Here are some general antitrust issues which will have to be considered by the court...
Antitrust Issues
The purpose of antitrust regulation is to protect consumers by preserving free competition in the market for goods and services. While certain antitrust laws focus on monopolies, mergers, and other business practices, the regulation of most concern to professional associations is Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. This provision outlaws agreements between competitors that unreasonably restrain competition, and persons found to have violated this law may be subject to crippling civil penalties and even jail time. And because every gathering among professionals within an industry is effectively a meeting of “competitors,” association members—and in particular, association leadership—must take special care in holding discussions or meetings not to make any agreement (either express or implied) or to take any action that may be interpreted as an unlawful restraint of trade.
The most obvious example of an illegal agreement is an agreement to set prices for a particular product or service, and pure price-fixing agreements have been deemed illegal under federal law regardless of any public benefit or pro-competitive rationale. The Sherman Act also prohibits any agreement among competitors that, while not specifically about price, has the effect of unlawfully fixing prices. Such agreements may include:
Agreements on price-related matters. Agreements about matters such as discounts, terms or conditions of sale, and decisions to quote or not to quote are illegal because they reduce consumer choice and have the effect of homogenizing prices. Agreements to restrict output. An agreement to restrict output is illegal because reducing the supply of a product or service inevitably drives up its price. Boycotts. A group boycott--an agreement among competitors not to deal with another person or business--violates the law if it is used to force another party to pay higher prices or to prevent a new competitor from entering the market. Market division/bid rigging. Agreements among competitors to divide sales territories or allocate customers--essentially, agreements not to compete--are presumed to be illegal. Agreements to restrict advertising. Restrictions on price advertising can be illegal if they deprive consumers of important information. Restrictions on non-price advertising also may be illegal if the evidence shows the restrictions have anticompetitive effects and lack reasonable business justification.
While agreements such as these do not necessarily rely on association involvement, the use of an association by conspiring parties to coordinate these actions can expose the association to enormous liability from both federal and private legal action. In addition, certain acts by an association itself can create antitrust liability for the association (and potentially any member of the leadership found to have knowingly violated the law). Antitrust issues that specifically involve acts of professional societies or trade associations include the following:
Membership. Associations that deny membership to certain qualified competitors may violate antitrust law, if this denial of membership has the effect of putting the denied party at a competitive disadvantage against member competitors. Collection and dissemination of data. Circulation of statistical data by an association may cause antitrust concerns if its use harms competition. For example, distribution of data on projected costs and prices in an industry may be considered a tool with which competitors can tacitly agree to set uniform prices. Generally, historical, aggregated data are less problematic from an antitrust standpoint than forward-looking, company- or industry-specific data. Codes of ethics. A professional code of ethics may be unlawful if it unreasonably restricts the ways professionals may compete. For example, it is unlawful for a code of ethics to state that price competition or price-based advertisement is unethical conduct.
Codes, standards, and certification programs. Any of these which have been unreasonably skewed to favor one competitor’s product or service over another raises antitrust concerns.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
<< <i>Here are some general antitrust issues which will have to be considered by the court... >>
Frank,
Nothing in the complaint I read shows any collusion between PCGS, NGC, ICG or ANACS to keep other grading firms from competing on Ebay, based on the information you quote I can see where some of the companies would have a hard time qualifying as "Professional" when it is obvious to the numismatic community that many of the items graded by these so called grading firms have no purpose other than to take advantage of uneducated collectors.
I could see Ebay using the defense that it is restricting deceptive trade practices being conducted by these companies, if push were to come to shove I could see them prohibiting the sale of any do it yourself grading companies that depict or describing these coins as graded.
On BS&T Now: Nothing. Fighting the Fight for 11 Years with the big "C" - Never Ever Give Up! Member PCGS Open Forum board 2002 - 2006 (closed end of 2006) Current board since 2006 Successful trades with many members, over the past two decades, never a bad deal.
<< <i>Here are some general antitrust issues which will have to be considered by the court...
Antitrust Issues
The purpose of antitrust regulation is to protect consumers by preserving free competition in the market for goods and services. While certain antitrust laws focus on monopolies, mergers, and other business practices, the regulation of most concern to professional associations is Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. This provision outlaws agreements between competitors that unreasonably restrain competition, and persons found to have violated this law may be subject to crippling civil penalties and even jail time. And because every gathering among professionals within an industry is effectively a meeting of “competitors,” association members—and in particular, association leadership—must take special care in holding discussions or meetings not to make any agreement (either express or implied) or to take any action that may be interpreted as an unlawful restraint of trade.
