<< <i>On the contrary UncleJoe, the issue is whether the standards used by ASA Accugrade consistently result in overgraded coins by ANA standards
That may be your issue but it is not an issue of the lawsuit. >>
Then you dont understand the lawsuit. It most certainly is an issue. Some of the statements supposedly made by the defendants and for which relief is being requested is all about that issue. For example:
"The coins in ACG holders can be 2 to 6 grades lower." "ACG overgrades by six (6) to ten (10) points" "That ACG does in fact overgrade coins"
<< <i><No one (other than yourself) ever said anything about whether they could grade on a non-ANA scale.>
Correct. That is my question: whether or not they have the right to grade them as they see them without undue interference. >>
I don't think anyone would really care in regard to ACG grading to their own proprietary system, except that their own "system" just happens to coincide exactly with the same designations that are used by an already established industry standard. Their interpretations of those designations are different, but that is what they label their slabs with.
So, the big issue surrounding this is that they are taking advantage of people who may not have very much knowledge of coin collecting. ACG acknowledges their standards are different, but for those poor people who are not aware of this issue (and don't know that they need to go read the little disclaimer on the ACG web site in order to find out this information), they can easily fall prey to this non-industry standard interpretation of designations.
Now, if ACG were to put some sort of disclaimer on each and every one of their slabs stating that their standard is different than the ANA standard (but that is uses the same designations), then there would be no problem.
Then you dont understand the lawsuit. It most certainly is an issue. Some of the statements supposedly made by the defendants and for which relief is being requested is all about that issue.
No. I do understand the lawsuit. The above is an issue for the one's that made the statements NOT an issue for ACG since you are trying to hold ACG to your standards.
Now, if ACG were to put some sort of disclaimer on each and every one of their slabs stating that their standard is different than the ANA standard (but that is uses the same designations), then there would be no problem.
Now we are getting somewhere. However, I don't think this really resolves the issue as to whether or not I can create my own grading standards tomorrow (anybody care to guess what NTC's standards are?) and market my own slabs without undue interference. (of course whether or not the market would accept my slabs is another issue.)
They can grade to thier own system and that is what Diane Hager alluded to in the ANA Board meeting where she said they graded based on 3 things (strike, luster, etc) and originally, ACG produced slabs that had these values designated on them. The problem was that they switched over to the current ANA standard grading scale in the designation on the slab and regardless of whether or not they were using thier own grading scale, in my opinion, it was a move designed to confuse the issue because they never published whether or not they were using the standard ANA grades (oops - now I'm gonna get named in the suit as well).
Besides - the three part grade system that Diane Hager referred to in the ANA Board meeting hasn't been used or marked on the ACG slabs in a number of years.
Cecil Total Copper Nutcase - African, British Ships, Channel Islands!!! 'Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup'
Speaking litigiously, couldn't the ANA and the grading services that adhere to ANA standards sue ACG? How is ACG different from a manufacturer of inferior bootleg products or designer knock-offs?
Goldfinger said: Why wouldn't there be coverage? Because it isn't something to be taken seriously?
Because they are a revenue stream for the coin papers (i.e., advertising dollars)
and, Speaking litigiously, couldn't the ANA and the grading services that adhere to ANA standards sue ACG? How is ACG different from a manufacturer of inferior bootleg products or designer knock-offs?
If the ANA grading scale were copyrighted, yes. Unfortunately, it's not.
Perhaps I should start my own gas station and sell gas by using my own metric. It's not by the gallon or the liter, it's Dave's cubits. I will sell 94 bobutane (bobutane does not necessarily equal to octane. Its a complex scale that takes into account many thing that octane does not measure) gas for $1.31 per cubit. I make no claims as to how cubits compare to gallons. If my customers make the inference that 1 cubit is roughly equal to a gallon, that's their own assumption.
I don't normally tell people that I use cubits instead of gallons (or liters) or bobutane instead of octane unless they ask. But surely I am honest, because I do tell them if they ask. If they buy my book, the book also carefully explain why Dave's cubits and bobutane are much better metrics. I may have to fight the evil government that mandate that I must sell gas by the inferior gallons and octane metrics. I think the government's efforts must be some sort of restraint of trade, because I get so many more customers with the $1.31 per cubit of 94 bobutane than the gas stations across the street that uses the alternative metrics.
