the seller didn't do it voluntarily.
BTW,,,, I did NOT file it that way,,,,,, as before I sent the seller a direct message to see if he settles it on his own which I am sure he will.
I've got a system that prints my packing slips and labels at the same time. I end up with a giant strip of thermal labels that lines up with a stack of packing slips. Easy.
Here is the sellers photo of the coin he was selling.
Here is what I received:
They both look the same,,,,, both are MS70's. Any buyer should be equally pleased with either coin. Both coins will sell for the same money when sold. Both coins are equally pleasing to the eye. A seller should be able to advertise the 1st coin and send the 2nd coin. The buyer should keep the 2nd coin and keep his big mouth shut,
This is what several of you are saying,,,,, you know that is wrong.
Still no word back from the seller.
UPDATE, just received the following message from the seller.
Good afternoon and thank you for reaching out to us at Joe Blow's Coins. It is a frustrating and unsatisfactory experience when your coin does not arrive as expected. We know that we have let you down, and for that, we are very sorry. Each and every member of the team at Joe Blow's Coins strives to provide the best possible service. We would like to offer you an exchange. Please contact us with any further concerns or questions you may have.
Joe Blow's Coins is sending me a return label so I guess that they don't blow after all.
In the first post, you said the photo in the listing was a stock photo.
Don't you call this a stock photo? I do,,,, the obverse side has a serial number of 0000000 this is normally done when items are listed before they get them back from grading, however this wasn't a pre-sale and coins shipped the next day so I am guessing this BIN has been up a long time. In checking they have sold over 25 of these and 2 more pcs after I bought mine.
I have no problem buying a generic coin from a stock photo but make sure the coin is the quality of the stock photo.
If it's a stock photo, then the pictured coin is not the one being sold.
No chit Sherlock,,,,,, great detective work,,,,,, I need to put you on retainer.
That's a little rude.
Your posting of the photos is entitled "here's the seller's photo of the coin he was selling" I think @MasonG was making the point that a "stock photo" is never the picture of the coin he was selling.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
If you know that, why did you post the picture above with the comment "Here is the sellers photo of the coin he was selling"?
Please show us where even one poster to this thread said something like that.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I'm not sure that's even a stock photo. It looks more like the kind of artist's rendering of a coin that the U.S. Mint uses on its website.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
Sounds like a good thing to confirm with the seller before clicking the "Buy It Now" button.
ouch...
Personally, I would never buy anything but bullion from a stock photo. Even without spots like that one, you could have toning that you don't like or you might think the coin is overgraded. Nothing good comes from a stock photo.
We even had a thread a couple years ago (same seller) where the buyer was mad that it was a different generation holder than the stock photo.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
That's a little rude.
Maybe so but it is very frustrating listening to all the answers trying to justify the spotted coin as being ok to ship in place of the photo or (image) they showed of the coin in the BIN. As I have said before the photos show a BLAST WHITE no problem no spots coin. Sending a spotted or toned or finger printed coin when showing that image is unacceptable.
I have heard many people on here moan & groan when they buy a coin off of one of the largest bullion dealers around and the coin they get is not the same coin as shown in their photo. That is not right either unless they call that out and say so.
This is the same thing thing.
OK if we want to pick at fly chit the photo or image the seller posted is what he was offering for sale. Sending anything other than a BLAST WHITE no problem PCGS MS70 1st Day of Issue Label Krugerrand would be unacceptable. If the seller wants the convience of not talking 50 photos of 50 different coins then make sure they are the same quality as the photo shows.
How many times do you read on here about Modern Widgets? This coin is a Modern Widget and as such all within the MS70 grade should be pretty much the same. No visible marks and no problems such as the spots. If you have MS70 coins that have different issues then you must post photos of the exact coins with issues.
The photo (image) shows a BLAST WHITE no problem coin and that is what I ordered and expected. I called the seller after receiving his latest message and they will send me a return label and a replacement coin. That is all I wanted and that is what I got. My original question was asking about the proper way to dispute the coin so IF I had a jerk for a seller that I would not get stuck with the coin.
