<< <i>In another post, someone said that Ken sent a bunch of coins to be attributed by Billy. This does not prove he sent the check. And he would surely not insure a check for $22.00 for a value of $3000.
Probably better to say: ALTHOUGH this does not prove he sent the check, he would surely not insure a check for $22.00 for a value of $3000.
GREAT POINT!!! I guess gold ole Billy won't be getting THAT business anymore.
Opportunity coppercoin. >>
What is this "opportunity coppercoin" about?
I have received no notice of a package. Ken has known my correct mailing address.
I'm not going to baby-sit when KP full well knows my current mailing address and when were talking about an auction that is over 2 months ended. Not just a couple of weeks ago.
<< <i>and now I have to flush this entire thread because people are not thinking clearly by posting the home addresses of dealers/collectors. This is the internet people! >>
>>
Well if he posts his own address, then all bets are off.
Forum AdministratorPSA & PSA/DNA ForumModerator@collectors.com | p 800.325.1121 | PSAcard.com
<< <i>and now I have to flush this entire thread because people are not thinking clearly by posting the home addresses of dealers/collectors. This is the internet people! >>
>>
Well if he posts his own address, then all bets are off. >>
Hey, someone posts your home address, I'm going to be all over them and it's going to vanish. If you publish it yourself, then my friend, you are on your own.
Forum AdministratorPSA & PSA/DNA ForumModerator@collectors.com | p 800.325.1121 | PSAcard.com
Hey, someone posts your home address, I'm going to be all over them and it's going to vanish. If you publish it yourself, then my friend, you are on your own. >>
<< <i>Please Billy, you're just a commoner. Please go away and eat your loss. Don't bother the high-and-mighty, those that have done a lot to, err.....I mean, for this hobby. >>
<< <i>Please Billy, you're just a commoner. Please go away and eat your loss. Don't bother the high-and-mighty, those that have done a lot to, err.....I mean, for this hobby. >>
Are you serious? This comment is just wrong. >>
I wish they 'd come up with a sarcasm emoticon. Sorry, MD, if you didn't get it.
Dear Andy, you must of missed this little diddy when you were growing up:
For want of a nail, the shoe was lost; For want of the shoe, the horse was lost; For want of the horse, the rider was lost; For want of the rider, the battle was lost; For want of the battle, the kingdom was lost; And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.
<< <i>Don't tell anyone here where to mail a check to to pay for Laura's new auctions either
Edited to add: Ken Potter has no problem with me posting his P.O. Box info & CLEARLY Billy has no dog in that hunt anymore regardless:
"My address is not P.O. Box 50428. I haven't had that P.O. Box for some 5 years now.
Ken Potter knows my mailing address is 239 Barbara Drive, Ladson, SC. He has sent me correspondence many times in the past way before this auction ....
Plus, 239 Barbara Drive is the address that I sent him on my e-mail notification to him ...
plus, 239 Barbara Drive is the address that I told him on the phone,
plus, 239 Barbara Drive is the address that is on the automatic e-mails that ebay sent to him and me when the auction ended July 14th." >>
Roger, Thanks for bringing me up to date! I went in to look and see what Billy is alluding to. Billy is way off on what he is trying to imply in the thread. He is trying to make it look like I ignored paying him when the fact is I had 40 coins (2005-P&D Minnesota doubled die quarters) he wanted to shoot images of and list for inclusion in the next issue of his online magazine, Die Variety News. I simply suggested (and he agreed) that when all was ready with those coins (that he knew I had to attribute with Die#s, owner's names, dates of submission, etc., photograph and write up for Numismatic News first) that I'd include the check for the coin I won along with the coins he wanted to shoot. It had nothing to do with a time limit that would be "typical" for an eBay transaction between two parties that usually do not know each other. It had to do with two longtime friends and a casual agreement to make it more convenient for both of us; I would sent the check at the same time as I sent the coins and he could send the coin I won back at the same time he returned some of those coins to me (others were to go elsewhere). I even included the postage (and more than he asked for) even though it could have rode for free with the items he needed to return! There was nothing more or less to our understanding. It had nothing to do with "making" Billy wait as he alludes to. Who would ever think that Billy -- who I thought was a longtime friend and associate -- would get all bent out of shape on the attributions, photos and write-ups I had to do for all the coins before shipping them to him -- taking several weeks? I did not need his services whatsoever! I was trying to do him a favor, upon his request, by getting the coins to him first so he could get his own photos and story for his magazine. I spent considerable time communicating with the owners of the coins to get permission to send them on to Billy (and to other attributers in a round robin style) to benefit him and all. I thought that at least several weeks was implied and it was crystal clear that he agreed. He also knew it was taking longer than either of us expected due to additional coins coming in beyond what we expected in the beginning for this continuing story and we touched base on this just a few weeks ago with no indications that he was growing impatient or didn't understand the situation when we talked on this last. If Billy wanted to be paid right away or decided later he needed to be paid sooner than later, all he had to do was indicate his desire to get paid sooner and a check would have gone out the same or next day! This is the way I pay for all auctions (in fact I pay most within seconds of auction end where PayPal is accepted)! The only exception here was that it seemed it was going to make it easier for both of us to wait. It should have been that simple but instead he said nothing about his change in position and decided to leave me a negative without any communication whatsoever. In fact, on the day I sent the check (9/6/06) to him, I gave him a courtesy call on my cell phone and told him I was just a few blocks away from the post office and that I was mailing the coins, some error tokens he wanted to see, and the check for the coin I won so that he'd have a heads-up on the fact they were on the way. Billy, knew full well they were in the mail but never bothered to let me know that they never arrived. He would lead you to believe he was more concerned about his $25 than the $3000.00 worth of a dozen or more folk's coins that were on the way to him! His statement on the Boards implying that I sent the coins to his old address on purpose is ludicrous! Why would I do that!!?? Can he really think I really wanted a package to sit in a post office for weeks while the owners of the coins are asking how much longer it is going to take for me to get them back? Does he really think I want to spend $12.05 on postage and insurance for a package that is just going to come back to me and I'll have to resend at like cost again? Yes! I was picking up the tab for shipping the coins to Billy so that he could add them to his files and get them into his magazine with absolutely no benefit to me! He did send an eBay invoice for the coin I won and I'm sure the address there was correct, but I had no reason to think the address I had on file was incorrect. He indicates he had given me a correct address in the past and I'm sure he did but it was not what I had on file and what I did have on file I had no reason to question. After all, as far as I knew it was "corrected" long ago. In this respect it was my mistake, but an honest one -- a mistake anybody could have made. You may doubt some folks when they say "it's in the mail" but I've been in the mail order coin business for 33 years and EVERYBODY that knows me, knows that when I say it is in the mail -- it's in the mail. Anybody that says different -- doesn't know me. Since Billy knew the coins and check were on the way he should have communicated with me to let me know they never arrived after a reasonable time. Why would he just assume I had a change of heart and decided not to send the package at the last moment? Why wouldn't he at least consider that maybe the package was lost or delayed and communicate with me on this? Instead, he leaves a negative along with a statement that alludes to something completely different from what our agreement was! If Billy, is upset about the 2005 Minnesota quarters not getting to him in time for his next issue of Die Variety News, I am certainly sorry about the mistake in shipping and I'm sorry that he missed his deadline. But getting so upset about such a problem (which I'm 110% sure this is all about) is not going to help the package get there and negative feedback for an unrelated issue where it was clear neither of us had a prior concern about a speedily payment -- is inappropriate. This displaced anger is similar to a person standing in a long line at a grocery store getting angry at a cashier because the price of milk went up a nickel. Some claim my neg to him was retaliatory but in reality it just gives me a bit of leverage to get Billy to agree to the mutual removal of a negative that should have never been left in the first place. It is a very sad situation but I view him as not being so trustworthy anymore so very unfortunately I had to make that move. In fact, his displaced anger resulting in giving a negative for inappropriate reasons is suggestive of him actually deserving it as I did absolutely nothing wrong. Everything I did was completely in line with our agreement. What I did do was try to do him a favor and in the process made an honest mistake in addressing a package. I got a negative in return without any prior communication from him. If he had time to go the PCGS Boards in an attempt to smear my name, why didn't he have the time to communicate with me, man to man? He certainly had the time to communicate with me a week ago when I asked for some comments to be included in my latest Coin World and Numismatic News articles on the discovery of the 2005-P Oregon quarter doubled die (which gave him some positive exposure) but no time to communicate with a longtime friend before leaving a negative for a check not arriving that he knew was mailed long ago? It's clear there is much more going on here than meets the casual eye! At this point I just hope Billy can recognize that we both made a mistake; I in addressing a package wrong and him jumping the gun in believing that something other than an honest mistake occurred. I'd hope we can shake hands and walk away from this as friends. Sincerely yours, Ken Potter PS: To those who suggested "Royalty," "Rich Dealer", etc., in reference to me, let it be known that I am far from rich, live in a small home in a working-class neighborhood, drive a 2000 Durango and work in a factory 40 hours a week as an Inspector (25 years prior as a press operator/assembly worker) and enjoy selling a few coins and writing about the hobby I enjoy.