The most obvious example of an illegal agreement is an agreement to set prices for a particular product or service, and pure price-fixing agreements have been deemed illegal under federal law regardless of any public benefit or pro-competitive rationale. The Sherman Act also prohibits any agreement among competitors that, while not specifically about price, has the effect of unlawfully fixing prices. Such agreements may include:
Agreements on price-related matters. Agreements about matters such as discounts, terms or conditions of sale, and decisions to quote or not to quote are illegal because they reduce consumer choice and have the effect of homogenizing prices. Agreements to restrict output. An agreement to restrict output is illegal because reducing the supply of a product or service inevitably drives up its price. Boycotts. A group boycott--an agreement among competitors not to deal with another person or business--violates the law if it is used to force another party to pay higher prices or to prevent a new competitor from entering the market. Market division/bid rigging. Agreements among competitors to divide sales territories or allocate customers--essentially, agreements not to compete--are presumed to be illegal. Agreements to restrict advertising. Restrictions on price advertising can be illegal if they deprive consumers of important information. Restrictions on non-price advertising also may be illegal if the evidence shows the restrictions have anticompetitive effects and lack reasonable business justification.
While agreements such as these do not necessarily rely on association involvement, the use of an association by conspiring parties to coordinate these actions can expose the association to enormous liability from both federal and private legal action. In addition, certain acts by an association itself can create antitrust liability for the association (and potentially any member of the leadership found to have knowingly violated the law). Antitrust issues that specifically involve acts of professional societies or trade associations include the following:
Membership. Associations that deny membership to certain qualified competitors may violate antitrust law, if this denial of membership has the effect of putting the denied party at a competitive disadvantage against member competitors. Collection and dissemination of data. Circulation of statistical data by an association may cause antitrust concerns if its use harms competition. For example, distribution of data on projected costs and prices in an industry may be considered a tool with which competitors can tacitly agree to set uniform prices. Generally, historical, aggregated data are less problematic from an antitrust standpoint than forward-looking, company- or industry-specific data. Codes of ethics. A professional code of ethics may be unlawful if it unreasonably restricts the ways professionals may compete. For example, it is unlawful for a code of ethics to state that price competition or price-based advertisement is unethical conduct.
Codes, standards, and certification programs. Any of these which have been unreasonably skewed to favor one competitor’s product or service over another raises antitrust concerns. >>
<< <i>Codes, standards, and certification programs. Any of these which have been unreasonably skewed to favor one competitor’s product or service over another raises antitrust concerns. >>
So a person selling a raw coin is being unfairly treated because the same coin certified might sell for more? What a bunch of horse dung this guy is trying to sell! When was the last time someone with an average IQ paid PCGS money for a SEG slab graded the same? Guess there goes the unreasonable agrument!
Sounds to me like there is just a few that likes to cry, "poor me"
If you don't like eBay's rules, open up your own web site and stop moaning about it. If you want to sell an inferior product, that is your choice but stop crying about it. Most advertisement agencies will tell you, “It is all about the packaging”. Next we will hear that a car dealer will have to sell a new BMW SUV for the same price as a Ford SUV.
We have heard phrases like “restraint of trade” and “Equal protection under the law” but I noticed that we don’t hear the phrase “Truth in Advertisement”
Now let us get down to the “nuts and bolts”. What seller on eBay who is selling a MS68 “Third World” graded slab and honestly believed that it was a MS68 coin, would be happy getting $60 when if he crossed it over to PCGS (grade for grade) he would probably get $15,000? Case in point, I bought a NNC MS68 1964-D Kennedy on eBay for $60 including postage and insurance. From the picture, I knew it wasn’t a MS68 coin, but figured that it would grade at least MS65. From the picture, it looked like it was the FS-104. After receiving the coin, I cracked it out and sent it into PCGS and it now sits in a MS65 holder marked 1964-D DDO FS-104. My point is the seller didn’t know about the variety, but if he thought it would grade even as a MS67 ($1,300 price range), he would have tried to cross it over to PCGS or NGC. So yes, I agree with eBay’s policy.
