<< <i>The lawsuit contains a blatant factual error. They, like some others here, are making the claim that bidders were sent eMail notices for ended auctions that accuse the seller of listing counterfeits. This is not the case, and never has been the case. The word counterfeit appears only in the notice sent to the seller and nowhere in the notice they send to the bidders. They have offered up exhibit C to prove their point, yet this exhibit is the notice sent to sellers, not the notice sent to buyers.
Russ, NCNE >>
I am not sure on the validity of this, because on the three auctions of mine that were ended by ebay for putting the numerical grade in the title all three buyers emailed me saying something to the affect of "nice try a-hole...thought you could pull a fast one and sell me a counterfeit coin...good thing ebay shut your auction down, dirtbag!" And I never once mentioned the word counterfeit to any of them, so how you suppose they got their info on being counterfeit?
morris
"Repent, for the kindom of heaven is at hand." ** I would take a shack on the Rock over a castle in the sand !! ** Don't take life so seriously...nobody gets out alive.
ALL VALLEY COIN AND JEWELRY 28480 B OLD TOWN FRONT ST TEMECULA, CA 92590 (951) 757-0334
<< <i>I wonder if these third world slabbers are going to point out to the court and jury that PCGS's own Buy, Sell, Trade Forum doesn't ban their products. >>
<< <i>Now, we who pay close attention may conclude that it's a numismatic "death penalty", but eBay is just one of many venues, and as a single venue it cannot reasonably assumed their policy results in said capital punishment, unless they also are found to be a monopoly, which they are not, and cannot found to be when there are alternative venues, including those provided by members of this forum >>
Keep in mind that I'm trying to think like an average juror here, many of which aren't fans of big, huge powerful businesses that have the ability to destroy smaller businesses with arguably arbitrary judgment calls that can make or break a business.
For the average individual looking to sell into a large audience, there really *is* no alternative venue to eBay. Thus, even if it's not an actual monopoly, it is in many ways a de facto monopoly for practical purposes. >>
Sort of like Microsoft...and look what happened to them...dum, dum, dum, dum. (cue creepy music)
morris
"Repent, for the kindom of heaven is at hand." ** I would take a shack on the Rock over a castle in the sand !! ** Don't take life so seriously...nobody gets out alive.
ALL VALLEY COIN AND JEWELRY 28480 B OLD TOWN FRONT ST TEMECULA, CA 92590 (951) 757-0334
<< <i>Ebay has not stopped one of them from selling anything they could sell before. Just limited the way they can define it in the title as well as claim a value based on data for coins that are graded under a different standard. >>
Good point...I wonder if the easy answer to all this is just not allowing anyone to put numerical grades in the titles and all certified coins. I for one don't think it matters a whole lot...after I had to edit all my auctions for my raw stuff, I still did pretty good.
morris
"Repent, for the kindom of heaven is at hand." ** I would take a shack on the Rock over a castle in the sand !! ** Don't take life so seriously...nobody gets out alive.
ALL VALLEY COIN AND JEWELRY 28480 B OLD TOWN FRONT ST TEMECULA, CA 92590 (951) 757-0334
This thread needs to go to a six seated outhouse, the first five tiny seats reserved for the little $hit's of the farmhouse and the BIG hole ,,,, reckon that is reserved,
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly."
I for one think what ebay is doing is just wrong (not that I completely side with the TPGs shut out)...but for many other reasons than just what people have already mentioned. Perhaps I will delve into my reasons later...I just want to ask this for now.
Not necessarily my beef with all this, but just to play a little DA...
Would you be okay with ebay banning a clothing maker of good quality clothing (that is not traded publically) but uses different measurements for the S, M, L, XL, XXL etc. from using the S, M, L, XL, XXL etc. in the title?
morris
"Repent, for the kindom of heaven is at hand." ** I would take a shack on the Rock over a castle in the sand !! ** Don't take life so seriously...nobody gets out alive.
ALL VALLEY COIN AND JEWELRY 28480 B OLD TOWN FRONT ST TEMECULA, CA 92590 (951) 757-0334
It is interesting to see the comments that suggest ebay has to prove that the plaintiffs are substandard in their business. Its the plaintiffs that are inferring that they are not. How are they going to prove otherwise. This is a commercial lawsuit in that no ones personal rights are being affected or discriminated against. I would think the court would be very cautious in finding judgment for the plaintiffs based upon an independent business decision. The ANA and PNG don't profit commercially from this scenario. Let's say the court tells ebay it must treat all products the same, think of the ramifications to commercial businesses. I've lost count of the number of times someone attempted to sue me and the bank I was employed at because we made a judgment that they didn't qualify for a loan and we turned them down. Imagine if we had the courts telling us what our loan standards had to be. I would think that this case would turn on a narrow point (maybe that's a wide point), that of a business having the right to conduct its business in a safe way especially towards the buyers.
This is a court of law not the government. If it were the opposite no doubt the plaintiffs would prevail.
<< <i>I for one think what ebay is doing is just wrong (not that I completely side with the TPGs shut out)...but for many other reasons than just what people have already mentioned. Perhaps I will delve into my reasons later...I just want to ask this for now.
Not necessarily my beef with all this, but just to play a little DA...
Would you be okay with ebay banning a clothing maker of good quality clothing (that is not traded publically) but uses different measurements for the S, M, L, XL, XXL etc. from using the S, M, L, XL, XXL etc. in the title?
morris >>
Does your clothing manufacturer charge radically different prices based on size?
<< <i>It's eBay's site- I don't see where they have an obligation to provide a venue for people to sell anything that eBay decides is not in their best interest. /q]
A couple of years ago I listed a bear skin rug. They pulled the auction within an hour...
I used to be somebody, now I'm just a coin collector. Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
<< <i>It's eBay's site- I don't see where they have an obligation to provide a venue for people to sell anything that eBay decides is not in their best interest. /q]
A couple of years ago I listed a bear skin rug. They pulled the auction within an hour... >>
Yeah, you won't see Michael Jackson bidding on the Elephant Man's skeletal remains there, either.
<< <i>It is interesting to see the comments that suggest ebay has to prove that the plaintiffs are substandard in their business. >>
Ebay sells ads. An adverting venue can reject ALL political ads, for example. But they can't sell ad space to Hillary and refuse to sell ads to Rudy. (or claim they DON'T discriminate against Rudy, but his ads can't use his name, even though Hillary and Rudy are charged the same amount)
<< <i> Its the plaintiffs that are inferring that they are not. >>
What SHOULD they infer when ebay calls their product fraudulent, misdescribed and counterfeit?
<< <i>This is a commercial lawsuit in that no ones personal rights are being affected or discriminated against. >>
Commercial lawsuits don't involve personal rights.
