Options
Grandmother's estate
shirohniichan
Posts: 4,992 ✭✭✭
GRANDMOTHER’S ESTATE: Nice 1875 Silver Dollar
Hi. My wife’s grandmother died last year and left a lot of coins and jewelry. My mom said Grandma had lots of Krugerrands and other coins she got as investments and keepsakes. One of the inexpensive ones I got from her estate was a 1909 Indian penny . Although a dealer said it’s not worth very much, I’m going to keep it for my daughter to remember her great-grandmother by. We’re not going to keep everything, so the investment type coins and the ones a local dealer said were worth a lot are up for sale. I found an 1875 silver dollar that looks really nice. It has a picture of a lady sitting on boxes or bales of something, and she’s holding a branch. There’s a scroll hanging down from her lap that says “LIBERTY” on it. On the back it says “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” on top and “TRADE DOLLAR 420 GRAINS .900 FINE” on the bottom. There is also a “CC” stamped underneath an eagle. The eagle has a scroll over its head reading “E PLURIBUS UNUM.”
My wife’s grandmother grew up in China, where a lot of these trade dollars were supposedly sent. She brought her coins with her when she moved here permanently over 20 years ago and got more until last year. It’s amazing this one survived so long in such great condition. Grandma collected a whole bunch of coins over her life, and it’s a pity to have to sell them. But we can’t afford to keep them sitting here while there are so many bills to be paid. Things sure have changed since Grandma collected coins. She was really smart, though, and never cleaned coins or did any of those things dealers warn collectors about. She’d be happy if people could get some joy out of adding her coins to their collections.
I got a whole bunch of Grandma's papers written in Chinese characters to translate for my brothers who can't read them. While looking through the papers I found receipts from coin dealers such as Bowers and Merena, Heritage Rare Coins, and some others. They wouldn't give me the purchase price for the coins, so I'm going to list them here and see how much they bring. Bidding starts at $1.00. Bless you for looking. We appreciate people buying these coins to help us pay our bills when money is so tight.
What do you think of this auction description? What would you assume about the coin if you believed the description?
If you believed it, it would be logical to think the coin for sale came from an old woman's estate. It would also be reasonable to assume that the woman got the coin in China and brought it with her to the States, that she never cleaned it or damaged it, that the coin's in great shape, that I don't know anything about coins, and that I have to sell it to make ends meet.
While the description I just wrote is technically correct on every point, it's a load of BS. My wife's grandmother really did die last year. I really did get a 1909 cent from Grandma's estate (though my grandmother's estate-- not my wife's grandmother's). My grandmother (not my wife's grandmother) really did have Krugerrands. I really did find an 1875-CC trade dollar (I got it on eBay, but nowhere did I specifically say I got it from either my grandmother or my wife's grandmother). My wife's grandmother really did grow up in China (the Republic of China [Taiwan]), and she really did bring coins with her to the US. The coin I'm selling has nothing to do with any of that, but I didn't specifically say that it did. My grandmother didn't clean her coins, though the coin I was describing had been cleaned at least one time. I really do appreciate people buying coins from me, and I really do use the money to pay bills. However, I am a part time dealer and I'm not hurting for cash (money is tight for some, just not me right now).
Now do we see how someone can write a technically correct eBay auction description that gives a vastly different impression from the truth about the coin?
[Edited to add some more fanciful deceptions. I really did get a bunch of papers to translate, and I really did find a bunch of receipts from various coin dealers. The receipts were already in my office, though, and had nothing to do with the papers I was translating (other than coincidence of location).
]
Hi. My wife’s grandmother died last year and left a lot of coins and jewelry. My mom said Grandma had lots of Krugerrands and other coins she got as investments and keepsakes. One of the inexpensive ones I got from her estate was a 1909 Indian penny . Although a dealer said it’s not worth very much, I’m going to keep it for my daughter to remember her great-grandmother by. We’re not going to keep everything, so the investment type coins and the ones a local dealer said were worth a lot are up for sale. I found an 1875 silver dollar that looks really nice. It has a picture of a lady sitting on boxes or bales of something, and she’s holding a branch. There’s a scroll hanging down from her lap that says “LIBERTY” on it. On the back it says “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” on top and “TRADE DOLLAR 420 GRAINS .900 FINE” on the bottom. There is also a “CC” stamped underneath an eagle. The eagle has a scroll over its head reading “E PLURIBUS UNUM.”
My wife’s grandmother grew up in China, where a lot of these trade dollars were supposedly sent. She brought her coins with her when she moved here permanently over 20 years ago and got more until last year. It’s amazing this one survived so long in such great condition. Grandma collected a whole bunch of coins over her life, and it’s a pity to have to sell them. But we can’t afford to keep them sitting here while there are so many bills to be paid. Things sure have changed since Grandma collected coins. She was really smart, though, and never cleaned coins or did any of those things dealers warn collectors about. She’d be happy if people could get some joy out of adding her coins to their collections.