So a person selling a raw coin is being unfairly treated because the same coin certified might sell for more? >>
No one said that...
<< <i> What a bunch of horse dung this guy is trying to sell! When was the last time someone with an average IQ paid PCGS money for a SEG slab graded the same? Guess there goes the unreasonable agrument! >>
And when was the last time someone with a reasonable IQ paid PCGS money for an NGC MS70? WOW- geniuses...the market determines the different prices for different TPG coins...
<< <i> Sounds to me like there is just a few that likes to cry, "poor me" >>
I only feel sorry for people that think they can pre-judge a lawsuit based on what they WANT the outcome to be, while ignoring the law.
<< <i>If you don't like eBay's rules, open up your own web site and stop moaning about it. If you want to sell an inferior product, that is your choice but stop crying about it. Most advertisement agencies will tell you, “It is all about the packaging”. Next we will hear that a car dealer will have to sell a new BMW SUV for the same price as a Ford SUV. >>
You absolutely miss the point. You can ban the ADVERTISING (that's what ebay is) of a CLASS of products (pornography, guns) but you ABSOLUTELY CANNOT allow gun advertising while accepting ads from S&W but not Ruger.
<< <i>We have heard phrases like “restraint of trade” and “Equal protection under the law” but I noticed that we don’t hear the phrase “Truth in Advertisement” >>
Since there is no enforceable standard for coin grades, it is not possible to prove untruthfulness from any TPG that simply grades to their own standards.
<< <i>Now let us get down to the “nuts and bolts”. What seller on eBay who is selling a MS68 “Third World” graded slab and honestly believed that it was a MS68 coin, would be happy getting $60 when if he crossed it over to PCGS (grade for grade) he would probably get $15,000? >>
Because it would not cross to PCGS. That's why the market value might only be $60 for the SLAB THAT IT'S IN. There are MS70 coins that NGC has slabbed numerous examples where PCGS has slabbed NONE. Is NGC fraudulent?
<< <i>Case in point, I bought a NNC MS68 1964-D Kennedy on eBay for $60 including postage and insurance. From the picture, I knew it wasn’t a MS68 coin, but figured that it would grade at least MS65. From the picture, it looked like it was the FS-104. After receiving the coin, I cracked it out and sent it into PCGS and it now sits in a MS65 holder marked 1964-D DDO FS-104. My point is the seller didn’t know about the variety, but if he thought it would grade even as a MS67 ($1,300 price range), he would have tried to cross it over to PCGS or NGC. So yes, I agree with eBay’s policy. >>
You can agree with ebay, but it's very likely that their policy will be ruled illegal.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
Nothing in the complaint I read shows any collusion between PCGS, NGC, ICG or ANACS to keep other grading firms from competing on Ebay, >>
The collusion is among the 'approved" grading companies, ebay, the ANA and the PNG.
<< <i>based on the information you quote I can see where some of the companies would have a hard time qualifying as "Professional" >>
"Professional" refers to the "professional" trade organizations, the ANA and the PNG.
<< <i>when it is obvious to the numismatic community that many of the items graded by these so called grading firms have no purpose other than to take advantage of uneducated collectors. >>
What's obvious to the numismatic community is different than how a typical jury might rule.
<< <i>I could see Ebay using the defense that it is restricting deceptive trade practices being conducted by these companies, if push were to come to shove I could see them prohibiting the sale of any do it yourself grading companies that depict or describing these coins as graded. >>
And when, exactly, have any of these grading companies, particularly PCI and SEGS, been PROVEN to have engaged in deceptive trade practices?
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
<< <i>Since there is no enforceable standard for coin grades, it is not possible to prove untruthfulness from any TPG that simply grades to their own standards. >>
If a TPG places a worn coin into it's holder and labels it mint state condition then there is a questionable amount of validity as to it's credibility.....
eBay is NOT an auction house. EBay is not registered anywhere as an auctioneer. Rather, eBay claims to be a facilitator- like an online bulletin board. That is the difference between Heritage, a licensed auctioneer, and eBay. And, that is why I tend to think Frank's analysis is better than others.
<< <i>eBay is NOT an auction house. EBay is not registered anywhere as an auctioneer. Rather, eBay claims to be a facilitator- like an online bulletin board. That is the difference between Heritage, a licensed auctioneer, and eBay. And, that is why I tend to think Frank's analysis is better than others. >>
If that's the analogy, online bulletin boards can decide who they allow to participate and who they do not. They can also change their policies as they see fit.