<< <i> I would think the court would be very cautious in finding judgment for the plaintiffs based upon an independent business decision. >>
Even if the independent business decision breaks the law?
<< <i> The ANA and PNG don't profit commercially from this scenario. >>
Liability for damages is not dependent on profit. The guy that ran over your kid didn't profit from it.
<< <i>Let's say the court tells ebay it must treat all products the same, think of the ramifications to commercial businesses. >>
Any decision would only apply to ebay.
<< <i> I've lost count of the number of times someone attempted to sue me and the bank I was employed at because we made a judgment that they didn't qualify for a loan and we turned them down. >>
Did the lawsuits have merit? Banks have paid BILLIONS in settlements for refusing to loan money to blacks, single women, for "red lining" certain neighborhoods, charging higher interest rates to minorities with the same income and credit history as whites, etc.
<< <i>Imagine if we had the courts telling us what our loan standards had to be. >>
Not a good example. Banks have always been heavily regulated.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
I've lost count of the number of times someone attempted to sue me and the bank I was employed at because we made a judgment that they didn't qualify for a loan and we turned them down. Imagine if we had the courts telling us what our loan standards had to be. IrishMike
If the courts would've done that with the banking industry years ago, there wouldn't have been the big mess with the Savings and Loans, and now the troubles with the housing loans that's causing folks all over the country to have their homes go into foreclosure.
<< <i>It is interesting to see the comments that suggest ebay has to prove that the plaintiffs are substandard in their business. Its the plaintiffs that are inferring that they are not. How are they going to prove otherwise. This is a commercial lawsuit in that no ones personal rights are being affected or discriminated against. I would think the court would be very cautious in finding judgment for the plaintiffs based upon an independent business decision. The ANA and PNG don't profit commercially from this scenario. Let's say the court tells ebay it must treat all products the same, think of the ramifications to commercial businesses. I've lost count of the number of times someone attempted to sue me and the bank I was employed at because we made a judgment that they didn't qualify for a loan and we turned them down. Imagine if we had the courts telling us what our loan standards had to be. I would think that this case would turn on a narrow point (maybe that's a wide point), that of a business having the right to conduct its business in a safe way especially towards the buyers.
This is a court of law not the government. If it were the opposite no doubt the plaintiffs would prevail. >>
Very well said, and clarifying.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
Kroger Grocery Stores will not allow me to sell my hot sauce on the same eye level shelf as Tobasco and Franks RedHot, mine is on the bottom row where you might not see it, and if you do, you have to bend down to reach it. I'm going to sue Kroger and the FDA, do you think I have a chance at winning?
Well here's my input on this... It's going to take a lot of lawyering on both sides to .."Educate"..a non informed jury to the hoby of numismatics.To understand the Sheldon Grading system of coins would be no easy task.To put it modern usage today and try to explain it and encorporate it into the field of the TPG's is a monumental feat.This case could drag on for years.....with no remedy.....JMO.....Grading is Subjective ...
<< <i>Kroger Grocery Stores will not allow me to sell my hot sauce on the same eye level shelf as Tabasco and Franks RedHot, mine is on the bottom row where you might not see it, and if you do, you have to bend down to reach it. I'm going to sue Kroger and the FDA, do you think I have a chance at winning? >>
Probably after you have been in business for 140 or 90 years as the companies mentioned above have you will be on the top shelf too. Congratulations on having a product that gets any shelf space at all in a super market, especially a chain.
After reading this thread and the complaint, I hope the Judge has the intestinal fortitude to give a summary judgment to the Defendants and award the Plaintiffs to pay all legal fees. When Judges start doing this then it might end some of these stupid law suits.
I noticed some posts in this thread that alludes to eBay being the same as Microsoft. Get real, eBay is no way the monopoly that Microsoft is.
If a seller of a coin on eBay wants their product to be treated the same as PCGS or NGC, then let them cross the coin over to PCGS or NGC before they sell it.
Getting back to the Complaint that was filed, what standing does PCI, NNC or Accugrade have? I wasn’t aware that PCI, NNC or Accugrade sold any coins on eBay. If these three companies do sell on eBay, are they a “Third Party Grading” company or a “First Party Grading” company.
<< <i>Well here's my input on this... It's going to take a lot of lawyering on both sides to .."Educate"..a non informed jury to the hobby of numismatics.To understand the Sheldon Grading system of coins would be no easy task.To put it modern usage today and try to explain it and incorporate it into the field of the TPG's is a monumental feat.This case could drag on for years.....with no remedy.....JMO.....Grading is Subjective ... >>
To me this guide seems so simple, eye appeal being the really subjective zinger:
General Grading Standards for U.S. Coins Good (G) - Coin will be heavily worn, but the main design and legend will be visible. Lettering may be worn smooth. May be dull or faded areas.
Very Good (VG) - Still well worn but more of the rim will be evident. Design and legend will be clear but worn flat. Lacks specific details.
Fine (F) - Medium to heavy wear but even overall. The design becomes clearer and details begin to appear. Some letters within the design will be apparent.
Very Fine (VF) - A visibly nicer coin. High spots will show light, even wear. Various major features are visible. Lettering is all readable.
Extra Fine (XF) - Slight wear will show on the highest points of the main devices. Words are sharp and easily readable. All details are clearly defined.
AU 50 - Slight traces of wear on the highest points of the coin; may be dull with some evidence of luster under any toning.
AU 53 - Just slightly better than an AU 50 with a little more luster visible. Eye appeal begins to make a difference between the AU grades.
AU 55 - An obviously nicer coin than an AU 50 with no major difficulties. More luster shines through the surfaces.
AU 58 - This is oftentimes called a slider as it will appear to many observers to be uncirculated. Just the faintest wear on the highest points of the coin. Luster should be quite evident, although some toning can be apparent. Usually coins with poor eye appeal will not make the AU 58 grade.
MS 60 - Mint State indicates a coin that has no wear and is uncirculated. It may have numerous bagmarks and/or be toned. MS 60 is the lowest quality of an uncirculated coin.
MS 61 - An uncirculated coin that is just slightly better than MS 60. However, no question that it is uncirculated. Whereas, some may debate over the merits of a coin being MS60 because of the excessive bagmarks, the MS61 should be more desirable.
MS 62 - This coin should be a much cleaner specimen than an MS 60, yet, just slightly better than an MS 61. There should be fewer bagmarks as the coin takes on more attractive features.
MS 63 - This is the grade that many collectors feel is the most collectible in numismatics. Prices are typically reasonable compared to higher grades and the coin should have at least an average strike and eye appeal, with minimal distracting marks.
MS 64 - This is the grade where prices in many series begin to increase dramatically. For this reason the coin will begin to show fewer marks and the strike will be the strongest yet. No primary distractions that will draw your eye. A near-gem coin with just a few tiny marks or weakness in strike to keep it from a higher grade.