Why must we all use the same standard for gas? Why not try to use my standard? Surely some dealers can continue to use gallons/liters while others can use my cubits/bobulene metric to help themselves to more business.
Surely I am an expert on the topic, and anyone that speaks out against my standard is trying to silence me and restraining my trade. I seek not to impose my standard on others, just let me and my dealer network sell gas with my standards free from interference.
I absolutely do expect to see this story covered in the numismatic world (Coin World and Numismatic News). If you don't cover this, you can't call yourself a newspaper. If I don't see anything by next week's issues, I'll be contacting them.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
<< <i>I absolutely do expect to see this story covered in the numismatic world (Coin World and Numismatic News). If you don't cover this, you can't call yourself a newspaper. If I don't see anything by next week's issues, I'll be contacting them. >>
If they don't cover it, they can kiss their credibility goodbye. This is a major numismatic story, and they should recognize it as such.
ASA Accugrade does not grade on this standard but on a separate strike and luster standard established by Alan Hager
Does that include artificial coloring?
I can't believe these people are still in business. I'd been taking it as a hopeful sign that their product has largely disappeared from the numismatic community in the last half-year or so.
The cool part about claiming a financial loss is having to answer the defense' first document request: All personal and corporate audited financial statements, bank statements, investments accounts, accounts receiveable, disbursements, etc. for the last 5, 7, or 10 years. Some of the documents missing? No problem. There are forensic accountants who can get access to state sales and income tax records as well as the IRS tax returns. Think they won't find that secret little bank account no one else knows about? Think again. The defense is being asked to pay for monetary damages and they have to evaluate how much mismanagement contributed to the downturn.
Invasion of privacy? Absolutely, but you are the one claiming you're injured. I don't think anyone damaged Accugrade's reputation as much as Diane's own public testimony at the ANA. She cried foul, demanded a hearing and became the laughing stock. They resigned from the ANA and are not allowed to have a table at Baltimore and perhaps other shows.
If you grade according to a mysterious set of standards and don't disclose it to the unsuspecting public; why are you upset when people call the grading nothing but cr@p? Once anyone is burned by one of the "hot potato" slabs, why would anyone buy another? Ford didn't stop making the Pinto because it was an excellent car. Consumers found out it was a terrible car with no resale value. I didn't own one or drive in one that I remember, but the automotive press and consumers groups had it at the bottom of the list - a car to avoid. Did Ford sue everyone who said that Ford produced an inferior product? No, the Pinto's reputation was so bad they discontinued the model when sales fell to zero.
Looks like Diane and Alan are about to shoot themselves in the foot again. The money they spend on lawyers would be better spent on an "extreme makeover".
Do we have any of the movie-time with extra butter flavor left?
Joe
The Philadelphia Mint: making coins since 1792. We make money by making money. Now in our 225th year thanks to no competition.
I'll give my take on the grading. I saw an ACG "MS70" 2004 silver eagle at a show last weekend. Through the case, I could see three obverse hits with my naked eye. Now if that's an ACG 70, fine, however, MS70 is defined in numismatics as a flawless coin. This coin had flaws, and since the scale had the same terms and was not said to be different, should be treated as such. In that case, the coin is overgraded.
The Hagers have no chance of pursuing what is essentially is a RICO/racketeering claim ... everyone is entitled to a constitutionally protected opinion. And, the truth is a complete defense. How many of this nation's leading coin experts will be standing in line to testify for the defense that what the defendants said was true? A preponderance of evidence is required to win a civil case. This ain't happening on this one. I would love to be rooting around in the Hagers' files and background in discovery, though. And, I have bought one ACG coin and was pleased with it and stated such on this board. Of course, I can't begin to enumerate the problem ACG slabs I have passed on. In the final analysis, I am a bit insulted not to make the hit list. Then again, I just be a little inconsequential collector ... no deep pockets here.
And wait a minute ... the suit essentially argues they have been run out of business by the conspirators and have lost millions in would-be profits. How, Mr. and Mrs. Hager, do you reconcile that claim with this statement on your own web site?