<< <i>eBay is NOT an auction house. EBay is not registered anywhere as an auctioneer. Rather, eBay claims to be a facilitator- like an online bulletin board. That is the difference between Heritage, a licensed auctioneer, and eBay. And, that is why I tend to think Frank's analysis is better than others. >>
That was very strange. Your points support the precise opposite of what Frank is so incoherently going on about.
Next!
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."
<< <i>eBay is NOT an auction house. EBay is not registered anywhere as an auctioneer. Rather, eBay claims to be a facilitator- like an online bulletin board. That is the difference between Heritage, a licensed auctioneer, and eBay. And, that is why I tend to think Frank's analysis is better than others.Jamesfm >>
<< <i>Since there is no enforceable standard for coin grades, it is not possible to prove untruthfulness from any TPG that simply grades to their own standards. >>
If a TPG places a worn coin into it's holder and labels it mint state condition then there is a questionable amount of validity as to it's credibility..... >>
You mean coins that are really AU58 slabbed as MS61 or MS62?
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
<< <i>Since there is no enforceable standard for coin grades, it is not possible to prove untruthfulness from any TPG that simply grades to their own standards. >>
If a TPG places a worn coin into it's holder and labels it mint state condition then there is a questionable amount of validity as to it's credibility..... >>
You mean coins that are really AU58 slabbed as MS61 or MS62? >>
Who considers them MS or AU to begin with.???...Grading is so subjective and criticized at many points as to be off as 3 to 4 points on the scale.There is no perfect standard in any grade that would stand up to any scrutiny.There is a value of the grade or basis of the grade to swing either way on a positive or a negative of that value. There are descriptive terms and statements set aside by ANA guidelines that ..Can.. be followed if one chooses.These are somewhat the basis of what the TPGs follow.
<< <i>eBay is NOT an auction house. EBay is not registered anywhere as an auctioneer. Rather, eBay claims to be a facilitator- like an online bulletin board. That is the difference between Heritage, a licensed auctioneer, and eBay. And, that is why I tend to think Frank's analysis is better than others.Jamesfm >>
Ebay should try and prevent FRAUD and those selling raw coins or third world holders that put high MS states on problem or circulated coins need to be stopped period. Ever notice many always quote the PCGS graded price for their crap problem coins.
<< <i>Centsless and those third tier graders have ganged up and sued ebay, the ANA and PNG over the new ebay policy for graded coins. Personally, I hope the judge assigned summarily dismisses it. >>
The lawsuit has been settled out of court, according to Coin World. Terms not announced.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
<< <i>Centsless and those third tier graders have ganged up and sued ebay, the ANA and PNG over the new ebay policy for graded coins. Personally, I hope the judge assigned summarily dismisses it. >>
The lawsuit has been settled out of court, according to Coin World. Terms not announced. >>
So has NGc been bammed from ebay? There is an ever so slightly big difference between grading everything MS70 and market grading everything MS66 and MS67 for the sake of stockholders.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
Ebay is just honestly slowly digging their own grave. It used to be a great way to buy and sell items. The fees weren't that bad, and the feedback system worked. They have slowly whittled away at everything that made them a decent venue for trade. I find myself more and more looking for other venues like the BST and even Craigslist!
<< <i>Once they heard that the plaintiffs had aquired Robert Chambers to testify in court about the differences between AU and BU, they threw in the towel. >>
Robert Chambers pointed the finger at Jim Beeu and accused him of misrepresentation....!!!
Comments
<< <i>I've lost track. What is this thread about? >>
Not a_clu
This is now an official cheat thread.
Ray
Web: www.tonyharmer.org
Antitrust Issues
The purpose of antitrust regulation is to protect consumers by preserving free competition in the market for goods and services. While certain antitrust laws focus on monopolies, mergers, and other business practices, the regulation of most concern to professional associations is Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. This provision outlaws agreements between competitors that unreasonably restrain competition, and persons found to have violated this law may be subject to crippling civil penalties and even jail time. And because every gathering among professionals within an industry is effectively a meeting of “competitors,” association members—and in particular, association leadership—must take special care in holding discussions or meetings not to make any agreement (either express or implied) or to take any action that may be interpreted as an unlawful restraint of trade.