MS 65 - This is the gem category. Coin should be fully struck with eye appeal. Either brilliant or toned but there should not be any unsightly marks or color that negates eye appeal. Any marks should be very minor in appearance. Prices spread out even further.
MS 66 - A coin that just jumps out at you as being nicer than an MS 65. The main devices on either side should have no more than very minor ticks and the fields should be cleaner than that of an MS 65.
MS 67 - A superior coin that has no major distractions to speak of. The fields should be near flawless with just the slightest contact on the main device. This coin should emit a look of satisfaction from the viewer. Prices increase further especially for coins with short supplies and strong demand.
MS 68 - A difficult grade to determine by most experts. When does a coin become MS 68 but is not quite MS69 or 70? A very superior coin with maybe just a minor tick on either side keeping it from perfection.
MS 69 - This is a coin that should create a gasp when viewed. There should be no imperfections to the naked eye. With a magnifying glass a minor mark or impediment may be visible.
MS 70 - A perfect coin with no imperfections seen with a magnifying glass. There should be no marks whatsoever; the coin must look like it just left the Mint. Very unusual in early coins as the mint did not have the quality they do today. Modern coins have been given this exalted grade although there is debate whether coins can be perfect.
As we proceed to higher grades, there should be a noticeable difference in each grade and an improvement in quality, strike, and eye appeal. However, since grading is subjective, it will still be difficult for most numismatists to see a distinct difference from one grade to the next. This is especially so in grades of MS67 and higher.
Any kind of damage or cleaning will downgrade the potential value of a coin.
<< <i>Kroger Grocery Stores will not allow me to sell my hot sauce on the same eye level shelf as Tobasco and Franks RedHot, mine is on the bottom row where you might not see it, and if you do, you have to bend down to reach it. I'm going to sue Kroger and the FDA, do you think I have a chance at winning? >>
If you pay the same "slotting fees" and "promotional allowances" to Kroger, you will get on the same shelf.
Ebay charges sellers of PCI or SEGS coins the same fees, but does not provide the same visibility.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
<< <i>Kroger Grocery Stores will not allow me to sell my hot sauce on the same eye level shelf as Tobasco and Franks RedHot, mine is on the bottom row where you might not see it, and if you do, you have to bend down to reach it. I'm going to sue Kroger and the FDA, do you think I have a chance at winning? >>
If you pay the same "slotting fees" and "promotional allowances" to Kroger, you will get on the same shelf.
Ebay charges sellers of PCI or SEGS coins the same fees, but does not provide the same visibility. >>
Yep, that is true. My argument is shot down already.....
<< <i>The defendants should trot out expert witness after expert witness detailing the true nature and reason behind all this SSS crap so that there is an extensive - and embarassing - record of precisely what these predators have done to the hobby. >>
I have been reading the court papers, just what does" foreign company" working under U.S laws mean? MAYBE CHINA is behind this? lol J/J but what does that really mean? just wondering. thanks,MoJo
<< <i>This message is being posted for SEGS Grading Service.
Just for the record (not that anyone on this board cares) SEGS Grading Service is not part of the suite filed... No member at SEGS talked to or corresponded with the representing law firm, nothing was signed or authorized, nor was any money paid. >>
This is interesting. Can a plaintiff just add other plaintiffs willy nilly? I know that's frequently done in a class action, but this isn't a class action suit. I wonder if PCI was also added without their knowledge? If so, and both SEGS and PCI remove themselves that would radically alter the flavor of this suit and make it far easier for eBay to crush these bugs.
<< <i>That is an excellent question. I would love to hear the answer to myself. There doesn't seem to be a response from the person asked that question. However, he has been paged several times at FUN to come to the SEGS table... so far no show >>
SEGS should, IMO, sue the law firm that filed the suit and named them as one of the plaintiffs. I bet it was supposed to be SGS, but having any reputation tarnish based on an association with a suit like this (considering the public view of it represented here) should be enough cause to expect more than just an edit to the filing.
<< <i>Thus, coins graded by Plaintiffs, NNC, ACG, PCI, and SEGS, cannot be listed or sold on eBay as "certified" coins and are referred to as "counterfeit" by eBay >>
JMO but to say "certified" coins and are referred to as "counterfeit,might be what gets them in trouble? are they being referred to as counterfeiters ? any attorneys here on the forum? what is your outake on this?
Dont get me wrong I am glad ebay did what they did,but what about new companys popping up? say a bunch on PCGS AND NGC graders started there own company,it would take a while to get established, but would they be allowed to list as PCGS,NGC,etc coins are listed? ;
It was my understanding, and correct me if I am wrong, but the emails sent out are general form letters that have a laundry list of possible infractions for why the listing is cancelled. Counterfeit, banned items, illegal items, ... are all possibilities without any one of them being singled out. A revipient jumping to the conclusion that this means they were offering a counterfeit coin might suggest that person has a mental processing problem, you know one that might one also confuse reading a PCGS price guide value and associating it with the potential value of a non-PCGS coin.
<< <i>It was my understanding, and correct me if I am wrong, but the emails sent out are general form letters that have a laundry list of possible infractions for why the listing is cancelled. Counterfeit, banned items, illegal items, ... are all possibilities without any one of them being singled out. >>
The eMail sent to sellers mentions counterfeit, the eMail sent to buyers does not, nor does it mention the word illegal. There have been claims that the eMail sent to buyers mentions counterfeits, but an example has yet to be produced. In fact, the exhibit the plaintiffs are using in this suit is the notice sent to sellers, not the notice sent to buyers.
<< <i>A couple of years ago I listed a bear skin rug. >>
I want one lol a few years ago My Daughter in-law's -sister listed a grey fox pelt on ebay, it was pulled in less than a hour, 2 days later the DNR was knocking on her door with the Sherrifs Dept in tow, (she is a taxidermist) they said she was selling Grey Timber Wolf pelts( illegal everywhere) after a 3 hour search of her house and shop they aplogized and left,someone from ebay(buyer/seller?) contacted them. they had to follow up on a "lead" she is still selling on ebay
<< <i>A couple of years ago I listed a bear skin rug. >>
I want one lol a few years ago My Daughter in-law's -sister listed a grey fox pelt on ebay, it was pulled in less than a hour, 2 days later the DNR was knocking on her door with the Sherrifs Dept in tow, (she is a taxidermist) they said she was selling Grey Timber Wolf pelts( illegal everywhere) after a 3 hour search of her house and shop they aplogized and left,someone from ebay(buyer/seller?) contacted them. they had to follow up on a "lead" she is still selling on ebay >>
I plan on getting one of these the old fashion way. Find it still on the bear.
