Geezz -- guys relax here, I'm just having some fun on a boring Christmas Eve. And I'm not calling anyone anything. I was the one called a thief.
I'm sorry Keets that you have lost respect for my intelligence -- I'll call Mensa and let them know.
<< <i>skipp all your education, lawyerly knowledge, whatever. none of them apply. >>
I might be out on a limb, but at least I know it. Tell me why your statement is correct. Debate it. Back it up with facts. Why isn't cherrypicking a form of stealing as compared to my "thievery" example or at least tell me why legally it is allowable?
I'm not convinced by your simple statement that you get it and I don't. Prove it.
So earlier this year I cherried a 1928-d Lincoln cent RPM#1 that I paid $23. I sent it to ANACS and got an MS63 RB grade. So I had another $30 invested. I sold it for $700. How much should I give back to the dealer? What about the persons that sold this coin over the 75 years since it was minted?
I found another one two months ago after looking at over 300 coins. I paid $25. Sent it off to ANACS and came back MS62 BN. So another $30 investment. I sold it for $52. So how much more should I have asked the buyer? You win some you lose some!
So if I find a cherry 1964 Lincoln that I think might be an PF69, I should pay him $30,000? Get real!
<< <i>As for getting laughed out of court, if I cherrypicked a 2 cent piece from you for $100 and it was a rare variety and was worth over $250,000 on the open market, you would be fine with that? >>
Yep. In point of fact, I would congratulate you.
<< <i>Would you not try to claim a share of the windfall? >>
Nope.
<< <i>Would you at least want to if you could. >>
Nope.
<< <i>Or would you huddle in the corner and lick your wounds and chalk it up to experience? >>
Huddle in the corner? Not hardly. But, yes, I would chalk it up to experience. It's a two-way street.
I'll equate this to a real life example. When my dad died, my slimeball brother hired a slimeball lawyer to sue for the estate. When said slimeball lawyer contacted me to participate as a claimant, I told him to stick it up his ass. Why? Because I wasn't entitled to that which I did not earn.
A dealer who does not know the product he is selling is not entitled to that which he did not earn.
I'll let keets debate it because he's the great debater but I'll just say CP aint stealing cause it aint. Oh, and if any of you cp me for $250K I'll just say you did well grasshopper. Next time you see me you had better buy me a beer though.
Change that we can believe in is that change which is 90% silver.
your posting is evidence as to why our court dockets are so cluttered with frivolous lawsuits. if an item is sold per your Russ two-cent piece example, there is absolutely no sound reason why Russ should have any recourse but to hide in the corner and lick his wounds while he studies the two-cent piece variety attribution book. lack of understanding that and payola are what clogs the dockets.
BTW, being a mensa and having common sense are in no way the same thing. watch "Rainman" again.
You SELL a coin to the dealer for $100 based upon mutual agreement. The dealer sells the coin for $1000 the next week to a friend of yours.
Would anyone here ask the dealer for a share in the profits?
No matter what the scenario, if he got lucky with the grade when he sent it in, or if he undergraded it when he bought it from you, its YOUR responsibility to educate yourself to the value of what you are selling. The same goes for the dealer. Buyer beware, seller beware. If I sell you a car that `I' think is worth $25,000, but the book value is only $10,000, you have NO recourse against me as a private person provided you were given all reasonable information about the car.
Aside from that, inherent within the coin market is the concept of cherrypicking. Its ALL based on what is the accepted value of an object that has NO inherent value at all. We all create the value. If I find a coin in Africa, owned by a goat herder, that is worth $10,000 and I give him the $100 he asks for(a months pay), I gave him a VERY fair deal. Its all situational. He has no access to the market, so is the coin worth $10,000? Nope. The coin is WORTH what he is willing to sell it to me for.
Another scenario: I sell someone some land that I think isn't worth much. The buyer has information that the land will be VERY valuable due a developers intentions of putting in a mall or something nearby. I sell to him, his information made money for him, my land is sold. I have no recourse to recover anything.
Wow Keets you are really going overboard on this one. I was just having a little fun and stirring the pot and pushing some buttons. I haven't caused any mischief here in a while. Well, I still respect you and your thoughts as well as everyone else who "played" along.
Sorry if I insulted or upset anyone, that was not my intention.
I have to go do some running around for Christmas, but I'd figure I'd do one last post before I left.........