The most obvious example of an illegal agreement is an agreement to set prices for a particular product or service, and pure price-fixing agreements have been deemed illegal under federal law regardless of any public benefit or pro-competitive rationale. The Sherman Act also prohibits any agreement among competitors that, while not specifically about price, has the effect of unlawfully fixing prices. Such agreements may include:
Agreements on price-related matters. Agreements about matters such as discounts, terms or conditions of sale, and decisions to quote or not to quote are illegal because they reduce consumer choice and have the effect of homogenizing prices.
Agreements to restrict output. An agreement to restrict output is illegal because reducing the supply of a product or service inevitably drives up its price.
Boycotts. A group boycott--an agreement among competitors not to deal with another person or business--violates the law if it is used to force another party to pay higher prices or to prevent a new competitor from entering the market.
Market division/bid rigging. Agreements among competitors to divide sales territories or allocate customers--essentially, agreements not to compete--are presumed to be illegal.
Agreements to restrict advertising. Restrictions on price advertising can be illegal if they deprive consumers of important information. Restrictions on non-price advertising also may be illegal if the evidence shows the restrictions have anticompetitive effects and lack reasonable business justification.
While agreements such as these do not necessarily rely on association involvement, the use of an association by conspiring parties to coordinate these actions can expose the association to enormous liability from both federal and private legal action. In addition, certain acts by an association itself can create antitrust liability for the association (and potentially any member of the leadership found to have knowingly violated the law). Antitrust issues that specifically involve acts of professional societies or trade associations include the following:
Membership. Associations that deny membership to certain qualified competitors may violate antitrust law, if this denial of membership has the effect of putting the denied party at a competitive disadvantage against member competitors.
Collection and dissemination of data. Circulation of statistical data by an association may cause antitrust concerns if its use harms competition. For example, distribution of data on projected costs and prices in an industry may be considered a tool with which competitors can tacitly agree to set uniform prices. Generally, historical, aggregated data are less problematic from an antitrust standpoint than forward-looking, company- or industry-specific data.
Codes of ethics. A professional code of ethics may be unlawful if it unreasonably restricts the ways professionals may compete. For example, it is unlawful for a code of ethics to state that price competition or price-based advertisement is unethical conduct.
Codes, standards, and certification programs. Any of these which have been unreasonably skewed to favor one competitor’s product or service over another raises antitrust concerns.
BTW - you do realize that the other coin auction houses don't accept third tier TPG holdered coins for consignment at all - don't you?
<< <i>Here are some general antitrust issues which will have to be considered by the court... >>
Frank,
Nothing in the complaint I read shows any collusion between PCGS, NGC, ICG or ANACS to keep other grading firms from competing on Ebay, based on the information you quote I can see where some of the companies would have a hard time qualifying as "Professional" when it is obvious to the numismatic community that many of the items graded by these so called grading firms have no purpose other than to take advantage of uneducated collectors.
I could see Ebay using the defense that it is restricting deceptive trade practices being conducted by these companies, if push were to come to shove I could see them prohibiting the sale of any do it yourself grading companies that depict or describing these coins as graded.
Fighting the Fight for 11 Years with the big "C" - Never Ever Give Up!
Member PCGS Open Forum board 2002 - 2006 (closed end of 2006) Current board since 2006 Successful trades with many members, over the past two decades, never a bad deal.
Knock it off Frank.
This is no longer a serious thread! It's cheat thread material now.
Post only to up your post count from now on.
Ray
<< <i>+1
Knock it off Frank.
This is no longer a serious thread! It's cheat thread material now.
Post only to up your post count from now on.
Ray >>
OK! +1
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
<< <i>Here are some general antitrust issues which will have to be considered by the court...
Antitrust Issues
The purpose of antitrust regulation is to protect consumers by preserving free competition in the market for goods and services. While certain antitrust laws focus on monopolies, mergers, and other business practices, the regulation of most concern to professional associations is Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. This provision outlaws agreements between competitors that unreasonably restrain competition, and persons found to have violated this law may be subject to crippling civil penalties and even jail time. And because every gathering among professionals within an industry is effectively a meeting of “competitors,” association members—and in particular, association leadership—must take special care in holding discussions or meetings not to make any agreement (either express or implied) or to take any action that may be interpreted as an unlawful restraint of trade.