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
<< <i>A revipient jumping to the conclusion that this means they were offering a counterfeit coin might suggest that person has a mental processing problem... >>
I'd say that anyone who reads this...
eBay does not permit the sale of currency that is improperly described, fraudulent or counterfeit.
and concludes that eBay is calling their item counterfeit has issues with reading comprehension.
Items can still be listed; grade and "slabbing" name can't be in title. Wow, real constaint of trade there.
Ebay got the nickname "sleazebay' for any number of fraudulant seller practices; one of which was overnight slabbing companies using their own grading scale which had nothing in common with ANA or any recognized standards. ACG willingly admits this. The worst was sellers calling their slabbed pocket change as MS65 and of course saying the PCGS price guide says this is worth $$$$$.
How many times have we as a community, right or wrong, sent emails to bidders alerting them before they got ripped by one of the phony slabbers? Don't need to answer that one here.
Joe
The Philadelphia Mint: making coins since 1792. We make money by making money. Now in our 225th year thanks to no competition.
<< <i>After reading this thread and the complaint, I hope the Judge has the intestinal fortitude to give a summary judgment to the Defendants and award the Plaintiffs to pay all legal fees. When Judges start doing this then it might end some of these stupid law suits. >>
So judges should make decisions without even having a trial?
<< <i>I noticed some posts in this thread that alludes to eBay being the same as Microsoft. Get real, eBay is no way the monopoly that Microsoft is. >>
Ebay has over a 95% share of the online auction market. Microsoft has viable competition from Apple, Linux, Sun.
<< <i>Getting back to the Complaint that was filed, what standing does PCI, NNC or Accugrade have? I wasn’t aware that PCI, NNC or Accugrade sold any coins on eBay. If these three companies do sell on eBay, are they a “Third Party Grading” company or a “First Party Grading” company. >>
Any bottleneck or restriction in a chain of distribution affects everyone upstream and downstream. You think David Hall wouldn't sue ebay if they banned PCGS coins?
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
IMO a suitable compromise would be for eBay to group the grading services into different categories. PCGS & NGC in one category, ANACS & ICG in the next, SEGS & PCI in the next, and all the others grouped in the last one. It would make the crap slabbers look more reputable, but you'd be able to weed them out by selecting the category you wanted to search in.
My sense is that ebay is not the target defendant the lawsuit, but has been named so that plaintiffs can get records during discovery that the ANA and PNG might be reluctant to produce.
If the allegations in the complaint are true, it sounds like eBay is trying in good faith to protect buyers. Ebay should be able to rely on the recommendations of the ANA and PNG in revising its coin listing policies. The ANA and PNG have been around forever, and they're widely believed to be independent organizations looking out for the best interests of collectors and dealers, not representing the interests of any specific companies. In response to ANA and PNG lobbying, ebay recognized that there was a problem with sellers selling grossly overgraded second and third-tier slabs, and adopted a policy recommended by the ANA and PNG to fix the problem. As it is, the policy is an improvement that keeps out a lot of bad slabs. Therefore, ebay has a good, simple argument that it is justified in setting a policy to protect buyers. Notably, by disqualifying many grading services, the policy reduces revenue for ebay, which supports the conclusion that ebay is selflessly trying to protect buyers.
The claims against the ANA and PNG might be a different story. Doesn't the ANA have a deep business relationship with NGC? What about PNG? Does anyone at the ANA or PNG have non-consumer-protection reasons to conspire against the plaintiffs? Who pissed off whom? Isn't long-time ANA member Bill Fivaz involved with SEGS? What's going on with that?
Finally, the hive of lawyers on this forum might get a kick out of the ANA press release attached as exhibit D of the complaint (page 30 of 31), where ANA Consumer Awareness Coordinator Susan McMillan states that "in order for a consumer fraud to occur, three elements must be present: a person's desire, ability and opportunity to commit the fraud." I think the ANA was wise to get new legal counsel. Ha.
The problem is ntot in informed folks weeding them out. The problem was someone searching for an 1878 8TF MS67 Morgan and getting one come up....in an WCG holder that many on here might say is a cleaned AU. The problem is in the grading. It would be a much easier case for PCI, SEGS , even ACG, to bring forward as they are at least independent third party services who could argue the grading subjectivity angle. Self-slabbers are pretty clear, though perhaps could hide a little better if they truly wished.
Not sure where all this should go. The problems presented on eBay with anyone defining a grade is preceisely what we used to have in greater abundance prior to third party grading. You can only protect ignorant consumers so much. I am pretty sure eBay is not making more money as a result of their policy change, which would be applaudable if only in the spirit of progress. Depending on how this ends up, they may just open up grading and designations to everyone and just restrict the use of other TPG names and acronyms in the titles and descriptions for other-than-those TPGs and raw coins.
<< <i>Kroger Grocery Stores will not allow me to sell my hot sauce on the same eye level shelf as Tobasco and Franks RedHot, mine is on the bottom row where you might not see it, and if you do, you have to bend down to reach it. I'm going to sue Kroger and the FDA, do you think I have a chance at winning? >>
I went to Frys today.......couldn't find your hot sauce.
<< <i>This message is being posted for SEGS Grading Service.
Just for the record (not that anyone on this board cares) SEGS Grading Service is not part of the suite filed... No member at SEGS talked to or corresponded with the representing law firm, nothing was signed or authorized, nor was any money paid. >>
I'm hoping that we see more input from this poster (because we on this forum, many of us at least, DO care - or at least are mildly interested)
It's just possible some good might come out of this. Maybe it will begin to define what a deceptive grade is, or is not. It might also define what a "third party grading service" really is and is not.
Several months ago I came across a listing for an 1887 Morgan in MS64. If I remember correctly it had about 3 or 4 hours to go and the bid was under $10 (I think - anyway it was very low). When I scrolled down to look at the photo this is what I saw:
At first I was pissed then I thought it was funny. I still wonder if this could be called an intentional attempt to defraud buyers. Maybe this lawsuit will answer or begin to answer the question.
Who is General Failure, and why is he reading my hard drive?
<< <i>I'm hoping that we see more input from this poster (because we on this forum, many of us at least, DO care - or at least are mildly interested) >>
Agreed -- but without the unnecessary "not that anyone on this board cares" bad attitude.
<< <i>This message is being posted for SEGS Grading Service.
Just for the record (not that anyone on this board cares) SEGS Grading Service is not part of the suite filed... No member at SEGS talked to or corresponded with the representing law firm, nothing was signed or authorized, nor was any money paid. >>
I'm hoping that we see more input from this poster (because we on this forum, many of us at least, DO care - or at least are mildly interested) >>
Yes for sure, I can't wait for his or her 7th post. Lot of creditability there. I doubt they made a true statement.