Those of us that DO know you knew it couldn't have POSSIBLY been anything worse than an honest miscommunication &/or mistake.
"If Billy, is upset about the 2005 Minnesota quarters not getting to him in time for his next issue of Die Variety News, I am certainly sorry about the mistake in shipping and I'm sorry that he missed his deadline. But getting so upset about such a problem (which I'm 110% sure this is all about)...
...It's clear there is much more going on here than meets the casual eye!"
I told you guys Billy had an agenda and something OTHER than the $22 ticked him off!
p.s. I STILL think that he can go to the P.O. that has the package & pick it up.
I’m not one for saying, “I told you so!” But after reading Koinpro’s post, it makes me think.
<< Send him a reminder tell him you are going to relist the item if payment is not received by__Date_______ If he does not follow through then neg with buyer did not follow up on sale. >>
<< <i>I would agree with this plus file a complaint with eBay. >>
If a reminder had been sent, you would have know that the package was overdue and steps could have been taken to track it down.
Well, I read most of the thread and wanted to read the follow-up from Ken, but, I got about 2 sentences in and my eyes hurt (not even trying to be funny here) and stopped reading.
Ken/Koinpro, please learn what spacing, the return key, and paragraphs are for. Everything jumbled together makes it hard to read.
<< <i>Roger, Thanks for bringing me up to date! I went in to look and see what Billy is alluding to. Billy is way off on what he is trying to imply in the thread. He is trying to make it look like I ignored paying him when the fact is I had 40 coins (2005-P&D Minnesota doubled die quarters) he wanted to shoot images of and list for inclusion in the next issue of his online magazine, Die Variety News. I simply suggested (and he agreed) that when all was ready with those coins (that he knew I had to attribute with Die#s, owner's names, dates of submission, etc., photograph and write up for Numismatic News first) that I'd include the check for the coin I won along with the coins he wanted to shoot. It had nothing to do with a time limit that would be "typical" for an eBay transaction between two parties that usually do not know each other. It had to do with two longtime friends and a casual agreement to make it more convenient for both of us; I would sent the check at the same time as I sent the coins and he could send the coin I won back at the same time he returned some of those coins to me (others were to go elsewhere). I even included the postage (and more than he asked for) even though it could have rode for free with the items he needed to return! There was nothing more or less to our understanding. It had nothing to do with "making" Billy wait as he alludes to. Who would ever think that Billy -- who I thought was a longtime friend and associate -- would get all bent out of shape on the attributions, photos and write-ups I had to do for all the coins before shipping them to him -- taking several weeks? I did not need his services whatsoever! I was trying to do him a favor, upon his request, by getting the coins to him first so he could get his own photos and story for his magazine. I spent considerable time communicating with the owners of the coins to get permission to send them on to Billy (and to other attributers in a round robin style) to benefit him and all. I thought that at least several weeks was implied and it was crystal clear that he agreed. He also knew it was taking longer than either of us expected due to additional coins coming in beyond what we expected in the beginning for this continuing story and we touched base on this just a few weeks ago with no indications that he was growing impatient or didn't understand the situation when we talked on this last. If Billy wanted to be paid right away or decided later he needed to be paid sooner than later, all he had to do was indicate his desire to get paid sooner and a check would have gone out the same or next day! This is the way I pay for all auctions (in fact I pay most within seconds of auction end where PayPal is accepted)! The only exception here was that it seemed it was going to make it easier for both of us to wait. It should have been that simple but instead he said nothing about his change in position and decided to leave me a negative without any communication whatsoever. In fact, on the day I sent the check (9/6/06) to him, I gave him a courtesy call on my cell phone and told him I was just a few blocks away from the post office and that I was mailing the coins, some error tokens he wanted to see, and the check for the coin I won so that he'd have a heads-up on the fact they were on the way. Billy, knew full well they were in the mail but never bothered to let me know that they never arrived. He would lead you to believe he was more concerned about his $25 than the $3000.00 worth of a dozen or more folk's coins that were on the way to him! His statement on the Boards implying that I sent the coins to his old address on purpose is ludicrous! Why would I do that!!?? Can he really think I really wanted a package to sit in a post office for weeks while the owners of the coins are asking how much longer it is going to take for me to get them back? Does he really think I want to spend $12.05 on postage and insurance for a package that is just going to come back to me and I'll have to resend at like cost again? Yes! I was picking up the tab for shipping the coins to Billy so that he could add them to his files and get them into his magazine with absolutely no benefit to me! He did send an eBay invoice for the coin I won and I'm sure the address there was correct, but I had no reason to think the address I had on file was incorrect. He indicates he had given me a correct address in the past and I'm sure he did but it was not what I had on file and what I did have on file I had no reason to question. After all, as far as I knew it was "corrected" long ago. In this respect it was my mistake, but an honest one -- a mistake anybody could have made. You may doubt some folks when they say "it's in the mail" but I've been in the mail order coin business for 33 years and EVERYBODY that knows me, knows that when I say it is in the mail -- it's in the mail. Anybody that says different -- doesn't know me. Since Billy knew the coins and check were on the way he should have communicated with me to let me know they never arrived after a reasonable time. Why would he just assume I had a change of heart and decided not to send the package at the last moment? Why wouldn't he at least consider that maybe the package was lost or delayed and communicate with me on this? Instead, he leaves a negative along with a statement that alludes to something completely different from what our agreement was! If Billy, is upset about the 2005 Minnesota quarters not getting to him in time for his next issue of Die Variety News, I am certainly sorry about the mistake in shipping and I'm sorry that he missed his deadline. But getting so upset about such a problem (which I'm 110% sure this is all about) is not going to help the package get there and negative feedback for an unrelated issue where it was clear neither of us had a prior concern about a speedily payment -- is inappropriate. This displaced anger is similar to a person standing in a long line at a grocery store getting angry at a cashier because the price of milk went up a nickel. Some claim my neg to him was retaliatory but in reality it just gives me a bit of leverage to get Billy to agree to the mutual removal of a negative that should have never been left in the first place. It is a very sad situation but I view him as not being so trustworthy anymore so very unfortunately I had to make that move. In fact, his displaced anger resulting in giving a negative for inappropriate reasons is suggestive of him actually deserving it as I did absolutely nothing wrong. Everything I did was completely in line with our agreement. What I did do was try to do him a favor and in the process made an honest mistake in addressing a package. I got a negative in return without any prior communication from him. If he had time to go the PCGS Boards in an attempt to smear my name, why didn't he have the time to communicate with me, man to man? He certainly had the time to communicate with me a week ago when I asked for some comments to be included in my latest Coin World and Numismatic News articles on the discovery of the 2005-P Oregon quarter doubled die (which gave him some positive exposure) but no time to communicate with a longtime friend before leaving a negative for a check not arriving that he knew was mailed long ago? It's clear there is much more going on here than meets the casual eye! At this point I just hope Billy can recognize that we both made a mistake; I in addressing a package wrong and him jumping the gun in believing that something other than an honest mistake occurred. I'd hope we can shake hands and walk away from this as friends. Sincerely yours, Ken Potter PS: To those who suggested "Royalty," "Rich Dealer", etc., in reference to me, let it be known that I am far from rich, live in a small home in a working-class neighborhood, drive a 2000 Durango and work in a factory 40 hours a week as an Inspector (25 years prior as a press operator/assembly worker) and enjoy selling a few coins and writing about the hobby I enjoy. >>
Ken,
You have your phone conversations mixed up. In the latest conversation (Sep 6th) you never told me you were sending a package to me. Think about this for a second: If, and you didn't, but if you had told me you were sending a package to me, especially a registered package, then I would have e-mailed you to let you know I have not received the package. That way we could both check to see what might have gone wrong. I would guess we both would quickly figure out the wrong address was used. The first time I even realized you had sent a registered package was last night from a scan of the form and I noticed it had the wrong mailing address.