The most obvious example of an illegal agreement is an agreement to set prices for a particular product or service, and pure price-fixing agreements have been deemed illegal under federal law regardless of any public benefit or pro-competitive rationale. The Sherman Act also prohibits any agreement among competitors that, while not specifically about price, has the effect of unlawfully fixing prices. Such agreements may include:
Agreements on price-related matters. Agreements about matters such as discounts, terms or conditions of sale, and decisions to quote or not to quote are illegal because they reduce consumer choice and have the effect of homogenizing prices.
Agreements to restrict output. An agreement to restrict output is illegal because reducing the supply of a product or service inevitably drives up its price.
Boycotts. A group boycott--an agreement among competitors not to deal with another person or business--violates the law if it is used to force another party to pay higher prices or to prevent a new competitor from entering the market.
Market division/bid rigging. Agreements among competitors to divide sales territories or allocate customers--essentially, agreements not to compete--are presumed to be illegal.
Agreements to restrict advertising. Restrictions on price advertising can be illegal if they deprive consumers of important information. Restrictions on non-price advertising also may be illegal if the evidence shows the restrictions have anticompetitive effects and lack reasonable business justification.
While agreements such as these do not necessarily rely on association involvement, the use of an association by conspiring parties to coordinate these actions can expose the association to enormous liability from both federal and private legal action. In addition, certain acts by an association itself can create antitrust liability for the association (and potentially any member of the leadership found to have knowingly violated the law). Antitrust issues that specifically involve acts of professional societies or trade associations include the following:
Membership. Associations that deny membership to certain qualified competitors may violate antitrust law, if this denial of membership has the effect of putting the denied party at a competitive disadvantage against member competitors.
Collection and dissemination of data. Circulation of statistical data by an association may cause antitrust concerns if its use harms competition. For example, distribution of data on projected costs and prices in an industry may be considered a tool with which competitors can tacitly agree to set uniform prices. Generally, historical, aggregated data are less problematic from an antitrust standpoint than forward-looking, company- or industry-specific data.
Codes of ethics. A professional code of ethics may be unlawful if it unreasonably restricts the ways professionals may compete. For example, it is unlawful for a code of ethics to state that price competition or price-based advertisement is unethical conduct.
Codes, standards, and certification programs. Any of these which have been unreasonably skewed to favor one competitor’s product or service over another raises antitrust concerns. >>
WOW!
Chance favors the prepared mind.
<< <i>Codes, standards, and certification programs. Any of these which have been unreasonably skewed to favor one competitor’s product or service over another raises antitrust concerns. >>
So a person selling a raw coin is being unfairly treated because the same coin certified might sell for more? What a bunch of horse dung this guy is trying to sell! When was the last time someone with an average IQ paid PCGS money for a SEG slab graded the same? Guess there goes the unreasonable agrument!
Sounds to me like there is just a few that likes to cry, "poor me"
If you don't like eBay's rules, open up your own web site and stop moaning about it. If you want to sell an inferior product, that is your choice but stop crying about it. Most advertisement agencies will tell you, “It is all about the packaging”. Next we will hear that a car dealer will have to sell a new BMW SUV for the same price as a Ford SUV.
We have heard phrases like “restraint of trade” and “Equal protection under the law” but I noticed that we don’t hear the phrase “Truth in Advertisement”
Now let us get down to the “nuts and bolts”. What seller on eBay who is selling a MS68 “Third World” graded slab and honestly believed that it was a MS68 coin, would be happy getting $60 when if he crossed it over to PCGS (grade for grade) he would probably get $15,000? Case in point, I bought a NNC MS68 1964-D Kennedy on eBay for $60 including postage and insurance. From the picture, I knew it wasn’t a MS68 coin, but figured that it would grade at least MS65. From the picture, it looked like it was the FS-104. After receiving the coin, I cracked it out and sent it into PCGS and it now sits in a MS65 holder marked 1964-D DDO FS-104. My point is the seller didn’t know about the variety, but if he thought it would grade even as a MS67 ($1,300 price range), he would have tried to cross it over to PCGS or NGC. So yes, I agree with eBay’s policy.
<< <i>
So a person selling a raw coin is being unfairly treated because the same coin certified might sell for more?
>>
No one said that...