<< <i>After reading this thread and the complaint, I hope the Judge has the intestinal fortitude to give a summary judgment to the Defendants and award the Plaintiffs to pay all legal fees. When Judges start doing this then it might end some of these stupid law suits. >>
So judges should make decisions without even having a trial? >>
<< <i>This message is being posted for SEGS Grading Service.
Just for the record (not that anyone on this board cares) SEGS Grading Service is not part of the suite filed... No member at SEGS talked to or corresponded with the representing law firm, nothing was signed or authorized, nor was any money paid. >>
I'm hoping that we see more input from this poster (because we on this forum, many of us at least, DO care - or at least are mildly interested) >>
Yes for sure, I can't wait for his or her 7th post. Lot of creditability there. I doubt they made a true statement. >>
I don't know what post count has to do with credibility, but OK... The attitude may be explainable by the board participants wholly reasonable bagging on SEGS grading inconsistencies, but that is just conjecture on my part.
Comments
<< <i>The lawsuit contains a blatant factual error. They, like some others here, are making the claim that bidders were sent eMail notices for ended auctions that accuse the seller of listing counterfeits. This is not the case, and never has been the case. The word counterfeit appears only in the notice sent to the seller and nowhere in the notice they send to the bidders. They have offered up exhibit C to prove their point, yet this exhibit is the notice sent to sellers, not the notice sent to buyers.
Russ, NCNE >>
I am not sure on the validity of this, because on the three auctions of mine that were ended by ebay for putting the numerical grade in the title all three buyers emailed me saying something to the affect of "nice try a-hole...thought you could pull a fast one and sell me a counterfeit coin...good thing ebay shut your auction down, dirtbag!"
And I never once mentioned the word counterfeit to any of them, so how you suppose they got their info on being counterfeit?
morris
** I would take a shack on the Rock over a castle in the sand !! **
Don't take life so seriously...nobody gets out alive.
ALL VALLEY COIN AND JEWELRY
28480 B OLD TOWN FRONT ST
TEMECULA, CA 92590
(951) 757-0334
www.allvalleycoinandjewelry.com
<< <i>I wonder if these third world slabbers are going to point out to the court and jury that PCGS's own Buy, Sell, Trade Forum doesn't ban their products.
Ebay doesn't ban there products.
<< <i>
<< <i>Now, we who pay close attention may conclude that it's a numismatic "death penalty", but eBay is just one of many venues, and as a single venue it cannot reasonably assumed their policy results in said capital punishment, unless they also are found to be a monopoly, which they are not, and cannot found to be when there are alternative venues, including those provided by members of this forum
Keep in mind that I'm trying to think like an average juror here, many of which aren't fans of big, huge powerful businesses that have the ability to destroy smaller businesses with arguably arbitrary judgment calls that can make or break a business.
For the average individual looking to sell into a large audience, there really *is* no alternative venue to eBay. Thus, even if it's not an actual monopoly, it is in many ways a de facto monopoly for practical purposes. >>
Sort of like Microsoft...and look what happened to them...dum, dum, dum, dum. (cue creepy music)
morris
** I would take a shack on the Rock over a castle in the sand !! **
Don't take life so seriously...nobody gets out alive.
ALL VALLEY COIN AND JEWELRY
28480 B OLD TOWN FRONT ST
TEMECULA, CA 92590
(951) 757-0334
www.allvalleycoinandjewelry.com
<< <i>Ebay has not stopped one of them from selling anything they could sell before. Just limited the way they can define it in the title as well as claim a value based on data for coins that are graded under a different standard. >>
Good point...I wonder if the easy answer to all this is just not allowing anyone to put numerical grades in the titles and all certified coins. I for one don't think it matters a whole lot...after I had to edit all my auctions for my raw stuff, I still did pretty good.
morris
** I would take a shack on the Rock over a castle in the sand !! **
Don't take life so seriously...nobody gets out alive.
ALL VALLEY COIN AND JEWELRY
28480 B OLD TOWN FRONT ST
TEMECULA, CA 92590
(951) 757-0334
www.allvalleycoinandjewelry.com
reckon that is reserved,
- Marcus Tullius Cicero, 106-43 BC
Not necessarily my beef with all this, but just to play a little DA...
Would you be okay with ebay banning a clothing maker of good quality clothing (that is not traded publically) but uses different measurements for the S, M, L, XL, XXL etc. from using the S, M, L, XL, XXL etc. in the title?
morris
** I would take a shack on the Rock over a castle in the sand !! **
Don't take life so seriously...nobody gets out alive.
ALL VALLEY COIN AND JEWELRY
28480 B OLD TOWN FRONT ST
TEMECULA, CA 92590
(951) 757-0334
www.allvalleycoinandjewelry.com
This is a court of law not the government. If it were the opposite no doubt the plaintiffs would prevail.
<< <i>I for one think what ebay is doing is just wrong (not that I completely side with the TPGs shut out)...but for many other reasons than just what people have already mentioned. Perhaps I will delve into my reasons later...I just want to ask this for now.
Not necessarily my beef with all this, but just to play a little DA...
Would you be okay with ebay banning a clothing maker of good quality clothing (that is not traded publically) but uses different measurements for the S, M, L, XL, XXL etc. from using the S, M, L, XL, XXL etc. in the title?
morris >>
Does your clothing manufacturer charge radically different prices based on size?
<< <i>funny how these people are mostly located in Florida. why am i not
surprised by that? >>
<< <i>It's eBay's site- I don't see where they have an obligation to provide a venue for people to sell anything that eBay decides is not in their best interest.
/q]
A couple of years ago I listed a bear skin rug. They pulled the auction within an hour...
Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
<< <i>
<< <i>It's eBay's site- I don't see where they have an obligation to provide a venue for people to sell anything that eBay decides is not in their best interest.
/q]
A couple of years ago I listed a bear skin rug. They pulled the auction within an hour... >>
Yeah, you won't see Michael Jackson bidding on the Elephant Man's skeletal remains there, either.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>
<< <i>funny how these people are mostly located in Florida. why am i not
surprised by that? >>
<< <i>It is interesting to see the comments that suggest ebay has to prove that the plaintiffs are substandard in their business. >>
Ebay sells ads. An adverting venue can reject ALL political ads, for example. But they can't sell ad space to Hillary and refuse to sell ads to Rudy. (or claim they DON'T discriminate against Rudy, but his ads can't use his name, even though Hillary and Rudy are charged the same amount)
<< <i> Its the plaintiffs that are inferring that they are not. >>
What SHOULD they infer when ebay calls their product fraudulent, misdescribed and counterfeit?
<< <i>This is a commercial lawsuit in that no ones personal rights are being affected or discriminated against. >>
Commercial lawsuits don't involve personal rights.
<< <i> I would think the court would be very cautious in finding judgment for the plaintiffs based upon an independent business decision. >>
Even if the independent business decision breaks the law?