I got a whole bunch of Grandma's papers written in Chinese characters to translate for my brothers who can't read them. While looking through the papers I found receipts from coin dealers such as Bowers and Merena, Heritage Rare Coins, and some others. They wouldn't give me the purchase price for the coins, so I'm going to list them here and see how much they bring. Bidding starts at $1.00. Bless you for looking. We appreciate people buying these coins to help us pay our bills when money is so tight.
What do you think of this auction description? What would you assume about the coin if you believed the description?
If you believed it, it would be logical to think the coin for sale came from an old woman's estate. It would also be reasonable to assume that the woman got the coin in China and brought it with her to the States, that she never cleaned it or damaged it, that the coin's in great shape, that I don't know anything about coins, and that I have to sell it to make ends meet.
While the description I just wrote is technically correct on every point, it's a load of BS. My wife's grandmother really did die last year. I really did get a 1909 cent from Grandma's estate (though my grandmother's estate-- not my wife's grandmother's). My grandmother (not my wife's grandmother) really did have Krugerrands. I really did find an 1875-CC trade dollar (I got it on eBay, but nowhere did I specifically say I got it from either my grandmother or my wife's grandmother). My wife's grandmother really did grow up in China (the Republic of China [Taiwan]), and she really did bring coins with her to the US. The coin I'm selling has nothing to do with any of that, but I didn't specifically say that it did. My grandmother didn't clean her coins, though the coin I was describing had been cleaned at least one time. I really do appreciate people buying coins from me, and I really do use the money to pay bills. However, I am a part time dealer and I'm not hurting for cash (money is tight for some, just not me right now).
Now do we see how someone can write a technically correct eBay auction description that gives a vastly different impression from the truth about the coin?
[Edited to add some more fanciful deceptions. I really did get a bunch of papers to translate, and I really did find a bunch of receipts from various coin dealers. The receipts were already in my office, though, and had nothing to do with the papers I was translating (other than coincidence of location).
] 
Obscurum per obscurius
0
Comments
Ray
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
i'm never gonna trust another thing you write
DAN
My first tassa slap 3/3/04
My shiny cents
I am Japanese American (i.e. my great-grandparents came to the States from Japan in the 1890's, but I was born and raised here). It's my wife's family that is from Taiwan.
Wait a minute shiro, was your, or your wife's grandmother ever married to harold, who died and left an estate to her to sell on ebay by cliford.
No, my grandmother was married to Harold's father. The truth comes out-- my real name is Clifford!
Obscurum per obscurius
I get caught up in the excitement sometimes, and lose objectivity, when collecting my passion. Thanks for reminding me to keep my guard up when dealing with people I don't know.
Nice try but I think your story sounded fishy.
<< <i>One of the inexpensive ones I got from her estate was a 1909 Indian cent in VF. >>
Somebody who would refer to an 1875 Trade dollar with the generic description "silver dollar" would probably not use a grade abbreviation like VF in their description of the Indian cent. And they would call it an Indian penny.
Obscurum per obscurius
Don >^< (o_/|_o)
If it can be misspelled
I already have
Complete Set of Chopmarked Trade Dollars
Carson City Silver Dollars Complete 1870-1893http://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/showcase.aspx?sc=2722"
i understand the parallel to "deb", but would someone actually DO that? what evidence is there that such desc's dupe buyers into bidding higher? i don't buy the much-repeated claims on here that "drivel sells".
it seems like a lot of wasted effort w/ no impact on raising bidding levels.
K S
The most effective scams have some common themes. First and most importantly, they try to get people's trust. They also try to make people feel that they have superior knowledge compared to the person you are dealing with. They always play off people's greed. Think of the Nigerian Email Scams.
In his story, shiro is establishing a level of comfort and trust by giving a good old folksy tale of himself and his family. He is giving the impression that we know more than him about these coins and therefor we feel superior and more confident that we are not going to be the ones coming out on the short end of any deal. He also throws in some big names that he found receipts from, throws in some details about a place where some of the coins in question were exported to and therefor they may be great finds that have been off the market for a while. That kind of stuf plays off of people's greed. He also throws in a good play for sypmpathy and tries to tug at the heartstrings a little.
I am not saying anything about any other auctions that may or may not have been discussed on this forum but shiro did a good job with his tale.