<< <i>
What a bunch of horse dung this guy is trying to sell! When was the last time someone with an average IQ paid PCGS money for a SEG slab graded the same? Guess there goes the unreasonable agrument!
>>
And when was the last time someone with a reasonable IQ paid PCGS money for an NGC MS70?
WOW- geniuses...the market determines the different prices for different TPG coins...
<< <i>
Sounds to me like there is just a few that likes to cry, "poor me"
>>
I only feel sorry for people that think they can pre-judge a lawsuit based on what they WANT the outcome to be, while ignoring the law.
<< <i>If you don't like eBay's rules, open up your own web site and stop moaning about it. If you want to sell an inferior product, that is your choice but stop crying about it. Most advertisement agencies will tell you, “It is all about the packaging”. Next we will hear that a car dealer will have to sell a new BMW SUV for the same price as a Ford SUV. >>
You absolutely miss the point. You can ban the ADVERTISING (that's what ebay is) of a CLASS of products (pornography, guns) but you ABSOLUTELY CANNOT allow gun advertising while accepting ads from S&W but not Ruger.
<< <i>We have heard phrases like “restraint of trade” and “Equal protection under the law” but I noticed that we don’t hear the phrase “Truth in Advertisement” >>
Since there is no enforceable standard for coin grades, it is not possible to prove untruthfulness from any TPG that simply grades to their own standards.
<< <i>Now let us get down to the “nuts and bolts”. What seller on eBay who is selling a MS68 “Third World” graded slab and honestly believed that it was a MS68 coin, would be happy getting $60 when if he crossed it over to PCGS (grade for grade) he would probably get $15,000?
>>
Because it would not cross to PCGS. That's why the market value might only be $60 for the SLAB THAT IT'S IN. There are MS70 coins that NGC has slabbed numerous examples where PCGS has slabbed NONE. Is NGC fraudulent?
<< <i>Case in point, I bought a NNC MS68 1964-D Kennedy on eBay for $60 including postage and insurance. From the picture, I knew it wasn’t a MS68 coin, but figured that it would grade at least MS65. From the picture, it looked like it was the FS-104. After receiving the coin, I cracked it out and sent it into PCGS and it now sits in a MS65 holder marked 1964-D DDO FS-104. My point is the seller didn’t know about the variety, but if he thought it would grade even as a MS67 ($1,300 price range), he would have tried to cross it over to PCGS or NGC. So yes, I agree with eBay’s policy.
You can agree with ebay, but it's very likely that their policy will be ruled illegal.
<< <i>Frank,
Nothing in the complaint I read shows any collusion between PCGS, NGC, ICG or ANACS to keep other grading firms from competing on Ebay, >>
The collusion is among the 'approved" grading companies, ebay, the ANA and the PNG.
<< <i>based on the information you quote I can see where some of the companies would have a hard time qualifying as "Professional" >>
"Professional" refers to the "professional" trade organizations, the ANA and the PNG.
<< <i>when it is obvious to the numismatic community that many of the items graded by these so called grading firms have no purpose other than to take advantage of uneducated collectors. >>
What's obvious to the numismatic community is different than how a typical jury might rule.
<< <i>I could see Ebay using the defense that it is restricting deceptive trade practices being conducted by these companies, if push were to come to shove I could see them prohibiting the sale of any do it yourself grading companies that depict or describing these coins as graded. >>
And when, exactly, have any of these grading companies, particularly PCI and SEGS, been PROVEN to have engaged in deceptive trade practices?
<< <i>Just in case you missed it: you do realize that the other auction houses won't handle third tier TPG's coins either - right?
Very good point!
<< <i>Since there is no enforceable standard for coin grades, it is not possible to prove untruthfulness from any TPG that simply grades to their own standards. >>
If a TPG places a worn coin into it's holder and labels it mint state condition then there is a questionable amount of validity as to it's credibility.....
<< <i>eBay is NOT an auction house. EBay is not registered anywhere as an auctioneer. Rather, eBay claims to be a facilitator- like an online bulletin board. That is the difference between Heritage, a licensed auctioneer, and eBay. And, that is why I tend to think Frank's analysis is better than others. >>
If that's the analogy, online bulletin boards can decide who they allow to participate and who they do not. They can also change their policies as they see fit.