<< <i> The ANA and PNG don't profit commercially from this scenario. >>
Liability for damages is not dependent on profit. The guy that ran over your kid didn't profit from it.
<< <i>Let's say the court tells ebay it must treat all products the same, think of the ramifications to commercial businesses. >>
Any decision would only apply to ebay.
<< <i> I've lost count of the number of times someone attempted to sue me and the bank I was employed at because we made a judgment that they didn't qualify for a loan and we turned them down. >>
Did the lawsuits have merit? Banks have paid BILLIONS in settlements for refusing to loan money to blacks, single women, for "red lining" certain neighborhoods, charging higher interest rates to minorities with the same income and credit history as whites, etc.
<< <i>Imagine if we had the courts telling us what our loan standards had to be. >>
Not a good example. Banks have always been heavily regulated.
If the courts would've done that with the banking industry years ago, there wouldn't have been the big mess with the Savings and Loans, and now the troubles with the housing loans that's causing folks all over the country to have their homes go into foreclosure.
Ray
<< <i>It is interesting to see the comments that suggest ebay has to prove that the plaintiffs are substandard in their business. Its the plaintiffs that are inferring that they are not. How are they going to prove otherwise. This is a commercial lawsuit in that no ones personal rights are being affected or discriminated against. I would think the court would be very cautious in finding judgment for the plaintiffs based upon an independent business decision. The ANA and PNG don't profit commercially from this scenario. Let's say the court tells ebay it must treat all products the same, think of the ramifications to commercial businesses. I've lost count of the number of times someone attempted to sue me and the bank I was employed at because we made a judgment that they didn't qualify for a loan and we turned them down. Imagine if we had the courts telling us what our loan standards had to be. I would think that this case would turn on a narrow point (maybe that's a wide point), that of a business having the right to conduct its business in a safe way especially towards the buyers.
This is a court of law not the government. If it were the opposite no doubt the plaintiffs would prevail.
Very well said, and clarifying.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
It's going to take a lot of lawyering on both sides to .."Educate"..a non informed jury to the hoby of numismatics.To understand the Sheldon Grading system of coins would be no easy task.To put it modern usage today and try to explain it and encorporate it into the field of the TPG's is a monumental feat.This case could drag on for years.....with no remedy.....JMO.....Grading is Subjective ...
<< <i>Kroger Grocery Stores will not allow me to sell my hot sauce on the same eye level shelf as Tabasco and Franks RedHot, mine is on the bottom row where you might not see it, and if you do, you have to bend down to reach it. I'm going to sue Kroger and the FDA, do you think I have a chance at winning? >>
Probably after you have been in business for 140 or 90 years as the companies mentioned above have you will be on the top shelf too. Congratulations on having a product that gets any shelf space at all in a super market, especially a chain.
Chance favors the prepared mind.
I noticed some posts in this thread that alludes to eBay being the same as Microsoft. Get real, eBay is no way the monopoly that Microsoft is.
If a seller of a coin on eBay wants their product to be treated the same as PCGS or NGC, then let them cross the coin over to PCGS or NGC before they sell it.
Getting back to the Complaint that was filed, what standing does PCI, NNC or Accugrade have? I wasn’t aware that PCI, NNC or Accugrade sold any coins on eBay. If these three companies do sell on eBay, are they a “Third Party Grading” company or a “First Party Grading” company.
<< <i> I wasn’t aware that PCI, NNC or Accugrade sold any coins on eBay. >>
Search for Treasure Galleries for ACG stuff.
Edit...TREASURE GALLERY INC
<< <i>Well here's my input on this...
It's going to take a lot of lawyering on both sides to .."Educate"..a non informed jury to the hobby of numismatics.To understand the Sheldon Grading system of coins would be no easy task.To put it modern usage today and try to explain it and incorporate it into the field of the TPG's is a monumental feat.This case could drag on for years.....with no remedy.....JMO.....Grading is Subjective ... >>
To me this guide seems so simple, eye appeal being the really subjective zinger:
General Grading Standards for U.S. Coins
Good (G) - Coin will be heavily worn, but the main design and legend will be visible. Lettering may be worn smooth. May be dull or faded areas.
Very Good (VG) - Still well worn but more of the rim will be evident. Design and legend will be clear but worn flat. Lacks specific details.
Fine (F) - Medium to heavy wear but even overall. The design becomes clearer and details begin to appear. Some letters within the design will be apparent.
Very Fine (VF) - A visibly nicer coin. High spots will show light, even wear. Various major features are visible. Lettering is all readable.
Extra Fine (XF) - Slight wear will show on the highest points of the main devices. Words are sharp and easily readable. All details are clearly defined.
AU 50 - Slight traces of wear on the highest points of the coin; may be dull with some evidence of luster under any toning.
AU 53 - Just slightly better than an AU 50 with a little more luster visible. Eye appeal begins to make a difference between the AU grades.
AU 55 - An obviously nicer coin than an AU 50 with no major difficulties. More luster shines through the surfaces.
AU 58 - This is oftentimes called a slider as it will appear to many observers to be uncirculated. Just the faintest wear on the highest points of the coin. Luster should be quite evident, although some toning can be apparent. Usually coins with poor eye appeal will not make the AU 58 grade.
MS 60 - Mint State indicates a coin that has no wear and is uncirculated. It may have numerous bagmarks and/or be toned. MS 60 is the lowest quality of an uncirculated coin.
MS 61 - An uncirculated coin that is just slightly better than MS 60. However, no question that it is uncirculated. Whereas, some may debate over the merits of a coin being MS60 because of the excessive bagmarks, the MS61 should be more desirable.
MS 62 - This coin should be a much cleaner specimen than an MS 60, yet, just slightly better than an MS 61. There should be fewer bagmarks as the coin takes on more attractive features.
MS 63 - This is the grade that many collectors feel is the most collectible in numismatics. Prices are typically reasonable compared to higher grades and the coin should have at least an average strike and eye appeal, with minimal distracting marks.
MS 64 - This is the grade where prices in many series begin to increase dramatically. For this reason the coin will begin to show fewer marks and the strike will be the strongest yet. No primary distractions that will draw your eye. A near-gem coin with just a few tiny marks or weakness in strike to keep it from a higher grade.
MS 65 - This is the gem category. Coin should be fully struck with eye appeal. Either brilliant or toned but there should not be any unsightly marks or color that negates eye appeal. Any marks should be very minor in appearance. Prices spread out even further.
MS 66 - A coin that just jumps out at you as being nicer than an MS 65. The main devices on either side should have no more than very minor ticks and the fields should be cleaner than that of an MS 65.
