<< <i>Certainly possible. Many insurance policies give the insurance co. the final right to settle (regardless of the merits of the case) and they will if they feel it will cost them less to settle than to defend. >>
Sure. The financial reasons for settling are clear: even if the case is an absolute slam-dunk, if it costs more to defend than to settle, one should settle.
However, it is my opinion that the ACG lawsuit was the most blatantly anti-collector action I have ever seen. If the ANA is truly the champion of the collector, they should have stuck to their guns despite the cost, and fought this thing out.
As general counsel of a corporation that was sued in a groundless case, I learned from personal experience that when the insurer decides to settle, your choices are to either (1) accept the inevitable and let them settle , or (2) wave goodbye to their lawyers and defend yourself, with full liability for all costs and expenses incurred after the rejection of settlement, including any amount by which the ultimate judgment exceeds the amount the insurer was willing to pay .
At the rates outside counsel charged when I retired 11 years ago, the ANA's expenses would probably have exceeded $150,000 just for the final preparation and trial. I hate to think about what those expenses would be now!
satootoko, the monetary reasons for settling are clear and sound. The problem is that this suit is about the most anti-collector action I have ever seen. The ANA is supposed to exist as an advocate for the collector. Sometimes that doesn't mean "how can we get out of this cheap", rather, it means "we got to take these bastards down for what they've done to the community and our members". Go at it full throttle, damn the torpedoes.
Ah-collectibles ebay id is now treasuregalleryinc Linkage.
Please note this is merely a statement of fact and a linkage to publically available information. No opinions regarding this ebay vendor, or statements regarding the business practices of said vendor, are made or otherwise implied, nor are they to be inferred.
At the end of the day, the insurance companies have a lot of say in whether to settle a case.
Also, the settlement amount may have been tiny and I wouldn't be surprised if it simply covered attorney's fees.
"Men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large." Fiat Money Inflation in France, Andrew Dickson White (1912)
<< <i>The ANA is supposed to exist as an advocate for the collector. Sometimes that doesn't mean "how can we get out of this cheap", rather, it means "we got to take these bastards down for what they've done to the community and our members". Go at it full throttle, damn the torpedoes. >>
When was the last time you saw acg set up at a major (or minor) coin show?
I believe they've been taken down.
With respect to "damn the torpedos," as a dues paying member of the ANA, I, for one, am glad they didn't go broke on a "full throttle" fools mission....
<< <i>Ah-collectibles ebay id is now treasuregalleryinc Linkage.
Please note this is merely a statement of fact and a linkage to publically available information. No opinions regarding this ebay vendor, or statements regarding the business practices of said vendor, are made or otherwise implied, nor are they to be inferred.
>>
Maybe there was something about the initials in the prior vendor name that was not conducive to the conduct of business in general, or marketing of the product offered in particular?
Please note this is merely a question. No opinions are expressed nor implied regarding this ebay vendor in general, nor it's product in particular. WIthout limitation to the generality of the foregiong, no statements or opinions regarding the character, reputation, business practices or any other attributes of said vendor and/or product, if any, are expresed or implied, nor are they to be inferred. Prior results are not necesary indicative of future performance. Any resemblence to an actual persons or products is purely coincidential. All statements are submitted on an "as is-where is" basis and representations, warranties or guaranties of grade, condition, quality or character, if any, are neither expressed nor implied and are hereby disclaimed and remised without recourse whatsoever adnauseam.
<< <i>With respect to "damn the torpedos," as a dues paying member of the ANA, I, for one, am glad they didn't go broke on a "full throttle" fools mission.... >>
Fair enough. When they come for you, I'll be sure to stand aside as well.
<< <i>ACG cannot claim victory in this, of that I am sure. >>
I would disagree. If they received a monitary settlement they won no matter what the amount. (Most likely their lawyer was on contingincy. I can't imagine ACG would be able to actually be paying his legal bills all this time otherwise. If not the only way ACG lost was if the settlement didn't cover his legal bills. Even if the settlement just coveredhisbillshe still won. See next comment.)
<< <i>Terms of the settlement were not disclosed, but I am virtually certain that none of the defendants lost money, which was the reason for the lawsuit, in the first place. >>
The plaintiff didn't care if the defendants lost money or not, he was interested in getting money no matter what the source was. He wouldn't care if it came from the defendant or their insurance company. As for the reason for the lawsuit, I would bet at least part of the reason for it was to cause turmoil, and at that he succeeded. Yes, ACG won.
<< <i>Ah-collectibles ebay id is now treasuregalleryinc Linkage. >>
I noticed that. Perhaps the nym "ah-collectibles" doesn't carry the cachet it once did?
>>
Hey, maybe Russ NCNE could use the AH Collectibles name? It certainly would be befitting!