CoinPeople.com || CoinWiki.com || NumisLinks.com
<< <i>the listing would be deceptive, but your theory has a serious flaw. simply that writing something like that does not help drive up coin prices!
i understand the parallel to "deb", but would someone actually DO that? what evidence is there that such desc's dupe buyers into bidding higher? i don't buy the much-repeated claims on here that "drivel sells".
it seems like a lot of wasted effort w/ no impact on raising bidding levels.
K S >>
I ran coins shows for 12 years. I've heard stories that'd make these Ebay sellers blush.
There's and old saying among dealers that the story accounts for half the price of a coin.
I'd say that drivel does indeed help to push the price especially so with the ill informed and gullible.
Ray
not trying to argue for the point of arguing, but just trying to point out that short of a dealer tossing his coins on the table w/out any extraneous desc's or grades (etc), and letting buyers set the price at their own whim, w/ no dealer influence whatsoever, it is impossible to separate a story from a coin.
possible stories to get a buyers trust:
#1 grandma got run over by a reindeer, left me these coins, and i'm selling them, blah blah blah
#2 ngc slabbed this coin as ms-64, but it's realy 65 and PQ, blah blah blah
#3 i got this coin out of pocket change in 1948 while standing in line at IGA on 34'th and pine blah blah blah
#4 (your favorite story here)
my point is, no coin is ever realistically sold w/ out a story.
what would REALLY be of benefit to the whole argument would be to ask the winners of granny's auctions, and ask how many of them were actually suckered by drivel & bid too much.
point well taken, but is it supported by facts?
K S
Personally, I think if those kind of sellers didn't think that their coin stories brought them more profit, they probably wouldn't go to the trouble of telling the stories in the first place.
I have no idea if Harold's widow is a scam or not and I have no facts about it myself but I am leery enough not to bid. That is just my personal opinion.
I also would have no desire to find out if any of the winners thought they bid higher because of any story or if they thought they were scammed. They might not know or might not be willing to admit either. I think that is human nature. It might be like asking the people who buy whizzed or slider AUs as BUs from some of the big name, weekly coin advertisers if they thought they were scammed. They usually don't know they have been taken until they go to sell.
CoinPeople.com || CoinWiki.com || NumisLinks.com
That's rather spooky, to tell the truth. You could definitely rise to Miss Haversham levels of infamy, if you ever decided to sell your soul to Numis-Satan!
6.2 Restricted Activities. Your Information (or any items listed) and your activities on the site shall not: (a) be false, inaccurate or misleading; (b) be fraudulent or involve the sale of counterfeit or stolen items; (c) . . .
The "Information" described above is something greater that "puffing." Puffing includes terms commonly used in trade without technical or substantial meaning like "A-1", "supurb", "stunning", "shiny","dazzling", etc . . .
"Puffing" generally has no effect on price, or should not to a reasonable person. The most common example you see often is car dealers. They are full of it.
My problem with the "Mrs. Haversham's" of the world is that they go beyond puffing, leading people to believe material facts that are not true, or omitting facts that would impact the price I would pay. Pretending that no educated numismatist has seen a coin in 40 years, when in fact that person bought the coin from a dealer recently, is false, inaccurate, and misleading. Failing to relate flaws (or repairs) on the coins which were told to him/her by a professional dealer is the same thing in my opinion.
I think we all know intuitively, even if you are a beginner, where puffing crosses the line to an intentional misrepresentation. The trouble is discovering all of the facts BEFORE you buy the coin. I don't care if you are Walter Breen, Jr., you can't get the whole story from a description and a photo.
We should all recognize puffing for what it is. We should also make a decision whether or not we can rely on material statements made by a seller. Is there any third party corroberation that the claims are true? With raw coins, you are totally at risk. You are less at risk if you deal with a dealer or person that you have had a relationship which confirms the integrity of the dealer.
This is a valuable element of this forum. I am more likely to buy a coin from a forum participant than a person I don't know. If you enjoy the forum, you are less likely to attempt to coinjack me or refuse to back up a sale, because you will get flamed on the boards, a place that you like to be.
In my opinion, if you buy raw coins on the internet, you have a 99% chance of NOT getting EXACTLY what you thought you would get. I'm not saying it wouldn't be "close" to the same. And yes, I have jumped out and bought raw coins and been disappointed.
Just a summing up of my thoughts on the last three relevant threads.
<< <i>It might be like asking the people who buy whizzed or slider AUs as BUs from some of the big name, weekly coin advertisers if they thought they were scammed. They usually don't know they have been taken until they go to sell. >>
problem is that several prominent and reliable dealers have bought you-know-who's coins (obviously for resale) and left pos. f.b. for her!
<< <i>Is there any third party corroberation that the claims are true? >>
NO. but, is there any 3d party corroporation that the claims are false? NO.