To date ASA has graded and authenticated over 430,000 individual items valued at over $360 million dollars. We are the fastest growing coin grading service in America today. Since August of 1999 our submissions for coin certification are up over 1,000%.
The Hagers were predisposed to find a conspiracy. Remember when they were offering a bounty for anyone who turned in someone whose opinion differed from their own on the grading of ACG coins? Let's dust off the statements of the ANA hearing while were at it, on the games played and the way old centsles was ripped.
<< <i>ASA Accugrade does not grade on this standard but on a separate strike and luster standard established by Alan Hager
Does that include artificial coloring?
I can't believe these people are still in business. I'd been taking it as a hopeful sign that their product has largely disappeared from the numismatic community in the last half-year or so. >>
I agree! I see the current legal action as ACG's death gasp!
As to the merit of ACG's case I would ask this:
I have owned one ACG slab. In my opinion that coin was overgraded. At the time I sold that coin I clearly stated that in my opinion the coin was overgraded by about five points to the buyer and priced the coin accordingly. As an end consumer, I believe I have every right to state my opinion on the quality of the products I use. If the company suffers a loss of business as a result of my opinion, that is their problem and if they had done a better job of pleasing their customer, I might have had a different opinion. If I were to go out to eat and found a hair in my food, or a fly, or got sick from eating it, do I not have every right to state my opinion of that company's food product? I believe that I do!
I will not withold my opinion of ACG out of fear of legal action on their part. I believe that as an unsatisified end user of their product I have every right to state my thoughts on the matter. We live in a nation where we have the right to state our opinions and where a business sinks or swims based on the actions of people not the courts. If ACG is sinking, they need to examine their business model, not dream up some ridiculous idea of a "plot" against them.
If you are in the Western North Carolina area, please consider visiting our coin shop:
Quick, print their web site. When they say their business has been hurt, come back with this quote off their site--
<< <i>Since August of 1999 our submissions for coin certification are up over 1,000%. >>
I thought PCGS just graded their 9 millionth coin...
<< <i>Today, over 9 million coins have been certified, generating over $160 million in fees to the coin grading services since our invention in 1985. >>
Forget coins, forget grading, forget all that you might know or think you know about ACG. This isn't about that, it's about law. As in most lawsuits, everything that's conceivable and mentionable is thrown into a complaint in order to see what makes it past a Summary Judgement motion. For the most part, from what I have read from the complaint, it's going to be difficult for ACG for prove many of it's allegations especially the RICO like charges. Conspiracy is almost impossible to prove. Someone else raised questions about jurisdiction and that might be very difficult for ACG as well, however, there will be certain allegations -- the personal ones, mostly the defamation and libel as being the strongest claims and only against certain defendants.
I think this lawsuit is very chilling. I am surprised that CU/PCGS for example, aren't named as defendants as well for publishing the defaming remarks. I think some of their allegations are pretty strong and if I were one of the defendant's left standing after the initial flee out of the case, I'm not sure I'd like being the one taking this thing to trial.
Hate me if you like, but I just don't think calling anyone a whore publically is a good idea.
<< <i>I think this lawsuit is very chilling. I am surprised that CU/PCGS for example, aren't named as defendants as well for publishing the defaming remarks. >>
Besides the likelihood that CU/PCGS are better financed, their lawyers probably pointed out that there was little likelihood of web forum providers being held responsible for the exercise by posters thereon of their free-speech opinions.
I suspect they're just lashing out for anything they can get, for a little PR, and a default judgement against those who don't respond to their suit so they can claim they "won" and all the denigrating comments are the "lies" as they claim them to be.
<< <i>I suspect they're just lashing out for anything they can get, for a little PR, and a default judgement against those who don't respond to their suit. >>
In your case, they won't be so lucky. However, if most of the others ignore their services, then I wouldn't be surprised if the Hagars claimed they "admitted" their "guilt" and that they prevailed over most of their accusers.
How many of the named defendants do you think will respond, Eric? I'll bet they could prevail in a plead for change of venue to a (non-Floridian) location geographically more convenient to the majority of the defendants.
These people conspired as a group for financial gain and carried out a plan, with mob mentality, to defame and destroy the Plaintiffs
Why would a group of individuals from all over the country "conspire" against someone they never met for finacial gain? There are much easier gains to be had! What makes them special?