Please note the foregoing is merely a question. No opinions are expressed nor implied regarding this this AH eggspert poster in general, nor his demeanor in particular. WIthout limitation to the generality of the foregiong, no statements or opinions regarding the character, reputation, business practices or any other attributes of said poster and/or his demeanor, if any, are expresed or implied, nor are they to be inferred. Prior results are not necesary indicative of future performance. Any resemblence to an actual persons is purely coincidential. All statements are submitted on an "as is-where is" basis and representations, warranties or guaranties of grade, condition, quality or character, if any, are neither expressed nor implied and are hereby disclaimed and remised without recourse whatsoever adnauseam.
<< <i>ACG cannot claim victory in this, of that I am sure. >>
I would disagree. If they received a monitary settlement they won no matter what the amount. (Most likely their lawyer was on contingincy. I can't imagine ACG would be able to actually be paying his legal bills all this time otherwise. If not the only way ACG lost was if the settlement didn't cover his legal bills. Even if the settlement just coveredhisbillshe still won. See next comment.)
<< <i>Terms of the settlement were not disclosed, but I am virtually certain that none of the defendants lost money, which was the reason for the lawsuit, in the first place. >>
The plaintiff didn't care if the defendants lost money or not, he was interested in getting money no matter what the source was. He wouldn't care if it came from the defendant or their insurance company. As for the reason for the lawsuit, I would bet at least part of the reason for it was to cause turmoil, and at that he succeeded. Yes, ACG won. >>
I would add that they won precisely because folks are now much more restrained on voicing what they really think of their "service" today. They have demonstrated that they can and will make your life hell even if you are a nonparticipant in the business, not materially tied to success of one over the other.
Do what I do about these things. I write: "Everything I write is my opinion" on the bottom of my posts. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, spoken or written. Just declare it as such as you remove any claim of a statement of fact(s).
All that might guarantee is that you are the only one sued since it is a statement that you are taking sole responsibility.
<< <i>Everyone is entitled to an opinion, spoken or written. >>
True, but the expressing of that opinion can still be actionable. For example if I went around expressing my "opinion" that you were a pediphile, and publishing that with the disclaimer that it was my opinion, would you just meekly stand by for it? Or if people started avoiding you and you lost business because of it etc. would you take action against me?
<< <i>Do what I do about these things. I write: "Everything I write is my opinion" on the bottom of my posts. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, spoken or written. Just declare it as such as you remove any claim of a statement of fact(s). >>
That will absolutely not insulate you from being sued when you defame someone ( in THEIR ) opinion.
<< <i>I keep thinking of that cool token someone posted not so long ago:
"Millions for defence, not one cent for tribute"
Not always an easy policy, but it pays off in the long term. (Easy for me to say though; it's not my money.) >>
If you pay taxes, it is your money.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>I can't believe they settled. And how much of that ANA money came from the fund that was solicited to help the 40 or so collectors initially named in the suit? >>
How much money was in that fund? Is the amount public record? Where is the money now?
Don't forget there was also an RCC defense fund set up through ebay where a lot of us donated coins and in some cases even bought them back. I never did hear how much was raised but I hope it was enough to get done what needed to be done.
<< <i>I can't believe they settled. And how much of that ANA money came from the fund that was solicited to help the 40 or so collectors initially named in the suit? >>
How much money was in that fund? Is the amount public record? Where is the money now? >>
The lack of these answers from the ANA is the main reason I decided not to renew my membership in 2006. The establishment of this defense fund was the main reason I renewed my membership in 2004. I was one of the original defendants, but, thankfully, was never served.
"Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity" - Hanlon's Razor
So.......was the decision to not go to court due to fallible grading standards. In other words, how would they have determined which set of "grading standards" were correct? The one which is followed by a majority? hmmm One could have easily shown that thousands of overgraded coins existed in all holders that would have compared equally graded to coins in the ACG holders.
Also, was this lawsuit the reason behind the ANA's decision to rewrite their "grading standards" in 2006 or 07 with PCGS and NGC following suit?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
Comments
<< <i>Certainly possible. Many insurance policies give the insurance co. the final right to settle (regardless of the merits of the case) and they will if they feel it will cost them less to settle than to defend. >>
Sure. The financial reasons for settling are clear: even if the case is an absolute slam-dunk, if it costs more to defend than to settle, one should settle.
However, it is my opinion that the ACG lawsuit was the most blatantly anti-collector action I have ever seen. If the ANA is truly the champion of the collector, they should have stuck to their guns despite the cost, and fought this thing out.
<< <i>nd how much of that ANA money came from the fund that was solicited to help the 40 or so collectors initially named in the suit?
Money which was never disbursed to any of the named defendants.