Zenny ---- there's no meeting of the minds. If the dealer knew it was a rare variety then it would be okay. There's no affirmative duties in contract law, but there is a requirement that you enter into a contract with "clean hands" and that you aren't trying to defraud the other party.
k10 --- I only overbill the clients I don't like.
keets -- I am a defense attorney and defend those that are sued frivolously. So the court dockets aren't full because of me or my clients.
Listen, the law looks at the world much differently than you might suspect. Somethings might be okay as a custom and practice in each individual industry, that doesn't exactly mean that the legal issues are in step with custom and practice.
And yes, I do cherrypick and I will continue to do so, just not to those I like and have built a relationship with. But to each his own.
Boy, I'm gald I started up this thread, heh. Gotten a lot of responses. Some helpful, some not, but I've realized a couple things for me personally about Cherrypicking. But, I think Meta put it best. The coins we buy and sell, have very little intrinsic value, just whatever the melt values are. All of our prices are all extrinsic. So, if I cherrypick a coin from a dealer at his offered price, that is the value that he has placed on that coin to him. To me, and to another collector that I might sell that coin to, the value might be much more. But it's intrinsic value is still the same. I don't think I would cherrypick a friend or a dealer that I had a good relationship with, but, I've never been in a position to cherrypick someone, so I don't really know what I would do... thx everyone for your different Points of View!
Interesting. How about this scenario? A dealer buys a coin from you for $70 that he knows he can sell for $100. Is he violating contract law for trying to make a small profit so he can pay the bills? What the difference between that and a cherrypick? Why can't the consumer buy a coin to make a profit?
BTW, was Cherry Picking a defined term here? If it was I missed it. The bottom line here is that it all boils down to money and whether two people can agree on a price whereby a transaction can be made. Cherry Picking is something that will always exist and it is not a crime.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
If there's evidence that the dealer paid full price for it then one may be obliged to point out that it's a scarce variety. Say for instance the flip identifies it as the more valuable coin but it's priced like the cheaper one. It may also be less ethical to offer a price based on a common coin. I would normally ask for a price rather than make an offer.
Some people may not feel right buying something for much less than its real value, but I figure the other party had ample opportunity to determine a coin's value and if he failed at this then it's his loss. I've never had anyone return a scarce variety to me with a note that it must have accidently gotten mixed in.
michael, when your ready to have all your hypotheticals answered correctly - just ask. for now, have fun.
<< <i>I am having some fun. This is actually how they teach law school. The professor provides a concept, rule of law and then they change the fact pattern. >>
btw, a few law schools (including harvard!) are moving away from the socratic method to spare the 'feelings' of the students!
I have never made a coin purchase where I haven't felt that I wasn't cherrypicking, Merry Christmas to all----------------------------------------------------BigE
<< <i>Zenny ---- there's no meeting of the minds. If the dealer knew it was a rare variety then it would be okay. There's no affirmative duties in contract law, but there is a requirement that you enter into a contract with "clean hands" and that you aren't trying to defraud the other party.
>>
if, as you admit, there's no affirmative duty, how can i possibly have dirty hands simply by not telling this professional what he could/should know on his own already?
I would agree that if he has made a mistake of fact such as 1909-vdb cent rather than 1909s-vdb perhaps, just perhaps, we are reaching the point where there may be some slight bit of culpabililty, but even with this if the dealer holds him/herself out to be a professional, and especially if it is he who has priced the item, i find it difficult to find against the defendant....
judgment: plaintiff ordered to attend ANA summer seminar for full two weeks!
this thread only highlights the wisdom of the Bard, and i don't mean clankeye!! lawyers have wrapped themselves around all facets of society for one reason only-----monetary gain. to even begin to mention contracts and all the other BS within the context of this thread is ludicrous and self-serving in the end. does a common, everyday transaction actually need the fear of litigation hanging over it?? methinks that some perceive a great importance about our need for them.
Please don't take offense here, but some of what you all consider "Cherrypicking" some dealers in reality they could care less. Many of these are old time dealers don't keep up with the modern varieties nor do they care to. So if you pick off something you can submit for 10.00 and make money, well they probably bought it for a dollar and are happy with their profit as well.
I've known a dealer for over 20 years that's been in the business for over 40 years and still has an eye like a hawk. He has said he made his money when there was really "cherrypicking" and big crack-out upgrades years ago. He doesn't fool with it anymore, and just is happy to make a profit at it part time. You might think you're getting him, but he probably got to one of your relatives years ago and still makes a handsome profit.
Now that I've replied to this thread it will die.