Your getting confused with what you said on the initial phone conversation when the first Minnesota DDRs were getting started to specifically ask me my correct mailing address for which I told you to use the home address and not the PO Box one. That was the main reason you called me -- and that's why you specifically asked for my correct mailing address because you told me you were sending the MN DDRs along with some tokens and the payment for the auction and that when I was done to forward to JW. It is this initial conversation your twisting with the Sep 6th phone conversation in which you talked about the Oregon DDR.
I even e-mailed you out of concern about that package and this is when you stated about the being busy stuff and you hadn't mailed it yet. You also even sent another e-mail out to the group about using consistent die numbers and you mentioned in that e-mail you hadn't sent out the package to Billy yet.
Your thinking that I was upset because I didn't get an opportunity to publish any of the MN DDRs in my Sep/Oct DVN magazine again, is just another example of many, of your twisting and confusing things. That is 100% totally not true Ken. I told you that I wasn't even going to mention anything about the MN DDRs in the Sep/Oct issue so you could rightfully so have the first publishing of them in the media press. I went on to say to you that I would mention about them in the much later Nov/Dec issue. This would afford you plenty of time to do your articles for NN and/or CW.
Ken, you have conveniently twisted things around so as to try and shift blame.
he has enough time to all of a sudden draft a HUGE email rebuttal but didn't have time for at least 6 Weeks (by his own admission on the Negative) to write a few letters on a check and envelope.
he has enough time to all of a sudden draft a HUGE email rebuttal but didn't have time for at least 6 Weeks (by his own admission on the Negative) to write a few letters on a check and envelope. >>
I will not likely be available later today for the 300th post, so would you please select someone worthy of the honors, with my most sincere compliments.
<< <i>Well, I read most of the thread and wanted to read the follow-up from Ken, but, I got about 2 sentences in and my eyes hurt (not even trying to be funny here) and stopped reading.
Ken/Koinpro, please learn what spacing, the return key, and paragraphs are for. Everything jumbled together makes it hard to read. >>
And that guy writes for a publication? Here's to editors I guess.
Billy, I do not have any phone conversations mixed up. I know what I said about sending them out and when I said it. I called you and told you in no uncertain terms they were on the way, saying the Minn quarters, the tokens and the check were shipping as soon as I got the the post office that I was on the way to. I remember the conversation well and having the package right next to me which is what gave me the idea to call in the first place. I told you all of this on the 6th -- the day I shipped it, while I was just a few blocks (maybe a half mile) away from the post office. I never said anything sooner about not hearing from you as I did not want to push it. I figured it was going to take some time. I can't say where you were when this conversation went on. I may have had a dropped call that day on the cell phone and talked to you for a few minuetes before realizing the call was dropped and having to call you back. It is hard to say as anybody using a cell phone gets dropped calls and doesn't always know exactly how much the other party heard or didn't hear. From what I remember, there was no reason for me to suspect you did not hear it all but if you are saying you didn't maybe there was a dropped call and I called back on continued where I thought we left off. That is the ONLY possiblity of you not hearing that part of my message unless I woke you up and my conversation wasn't not registering until you woke up fully. On your using material in DVN and me thinking you were upset for not getting it yet -- I'm not twisting -- I just couldn't figure out any other reason for you to have not communicated with me on the package or auction and just out of the blue leaving a negative for an issue that we had already agree on. It is also odd that you'd go into the PCGS message boards to sling mud at a supposed friend without at least trying to find out what went wrong. Is this what friends do? I'm spending money and sending you 40 coins at my expense so you can include them in your magazine and this is how you thank me? Billy, you never once suggested that waiting until the package arrived to get paid for a $25 item was anything but OK. It was supposed to make a small bit of trouble a bit easier for BOTH of us. You did experess a concern about your consignor and wanting to know if you should send him back the coin but after I told you that I wanted it and to consider anything I bid on as sold you approved. It was strage that I even had to tell you that as you had already agreed earlier that I'd send the check with the coins. My email to the attributers about using consistent die numbers and that I hadn't sent out the package to you yet was before this conversation when I called to tell you they were being shipped. The postmark on the Registered Mail slip confirms the date it was shipped I guess we will have to agree to disagree if it puts closure to the problem. Sincerely, Ken
<< <i>
<< <i>Roger, Thanks for bringing me up to date! I went in to look and see what Billy is alluding to. Billy is way off on what he is trying to imply in the thread. He is trying to make it look like I ignored paying him when the fact is I had 40 coins (2005-P&D Minnesota doubled die quarters) he wanted to shoot images of and list for inclusion in the next issue of his online magazine, Die Variety News. I simply suggested (and he agreed) that when all was ready with those coins (that he knew I had to attribute with Die#s, owner's names, dates of submission, etc., photograph and write up for Numismatic News first) that I'd include the check for the coin I won along with the coins he wanted to shoot. It had nothing to do with a time limit that would be "typical" for an eBay transaction between two parties that usually do not know each other. It had to do with two longtime friends and a casual agreement to make it more convenient for both of us; I would sent the check at the same time as I sent the coins and he could send the coin I won back at the same time he returned some of those coins to me (others were to go elsewhere). I even included the postage (and more than he asked for) even though it could have rode for free with the items he needed to return! There was nothing more or less to our understanding. It had nothing to do with "making" Billy wait as he alludes to. Who would ever think that Billy -- who I thought was a longtime friend and associate -- would get all bent out of shape on the attributions, photos and write-ups I had to do for all the coins before shipping them to him -- taking several weeks? I did not need his services whatsoever! I was trying to do him a favor, upon his request, by getting the coins to him first so he could get his own photos and story for his magazine. I spent considerable time communicating with the owners of the coins to get permission to send them on to Billy (and to other attributers in a round robin style) to benefit him and all. I thought that at least several weeks was implied and it was crystal clear that he agreed. He also knew it was taking longer than either of us expected due to additional coins coming in beyond what we expected in the beginning for this continuing story and we touched base on this just a few weeks ago with no indications that he was growing impatient or didn't understand the situation when we talked on this last. If Billy wanted to be paid right away or decided later he needed to be paid sooner than later, all he had to do was indicate his desire to get paid sooner and a check would have gone out the same or next day! This is the way I pay for all auctions (in fact I pay most within seconds of auction end where PayPal is accepted)! The only exception here was that it seemed it was going to make it easier for both of us to wait. It should have been that simple but instead he said nothing about his change in position and decided to leave me a negative without any communication whatsoever. In fact, on the day I sent the check (9/6/06) to him, I gave him a courtesy call on my cell phone and told him I was just a few blocks away from the post office and that I was mailing the coins, some error tokens he wanted to see, and the check for the coin I won so that he'd have a heads-up on the fact they were on the way. Billy, knew full well they were in the mail but never bothered to let me know that they never arrived. He would lead you to believe he was more concerned about his $25 than the $3000.00 worth of a dozen or more folk's coins that were on the way to him! His statement on the Boards implying that I sent the coins to his old address on purpose is ludicrous! Why would I do that!!?? Can he really think I really wanted a package to sit in a post office for weeks