Since that question has been answered to my satisfaction I will have no further comments on this subject after this posting!!!
DOES NOT MATTER,,,,, the image implies a BLAST WHITE no problem coin will be shipped. It was not.
I also purchased a 2019 coin from them from another listing using the same type of photo (image) and description and it is PERFECT and believe me I have went over it with a fine tooth comb.
I hope my adding the word (image) in addition to photo will be of great comfort to some.
Austa-La-Vista BABY!!!!!!!
Hard to argue with that.
Late to the thread. Seems like GrandAm is satisfied and will have no further comment. Glad it worked out between him and the seller. I know if I received a spotted coin such as he did, stock photo or not, I'd not be happy and do everything to have it made right.
Interesting thread. I've seen many bullion coins on Ebay with stock photos, but no decent seller should be sending out blatantly spotted coins like this - you can look at the coin and see the problem in a split second. Maybe it's packed by bots?
For low priced bullion, stock photos should suffice. But I'm leery of them for higher priced items, especially for common date $20 Libs and Saints. I've seen stock photos of nice MS-62 gold, but I'm betting that's not what you get.
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets
Due to volume, the seller may well have been unaware of the spotting (benefit of the doubt). And the buyer here may (hopefully) work out things cordially by virtue of the direct communication with the seller (the right move).
Still, though, the seller, I assume, did NOT list the item as "a coin in an MS70 slab." He was was selling an "MS70" coin, presumably for MS70 prices. The coin the OP received was NOT an "MS70" coin.
I've certainly sold coins on eBay I found were spotted when I went to list them. In the listing headline, I will SAY the coin has spots, and would locate and describe the spotting in the listing description. Also: I'll start them as $.99 start auctions, and let the market play out, based on the pictures and that info. The results usually were satisfactory, with no hassles, no returns.
I get it that technically, pushing the BUY button is a "contract," but holding the buyer to such a contract under this circumstances is fraudulent, IMHO, and worthy of taking issue.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
I don't usually disagree with you David! But I do here. The majority of sellers who use stock photos always use the best they have ever had or can find pictures of. Ebay should absolutely ban Stock Photos in the coin category! All coins are unique, unlike a pair of shoes or a blouse.
If it could have spotted since grading, it could have spotted in transit. Not likely, but seller deserves the benefit of the doubt. Send it back and get your refund!
SNAD. Spots need a dip. Send it back. eBay and the seller (in spite of his or her policy) must make it right when stock photos are used and items are not as described or shown in the photo.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Dipping coins with milk spots doesn't work.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Back to the OP' original question, use ebay's resolution center to open and monitor claims.
No Way Out: Stimulus and Money Printing Are the Only Path Left
Well, I'm glad the coin dealer is stepping up to do the right thing....... so crisis averted via normal communication channels.
As for grading, we all know that the spotted coin would never grade 70 if tried again, but that is meaningless to eBay, PayPal, the courts (subject to expert opinion), and just about anyone else who would arbitrate a disagreement. If you bought a 70 and the thing sold to you was professionally graded MS70 by a well-recognized grading service, that's what it is. Arguments about that will be referred back to the grading service - and there's no grade guarantee there.
If the grading service gives it a 70 and the coin is subsequently damaged, the grading service considers the grade guarantee to be null and void. Milk spots are damage as far a the marketplace is concerned.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
I know that, and you know that, but try getting non-coin folks to understand it. Gunna be an uphill fight.
Personally, I'm not 100% convinced that spotting should change the grade, and I'm a coin person. LOL. Why are milk spots worse than toning? I mean, they are generally uglier, but not always.
I had a complete set of silver eagles in original holders recently. A number of them had very faint, barely visible milky shadows in the fields. Barely noticeable without magnification in a couple cases. Am I to assume those coins are only 69s now? Meanwhile, I can have a rainbow toned coin grade 70? Which one has more "surface damage"?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.