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
Hi mgood3. You said; "Interesting. How about this scenario? A dealer buys a coin from you for $70 that he knows he can sell for $100. Is he violating contract law for trying to make a small profit so he can pay the bills? What the difference between that and a cherrypick? Why can't the consumer buy a coin to make a profit?"
The difference is that in your example BOTH parties knew exactly what they were buying and selling when they entered the deal. This is NOT a cherrypick. A cherrypick in numismatics usually occurs when someone buys something that the seller is unaware he is selling (usually to the detriment of the Seller). Otherwise it would not be a cherrypick. If a buyer is aware of a mistake made by a Seller at the time the deal is made, isn't it appropriate to inform the Seller of that mistake? Can a deal really be considered "wholesome" if one of the parties to the deal made a mistake? Think about it. Merry Christmas! matteproof
Hi meta. You said; "You SELL a coin to the dealer for $100 based upon mutual agreement. The dealer sells the coin for $1000 the next week to a friend of yours. Would anyone here ask the dealer for a share in the profits?"
If the original Seller KNEW what he was selling (not likely in the example that you provided) then the deal would seem to pass muster. However, in your example it is HIGHLY likely that the original seller did not know what he was selling.
Assume the following hypothetical using your scenario. Let's say that the original seller sold his 1888-O Morgan Dollar in ms60 for $100 to a dealer. Both parties made this trade based on the assumption that it was an 1888-O Morgan dollar at the center of the transaction. Then, the dealer turned around and one week later sold that 1888-O Morgan Dollar for $1,000. We would know that the second buyer probably got ripped by the Dealer because an 1888-O Morgan dollar in ms60 condition is NOT likely to sell for $1,000 (right?).
However, if the original Seller sold his 1888-O Morgan dollar to the dealer UNAWARE that it was really an 1888-O Scarface Morgan dollar (but the Dealer DID know - and did not reveal this to the Seller) and he accordingly sold it for 1k one week later, would you still believe that a fair transaction took place? If yes, why? Merry Christmas. matteproof
If someone sells something to anyone for an agreed upon price and did not know exactly what they were selling in the first place, they LOSE!! Plain and simple. A lot of people here trying to pick the fly$hit out of the pepper IMO...Ken
<< <i>If someone sells something to anyone for an agreed upon price and did not know exactly what they were selling in the first place, they LOSE!! Plain and simple. A lot of people here trying to pick the fly$hit out of the pepper IMO...Ken >>
The world is a dangerous place. Its imperative upon those that do not wish to be taken advantage of that they educate THEMSELVES in the ways and means of the world. Its not societies obligation to protect every single interest of every single person down to the level that we are talking about here. We all have rights, sure, but to insist that someone has recourse against another party when, due to their own ignorance, they fail to understand the value of something they are selling to that party is truly a VERY slippery slope. A short time ago this discussion wouldnt even be held, as personal responsibility was considered just that, resting on the shoulders of everyone to protect their OWN interests. Laws protect people, but should never come at the expense of denying the need for a high value being placed on personal responsibility. Society should not be responsible for a persons ignorance, but it seems that as of recent, a very powerful interest group has taken in upon itself to make this not the case. Why? To make society `safer' for stupid, uneducated, weak minded, lazy, irresponible people? No. To make more money for themselves. Its not my duty, or yours, to protect people from themselves to the level some people who wish to profit from this sort of scenario would wish to see. Smarter, better educated, strong minded, motivated, responsible people will always find the advantage in life.....and coins! Merry X-mas to all!
I cherrypick every chance I get. Here is a perfect example of why I go it. I asked my current dealer why is all his MS inventory graded MS-60 or MS-63? I further informed him that I have purchased numerous items from him that has been certified MS-65 and higher. I even informed him that he may want to consider submitting some of his inventory for certification. His response to my statement was "I dont have time to sit hear and look at everything if it looks decent I give it a 63 grade if not it gets the 60 grade. So from my standpoint he IMHO asks for it.
Stacy
Sleep well tonight for the 82nd Airborne Division is on point for the nation. AIRBORNE!
What they also did was point out what they were looking for when they found it.
James, good post. My favorite dealer allows me to look through anything in the shop. He also charges me for cherrypicking by making me help him learn. He said, "I don't care what you're looking for. Just tell me, so I'll know to look too." That works pretty good for both of us.
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
Hi Meta. You said; "Laws protect people, but should never come at the expense of denying the need for a high value being placed on personal responsibility."