while the owners of the coins are asking how much longer it is going to take for me to get them back? Does he really think I want to spend $12.05 on postage and insurance for a package that is just going to come back to me and I'll have to resend at like cost again? Yes! I was picking up the tab for shipping the coins to Billy so that he could add them to his files and get them into his magazine with absolutely no benefit to me! He did send an eBay invoice for the coin I won and I'm sure the address there was correct, but I had no reason to think the address I had on file was incorrect. He indicates he had given me a correct address in the past and I'm sure he did but it was not what I had on file and what I did have on file I had no reason to question. After all, as far as I knew it was "corrected" long ago. In this respect it was my mistake, but an honest one -- a mistake anybody could have made. You may doubt some folks when they say "it's in the mail" but I've been in the mail order coin business for 33 years and EVERYBODY that knows me, knows that when I say it is in the mail -- it's in the mail. Anybody that says different -- doesn't know me. Since Billy knew the coins and check were on the way he should have communicated with me to let me know they never arrived after a reasonable time. Why would he just assume I had a change of heart and decided not to send the package at the last moment? Why wouldn't he at least consider that maybe the package was lost or delayed and communicate with me on this? Instead, he leaves a negative along with a statement that alludes to something completely different from what our agreement was! If Billy, is upset about the 2005 Minnesota quarters not getting to him in time for his next issue of Die Variety News, I am certainly sorry about the mistake in shipping and I'm sorry that he missed his deadline. But getting so upset about such a problem (which I'm 110% sure this is all about) is not going to help the package get there and negative feedback for an unrelated issue where it was clear neither of us had a prior concern about a speedily payment -- is inappropriate. This displaced anger is similar to a person standing in a long line at a grocery store getting angry at a cashier because the price of milk went up a nickel. Some claim my neg to him was retaliatory but in reality it just gives me a bit of leverage to get Billy to agree to the mutual removal of a negative that should have never been left in the first place. It is a very sad situation but I view him as not being so trustworthy anymore so very unfortunately I had to make that move. In fact, his displaced anger resulting in giving a negative for inappropriate reasons is suggestive of him actually deserving it as I did absolutely nothing wrong. Everything I did was completely in line with our agreement. What I did do was try to do him a favor and in the process made an honest mistake in addressing a package. I got a negative in return without any prior communication from him. If he had time to go the PCGS Boards in an attempt to smear my name, why didn't he have the time to communicate with me, man to man? He certainly had the time to communicate with me a week ago when I asked for some comments to be included in my latest Coin World and Numismatic News articles on the discovery of the 2005-P Oregon quarter doubled die (which gave him some positive exposure) but no time to communicate with a longtime friend before leaving a negative for a check not arriving that he knew was mailed long ago? It's clear there is much more going on here than meets the casual eye! At this point I just hope Billy can recognize that we both made a mistake; I in addressing a package wrong and him jumping the gun in believing that something other than an honest mistake occurred. I'd hope we can shake hands and walk away from this as friends. Sincerely yours, Ken Potter PS: To those who suggested "Royalty," "Rich Dealer", etc., in reference to me, let it be known that I am far from rich, live in a small home in a working-class neighborhood, drive a 2000 Durango and work in a factory 40 hours a week as an Inspector (25 years prior as a press operator/assembly worker) and enjoy selling a few coins and writing about the hobby I enjoy. >>
Ken,
You have your phone conversations mixed up. In the latest conversation (Sep 6th) you never told me you were sending a package to me. Think about this for a second: If, and you didn't, but if you had told me you were sending a package to me, especially a registered package, then I would have e-mailed you to let you know I have not received the package. That way we could both check to see what might have gone wrong. I would guess we both would quickly figure out the wrong address was used. The first time I even realized you had sent a registered package was last night from a scan of the form and I noticed it had the wrong mailing address.
Your getting confused with what you said on the initial phone conversation when the first Minnesota DDRs were getting started to specifically ask me my correct mailing address for which I told you to use the home address and not the PO Box one. That was the main reason you called me -- and that's why you specifically asked for my correct mailing address because you told me you were sending the MN DDRs along with some tokens and the payment for the auction and that when I was done to forward to JW. It is this initial conversation your twisting with the Sep 6th phone conversation in which you talked about the Oregon DDR.
I even e-mailed you out of concern about that package and this is when you stated about the being busy stuff and you hadn't mailed it yet. You also even sent another e-mail out to the group about using consistent die numbers and you mentioned in that e-mail you hadn't sent out the package to Billy yet.
Your thinking that I was upset because I didn't get an opportunity to publish any of the MN DDRs in my Sep/Oct DVN magazine again, is just another example of many, of your twisting and confusing things. That is 100% totally not true Ken. I told you that I wasn't even going to mention anything about the MN DDRs in the Sep/Oct issue so you could rightfully so have the first publishing of them in the media press. I went on to say to you that I would mention about them in the much later Nov/Dec issue. This would afford you plenty of time to do your articles for NN and/or CW.
Ken, you have conveniently twisted things around so as to try and shift blame.
he has enough time to all of a sudden draft a HUGE email rebuttal but didn't have time for at least 6 Weeks (by his own admission on the Negative) to write a few letters on a check and envelope >>
he has enough time to all of a sudden draft a HUGE email rebuttal but didn't have time for at least 6 Weeks (by his own admission on the Negative) to write a few letters on a check and envelope >>
he has enough time to all of a sudden draft a HUGE email rebuttal but didn't have time for at least 6 Weeks (by his own admission on the Negative) to write a few letters on a check and envelope >>
I do not know Billy personally so I cannot comment on him. On the other hand, I can say is Ken is a very polite and hosent individual because I had dealt with him before. I sent him couple emails few months ago for his opinion. Ken would always reply in a very detailed and poite manner without asking for any reward. I had never purchased anything from him nor he had received any benefit from me.
I just hope the both Ken and Billy can resolve this issue offline.
We are not here to make any judgement since we do not know the story behind it.
It is just like noone will buy a slab coin labeled "MS70" without seeing the coin or the image.
New PGCS collector - still learning from all other fellow collectors.
Comments
<< <i>In another post, someone said that Ken sent a bunch of coins to be attributed by Billy. This does not prove he sent the check. And he would surely not insure a check for $22.00 for a value of $3000.
Probably better to say: ALTHOUGH this does not prove he sent the check, he would surely not insure a check for $22.00 for a value of $3000.
GREAT POINT!!! I guess gold ole Billy won't be getting THAT business anymore.
Opportunity coppercoin. >>
What is this "opportunity coppercoin" about?
I have received no notice of a package. Ken has known my correct mailing address.
I'm not going to baby-sit when KP full well knows my current mailing address and when were talking about an auction that is over 2 months ended. Not just a couple of weeks ago.
<< <i>
<< <i>and now I have to flush this entire thread because people are not thinking clearly by posting the home addresses of dealers/collectors. This is the internet people! >>
Well if he posts his own address, then all bets are off.
Forum AdministratorPSA & PSA/DNA ForumModerator@collectors.com | p 800.325.1121 | PSAcard.com
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>and now I have to flush this entire thread because people are not thinking clearly by posting the home addresses of dealers/collectors. This is the internet people! >>
Well if he posts his own address, then all bets are off. >>
Dang... I thought we'd go back to coins...