I know of not ONE person that money was dispersed to. >>
I know of one person who received a very nominal amount.
My icon IS my coin. It is a gem 1949 FBL Franklin.
<< <i>I know of one person who received a very nominal amount. >>
I hope it was k6az. He was a tremendous help for me through the whole wretched affair.
<< <i>
<< <i>I know of one person who received a very nominal amount. >>
I hope it was k6az. He was a tremendous help for me through the whole wretched affair. >>
I hope it was him too. He was the backbone for out little group of people who had no idea of what to do. I still feel like I owe him BIG.
-Mark Twain
<< <i>I assume ACG and ICG are seperate companies with very different grading practices? >>
Quite.
<< <i>I assume ACG and ICG are seperate companies with very different grading practices? >>
Heh. Nice icon.
My icon IS my coin. It is a gem 1949 FBL Franklin.
As general counsel of a corporation that was sued in a groundless case, I learned from personal experience that when the insurer decides to settle, your choices are to either (1) accept the inevitable and let them settle
At the rates outside counsel charged when I retired 11 years ago, the ANA's expenses would probably have exceeded $150,000 just for the final preparation and trial. I hate to think about what those expenses would be now!
Please note this is merely a statement of fact and a linkage to publically available information. No opinions regarding this ebay vendor, or statements regarding the business practices of said vendor, are made or otherwise implied, nor are they to be inferred.
Also, the settlement amount may have been tiny and I wouldn't be surprised if it simply covered attorney's fees.
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
<< <i>The ANA is supposed to exist as an advocate for the collector. Sometimes that doesn't mean "how can we get out of this cheap", rather, it means "we got to take these bastards down for what they've done to the community and our members". Go at it full throttle, damn the torpedoes. >>
When was the last time you saw acg set up at a major (or minor) coin show?
I believe they've been taken down.
With respect to "damn the torpedos," as a dues paying member of the ANA, I, for one, am glad they didn't go broke on a "full throttle" fools mission....
<< <i>Ah-collectibles ebay id is now treasuregalleryinc Linkage.
Please note this is merely a statement of fact and a linkage to publically available information. No opinions regarding this ebay vendor, or statements regarding the business practices of said vendor, are made or otherwise implied, nor are they to be inferred.
Maybe there was something about the initials in the prior vendor name that was not conducive to the conduct of business in general, or marketing of the product offered in particular?
Please note this is merely a question. No opinions are expressed nor implied regarding this ebay vendor in general, nor it's product in particular. WIthout limitation to the generality of the foregiong, no statements or opinions regarding the character, reputation, business practices or any other attributes of said vendor and/or product, if any, are expresed or implied, nor are they to be inferred. Prior results are not necesary indicative of future performance. Any resemblence to an actual persons or products is purely coincidential. All statements are submitted on an "as is-where is" basis and representations, warranties or guaranties of grade, condition, quality or character, if any, are neither expressed nor implied and are hereby disclaimed and remised without recourse whatsoever adnauseam.
<< <i>With respect to "damn the torpedos," as a dues paying member of the ANA, I, for one, am glad they didn't go broke on a "full throttle" fools mission.... >>
Fair enough. When they come for you, I'll be sure to stand aside as well.
<< <i>Ah-collectibles ebay id is now treasuregalleryinc Linkage. >>
I noticed that. Perhaps the nym "ah-collectibles" doesn't carry the cachet it once did?
I knew I couldn't write that with a straight face.
In any case, he's still got me blocked, which is just fine with me.
<< <i>ACG cannot claim victory in this, of that I am sure. >>
I would disagree. If they received a monitary settlement they won no matter what the amount. (Most likely their lawyer was on contingincy. I can't imagine ACG would be able to actually be paying his legal bills all this time otherwise. If not the only way ACG lost was if the settlement didn't cover his legal bills. Even if the settlement just coveredhisbillshe still won. See next comment.)
<< <i>Terms of the settlement were not disclosed, but I am virtually certain that none of the defendants lost money, which was the reason for the lawsuit, in the first place. >>
The plaintiff didn't care if the defendants lost money or not, he was interested in getting money no matter what the source was. He wouldn't care if it came from the defendant or their insurance company. As for the reason for the lawsuit, I would bet at least part of the reason for it was to cause turmoil, and at that he succeeded. Yes, ACG won.
<< <i>
<< <i>Ah-collectibles ebay id is now treasuregalleryinc Linkage. >>
I noticed that. Perhaps the nym "ah-collectibles" doesn't carry the cachet it once did?
>>
Hey, maybe Russ NCNE could use the AH Collectibles name? It certainly would be befitting!