<< <i>My problem with the "Mrs. Haversham's" of the world is that they go beyond puffing, leading people to believe material facts that are not true, or omitting facts that would impact the price I would pay. >>
doug, i do not argue w/ your opinion as stated. what i challenge is whether this has actually taken place. did YOU believe material facts that were not true? NO (i think). and have you asked anyone else if they believed material facts that were not true? NO. so what is the basis for your accusation???
i have not argued w/ anyone over whether or not the stories are true. but what i can't stand is accusations that are 100% not supported by any facts or research whatsoever. to say that "miss haversham" is misleading is valid ONLY IF you have found someone who was actually mislead! and i don't think you have done that! if you have, go ahead and spell out the research. but just spouting off accusations with zero support is worse than what "miss haversham" has done.
it is a flat-out lie to accuse someone of doing something (writing misleading ads) when you have not shown that it actually occurred (someone was mislead). you are misleading US by omitting facts (ie. your research) to support your claims, and that is the ONLY reason i'm at odds w/ the "scam bashers" in these 3 threads.
BTW, this is not to pick on you in particular, this forum is chock-full of unsubstantitated accusations all the time, with zero evidence to support them.
one last thing,
<< <i>"you can't get the whole story from a description and a photo" >>
, and you can't get it from a slab, either.
K S
PS: i added a couple paragraphs and went back and fixed some spelling
Mr. Dork seems to be playing hard to get on the bags of old oat pennies, but what if I throw in the old big penny I found when I was a kid!!! It has a date of 1794 on it, but I don't really know if that was when it was made or not. It is very shiny! I showed it to my granddaughter and she loved it! She liked the way the light bounced off of it when you turn it round and round sort of like the hands of an old clock.
Please, Mr. Dork, tell me how many of the oat pennies you want. If I don't hear from you soon, I'll have to put them on EBay, or sell them to the dealer around the corner. He told me he would give me something called "melt value", but I don't know if that is good or bad???? I need to get some money so I can pay for my medicines. They have gotten SOOO expensive!
Ta Ta for now!!!
K S
<< <i>not trying to argue for the point of arguing >>
Really, Karl?
Doug,
Your post defining the difference between hype and fraud is spot-on, and effectively closes the debate. I'm sure there will be some, <cough>Karl</cough> who may continue to flail, hopelessly attempting to argue an unreasonable and untenable position, but you've erected a logical, conclusive and impenetrable fortress of reason. Game, set, match.
Russ, NCNE
K S
It is still possible that Deb really exists and didn't know any better. That does not change the fact that the auction description was misleading. While my fantasy description can similarly be explained as true on every point, it is still misleading. What makes something misleading is what a rational person would reasonably interpret the words to mean. For example, no one could know for sure there was a distinction between my wife's grandmother and "Grandma" in my auction description unless I made that clear.
In Deb's auction the 1795 dollar was listed under the title "HUSBAND'S ESTATE," but there was no way anyone could possibly deduce that the coin in question was not part of that estate and that she was merely selling it for another dealer or that she had traded some of Harold's coins for it (depending on whose story you believe). Similarly, saying her son happened to notice a shiny spot where someone "may have" tried to polish off a scratch is not enough information for a rational person to deduce that she bought it as a repaired and retoned coin and knew it as such.
If some cannot see that Deb's auction was misleading (no matter what her intentions may have been), then I don't see how those same people could complain against my fantasy auction.
Obscurum per obscurius
<< <i>"MR." Dorkkarl >>
thanks dude!
what doug and russ don't get is this. i don't debate 99% of the "drivel" posted in the 3 threads. the ONLY point of contention for me is this:
was the listing misleading? (- intentional or not.)
the question CAN NOT POSSIBLY be answered with brilliant logic, or impentetrable fortresses, or sarcasm, or ANYTHING you'd do from the cozy comfort of your la-z-boy recliner. arm-chair theories just cloud the issues. you can ONLY answer this question by showing that somebody was mislead, and the only way to do THAT - would be to ask. nobody has offered even the tiniest sliver of research, yet villains have been named.
that is MY ONLY complaint.
K S
<< <i> if you ever decided to sell your soul to Numis-Satan! >>
Heritage is buying souls?????????
My point of contention is that language can be misleading, whether the auction winner realizes it or not.
I could go into a car dealership and someone may me the one I liked just came in 10 minutes ago, hadn't been looked over yet by anyone, and was driven by a little old lady who never got into an accident. I could see where panels have been replaced, see evicdence of repainting, and notice the radio presets are all on acid rock stations, then make an offer based on my appraisal of the real situation. If we struck a deal and I was satisfied with what I paid for the car, his description would still have been misleading.