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>I'm getting dizzzzyyyyyyy. >>
Hey, someone posts your home address, I'm going to be all over them and it's going to vanish. If you publish it yourself, then my friend, you are on your own.
Forum AdministratorPSA & PSA/DNA ForumModerator@collectors.com | p 800.325.1121 | PSAcard.com
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm getting dizzzzyyyyyyy. >>
Hey, someone posts your home address, I'm going to be all over them and it's going to vanish. If you publish it yourself, then my friend, you are on your own. >>
But who is looking out for the stupid people?
Nice Houdini imitation SMOtis !
<< <i>It's time to blame this controversy on the defunct Open Forum. >>
No, it's Bush's fault.
I'm not sure. Let's take a look at the PCGS Mission Statement...
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>
<< <i>It's time to blame this controversy on the defunct Open Forum. >>
No, it's Bush's fault. >>
Well...yeah.
Enough time to look at the auction should mean they have enough time to spend/send the money for the auction.
-Daniel
-Aristotle
Dum loquimur fugerit invida aetas. Carpe diem quam minimum credula postero.
-Horace
<< <i>Please Billy, you're just a commoner. Please go away and eat your loss. Don't bother the high-and-mighty, those that have done a lot to, err.....I mean, for this hobby. >>
Are you serious? This comment is just wrong.
<< <i>
<< <i>Please Billy, you're just a commoner. Please go away and eat your loss. Don't bother the high-and-mighty, those that have done a lot to, err.....I mean, for this hobby. >>
Are you serious? This comment is just wrong. >>
I wish they 'd come up with a sarcasm emoticon. Sorry, MD, if you didn't get it.
K S
For want of a nail, the shoe was lost;
For want of the shoe, the horse was lost;
For want of the horse, the rider was lost;
For want of the rider, the battle was lost;
For want of the battle, the kingdom was lost;
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.
<< <i>Don't tell anyone here where to mail a check to to pay for Laura's new auctions either
Edited to add: Ken Potter has no problem with me posting his P.O. Box info & CLEARLY Billy has no dog in that hunt anymore regardless:
"My address is not P.O. Box 50428. I haven't had that P.O. Box for some 5 years now.
Ken Potter knows my mailing address is 239 Barbara Drive, Ladson, SC. He has sent me correspondence many times in the past way before this auction ....
Plus, 239 Barbara Drive is the address that I sent him on my e-mail notification to him ...
plus, 239 Barbara Drive is the address that I told him on the phone,
plus, 239 Barbara Drive is the address that is on the automatic e-mails that ebay sent to him and me when the auction ended July 14th." >>
Thanks for bringing me up to date! I went in to look and see what Billy is alluding to. Billy is way off on what he is trying to imply in the thread. He is trying to make it look like I ignored paying him when the fact is I had 40 coins (2005-P&D Minnesota doubled die quarters) he wanted to shoot images of and list for inclusion in the next issue of his online magazine, Die Variety News. I simply suggested (and he agreed) that when all was ready with those coins (that he knew I had to attribute with Die#s, owner's names, dates of submission, etc., photograph and write up for Numismatic News first) that I'd include the check for the coin I won along with the coins he wanted to shoot. It had nothing to do with a time limit that would be "typical" for an eBay transaction between two parties that usually do not know each other. It had to do with two longtime friends and a casual agreement to make it more convenient for both of us; I would sent the check at the same time as I sent the coins and he could send the coin I won back at the same time he returned some of those coins to me (others were to go elsewhere). I even included the postage (and more than he asked for) even though it could have rode for free with the items he needed to return! There was nothing more or less to our understanding. It had nothing to do with "making" Billy wait as he alludes to. Who would ever think that Billy -- who I thought was a longtime friend and associate -- would get all bent out of shape on the attributions, photos and write-ups I had to do for all the coins before shipping them to him -- taking several weeks? I did not need his services whatsoever! I was trying to do him a favor, upon his request, by getting the coins to him first so he could get his own photos and story for his magazine. I spent considerable time communicating with the owners of the coins to get permission to send them on to Billy (and to other attributers in a round robin style) to benefit him and all. I thought that at least several weeks was implied and it was crystal clear that he agreed. He also knew it was taking longer than either of us expected due to additional coins coming in beyond what we expected in the beginning for this continuing story and we touched base on this just a few weeks ago with no indications that he was growing impatient or didn't understand the situation when we talked on this last. If Billy wanted to be paid right away or decided later he needed to be paid sooner than later, all he had to do was indicate his desire to get paid sooner and a check would have gone out the same or next day! This is the way I pay for all auctions (in fact I pay most within seconds of auction end where PayPal is accepted)! The only exception here was that it seemed it was going to make it easier for both of us to wait. It should have been that simple but instead he said nothing about his change in position and decided to leave me a negative without any communication whatsoever.
In fact, on the day I sent the check (9/6/06) to him, I gave him a courtesy call on my cell phone and told him I was just a few blocks away from the post office and that I was mailing the coins, some error tokens he wanted to see, and the check for the coin I won so that he'd have a heads-up on the fact they were on the way. Billy, knew full well they were in the mail but never bothered to let me know that they never arrived. He would lead you to believe he was more concerned about his $25 than the $3000.00 worth of a dozen or more folk's coins that were on the way to him! His statement on the Boards implying that I sent the coins to his old address on purpose is ludicrous! Why would I do that!!?? Can he really think I really wanted a package to sit in a post office for weeks while the owners of the coins are asking how much longer it is going to take for me to get them back? Does he really think I want to spend $12.05 on postage and insurance for a package that is just going to come back to me and I'll have to resend at like cost again? Yes! I was picking up the tab for shipping the coins to Billy so that he could add them to his files and get them into his magazine with absolutely no benefit to me!
He did send an eBay invoice for the coin I won and I'm sure the address there was correct, but I had no reason to think the address I had on file was incorrect. He indicates he had given me a correct address in the past and I'm sure he did but it was not what I had on file and what I did have on file I had no reason to question. After all, as far as I knew it was "corrected" long ago. In this respect it was my mistake, but an honest one -- a mistake anybody could have made. You may doubt some folks when they say "it's in the mail" but I've been in the mail order coin business for 33 years and EVERYBODY that knows me, knows that when I say it is in the mail -- it's in the mail. Anybody that says different -- doesn't know me. Since Billy knew the coins and check were on the way he should have communicated with me to let me know they never arrived after a reasonable time. Why would he just assume I had a change of heart and decided not to send the package at the last moment? Why wouldn't he at least consider that maybe the package was lost or delayed and communicate with me on this? Instead, he leaves a negative along with a statement that alludes to something completely different from what our agreement was!
If Billy, is upset about the 2005 Minnesota quarters not getting to him in time for his next issue of Die Variety News, I am certainly sorry about the mistake in shipping and I'm sorry that he missed his deadline. But getting so upset about such a problem (which I'm 110% sure this is all about) is not going to help the package get there and negative feedback for an unrelated issue where it was clear neither of us had a prior concern about a speedily payment -- is inappropriate. This displaced anger is similar to a person standing in a long line at a grocery store getting angry at a cashier because the price of milk went up a nickel.
Some claim my neg to him was retaliatory but in reality it just gives me a bit of leverage to get Billy to agree to the mutual removal of a negative that should have never been left in the first place. It is a very sad situation but I view him as not being so trustworthy anymore so very unfortunately I had to make that move. In fact, his displaced anger resulting in giving a negative for inappropriate reasons is suggestive of him actually deserving it as I did absolutely nothing wrong. Everything I did was completely in line with our agreement. What I did do was try to do him a favor and in the process made an honest mistake in addressing a package. I got a negative in return without any prior communication from him. If he had time to go the PCGS Boards in an attempt to smear my name, why didn't he have the time to communicate with me, man to man? He certainly had the time to communicate with me a week ago when I asked for some comments to be included in my latest Coin World and Numismatic News articles on the discovery of the 2005-P Oregon quarter doubled die (which gave him some positive exposure) but no time to communicate with a longtime friend before leaving a negative for a check not arriving that he knew was mailed long ago? It's clear there is much more going on here than meets the casual eye!