MS 67 - A superior coin that has no major distractions to speak of. The fields should be near flawless with just the slightest contact on the main device. This coin should emit a look of satisfaction from the viewer. Prices increase further especially for coins with short supplies and strong demand.
MS 68 - A difficult grade to determine by most experts. When does a coin become MS 68 but is not quite MS69 or 70? A very superior coin with maybe just a minor tick on either side keeping it from perfection.
MS 69 - This is a coin that should create a gasp when viewed. There should be no imperfections to the naked eye. With a magnifying glass a minor mark or impediment may be visible.
MS 70 - A perfect coin with no imperfections seen with a magnifying glass. There should be no marks whatsoever; the coin must look like it just left the Mint. Very unusual in early coins as the mint did not have the quality they do today. Modern coins have been given this exalted grade although there is debate whether coins can be perfect.
As we proceed to higher grades, there should be a noticeable difference in each grade and an improvement in quality, strike, and eye appeal. However, since grading is subjective, it will still be difficult for most numismatists to see a distinct difference from one grade to the next. This is especially so in grades of MS67 and higher.
Any kind of damage or cleaning will downgrade the potential value of a coin.
Chance favors the prepared mind.
<< <i>What SHOULD they infer when ebay calls their product fraudulent, misdescribed and counterfeit? >>
Ebay calls their product fraudulent, misdescribed or counterfeit. "Or"- not "and". There's a difference.
<< <i>
<< <i>What SHOULD they infer when ebay calls their product fraudulent, misdescribed and counterfeit? >>
Ebay calls their product fraudulent, misdescribed or counterfeit. "Or"- not "and". There's a difference. >>
Wording is critical.
It's simple in a court of law to determine what is lawful. That which is not fraudulent
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>Kroger Grocery Stores will not allow me to sell my hot sauce on the same eye level shelf as Tobasco and Franks RedHot, mine is on the bottom row where you might not see it, and if you do, you have to bend down to reach it. I'm going to sue Kroger and the FDA, do you think I have a chance at winning? >>
If you pay the same "slotting fees" and "promotional allowances" to Kroger, you will get on the same shelf.
Ebay charges sellers of PCI or SEGS coins the same fees, but does not provide the same visibility.
<< <i>
<< <i>Kroger Grocery Stores will not allow me to sell my hot sauce on the same eye level shelf as Tobasco and Franks RedHot, mine is on the bottom row where you might not see it, and if you do, you have to bend down to reach it. I'm going to sue Kroger and the FDA, do you think I have a chance at winning? >>
If you pay the same "slotting fees" and "promotional allowances" to Kroger, you will get on the same shelf.
Ebay charges sellers of PCI or SEGS coins the same fees, but does not provide the same visibility. >>
Yep, that is true. My argument is shot down already.....
<< <i>Jeeze... the next thing you know, the cable TV conglomerates are gonna ban coin shows, jewelry shows & infomercials...... LOL >>
WHAT NO MORE COINVAULT! or any other of those FINE coin shows
the_northern_trading_company
ace@airadv.net
<< <i>The defendants should trot out expert witness after expert witness detailing the true nature and reason behind all this SSS crap so that there is an extensive - and embarassing - record of precisely what these predators have done to the hobby. >>
the_northern_trading_company
ace@airadv.net
MAYBE CHINA is behind this? lol
J/J but what does that really mean? just wondering. thanks,MoJo
the_northern_trading_company
ace@airadv.net
<< <i>This message is being posted for SEGS Grading Service.
Just for the record (not that anyone on this board cares) SEGS Grading Service is not part of the suite filed...
No member at SEGS talked to or corresponded with the representing law firm, nothing was signed or authorized, nor was any money paid. >>
This is interesting. Can a plaintiff just add other plaintiffs willy nilly? I know that's frequently done in a class action, but this isn't a class action suit. I wonder if PCI was also added without their knowledge? If so, and both SEGS and PCI remove themselves that would radically alter the flavor of this suit and make it far easier for eBay to crush these bugs.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>I have been reading the court papers, just what does" foreign company" working under U.S laws mean? >>
As noted earlier in the thread, it means they are in a different state than where the suit was filed.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>That is an excellent question. I would love to hear the answer to myself.
There doesn't seem to be a response from the person asked that question.
However, he has been paged several times at FUN to come to the SEGS table... so far no show >>
SEGS should, IMO, sue the law firm that filed the suit and named them as one of the plaintiffs. I bet it was supposed to be SGS, but having any reputation tarnish based on an association with a suit like this (considering the public view of it represented here) should be enough cause to expect more than just an edit to the filing.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
<< <i>Thus, coins graded by Plaintiffs, NNC, ACG, PCI, and SEGS, cannot be listed or sold on eBay as "certified" coins and are referred to as "counterfeit" by eBay >>
JMO but to say "certified" coins and are referred to as "counterfeit,might be what gets them in trouble? are they being referred to as counterfeiters ?
any attorneys here on the forum? what is your outake on this?
Dont get me wrong I am glad ebay did what they did,but what about new companys popping up? say a bunch on PCGS AND NGC graders started there own company,it would take a while to get established, but would they be allowed to list as PCGS,NGC,etc coins are listed?
;
the_northern_trading_company
ace@airadv.net
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
<< <i>It was my understanding, and correct me if I am wrong, but the emails sent out are general form letters that have a laundry list of possible infractions for why the listing is cancelled. Counterfeit, banned items, illegal items, ... are all possibilities without any one of them being singled out. >>
The eMail sent to sellers mentions counterfeit, the eMail sent to buyers does not, nor does it mention the word illegal. There have been claims that the eMail sent to buyers mentions counterfeits, but an example has yet to be produced. In fact, the exhibit the plaintiffs are using in this suit is the notice sent to sellers, not the notice sent to buyers.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>A couple of years ago I listed a bear skin rug. >>
I want one
a few years ago
My Daughter in-law's -sister listed a grey fox pelt on ebay, it was pulled in less than a hour, 2 days later the DNR was knocking on her door with the Sherrifs Dept in tow, (she is a taxidermist) they said she was selling Grey Timber Wolf pelts( illegal everywhere) after a 3 hour search of her house and shop they aplogized and left,someone from ebay(buyer/seller?) contacted them. they had to follow up on a "lead" she is still selling on ebay
the_northern_trading_company
ace@airadv.net
<< <i>
<< <i>A couple of years ago I listed a bear skin rug. >>
I want one
a few years ago
My Daughter in-law's -sister listed a grey fox pelt on ebay, it was pulled in less than a hour, 2 days later the DNR was knocking on her door with the Sherrifs Dept in tow, (she is a taxidermist) they said she was selling Grey Timber Wolf pelts( illegal everywhere) after a 3 hour search of her house and shop they aplogized and left,someone from ebay(buyer/seller?) contacted them. they had to follow up on a "lead" she is still selling on ebay
I plan on getting one of these the old fashion way. Find it still on the bear.