Some other car buyers may be duped into paying more for junk, even if savvy buyers are able to catch the errors in the salesman's claims.
The same applies to coin sales. Even if the final buyer saw through the bad descriptions, it does not therefore make the descriptions legitimate.
Obscurum per obscurius
......er, thread.
K S
As you know, a few months ago I spent $200 winning four of Deb's auctions. If the same group of coins were auctioned again today, I wouldn't bid nearly as much. Why? Because I believe enough of a case has been made to establish some kind of relationship between Deb and JadeCoins (whether it's a good one or bad one doesn't matter much.) In other words, my chances of getting a "great" deal would be much better if the coins really were from a deceased husband's estate than they would be if the coins were ones that a dealer had already sifted through. I based my past bids believing that the former was somewhat true.
Do I know for a fact Deb's coin aren't from her husband's estate? No. But I do know that she has sold at least one item under that pretense which was actually repaired and doctored recently by a coin dealer. I admit I bought into the hype of the story. But when buying sight-unseen from sellers un-seen, people base their bid amounts weighted according to how much of a chance there is that the coins will meet, or hopefully exceed, their expectations. Therein lies the problem with falsefying a coin's true history.
Would I still buy from Deb? Sure. Would I bid as much now as I would have two months ago? No way. And that's coming from the author of 4 of Deb's positive feedbacks.
-Dan
<< <i>If the same group of (deb's) coins were auctioned again today, I wouldn't bid nearly as much. Why? . . . my chances of getting a "great" deal would be much better if the coins really were from a deceased husband's estate than they would be if the coins were ones that a dealer had already sifted through . . ... Therein lies the problem with falsefying a coin's true history. >>
dan, if you want to believe you were duped into bidding too much - thats your opinion, which i respect completely. but your opinion is not based on proof. it is based on doug's and russ's assertions, as expressed in very effective "drivel" on this forum, that "deb" had a malicious intent to deceive. i personally do not believe their story, and i think my opinion should be respected.
interestingly i suspect that the only guys not open to respecting my conflicting opinion are the same guys who only buy "plastic".
again and again, my ONLY point of contention: NO PROOF whatsoever has been offered to show any of "deb's" listings are designed to mislead the public. you know, i wouldn't even care, but if you search for words like "scam" and "bogus" through this forum, what's really scary is how many "scams" are "exposed", yet NEVER proved.
K S
PS: dan, forgot to mention that a relationship between "Deb" and an "unnamed" dealer was made long ago by her own admission in her listings. don't remember which one, but i clearly remember a huge collection of commem's that she paid a dealer to grade.
DO you, or DO YOU NOT have proof that the "deb" listings were written with intent to deceive?
simple question, which i think settles the issue once and for all for me.
K S
One doesn't have to be able to "prove" an intent to deceive to say "whoa, I'm steering a wide berth from this load of cr@p in the future."
Once dealers start coming into the picture, once coins are "uncleaned," once previous eBay handles become significant -- in short, once there's a whole lot of 'splainin' to do, alarm bells ought to go off. Questionable veracity on these points taints all of Deb's auction for me (but since she's not selling proof nickels, this presents no significant burden).
Integrity is and ought to be the basis for doing business, not stories of chipmunks and other woodland creatures.
If Deb is truly a grieving widow and wishes to share, great. Just don't tangle up the history of the coins with the back-story. It tends to mislead, whether or not that is the intent, and whether one is actually misled or not. There may be no actual reliance, and therefore no damages for purposes of a lawsuit, but in sight-unseen auctions, it is advisable to play it straight if you want repeat business.
Just my two cents.
William S. Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night
"ok, i have to admit that i bought some coins from her a while back, was pleased with them, but i've personally come to the conclusion that something's amiss. ie., i find myself in agreement with Russ. BTW i haven't bid on anymore of "her" auctions either.
K S"
oops, here is another quote "but i'm convinced now that the whole thing is bogus, NOT that i personally care"
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
Speaking about deception, and cars:
The best thing to do before buying a car, is to get the facts, 100%.
Know what the gas mileage is, the space it has, does it do 0-60 in 5 sec. flat, what's the warranty, blah blah.
Don't let the salesman feed you a line, if the salesman is true, he will show you the car, give you some nice features, and let you decide whether you want it or not.
Hum, I wonder if this would apply to everything you buy, material wise, in life?!