At this point I just hope Billy can recognize that we both made a mistake; I in addressing a package wrong and him jumping the gun in believing that something other than an honest mistake occurred. I'd hope we can shake hands and walk away from this as friends. Sincerely yours,
Ken Potter
PS: To those who suggested "Royalty," "Rich Dealer", etc., in reference to me, let it be known that I am far from rich, live in a small home in a working-class neighborhood, drive a 2000 Durango and work in a factory 40 hours a week as an Inspector (25 years prior as a press operator/assembly worker) and enjoy selling a few coins and writing about the hobby I enjoy.
Ken,
Those of us that DO know you knew it couldn't have POSSIBLY been anything worse than an honest miscommunication &/or mistake.
"If Billy, is upset about the 2005 Minnesota quarters not getting to him in time for his next issue of Die Variety News, I am certainly sorry about the mistake in shipping and I'm sorry that he missed his deadline. But getting so upset about such a problem (which I'm 110% sure this is all about)...
...It's clear there is much more going on here than meets the casual eye!"
I told you guys Billy had an agenda and something OTHER than the $22 ticked him off!
p.s. I STILL think that he can go to the P.O. that has the package & pick it up.
Glad to see this is now cleared-up.
2K
8 Reales Madness Collection
<< Send him a reminder tell him you are going to relist the item if payment is not received by__Date_______ If he does not follow through then neg with buyer did not follow up on sale. >>
<< <i>I would agree with this plus file a complaint with eBay.
If a reminder had been sent, you would have know that the package was overdue and steps could have been taken to track it down.
Ken/Koinpro, please learn what spacing, the return key, and paragraphs are for. Everything jumbled together makes it hard to read.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>Roger,
Thanks for bringing me up to date! I went in to look and see what Billy is alluding to. Billy is way off on what he is trying to imply in the thread. He is trying to make it look like I ignored paying him when the fact is I had 40 coins (2005-P&D Minnesota doubled die quarters) he wanted to shoot images of and list for inclusion in the next issue of his online magazine, Die Variety News. I simply suggested (and he agreed) that when all was ready with those coins (that he knew I had to attribute with Die#s, owner's names, dates of submission, etc., photograph and write up for Numismatic News first) that I'd include the check for the coin I won along with the coins he wanted to shoot. It had nothing to do with a time limit that would be "typical" for an eBay transaction between two parties that usually do not know each other. It had to do with two longtime friends and a casual agreement to make it more convenient for both of us; I would sent the check at the same time as I sent the coins and he could send the coin I won back at the same time he returned some of those coins to me (others were to go elsewhere). I even included the postage (and more than he asked for) even though it could have rode for free with the items he needed to return! There was nothing more or less to our understanding. It had nothing to do with "making" Billy wait as he alludes to. Who would ever think that Billy -- who I thought was a longtime friend and associate -- would get all bent out of shape on the attributions, photos and write-ups I had to do for all the coins before shipping them to him -- taking several weeks? I did not need his services whatsoever! I was trying to do him a favor, upon his request, by getting the coins to him first so he could get his own photos and story for his magazine. I spent considerable time communicating with the owners of the coins to get permission to send them on to Billy (and to other attributers in a round robin style) to benefit him and all. I thought that at least several weeks was implied and it was crystal clear that he agreed. He also knew it was taking longer than either of us expected due to additional coins coming in beyond what we expected in the beginning for this continuing story and we touched base on this just a few weeks ago with no indications that he was growing impatient or didn't understand the situation when we talked on this last. If Billy wanted to be paid right away or decided later he needed to be paid sooner than later, all he had to do was indicate his desire to get paid sooner and a check would have gone out the same or next day! This is the way I pay for all auctions (in fact I pay most within seconds of auction end where PayPal is accepted)! The only exception here was that it seemed it was going to make it easier for both of us to wait. It should have been that simple but instead he said nothing about his change in position and decided to leave me a negative without any communication whatsoever.
In fact, on the day I sent the check (9/6/06) to him, I gave him a courtesy call on my cell phone and told him I was just a few blocks away from the post office and that I was mailing the coins, some error tokens he wanted to see, and the check for the coin I won so that he'd have a heads-up on the fact they were on the way. Billy, knew full well they were in the mail but never bothered to let me know that they never arrived. He would lead you to believe he was more concerned about his $25 than the $3000.00 worth of a dozen or more folk's coins that were on the way to him! His statement on the Boards implying that I sent the coins to his old address on purpose is ludicrous! Why would I do that!!?? Can he really think I really wanted a package to sit in a post office for weeks while the owners of the coins are asking how much longer it is going to take for me to get them back? Does he really think I want to spend $12.05 on postage and insurance for a package that is just going to come back to me and I'll have to resend at like cost again? Yes! I was picking up the tab for shipping the coins to Billy so that he could add them to his files and get them into his magazine with absolutely no benefit to me!
He did send an eBay invoice for the coin I won and I'm sure the address there was correct, but I had no reason to think the address I had on file was incorrect. He indicates he had given me a correct address in the past and I'm sure he did but it was not what I had on file and what I did have on file I had no reason to question. After all, as far as I knew it was "corrected" long ago. In this respect it was my mistake, but an honest one -- a mistake anybody could have made. You may doubt some folks when they say "it's in the mail" but I've been in the mail order coin business for 33 years and EVERYBODY that knows me, knows that when I say it is in the mail -- it's in the mail. Anybody that says different -- doesn't know me. Since Billy knew the coins and check were on the way he should have communicated with me to let me know they never arrived after a reasonable time. Why would he just assume I had a change of heart and decided not to send the package at the last moment? Why wouldn't he at least consider that maybe the package was lost or delayed and communicate with me on this? Instead, he leaves a negative along with a statement that alludes to something completely different from what our agreement was!
If Billy, is upset about the 2005 Minnesota quarters not getting to him in time for his next issue of Die Variety News, I am certainly sorry about the mistake in shipping and I'm sorry that he missed his deadline. But getting so upset about such a problem (which I'm 110% sure this is all about) is not going to help the package get there and negative feedback for an unrelated issue where it was clear neither of us had a prior concern about a speedily payment -- is inappropriate. This displaced anger is similar to a person standing in a long line at a grocery store getting angry at a cashier because the price of milk went up a nickel.
Some claim my neg to him was retaliatory but in reality it just gives me a bit of leverage to get Billy to agree to the mutual removal of a negative that should have never been left in the first place. It is a very sad situation but I view him as not being so trustworthy anymore so very unfortunately I had to make that move. In fact, his displaced anger resulting in giving a negative for inappropriate reasons is suggestive of him actually deserving it as I did absolutely nothing wrong. Everything I did was completely in line with our agreement. What I did do was try to do him a favor and in the process made an honest mistake in addressing a package. I got a negative in return without any prior communication from him. If he had time to go the PCGS Boards in an attempt to smear my name, why didn't he have the time to communicate with me, man to man? He certainly had the time to communicate with me a week ago when I asked for some comments to be included in my latest Coin World and Numismatic News articles on the discovery of the 2005-P Oregon quarter doubled die (which gave him some positive exposure) but no time to communicate with a longtime friend before leaving a negative for a check not arriving that he knew was mailed long ago? It's clear there is much more going on here than meets the casual eye!