I agree completely. And I believe that personal responsibility is beautifully demonstrated when a Buyer INFORMS a Seller of his mistake if the seller is making one in a transaction.
You said; "...Society should not be responsible for a persons ignorance...."
You are correct - to a degree - that society itself is not responsible for a person's ignorance (though in many instances it is). However, we are not talking about society being responsbile in our hypothetical coin transaction. We are talking about two people - a buyer and a seller - being responsible between each other in a transaction. Why would this not also include one party informing the other party of their mistake when one is being made in a transaction? Responsibility normally operates in an atmosphere of honesty. Think about it. Merry Christmas. matteproof
Hi kssteelheader. You said; "If someone sells something to anyone for an agreed upon price and did not know exactly what they were selling in the first place, they LOSE!! Plain and simple"
While I understand your basic statement, I don't think it's that plain or simple KS. If it were, then anybody could buy grandma's deceased husband's coin collection for ten cents on the dollar and call it fair play simply because grandma did not know exactly what she was selling. In such a scenario, I don't think it would be sufficient to tell grandma "sorry granny, you lose." Give it some thought. Merry Christmas. matteproof
I agree with you on the point of when someone buys a coin from me that I believe will upgrade and I know they are buying it to do so I ask them to let me know if it upgrades. The same with varieties and whatever.
matteproof, sorry if there is any confusion. I'm speaking of people in the know, to speak of, coin dealers vs coin buyers. If you snooze, you lose.....Ken
<< <i>matteproof, sorry if there is any confusion. I'm speaking of people in the know, to speak of, coin dealers vs coin buyers. If you snooze, you lose.....Ken >>
I hear you Ken. I can't help but wonder how easy life would be if everyone treated everyone the same way that they themselves would like to be treated. Perhaps that is the very essence of the Christmas message. Merry Christmas Ken. matteproof
........my truth for the day------if you are cherrypicking a coin and you tell the seller, you are not only stupid, you aren't cherrypicking!! i am glad that you feel happy and that your conscience is clear. you are still stupid, though, and you still aren't cherrypicking.
Comments
I'm sorry Keets that you have lost respect for my intelligence -- I'll call Mensa and let them know.
<< <i>skipp all your education, lawyerly knowledge, whatever. none of them apply. >>
I might be out on a limb, but at least I know it. Tell me why your statement is correct. Debate it. Back it up with facts. Why isn't cherrypicking a form of stealing as compared to my "thievery" example or at least tell me why legally it is allowable?
I'm not convinced by your simple statement that you get it and I don't. Prove it.
Michael
I found another one two months ago after looking at over 300 coins. I paid $25. Sent it off to ANACS and came back MS62 BN. So another $30 investment. I sold it for $52. So how much more should I have asked the buyer? You win some you lose some!
So if I find a cherry 1964 Lincoln that I think might be an PF69, I should pay him $30,000? Get real!
<< <i>As for getting laughed out of court, if I cherrypicked a 2 cent piece from you for $100 and it was a rare variety and was worth over $250,000 on the open market, you would be fine with that? >>
Yep. In point of fact, I would congratulate you.
<< <i>Would you not try to claim a share of the windfall? >>
Nope.
<< <i>Would you at least want to if you could. >>
Nope.
<< <i>Or would you huddle in the corner and lick your wounds and chalk it up to experience? >>
Huddle in the corner? Not hardly. But, yes, I would chalk it up to experience. It's a two-way street.
I'll equate this to a real life example. When my dad died, my slimeball brother hired a slimeball lawyer to sue for the estate. When said slimeball lawyer contacted me to participate as a claimant, I told him to stick it up his ass. Why? Because I wasn't entitled to that which I did not earn.
A dealer who does not know the product he is selling is not entitled to that which he did not earn.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>I was the one called a thief. >>
So DO you double bill your clients?
Oh, and if any of you cp me for $250K I'll just say you did well grasshopper. Next time you see me you had better buy me a beer though.
your posting is evidence as to why our court dockets are so cluttered with frivolous lawsuits. if an item is sold per your Russ two-cent piece example, there is absolutely no sound reason why Russ should have any recourse but to hide in the corner and lick his wounds while he studies the two-cent piece variety attribution book. lack of understanding that and payola are what clogs the dockets.
BTW, being a mensa and having common sense are in no way the same thing. watch "Rainman" again.
al h.
You SELL a coin to the dealer for $100 based upon mutual agreement.
The dealer sells the coin for $1000 the next week to a friend of yours.
Would anyone here ask the dealer for a share in the profits?