Robert
<< <i>One doesn't have to be able to "prove" an intent to deceive to say "whoa, I'm steering a wide berth from this load of cr@p in the future." >>
TOTALLY agree
i am not trying to say you gotta have "proof" for those decisions you make based on your opinoin. my ONLY point of contention (again) is whether the listing was misleading or not. for russ and doug and shiro, it was. for me, it was not. i have no "proof" that it was'nt misleading, anymore than there is proof that it was!
mark, here's my answer to your comments. i was drawn in by a story - the story initiated by goose3 and piled onto by other forum members. yes, i was suckered by a story (sound familiar?), but as others posted their comments, and after i thought about it, i realized that i had the mistake of being drawn in by the verbose arguments and the constant sniping about unrelated issues.
it wasn't until i figured out the key point to the whole argument - ie. DO you, or DO YOU NOT have proof that the "deb" listings were written with intent to deceive? then i realized that all the bandwagon riders were doing exactly what they accused "deb" of doing: fabricating a story based on assumptions and emotions, but somehow avoiding factual data.
it would be different if the basis of the thread was "i don't think we got the whole story, so i will steer clear of this stuff". instead, the basis became a professional coin dealer whizzing coins by the bankroll, dumping them on ebay in the guise of an old lady, concocting bogus receipts and history for the whole thing, then disappearing into thin air after collecting hundred's of thousand's of dollars in illicit gain from greedy coin idiots.
the known facts do not support the forum's contrived story, any more than anyone has proved that "Deb" is out to maliciously deceive.
boy, i don't know how much more can really be argued! some will never see my point, but it sounds like a lot of readers have. i really can't say that it matters much to me which "story" you believe, but for chrissake, make up your own mind, and don't let others make up your mind for you. it's the same thing i hammer away at day in and day out regarding slabs.
K S
1. A board member recognized the 1795 dollar sold at a coin show to a dealer. (I edited the date since I screwed it up on the first post)
2. This dealer (Jadecoin) admitted to having the coin repaired and/or cleaned.
3. Jadecoin (Garcia) admitted that he enhance coins all of the time, hires a coin doctor to do some repairs, and tries to justify it as a good thing.
3. Jadecoin admitted selling this coin to "earlycoins," and claims he described the "doctoring" to her.
4. Earlycoins, aka "Deb Greenman" did not list any doctoring in the description of the 1795 dollar.
5. When asked, it was admitted that the coin wasn't really a part of dead Harold's "collection," but a part of his "estate" since Deb allegedly traded some of dead Harold's coins for the coin in question.
6. Why would an old lady who pretends not to know anything about coins actually trade some coins for another one?????
7. There is only one "Deb Greenman" in the Grand Rapids area, and she is married to Jim Greenman, not "Harold."
If you recall any facts different, please site me chapter and verse.
Then tell me where the proof is lacking.
<< <i>If you recall any facts different, please site me chapter and verse >>
be glad to
<< <i>1. A board member recognized the 1795 dollar sold at a coin show to a dealer. (I edited the date since I screwed it up on the first post) >>
true
<< <i>2. This dealer (Jadecoin) admitted to having the coin repaired and/or cleaned. >>
true
<< <i>3. Jadecoin (Garcia) admitted that he enhance coins all of the time, hires a coin doctor to do some repairs, and tries to justify it as a good thing. >>
FALSE. jade admitted to enhancing VERY FEW coins, and then only when the coin was crap to begin with. they DO NOT justify it as a "good" thing, but rather as a valid thing.
ie, are antique cars ever restored for auto shows? are extremely rare paintings ever cleaned for posterity? has the Sistine Chapel (spelling?) ever been touched up for its own good? are historic buildings ever refaced to preserve their original appearance? is antique furniture ever refinished to improved its strength and preservation? are ancient books ever rebound to make them likely to last another 1000 years? are greek and roman ruins ever excavated and restored as closely as possible to their original appearance?
so tell me, is the real problem restoration of damaged coins? or is it that the whole notion that "repaired coins are junk" is just a bunch of BS driveled by dealers and collectors w/ deep pockets so they can overprice their unrepaired coins for excessive retail profits?
<< <i>3. Jadecoin admitted selling this coin to "earlycoins," and claims he described the "doctoring" to her. >>
FALSE. they did not say they "sold" the coin to earlycoins. the nature of the transaction was not detailed. true, however, that they would have described the doctoring IF they followed their own policy.
<< <i>4. Earlycoins, aka "Deb Greenman" did not list any doctoring in the description of the 1795 dollar. >>
FALSE. & we've gone over this so many times already. the listing said something about a crisscross being scraped off, and shiny areas. somehow, i believe that didn't fool anyone into thinking the coin was original. why do we keep going over this one??? since your'e so concerned about it, doug, the research is really very simple, and it goes something like this:
read the following text: "there is a criss-cross scratched on the front that somebody may have attempted to scrape off, since the area on the picture itself is shiny, while the rest of the coin has some dirt on it", and raise you hand if you believe the coin being described is original.
how many readers do you really think would be duped into thinking that 1795 dollar was original, based on this blurb?