They intimidated and interfered with people bidding on e-Bay auctions on any ACG coin.
No one ever harassed or intimidated me when I bid on an ACG coin.
<< <i>I absolutely do expect to see this story covered in the numismatic world (Coin World and Numismatic News). If you don't cover this, you can't call yourself a newspaper. If I don't see anything by next week's issues, I'll be contacting them. >>
If they don't cover it, they can kiss their credibility goodbye. This is a major numismatic story, and they should recognize it as such. >>
I don't expect to see this ever covered in the Numismatist either, despite a few of the defendants named.
"Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity" - Hanlon's Razor
<< <i>Says ACG, that's who. Ever heard of the Accugrade™ grading system? It's not the same ANA standard that everyone else is on. You might better read ACG's website. >>
If I may, I'd like to use someone's (I forgot their name!) analogy from another thread: if you make a movie and rate it G, when the content is clearly deservant of an R rating on the MPAA scale, and I go and start telling people not to send their kids to see it since it's full of profanity, do you have a strong case for a lawsuit against me? In marketing it's called "bait and switch"--you draw someone in with advertisements to make them believe that they are getting something they are not, then cover yourself by claiming to use a different standard. A good example would be saying that you are selling 16 ounnce bags of potato chips for $.25; only when the consumer actually purchases the bag do they realize that "ounnce" is not merely a typo for "ounce," but is actually "a new measurement" equal to half an ounce.
It's my understanding that "bait and switch" isn't legal? Am I mistaken? Isn't the use of the same designations as the Sheldon scale designed to imply that they are, in fact, using the Sheldon scale? Isn't that bait and switch?
I heard they were making a French version of Medal of Honor. I wonder how many hotkeys it'll have for "surrender."
Comments
<< <i>On the contrary UncleJoe, the issue is whether the standards used by ASA Accugrade consistently result in overgraded coins by ANA standards
That may be your issue but it is not an issue of the lawsuit. >>
Then you dont understand the lawsuit. It most certainly is an issue. Some of the statements supposedly made by the defendants and for which relief is being requested is all about that issue. For example:
"The coins in ACG holders can be 2 to 6 grades lower."
"ACG overgrades by six (6) to ten (10) points"
"That ACG does in fact overgrade coins"
<< <i><No one (other than yourself) ever said anything about whether they could grade on a non-ANA scale.>
Correct. That is my question: whether or not they have the right to grade them as they see them without undue interference. >>
I don't think anyone would really care in regard to ACG grading to their own proprietary system, except that their own "system" just happens to coincide exactly with the same designations that are used by an already established industry standard. Their interpretations of those designations are different, but that is what they label their slabs with.
So, the big issue surrounding this is that they are taking advantage of people who may not have very much knowledge of coin collecting. ACG acknowledges their standards are different, but for those poor people who are not aware of this issue (and don't know that they need to go read the little disclaimer on the ACG web site in order to find out this information), they can easily fall prey to this non-industry standard interpretation of designations.
Now, if ACG were to put some sort of disclaimer on each and every one of their slabs stating that their standard is different than the ANA standard (but that is uses the same designations), then there would be no problem.
No. I do understand the lawsuit. The above is an issue for the one's that made the statements NOT an issue for ACG since you are trying to hold ACG to your standards.
Now, if ACG were to put some sort of disclaimer on each and every one of their slabs stating that their standard is different than the ANA standard (but that is uses the same designations), then there would be no problem.
Now we are getting somewhere. However, I don't think this really resolves the issue as to whether or not I can create my own grading standards tomorrow (anybody care to guess what NTC's standards are?) and market my own slabs without undue interference. (of course whether or not the market would accept my slabs is another issue.)
Joe.
Besides - the three part grade system that Diane Hager referred to in the ANA Board meeting hasn't been used or marked on the ACG slabs in a number of years.
Total Copper Nutcase - African, British Ships, Channel Islands!!!
'Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup'
e-mail me here
WINNER:
POTD 8-30-05 (awarded by dthigpen)
POTD 9-8-05 (awarded by gsaguy)
GSAGUY Slam 12-10-04
Why wouldn't there be coverage? Because it isn't something to be taken seriously?