At this point I just hope Billy can recognize that we both made a mistake; I in addressing a package wrong and him jumping the gun in believing that something other than an honest mistake occurred. I'd hope we can shake hands and walk away from this as friends. Sincerely yours,
Ken Potter
PS: To those who suggested "Royalty," "Rich Dealer", etc., in reference to me, let it be known that I am far from rich, live in a small home in a working-class neighborhood, drive a 2000 Durango and work in a factory 40 hours a week as an Inspector (25 years prior as a press operator/assembly worker) and enjoy selling a few coins and writing about the hobby I enjoy. >>
Ken,
You have your phone conversations mixed up. In the latest conversation (Sep 6th) you never told me you were sending a package to me. Think about this for a second: If, and you didn't, but if you had told me you were sending a package to me, especially a registered package, then I would have e-mailed you to let you know I have not received the package. That way we could both check to see what might have gone wrong. I would guess we both would quickly figure out the wrong address was used. The first time I even realized you had sent a registered package was last night from a scan of the form and I noticed it had the wrong mailing address.
Your getting confused with what you said on the initial phone conversation when the first Minnesota DDRs were getting started to specifically ask me my correct mailing address for which I told you to use the home address and not the PO Box one. That was the main reason you called me -- and that's why you specifically asked for my correct mailing address because you told me you were sending the MN DDRs along with some tokens and the payment for the auction and that when I was done to forward to JW. It is this initial conversation your twisting with the Sep 6th phone conversation in which you talked about the Oregon DDR.
I even e-mailed you out of concern about that package and this is when you stated about the being busy stuff and you hadn't mailed it yet. You also even sent another e-mail out to the group about using consistent die numbers and you mentioned in that e-mail you hadn't sent out the package to Billy yet.
Your thinking that I was upset because I didn't get an opportunity to publish any of the MN DDRs in my Sep/Oct DVN magazine again, is just another example of many, of your twisting and confusing things. That is 100% totally not true Ken. I told you that I wasn't even going to mention anything about the MN DDRs in the Sep/Oct issue so you could rightfully so have the first publishing of them in the media press. I went on to say to you that I would mention about them in the much later Nov/Dec issue. This would afford you plenty of time to do your articles for NN and/or CW.
Ken, you have conveniently twisted things around so as to try and shift blame.
This is going to be a we agree to disagree.
Billy
he has enough time to all of a sudden draft a HUGE email rebuttal but didn't have time for at least 6 Weeks (by his own admission on the Negative) to write a few letters on a check and envelope.
<< <i>Odd....
he has enough time to all of a sudden draft a HUGE email rebuttal but didn't have time for at least 6 Weeks (by his own admission on the Negative) to write a few letters on a check and envelope. >>
I will not likely be available later today for the 300th post, so would you please select someone worthy of the honors, with my most sincere compliments.
<< <i>Well, I read most of the thread and wanted to read the follow-up from Ken, but, I got about 2 sentences in and my eyes hurt (not even trying to be funny here) and stopped reading.
Ken/Koinpro, please learn what spacing, the return key, and paragraphs are for. Everything jumbled together makes it hard to read. >>
And that guy writes for a publication? Here's to editors I guess.
your avatar is offensive.
i am truly shocked the dark forum overlords would allow such perversion.
this is the kind of behavior one would expect to find in the open forum (r.i.p.)
i love it.
hi, i'm tom.
i do not doctor coins like some who post in here.
<< <i>ER...
your avatar is offensive.
i am truly shocked the dark forum overlords would allow such perversion.
this is the kind of behavior one would expect to find in the open forum (r.i.p.)
i love it. >>
I do apologize, but my profile function is broken.
hi, i'm tom.
i do not doctor coins like some who post in here.
<< <i>I do apologize, but my profile function is broken.
I'm surprised that the bed hasn't broke by now! Talk about stamina, Bob Doyle will be knocking on your door asking who your Doctor is.
<< <i>Billy,
Are you there dude? Is that giant sucking sound you leaving the building?
Your posts are proving that you are nothing but a low-class idiot.
1/2 Cents
U.S. Revenue Stamps
<< <i>"please give us a link to the auction ..."
Auction >>
Feedback says "Seller was paid by check sent out nearly two weeks ago! Says I did not pay?????"
Don't really know what to make of that.
Jonathan
I do not have any phone conversations mixed up. I know what I said about sending them out and when I said it. I called you and told you in no uncertain terms they were on the way, saying the Minn quarters, the tokens and the check were shipping as soon as I got the the post office that I was on the way to. I remember the conversation well and having the package right next to me which is what gave me the idea to call in the first place. I told you all of this on the 6th -- the day I shipped it, while I was just a few blocks (maybe a half mile) away from the post office. I never said anything sooner about not hearing from you as I did not want to push it. I figured it was going to take some time. I can't say where you were when this conversation went on. I may have had a dropped call that day on the cell phone and talked to you for a few minuetes before realizing the call was dropped and having to call you back. It is hard to say as anybody using a cell phone gets dropped calls and doesn't always know exactly how much the other party heard or didn't hear. From what I remember, there was no reason for me to suspect you did not hear it all but if you are saying you didn't maybe there was a dropped call and I called back on continued where I thought we left off. That is the ONLY possiblity of you not hearing that part of my message unless I woke you up and my conversation wasn't not registering until you woke up fully.
On your using material in DVN and me thinking you were upset for not getting it yet -- I'm not twisting -- I just couldn't figure out any other reason for you to have not communicated with me on the package or auction and just out of the blue leaving a negative for an issue that we had already agree on. It is also odd that you'd go into the PCGS message boards to sling mud at a supposed friend without at least trying to find out what went wrong. Is this what friends do? I'm spending money and sending you 40 coins at my expense so you can include them in your magazine and this is how you thank me? Billy, you never once suggested that waiting until the package arrived to get paid for a $25 item was anything but OK. It was supposed to make a small bit of trouble a bit easier for BOTH of us. You did experess a concern about your consignor and wanting to know if you should send him back the coin but after I told you that I wanted it and to consider anything I bid on as sold you approved. It was strage that I even had to tell you that as you had already agreed earlier that I'd send the check with the coins.
My email to the attributers about using consistent die numbers and that I hadn't sent out the package to you yet was before this conversation when I called to tell you they were being shipped. The postmark on the Registered Mail slip confirms the date it was shipped
I guess we will have to agree to disagree if it puts closure to the problem.
Sincerely,
Ken
<< <i>
<< <i>Roger,
Thanks for bringing me up to date! I went in to look and see what Billy is alluding to. Billy is way off on what he is trying to imply in the thread. He is trying to make it look like I ignored paying him when the fact is I had 40 coins (2005-P&D Minnesota doubled die quarters) he wanted to shoot images of and list for inclusion in the next issue of his online magazine, Die Variety News. I simply suggested (and he agreed) that when all was ready with those coins (that he knew I had to attribute with Die#s, owner's names, dates of submission, etc., photograph and write up for Numismatic News first) that I'd include the check for the coin I won along with the coins he wanted to shoot. It had nothing to do with a time limit that would be "typical" for an eBay transaction between two parties that usually do not know each other. It had to do with two longtime friends and a casual agreement to make it more convenient for both of us; I would sent the check at the same time as I sent the coins and he could send the coin I won back at the same time he returned some of those coins to me (others were to go elsewhere). I even included the postage (and more than he asked for) even though it could have rode for free with the items he needed to return! There was nothing more or less to our understanding. It had nothing to do with "making" Billy wait as he alludes to. Who would ever think that Billy -- who I thought was a longtime friend and associate -- would get all bent out of shape on the attributions, photos and write-ups I had to do for all the coins before shipping them to him -- taking several weeks? I did not need his services whatsoever! I was trying to do him a favor, upon his request, by getting the coins to him first so he could get his own photos and story for his magazine. I spent considerable time communicating with the owners of the coins to get permission to send them on to Billy (and to other attributers in a round robin style) to benefit him and all. I thought that at least several weeks was implied and it was crystal clear that he agreed. He also knew it was taking longer than either of us expected due to additional coins coming in beyond what we expected in the beginning for this continuing story and we touched base on this just a few weeks ago with no indications that he was growing impatient or didn't understand the situation when we talked on this last. If Billy wanted to be paid right away or decided later he needed to be paid sooner than later, all he had to do was indicate his desire to get paid sooner and a check would have gone out the same or next day! This is the way I pay for all auctions (in fact I pay most within seconds of auction end where PayPal is accepted)! The only exception here was that it seemed it was going to make it easier for both of us to wait. It should have been that simple but instead he said nothing about his change in position and decided to leave me a negative without any communication whatsoever.