<< <i>As noted earlier in the thread, it means they are in a different state than where the suit was filed. >>
Thanks Russ I missed that one
the_northern_trading_company
ace@airadv.net
<< <i>A revipient jumping to the conclusion that this means they were offering a counterfeit coin might suggest that person has a mental processing problem... >>
I'd say that anyone who reads this...
eBay does not permit the sale of currency that is improperly described, fraudulent or counterfeit.
and concludes that eBay is calling their item counterfeit has issues with reading comprehension.
Ebay got the nickname "sleazebay' for any number of fraudulant seller practices; one of which was overnight slabbing companies using their own grading scale which had nothing in common with ANA or any recognized standards. ACG willingly admits this. The worst was sellers calling their slabbed pocket change as MS65 and of course saying the PCGS price guide says this is worth $$$$$.
How many times have we as a community, right or wrong, sent emails to bidders alerting them before they got ripped by one of the phony slabbers? Don't need to answer that one here.
Joe
<< <i>After reading this thread and the complaint, I hope the Judge has the intestinal fortitude to give a summary judgment to the Defendants and award the Plaintiffs to pay all legal fees. When Judges start doing this then it might end some of these stupid law suits. >>
So judges should make decisions without even having a trial?
<< <i>I noticed some posts in this thread that alludes to eBay being the same as Microsoft. Get real, eBay is no way the monopoly that Microsoft is. >>
Ebay has over a 95% share of the online auction market. Microsoft has viable competition from Apple, Linux, Sun.
<< <i>Getting back to the Complaint that was filed, what standing does PCI, NNC or Accugrade have? I wasn’t aware that PCI, NNC or Accugrade sold any coins on eBay. If these three companies do sell on eBay, are they a “Third Party Grading” company or a “First Party Grading” company. >>
Any bottleneck or restriction in a chain of distribution affects everyone upstream and downstream. You think David Hall wouldn't sue ebay if they banned PCGS coins?
If the allegations in the complaint are true, it sounds like eBay is trying in good faith to protect buyers. Ebay should be able to rely on the recommendations of the ANA and PNG in revising its coin listing policies. The ANA and PNG have been around forever, and they're widely believed to be independent organizations looking out for the best interests of collectors and dealers, not representing the interests of any specific companies. In response to ANA and PNG lobbying, ebay recognized that there was a problem with sellers selling grossly overgraded second and third-tier slabs, and adopted a policy recommended by the ANA and PNG to fix the problem. As it is, the policy is an improvement that keeps out a lot of bad slabs. Therefore, ebay has a good, simple argument that it is justified in setting a policy to protect buyers. Notably, by disqualifying many grading services, the policy reduces revenue for ebay, which supports the conclusion that ebay is selflessly trying to protect buyers.
The claims against the ANA and PNG might be a different story. Doesn't the ANA have a deep business relationship with NGC? What about PNG? Does anyone at the ANA or PNG have non-consumer-protection reasons to conspire against the plaintiffs? Who pissed off whom? Isn't long-time ANA member Bill Fivaz involved with SEGS? What's going on with that?
Finally, the hive of lawyers on this forum might get a kick out of the ANA press release attached as exhibit D of the complaint (page 30 of 31), where ANA Consumer Awareness Coordinator Susan McMillan states that "in order for a consumer fraud to occur, three elements must be present: a person's desire, ability and opportunity to commit the fraud." I think the ANA was wise to get new legal counsel. Ha.
Not sure where all this should go. The problems presented on eBay with anyone defining a grade is preceisely what we used to have in greater abundance prior to third party grading. You can only protect ignorant consumers so much. I am pretty sure eBay is not making more money as a result of their policy change, which would be applaudable if only in the spirit of progress. Depending on how this ends up, they may just open up grading and designations to everyone and just restrict the use of other TPG names and acronyms in the titles and descriptions for other-than-those TPGs and raw coins.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
<< <i>Kroger Grocery Stores will not allow me to sell my hot sauce on the same eye level shelf as Tobasco and Franks RedHot, mine is on the bottom row where you might not see it, and if you do, you have to bend down to reach it. I'm going to sue Kroger and the FDA, do you think I have a chance at winning? >>
I went to Frys today.......couldn't find your hot sauce.
<< <i>This message is being posted for SEGS Grading Service.
Just for the record (not that anyone on this board cares) SEGS Grading Service is not part of the suite filed...
No member at SEGS talked to or corresponded with the representing law firm, nothing was signed or authorized, nor was any money paid. >>
I'm hoping that we see more input from this poster (because we on this forum, many of us at least, DO care - or at least are mildly interested)
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
Several months ago I came across a listing for an 1887 Morgan in MS64. If I remember correctly it had about 3 or 4 hours to go and the bid was under $10 (I think - anyway it was very low). When I scrolled down to look at the photo this is what I saw:
At first I was pissed then I thought it was funny. I still wonder if this could be called an intentional attempt to defraud buyers. Maybe this lawsuit will answer or begin to answer the question.
<< <i>I'm hoping that we see more input from this poster (because we on this forum, many of us at least, DO care - or at least are mildly interested)
Agreed -- but without the unnecessary "not that anyone on this board cares" bad attitude.
<< <i>
<< <i>This message is being posted for SEGS Grading Service.
Just for the record (not that anyone on this board cares) SEGS Grading Service is not part of the suite filed...
No member at SEGS talked to or corresponded with the representing law firm, nothing was signed or authorized, nor was any money paid. >>
I'm hoping that we see more input from this poster (because we on this forum, many of us at least, DO care - or at least are mildly interested)
Yes for sure, I can't wait for his or her 7th post. Lot of creditability there. I doubt they made a true statement.
Chance favors the prepared mind.
<< <i>
<< <i>After reading this thread and the complaint, I hope the Judge has the intestinal fortitude to give a summary judgment to the Defendants and award the Plaintiffs to pay all legal fees. When Judges start doing this then it might end some of these stupid law suits. >>
So judges should make decisions without even having a trial? >>
Judges do so all the time.
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>This message is being posted for SEGS Grading Service.
Just for the record (not that anyone on this board cares) SEGS Grading Service is not part of the suite filed...
No member at SEGS talked to or corresponded with the representing law firm, nothing was signed or authorized, nor was any money paid. >>
I'm hoping that we see more input from this poster (because we on this forum, many of us at least, DO care - or at least are mildly interested)
Yes for sure, I can't wait for his or her 7th post. Lot of creditability there. I doubt they made a true statement. >>
I don't know what post count has to do with credibility, but OK... The attitude may be explainable by the board participants wholly reasonable bagging on SEGS grading inconsistencies, but that is just conjecture on my part.
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1