Because they are a revenue stream for the coin papers (i.e., advertising dollars)
and,
Speaking litigiously, couldn't the ANA and the grading services that adhere to ANA standards sue ACG? How is ACG different from a manufacturer of inferior bootleg products or designer knock-offs?
If the ANA grading scale were copyrighted, yes. Unfortunately, it's not.
I don't normally tell people that I use cubits instead of gallons (or liters) or bobutane instead of octane unless they ask. But surely I am honest, because I do tell them if they ask. If they buy my book, the book also carefully explain why Dave's cubits and bobutane are much better metrics. I may have to fight the evil government that mandate that I must sell gas by the inferior gallons and octane metrics. I think the government's efforts must be some sort of restraint of trade, because I get so many more customers with the $1.31 per cubit of 94 bobutane than the gas stations across the street that uses the alternative metrics.
Such does not exist for coins.
Joe.
Surely I am an expert on the topic, and anyone that speaks out against my standard is trying to silence me and restraining my trade. I seek not to impose my standard on others, just let me and my dealer network sell gas with my standards free from interference.
<< <i>Has there been any coverage of this in the numismatic press yet? >>
The Orlando Sentinel apparently doesn't care, either. I searched their site and found 0 articles on Accugrade.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
<< <i>I absolutely do expect to see this story covered in the numismatic world (Coin World and Numismatic News). If you don't cover this, you can't call yourself a newspaper. If I don't see anything by next week's issues, I'll be contacting them. >>
If they don't cover it, they can kiss their credibility goodbye. This is a major numismatic story, and they should recognize it as such.
Does that include artificial coloring?
I can't believe these people are still in business. I'd been taking it as a hopeful sign that their product has largely disappeared from the numismatic community in the last half-year or so.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
Invasion of privacy? Absolutely, but you are the one claiming you're injured. I don't think anyone damaged Accugrade's reputation as much as Diane's own public testimony at the ANA. She cried foul, demanded a hearing and became the laughing stock. They resigned from the ANA and are not allowed to have a table at Baltimore and perhaps other shows.
If you grade according to a mysterious set of standards and don't disclose it to the unsuspecting public; why are you upset when people call the grading nothing but cr@p? Once anyone is burned by one of the "hot potato" slabs, why would anyone buy another? Ford didn't stop making the Pinto because it was an excellent car. Consumers found out it was a terrible car with no resale value. I didn't own one or drive in one that I remember, but the automotive press and consumers groups had it at the bottom of the list - a car to avoid. Did Ford sue everyone who said that Ford produced an inferior product? No, the Pinto's reputation was so bad they discontinued the model when sales fell to zero.
Looks like Diane and Alan are about to shoot themselves in the foot again. The money they spend on lawyers would be better spent on an "extreme makeover".
Do we have any of the movie-time with extra butter flavor left?
Joe
Jeremy
<< <i>Jeremy, hits don't count. Was the luster 70? >>
and strike too. Got to have both of those. If ya do, it's home free.
And wait a minute ... the suit essentially argues they have been run out of business by the conspirators and have lost millions in would-be profits. How, Mr. and Mrs. Hager, do you reconcile that claim with this statement on your own web site?
To date ASA has graded and authenticated over 430,000 individual items valued at over $360 million dollars. We are the fastest growing coin grading service in America today. Since August of 1999 our submissions for coin certification are up over 1,000%.
The Hagers were predisposed to find a conspiracy. Remember when they were offering a bounty for anyone who turned in someone whose opinion differed from their own on the grading of ACG coins? Let's dust off the statements of the ANA hearing while were at it, on the games played and the way old centsles was ripped.
The Ludlow Brilliant Collection (1938-64)
<< <i>ASA Accugrade does not grade on this standard but on a separate strike and luster standard established by Alan Hager
Does that include artificial coloring?
I can't believe these people are still in business. I'd been taking it as a hopeful sign that their product has largely disappeared from the numismatic community in the last half-year or so. >>
I agree! I see the current legal action as ACG's death gasp!