<< <i>eBay is NOT an auction house. EBay is not registered anywhere as an auctioneer. Rather, eBay claims to be a facilitator- like an online bulletin board. That is the difference between Heritage, a licensed auctioneer, and eBay. And, that is why I tend to think Frank's analysis is better than others. >>
That was very strange. Your points support the precise opposite of what Frank is so incoherently going on about.
Next!
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
Four grading services, two dealers sue eBay, ANA, PNG
Chance favors the prepared mind.
<< <i>eBay is NOT an auction house. EBay is not registered anywhere as an auctioneer. Rather, eBay claims to be a facilitator- like an online bulletin board. That is the difference between Heritage, a licensed auctioneer, and eBay. And, that is why I tend to think Frank's analysis is better than others.Jamesfm >>
James is a lawyer, by the way.
Ray
<< <i>
<< <i>Since there is no enforceable standard for coin grades, it is not possible to prove untruthfulness from any TPG that simply grades to their own standards. >>
If a TPG places a worn coin into it's holder and labels it mint state condition then there is a questionable amount of validity as to it's credibility..... >>
You mean coins that are really AU58 slabbed as MS61 or MS62?
<< <i>Has anybody heard any more news on this subject???
My hope is that the judge will find it a frivolous lawsuit and fine the instigators out of their shoes.
And I hate Ebray!!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Since there is no enforceable standard for coin grades, it is not possible to prove untruthfulness from any TPG that simply grades to their own standards. >>
If a TPG places a worn coin into it's holder and labels it mint state condition then there is a questionable amount of validity as to it's credibility..... >>
You mean coins that are really AU58 slabbed as MS61 or MS62? >>
Who considers them MS or AU to begin with.???...Grading is so subjective and criticized at many points as to be off as 3 to 4 points on the scale.There is no perfect standard in any grade that would stand up to any scrutiny.There is a value of the grade or basis of the grade to swing either way on a positive or a negative of that value.
There are descriptive terms and statements set aside by ANA guidelines that ..Can.. be followed if one chooses.These are somewhat the basis of what the TPGs follow.
<< <i>
<< <i>eBay is NOT an auction house. EBay is not registered anywhere as an auctioneer. Rather, eBay claims to be a facilitator- like an online bulletin board. That is the difference between Heritage, a licensed auctioneer, and eBay. And, that is why I tend to think Frank's analysis is better than others.Jamesfm >>
James is a lawyer, by the way.
Ray >>
I'll try not to hold that against him...
<< <i>
<< <i>+1
Knock it off Frank.
This is no longer a serious thread! It's cheat thread material now.
Post only to up your post count from now on.
Ray >>
OK! +1 >>
I despise cheating.
Random Collector
www.marksmedals.com
but eBay has always insisted they are not an auction house, just a venue for exchange
eBay has enough money for lawyers that this will be 3-5 years at least
how is Tiffany vs eBay coming along?
a decent size company suing eBay for being a venue for selling counterfeit copies of their product
<< <i>Centsless and those third tier graders have ganged up and sued ebay, the ANA and PNG over the new ebay policy for graded coins. Personally, I hope the judge assigned summarily dismisses it. >>
The lawsuit has been settled out of court, according to Coin World. Terms not announced.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
<< <i>
<< <i>Centsless and those third tier graders have ganged up and sued ebay, the ANA and PNG over the new ebay policy for graded coins. Personally, I hope the judge assigned summarily dismisses it. >>
The lawsuit has been settled out of court, according to Coin World. Terms not announced. >>
So has NGc been bammed from ebay? There is an ever so slightly big difference between grading everything MS70 and market grading everything MS66 and MS67 for the sake of stockholders.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Dwayne F. Sessom
Ebay ID: V-Nickel-Coins
My V Nickel Registry Set - https://pcgs.com/setregistry/alltimeset/71874
eye appeal
No, I appeal !
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>Once they heard that the plaintiffs had aquired Robert Chambers to testify in court about the differences between AU and BU, they threw in the towel. >>
Robert Chambers pointed the finger at Jim Beeu and accused him of misrepresentation....!!!
<< <i>
eye appeal
No, I appeal ! >>
I usually don't care for toning, but I kinda like that Merc!
Dwayne F. Sessom
Ebay ID: V-Nickel-Coins
My V Nickel Registry Set - https://pcgs.com/setregistry/alltimeset/71874