<< <i>5. When asked, it was admitted that the coin wasn't really a part of dead Harold's "collection," but a part of his "estate" since Deb allegedly traded some of dead Harold's coins for the coin in question. >>
true, but again , we've been over this too many times. YOU guys say this was maliciously done to mislead bidders, as if the whole world of ebay hangs on a thread just waiting for estate coins to pop up, so they can dive in and bid double retail on them. i believe (my opinion) she forgot to mention it specifically. and you know what, if you look at the prices she got on this last round, there's no way you can possibly say she's getting inflated prices on her stuff. so the whole bogus story that slapping the "old estate" sticker on these listings did anything to inflate prices is drivel.
<< <i>6. Why would an old lady who pretends not to know anything about coins actually trade some coins for another one????? >>
for chrissake, ask the old lady!!! this is been my complaint from the beginning. you ask questions that imply conspiracy, and scam, and bogus pretenses, and yoy do nothing to answer your own questions, except make up drivel!
<< <i>7. There is only one "Deb Greenman" in the Grand Rapids area, and she is married to Jim Greenman, not "Harold." >>
excuse my strong language, but this was the stupidest thing you did, doug, and i ca'nt believe you did it. i want to fill this paragraph with obscenities, but i'll keep it clean. YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY ZERO PROOF THAT THIS IS "EARLYCOIN", YET YOU HAVE POSTED A NAME AND ADDR. WHAT IF YOU ARE WRONG? you have been wrong about a lot of things regarding this thread (see above).
i've answered your 7 statements head-on, it's time for you to answer mine. DO you, or DO YOU NOT have proof that the "deb" listings were written with intent to deceive? i, like many others, just want to see your research which shows that bidders were deceived. that's all!
K S
No, no, no-- we're supposed to focus on the holder. Certification services are run by professionals, right? And most of us aren't numismatic professionals, right? So whatever the professional graders say has more weight than any of our own amateur opinions, right?
Next time you go to buy coins, be sure to cast all caution to the wind when buying certified coins. Trust the experts.
(Note: Large quantities of sarcasm have been detected in this thread. Read with caution.)
Obscurum per obscurius
1. Point conceded by Karl
2. Point conceded by Karl
3&4. Point basically conceded by Karl, and for that not conceded, I'll let James Garcia's word's ring out one more time:
James Garcia quoted on thread "Harold's Estate: Jade coin replies!": "The jade Coin Company publicly supports efforts to repair coins which would otherwise be uncollectable (though we don't provide such service ourselves). That includes plugging holes, repairing surface scratches, and retoning drastically cleaned coins"
James Garcia quoted from the Guestbook for Allen Stockton: "Thank you, Allen, for performing such an outstanding job on the detail restoration of the 1800 bust dollar. Ive touched up the toning just a bit to suit the look of the rest of my coins. You can look at the finished product here. . . " (I thought they said in the previous quote that they don't do it themselves???)
Jadecoin also provides a definition of "curated" on their website. "curated." Here is a term that has caused quite a bit of controversy in recent years. It is really just another way of saying "cleaned" without having to use that most-despised of terms. Don't be fooled by the folks who promote use of this term, though. No matter how you look at, a coin whose surfaces have been enhanced in any way is cleaned
Jadecoin's second post on the above referenced thread: Second of all, I agree 100% that "earlycoins" should have mentioned the 1795's problem.
KARL, DO YOU GET THE POINT YET?
5. Point conceded by Karl.
6. This was a rhetorical question, whether Karl concedes or not.
7. Karl, grow up. You can't come up with another Deb Greenman, and the listing I stated was public information. If you can come up with another "Deb Greenman" that lives in the reasonable vicinity of Caledonia's post office, sure I'll listen. If you think you can hide on the internet, you are dead wrong. It acutally makes it easier to find people. In fact, I could post a picture of Deb Greenman's house right here on this thread . . . or your house, Karl.
The above points answer your question to me. Just for further emphasis, this next passage was found on the Jadecoin website (I added the bold to direct your attention to it):
Musings from the Jadecoin website:
November 5, 2001: Sometimes, cheaper is better
At the show here in Indinapolis this past weekend, we happened to be set up next to a dealer who had a HUGE "buying" sign. The sign had glaring colors and words that essentially said "we'll buy anything, everything, anytime, anywhere from anybody. The funny thing is, when Dennis asked them if they would be interested in a small lot of some common silver dollars, the answer was "no"! Strange, we thought. Dennis suggested that maybe if he wore a grey wig and put on some grandma bifocal glasses, the kind dealer might generously offer three bucks per coin just to get 'em off our hands.