Please note the foregoing is merely a question. No opinions are expressed nor implied regarding this this AH eggspert poster in general, nor his demeanor in particular. WIthout limitation to the generality of the foregiong, no statements or opinions regarding the character, reputation, business practices or any other attributes of said poster and/or his demeanor, if any, are expresed or implied, nor are they to be inferred. Prior results are not necesary indicative of future performance. Any resemblence to an actual persons is purely coincidential. All statements are submitted on an "as is-where is" basis and representations, warranties or guaranties of grade, condition, quality or character, if any, are neither expressed nor implied and are hereby disclaimed and remised without recourse whatsoever adnauseam.
<< <i>
<< <i>ACG cannot claim victory in this, of that I am sure. >>
I would disagree. If they received a monitary settlement they won no matter what the amount. (Most likely their lawyer was on contingincy. I can't imagine ACG would be able to actually be paying his legal bills all this time otherwise. If not the only way ACG lost was if the settlement didn't cover his legal bills. Even if the settlement just coveredhisbillshe still won. See next comment.)
<< <i>Terms of the settlement were not disclosed, but I am virtually certain that none of the defendants lost money, which was the reason for the lawsuit, in the first place. >>
The plaintiff didn't care if the defendants lost money or not, he was interested in getting money no matter what the source was. He wouldn't care if it came from the defendant or their insurance company. As for the reason for the lawsuit, I would bet at least part of the reason for it was to cause turmoil, and at that he succeeded. Yes, ACG won. >>
I would add that they won precisely because folks are now much more restrained on voicing what they really think of their "service" today. They have demonstrated that they can and will make your life hell even if you are a nonparticipant in the business, not materially tied to success of one over the other.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
Looking for alot of crap.
<< <i>Everything I write is my opinion. >>
All that might guarantee is that you are the only one sued since it is a statement that you are taking sole responsibility.
<< <i>Everyone is entitled to an opinion, spoken or written. >>
True, but the expressing of that opinion can still be actionable. For example if I went around expressing my "opinion" that you were a pediphile, and publishing that with the disclaimer that it was my opinion, would you just meekly stand by for it? Or if people started avoiding you and you lost business because of it etc. would you take action against me?
<< <i>Do what I do about these things. I write: "Everything I write is my opinion" on the bottom of my posts. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, spoken or written. Just declare it as such as you remove any claim of a statement of fact(s). >>
That will absolutely not insulate you from being sued when you defame someone ( in THEIR ) opinion.
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
comoncents
"Millions for defence, not one cent for tribute"
Not always an easy policy, but it pays off in the long term. (Easy for me to say though; it's not my money.)
<< <i>I keep thinking of that cool token someone posted not so long ago:
"Millions for defence, not one cent for tribute"
Not always an easy policy, but it pays off in the long term. (Easy for me to say though; it's not my money.) >>
If you pay taxes, it is your money.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>I keep thinking of that cool token someone posted not so long ago:
"Millions for defence, not one cent for tribute"
Not always an easy policy, but it pays off in the long term. (Easy for me to say though; it's not my money.) >>
If you pay taxes, it is your money. >>
Taxes my arse!
I suspect the liability insurance carriers paid a settlement-probably not in big $$.
All of us who have liability coverage will pay for this.
Don't think you have liability coverage? Check your homeowners policy (you do).
<< <i>I can't believe they settled. And how much of that ANA money came from the fund that was solicited to help the 40 or so collectors initially named in the suit? >>
How much money was in that fund? Is the amount public record? Where is the money now?
Chance favors the prepared mind.
<< <i>How much money was in that fund? Is the amount public record? Where is the money now? >>
Don't hold your breath waiting for answers to those perfectly legitimate questions.
Damn the ANA and their attornies. Nobody will watch your ass like you will.....
<< <i>
<< <i>I can't believe they settled. And how much of that ANA money came from the fund that was solicited to help the 40 or so collectors initially named in the suit? >>
How much money was in that fund? Is the amount public record? Where is the money now? >>
The lack of these answers from the ANA is the main reason I decided not to renew my membership in 2006. The establishment of this defense fund was the main reason I renewed my membership in 2004. I was one of the original defendants, but, thankfully, was never served.
What a mess this was.
Sounds like one of the posters to this thread recently expired.
ACG lost the lawsuit, I could find the thread on this, it was around 2007 when the judgment came down.
RIP Craton.
So.......was the decision to not go to court due to fallible grading standards. In other words, how would they have determined which set of "grading standards" were correct? The one which is followed by a majority? hmmm One could have easily shown that thousands of overgraded coins existed in all holders that would have compared equally graded to coins in the ACG holders.
Also, was this lawsuit the reason behind the ANA's decision to rewrite their "grading standards" in 2006 or 07 with PCGS and NGC following suit?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
RIP Craton