As to the merit of ACG's case I would ask this:
I have owned one ACG slab. In my opinion that coin was overgraded. At the time I sold that coin I clearly stated that in my opinion the coin was overgraded by about five points to the buyer and priced the coin accordingly. As an end consumer, I believe I have every right to state my opinion on the quality of the products I use. If the company suffers a loss of business as a result of my opinion, that is their problem and if they had done a better job of pleasing their customer, I might have had a different opinion. If I were to go out to eat and found a hair in my food, or a fly, or got sick from eating it, do I not have every right to state my opinion of that company's food product? I believe that I do!
I will not withold my opinion of ACG out of fear of legal action on their part. I believe that as an unsatisified end user of their product I have every right to state my thoughts on the matter. We live in a nation where we have the right to state our opinions and where a business sinks or swims based on the actions of people not the courts. If ACG is sinking, they need to examine their business model, not dream up some ridiculous idea of a "plot" against them.
WNC Coins, LLC
1987-C Hendersonville Road
Asheville, NC 28803
wnccoins.com
<< <i>Since August of 1999 our submissions for coin certification are up over 1,000%. >>
I thought PCGS just graded their 9 millionth coin...
<< <i>Today, over 9 million coins have been certified, generating over $160 million in fees to the coin grading services since our invention in 1985. >>
I think this lawsuit is very chilling. I am surprised that CU/PCGS for example, aren't named as defendants as well for publishing the defaming remarks. I think some of their allegations are pretty strong and if I were one of the defendant's left standing after the initial flee out of the case, I'm not sure I'd like being the one taking this thing to trial.
Hate me if you like, but I just don't think calling anyone a whore publically is a good idea.
Michael
<< <i>I think this lawsuit is very chilling. I am surprised that CU/PCGS for example, aren't named as defendants as well for publishing the defaming remarks. >>
Besides the likelihood that CU/PCGS are better financed, their lawyers probably pointed out that there was little likelihood of web forum providers being held responsible for the exercise by posters thereon of their free-speech opinions.
I suspect they're just lashing out for anything they can get, for a little PR, and a default judgement against those who don't respond to their suit so they can claim they "won" and all the denigrating comments are the "lies" as they claim them to be.
Come on over ... to The Dark Side!
<< <i>I suspect they're just lashing out for anything they can get, for a little PR, and a default judgement against those who don't respond to their suit. >>
Trust me, that is not going to happen.
How many of the named defendants do you think will respond, Eric? I'll bet they could prevail in a plead for change of venue to a (non-Floridian) location geographically more convenient to the majority of the defendants.
Come on over ... to The Dark Side!
<< <i>How many of the named defendants do you think will respond, Eric? >>
Everyone.
Why would a group of individuals from all over the country "conspire" against someone they never met for finacial gain? There are much easier gains to be had! What makes them special?
They intimidated and interfered with people bidding on e-Bay auctions on any ACG coin.
No one ever harassed or intimidated me when I bid on an ACG coin.
Looking for PCGS AU58 Washington's, 32-63.
<< <i>
<< <i>I absolutely do expect to see this story covered in the numismatic world (Coin World and Numismatic News). If you don't cover this, you can't call yourself a newspaper. If I don't see anything by next week's issues, I'll be contacting them. >>
If they don't cover it, they can kiss their credibility goodbye. This is a major numismatic story, and they should recognize it as such. >>
I don't expect to see this ever covered in the Numismatist either, despite a few of the defendants named.
<< <i>Says ACG, that's who. Ever heard of the Accugrade™ grading system? It's not the same ANA standard that everyone else is on. You might better read ACG's website. >>
If I may, I'd like to use someone's (I forgot their name!) analogy from another thread: if you make a movie and rate it G, when the content is clearly deservant of an R rating on the MPAA scale, and I go and start telling people not to send their kids to see it since it's full of profanity, do you have a strong case for a lawsuit against me? In marketing it's called "bait and switch"--you draw someone in with advertisements to make them believe that they are getting something they are not, then cover yourself by claiming to use a different standard. A good example would be saying that you are selling 16 ounnce bags of potato chips for $.25; only when the consumer actually purchases the bag do they realize that "ounnce" is not merely a typo for "ounce," but is actually "a new measurement" equal to half an ounce.
It's my understanding that "bait and switch" isn't legal? Am I mistaken? Isn't the use of the same designations as the Sheldon scale designed to imply that they are, in fact, using the Sheldon scale? Isn't that bait and switch?
TP
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870