Does anyone think that our "scambuster" conclusion sounds just like the thoughts expressed by James and Dennis? Coincidence?
I fear obscenities are in the works, but I hope not.
s-l-o-w-l-y one more time, and pretend it's a game. that'll make it easier for you to understand, ok?
<< 1. A board member recognized the 1795 dollar sold at a coin show to a dealer.>>
TRUE
<< 2. This dealer (Jadecoin) admitted to having the coin repaired and/or cleaned. >>
TRUE
good job, doug. so far, you have made 2 true statements and have 2 points. that's jus tlike scoring a safety!
<< 3. Jadecoin (Garcia) admitted that he enhance coins all of the time>>
FALSE. sorry, doug, but you didn't show (ie supply proof) that jade-coin said "we enhance coins all the time".
doug, you lied when you wrote #3. you loose a point
<< 4. Earlycoins, aka "Deb Greenman" did not list any doctoring in the description of the 1795 dollar. >>
FALSE. earlycoins wrote: "there is a criss-cross scratched on the front that somebody may have attempted to scrape off, since the area on the picture itself is shiny, while the rest of the coin has some dirt on it"
darn, doug, you lied on #4 as well! zap another point
you are now at zero points, since for every true statement you made, you also made a false statement. those turnovers'll kill ya!
<< 5. When asked, it was admitted that the coin wasn't really a part of dead Harold's "collection," but a part of his "estate" since Deb allegedly traded some of dead Harold's coins for the coin in question. >>
TRUE enough to earn back a point!
whew! your back in positive territory, doug, at 1 point!
<< 6. Why would an old lady who pretends not to know anything about coins actually trade some coins for another one????? >>
ZERO points awarded, since this is actually the same as #5. sorry, but you even admitted it was a rhetorical question.
<< 7. There is only one "Deb Greenman" in the Grand Rapids area, and she is married to Jim Greenman, not "Harold." >>
WOW, negative 4 points on this, because that is how many board members are disappointed by you publishing a first name, last name, street address and stalker-guide street-map right in a public forum, even though YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY ZERO PROOF THAT THIS IS "EARLYCOIN", YET YOU HAVE POSTED A NAME AND ADDR. WHAT IF YOU ARE WRONG? what if "deb greenman" is an assumed name? what if she lives in a different city? ooohhhhh, i get it, EVERYBODY on ebay lists auctions under their real name, right? i guess that you never think you're wrong, do ya, doug?
bad news, you got to this point in your drivel with negative-three points. let's see if you helped yourself out later.
<<I could post a picture of . . . your house, Karl.>>
FALSE, because i don't live in a house! sorry dude, you shoudln't force those bad throws anyway. but that lie is gonna cost ya!
negative-four. is it too late for doug to rescue his fledgling career ??? CALL A TIME OUT! get in the huddle, doug, and lets see if you can't close out this game and still pull out a victory , even four points down. can you do it? you bet! all you have to do is .. .. . . . . ANSWER THE BONUS QUESTION!!!
this is it, doug. your last chance. you could still pull the game out, even with a negative score. but there's no time to punt, and a field goal won't save ya. YOU GOTTA THROW THE HAIL MARY PASS! all it takes is a single heave, just one simple, honest answer. so here it goes, with no time left on the clock, the question we've all been waiting to hear you answer:
DO you, or DO YOU NOT have proof that the "deb" listings were written with intent to deceive?
take your time, doug. think carefully. remember, the clock is your enemy. think about the question, doug. then think about your answer very, very carefully. remember, that even if you gotta guess, you have a 50% chance of getting it right. this is your chance - throw the ball . . . . . .. . . .. . . NOW!!! THROW THE BALL, NOW, DOUG!!!
or get back on the bench with the rest of the, uh, bench-people. (edited to remove mean word)
K S
FALSE. earlycoins wrote: "there is a criss-cross scratched on the front that somebody may have attempted to scrape off, since the area on the picture itself is shiny, while the rest of the coin has some dirt on it"
darn, doug, you lied on #4 as well! zap another point
Not quite false.
Deb said her son noticed something that appeared like a problem, when in fact (if we believe the dealer) Deb knew for certain that the coin had been doctored. Saying someone else noticed there "may be" a problem is not the same thing as disclosing that a dealer explicitly told her the coin had been worked on.
Doug's point total just went back up!
Congrats, Doug!
BTW, I found a "Milton Deb Greenman" listed in the Grand Rapids area. Is that a man or a woman?
Obscurum per obscurius
I don't know how Karl can continue to argue a lack of misrepresentation after even James Garcia said he agreed 100% that she should have mentioned the problems with the 1795 coin. I think I get that point back too.