No matter what the scenario, if he got lucky with the grade when he sent it in, or if he undergraded it when he bought it from you, its YOUR responsibility to educate yourself to the value of what you are selling. The same goes for the dealer. Buyer beware, seller beware. If I sell you a car that `I' think is worth $25,000, but the book value is only $10,000, you have NO recourse against me as a private person provided you were given all reasonable information about the car.
Aside from that, inherent within the coin market is the concept of cherrypicking. Its ALL based on what is the accepted value of an object that has NO inherent value at all. We all create the value. If I find a coin in Africa, owned by a goat herder, that is worth $10,000 and I give him the $100 he asks for(a months pay), I gave him a VERY fair deal. Its all situational. He has no access to the market, so is the coin worth $10,000? Nope. The coin is WORTH what he is willing to sell it to me for.
Another scenario: I sell someone some land that I think isn't worth much. The buyer has information that the land will be VERY valuable due a developers intentions of putting in a mall or something nearby. I sell to him, his information made money for him, my land is sold. I have no recourse to recover anything.
Sorry if I insulted or upset anyone, that was not my intention.
I have to go do some running around for Christmas, but I'd figure I'd do one last post before I left.........
Zenny ---- there's no meeting of the minds. If the dealer knew it was a rare variety then it would be okay. There's no affirmative duties in contract law, but there is a requirement that you enter into a contract with "clean hands" and that you aren't trying to defraud the other party.
k10 --- I only overbill the clients I don't like.
keets -- I am a defense attorney and defend those that are sued frivolously. So the court dockets aren't full because of me or my clients.
Listen, the law looks at the world much differently than you might suspect. Somethings might be okay as a custom and practice in each individual industry, that doesn't exactly mean that the legal issues are in step with custom and practice.
And yes, I do cherrypick and I will continue to do so, just not to those I like and have built a relationship with. But to each his own.
Michael
42/92
ANYONE here bought a coin at auction that happened to upgrade? Did you send a check to the auction house?
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
If there's evidence that the dealer paid full price for it then one may be obliged to point out
that it's a scarce variety. Say for instance the flip identifies it as the more valuable coin but it's
priced like the cheaper one. It may also be less ethical to offer a price based on a common
coin. I would normally ask for a price rather than make an offer.
Some people may not feel right buying something for much less than its real value, but I figure
the other party had ample opportunity to determine a coin's value and if he failed at this then
it's his loss. I've never had anyone return a scarce variety to me with a note that it must have
accidently gotten mixed in.
when your ready to have all your hypotheticals answered correctly - just ask. for now, have fun.
<< <i>I am having some fun. This is actually how they teach law school. The professor provides a concept, rule of law and then they change the fact pattern. >>
btw, a few law schools (including harvard!) are moving away from the socratic method to spare the 'feelings' of the students!
<< <i>Zenny ---- there's no meeting of the minds. If the dealer knew it was a rare variety then it would be okay. There's no affirmative duties in contract law, but there is a requirement that you enter into a contract with "clean hands" and that you aren't trying to defraud the other party.
>>
if, as you admit, there's no affirmative duty, how can i possibly have dirty hands simply by not telling this professional what he could/should know on his own already?
I would agree that if he has made a mistake of fact such as 1909-vdb cent rather than 1909s-vdb perhaps, just perhaps, we are reaching the point where there may be some slight bit of culpabililty, but even with this if the dealer holds him/herself out to be a professional, and especially if it is he who has priced the item, i find it difficult to find against the defendant....
judgment: plaintiff ordered to attend ANA summer seminar for full two weeks!
z
al h.
I've known a dealer for over 20 years that's been in the business for over 40 years and still has an eye like a hawk. He has said he made his money when there was really "cherrypicking" and big crack-out upgrades years ago. He doesn't fool with it anymore, and just is happy to make a profit at it part time. You might think you're getting him, but he probably got to one of your relatives years ago and still makes a handsome profit.
Now that I've replied to this thread it will die.
The difference is that in your example BOTH parties knew exactly what they were buying and selling when they entered the deal. This is NOT a cherrypick. A cherrypick in numismatics usually occurs when someone buys something that the seller is unaware he is selling (usually to the detriment of the Seller). Otherwise it would not be a cherrypick. If a buyer is aware of a mistake made by a Seller at the time the deal is made, isn't it appropriate to inform the Seller of that mistake? Can a deal really be considered "wholesome" if one of the parties to the deal made a mistake? Think about it. Merry Christmas! matteproof
ps. Right On Frattlaw!