In fact, on the day I sent the check (9/6/06) to him, I gave him a courtesy call on my cell phone and told him I was just a few blocks away from the post office and that I was mailing the coins, some error tokens he wanted to see, and the check for the coin I won so that he'd have a heads-up on the fact they were on the way. Billy, knew full well they were in the mail but never bothered to let me know that they never arrived. He would lead you to believe he was more concerned about his $25 than the $3000.00 worth of a dozen or more folk's coins that were on the way to him! His statement on the Boards implying that I sent the coins to his old address on purpose is ludicrous! Why would I do that!!?? Can he really think I really wanted a package to sit in a post office for weeks while the owners of the coins are asking how much longer it is going to take for me to get them back? Does he really think I want to spend $12.05 on postage and insurance for a package that is just going to come back to me and I'll have to resend at like cost again? Yes! I was picking up the tab for shipping the coins to Billy so that he could add them to his files and get them into his magazine with absolutely no benefit to me!
He did send an eBay invoice for the coin I won and I'm sure the address there was correct, but I had no reason to think the address I had on file was incorrect. He indicates he had given me a correct address in the past and I'm sure he did but it was not what I had on file and what I did have on file I had no reason to question. After all, as far as I knew it was "corrected" long ago. In this respect it was my mistake, but an honest one -- a mistake anybody could have made. You may doubt some folks when they say "it's in the mail" but I've been in the mail order coin business for 33 years and EVERYBODY that knows me, knows that when I say it is in the mail -- it's in the mail. Anybody that says different -- doesn't know me. Since Billy knew the coins and check were on the way he should have communicated with me to let me know they never arrived after a reasonable time. Why would he just assume I had a change of heart and decided not to send the package at the last moment? Why wouldn't he at least consider that maybe the package was lost or delayed and communicate with me on this? Instead, he leaves a negative along with a statement that alludes to something completely different from what our agreement was!
If Billy, is upset about the 2005 Minnesota quarters not getting to him in time for his next issue of Die Variety News, I am certainly sorry about the mistake in shipping and I'm sorry that he missed his deadline. But getting so upset about such a problem (which I'm 110% sure this is all about) is not going to help the package get there and negative feedback for an unrelated issue where it was clear neither of us had a prior concern about a speedily payment -- is inappropriate. This displaced anger is similar to a person standing in a long line at a grocery store getting angry at a cashier because the price of milk went up a nickel.
Some claim my neg to him was retaliatory but in reality it just gives me a bit of leverage to get Billy to agree to the mutual removal of a negative that should have never been left in the first place. It is a very sad situation but I view him as not being so trustworthy anymore so very unfortunately I had to make that move. In fact, his displaced anger resulting in giving a negative for inappropriate reasons is suggestive of him actually deserving it as I did absolutely nothing wrong. Everything I did was completely in line with our agreement. What I did do was try to do him a favor and in the process made an honest mistake in addressing a package. I got a negative in return without any prior communication from him. If he had time to go the PCGS Boards in an attempt to smear my name, why didn't he have the time to communicate with me, man to man? He certainly had the time to communicate with me a week ago when I asked for some comments to be included in my latest Coin World and Numismatic News articles on the discovery of the 2005-P Oregon quarter doubled die (which gave him some positive exposure) but no time to communicate with a longtime friend before leaving a negative for a check not arriving that he knew was mailed long ago? It's clear there is much more going on here than meets the casual eye!
At this point I just hope Billy can recognize that we both made a mistake; I in addressing a package wrong and him jumping the gun in believing that something other than an honest mistake occurred. I'd hope we can shake hands and walk away from this as friends. Sincerely yours,
Ken Potter
PS: To those who suggested "Royalty," "Rich Dealer", etc., in reference to me, let it be known that I am far from rich, live in a small home in a working-class neighborhood, drive a 2000 Durango and work in a factory 40 hours a week as an Inspector (25 years prior as a press operator/assembly worker) and enjoy selling a few coins and writing about the hobby I enjoy. >>
Ken,
You have your phone conversations mixed up. In the latest conversation (Sep 6th) you never told me you were sending a package to me. Think about this for a second: If, and you didn't, but if you had told me you were sending a package to me, especially a registered package, then I would have e-mailed you to let you know I have not received the package. That way we could both check to see what might have gone wrong. I would guess we both would quickly figure out the wrong address was used. The first time I even realized you had sent a registered package was last night from a scan of the form and I noticed it had the wrong mailing address.
Your getting confused with what you said on the initial phone conversation when the first Minnesota DDRs were getting started to specifically ask me my correct mailing address for which I told you to use the home address and not the PO Box one. That was the main reason you called me -- and that's why you specifically asked for my correct mailing address because you told me you were sending the MN DDRs along with some tokens and the payment for the auction and that when I was done to forward to JW. It is this initial conversation your twisting with the Sep 6th phone conversation in which you talked about the Oregon DDR.
I even e-mailed you out of concern about that package and this is when you stated about the being busy stuff and you hadn't mailed it yet. You also even sent another e-mail out to the group about using consistent die numbers and you mentioned in that e-mail you hadn't sent out the package to Billy yet.
Your thinking that I was upset because I didn't get an opportunity to publish any of the MN DDRs in my Sep/Oct DVN magazine again, is just another example of many, of your twisting and confusing things. That is 100% totally not true Ken. I told you that I wasn't even going to mention anything about the MN DDRs in the Sep/Oct issue so you could rightfully so have the first publishing of them in the media press. I went on to say to you that I would mention about them in the much later Nov/Dec issue. This would afford you plenty of time to do your articles for NN and/or CW.
Ken, you have conveniently twisted things around so as to try and shift blame.
This is going to be a we agree to disagree.
Billy >>
And if he is reading this thread, he needs to know he should get a refund on that horrible hairpiece! Maybe that's affecting his judgement?
<< <i>Odd....
he has enough time to all of a sudden draft a HUGE email rebuttal but didn't have time for at least 6 Weeks (by his own admission on the Negative) to write a few letters on a check and envelope >>
Funny how that works isn't it?
<< <i>
<< <i>Odd....
he has enough time to all of a sudden draft a HUGE email rebuttal but didn't have time for at least 6 Weeks (by his own admission on the Negative) to write a few letters on a check and envelope >>
Funny how that works isn't it?
funny wierd?
or funny haha?
hi, i'm tom.
i do not doctor coins like some who post in here.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Odd....
he has enough time to all of a sudden draft a HUGE email rebuttal but didn't have time for at least 6 Weeks (by his own admission on the Negative) to write a few letters on a check and envelope >>
Funny how that works isn't it?
funny wierd?
or funny haha? >>
Funny pathetic.
So, after all this back and forth .............. and both sides of the story being presented.............
Who's going to step up and admit to being a DOLT for whining on this forum about what should have been a private issue between two business men?
Still, I don't like to neg anyone.
Send him one more email "Last chance, Mr. Bigshot!"
On the other hand, I can say is Ken is a very polite and hosent individual because I had dealt with him before. I sent him couple emails few months ago for his opinion. Ken would always reply in a very detailed and poite manner without asking for any reward. I had never purchased anything from him nor he had received any benefit from me.
I just hope the both Ken and Billy can resolve this issue offline.
We are not here to make any judgement since we do not know the story behind it.
It is just like noone will buy a slab coin labeled "MS70" without seeing the coin or the image.
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!
Never view my other linked pages. They aren't coin related.
Was that cheating?
Never view my other linked pages. They aren't coin related.