The dealer sells the coin for $1000 the next week to a friend of yours. Would anyone here ask the dealer for a share in the profits?"
If the original Seller KNEW what he was selling (not likely in the example that you provided) then the deal would seem to pass muster. However, in your example it is HIGHLY likely that the original seller did not know what he was selling.
Assume the following hypothetical using your scenario. Let's say that the original seller sold his 1888-O Morgan Dollar in ms60 for $100 to a dealer. Both parties made this trade based on the assumption that it was an 1888-O Morgan dollar at the center of the transaction. Then, the dealer turned around and one week later sold that 1888-O Morgan Dollar for $1,000. We would know that the second buyer probably got ripped by the Dealer because an 1888-O Morgan dollar in ms60 condition is NOT likely to sell for $1,000 (right?).
However, if the original Seller sold his 1888-O Morgan dollar to the dealer UNAWARE that it was really an 1888-O Scarface Morgan dollar (but the Dealer DID know - and did not reveal this to the Seller) and he accordingly sold it for 1k one week later, would you still believe that a fair transaction took place? If yes, why? Merry Christmas. matteproof
<< <i>A lot of people here trying to pick the fly$hit out of the pepper >>
interesting....
"Senorita HepKitty"
"I want a real cool Kitty from Hepcat City, to stay in step with me" - Bill Carter
<< <i>If someone sells something to anyone for an agreed upon price and did not know exactly what they were selling in the first place, they LOSE!! Plain and simple. A lot of people here trying to pick the fly$hit out of the pepper IMO...Ken >>
The world is a dangerous place. Its imperative upon those that do not wish to be taken advantage of that they educate THEMSELVES in the ways and means of the world. Its not societies obligation to protect every single interest of every single person down to the level that we are talking about here. We all have rights, sure, but to insist that someone has recourse against another party when, due to their own ignorance, they fail to understand the value of something they are selling to that party is truly a VERY slippery slope. A short time ago this discussion wouldnt even be held, as personal responsibility was considered just that, resting on the shoulders of everyone to protect their OWN interests. Laws protect people, but should never come at the expense of denying the need for a high value being placed on personal responsibility. Society should not be responsible for a persons ignorance, but it seems that as of recent, a very powerful interest group has taken in upon itself to make this not the case. Why? To make society `safer' for stupid, uneducated, weak minded, lazy, irresponible people? No. To make more money for themselves. Its not my duty, or yours, to protect people from themselves to the level some people who wish to profit from this sort of scenario would wish to see. Smarter, better educated, strong minded, motivated, responsible people will always find the advantage in life.....and coins!
Sleep well tonight for the 82nd Airborne Division is on point for the nation.
AIRBORNE!
James, good post. My favorite dealer allows me to look through anything in the shop. He also charges me for cherrypicking by making me help him learn. He said, "I don't care what you're looking for. Just tell me, so I'll know to look too."
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
I agree completely. And I believe that personal responsibility is beautifully demonstrated when a Buyer INFORMS a Seller of his mistake if the seller is making one in a transaction.
You said; "...Society should not be responsible for a persons ignorance...."
You are correct - to a degree - that society itself is not responsible for a person's ignorance (though in many instances it is). However, we are not talking about society being responsbile in our hypothetical coin transaction. We are talking about two people - a buyer and a seller - being responsible between each other in a transaction. Why would this not also include one party informing the other party of their mistake when one is being made in a transaction? Responsibility normally operates in an atmosphere of honesty. Think about it. Merry Christmas. matteproof
While I understand your basic statement, I don't think it's that plain or simple KS. If it were, then anybody could buy grandma's deceased husband's coin collection for ten cents on the dollar and call it fair play simply because grandma did not know exactly what she was selling. In such a scenario, I don't think it would be sufficient to tell grandma "sorry granny, you lose." Give it some thought. Merry Christmas. matteproof
I agree with you on the point of when someone buys a coin from me that I believe will upgrade and I know they are buying it to do so I ask them to let me know if it upgrades. The same with varieties and whatever.
<< <i>matteproof, sorry if there is any confusion. I'm speaking of people in the know, to speak of, coin dealers vs coin buyers. If you snooze, you lose.....Ken >>
I hear you Ken. I can't help but wonder how easy life would be if everyone treated everyone the same way that they themselves would like to be treated. Perhaps that is the very essence of the Christmas message. Merry Christmas Ken. matteproof
al h.