http://www.ebay.com/itm/1959-Lincol...328876?hash=item4af9ab3cac:g:iX4AAOSwX~dWo7Zm Proof? Polished is more like it. http://www.ebay.com/itm/1962-Frankl...980961?hash=item3f53fc43a1:g:H3MAAOSwqv9V6LWF $340 for a polished 1962 Franklin? http://www.ebay.com/itm/1996-W-ROOS...645009?hash=item2363e28551:g:Yk8AAOSwB4NW1Nf3 You can clearly see spots. Not a 70, and not worth half the price. http://www.ebay.com/itm/1971-S-Jeff...652118?hash=item33b2983716:g:SVAAAOSwd0BVsk8v Look at the third image. I don't even...
I think, according to EBay policy, that those "SGS graded" coins can only be advertised as raw. If someone will confirm that, I'll be more than glad to ring the seller up with EBay.
You sure about this one? Unfortunately, not everyone who offers/sells this junk is a scammer. ABON, absolutely, but the last I knew they are no more, yet the damage is done. No matter what side the person is on, the taking or the taken, this isn't funny but sad, and as with so many other shams, is nothing more than another black eye upon the hobby. A well known one that shouldn't be news to anyone here, but still a black eye nonetheless.
Santini, according to Ebay rules, the last seller is in violation by saying the SGS coin is a PF70CAM, when you can only do that with PCGS/NGC/ANACS/ICG. The third seller isn't doing anything, and the first and second sellers just don't know any better.
I would cringe in horror, because someone may fall for this, and pieces of history have been destroied (hopefully no one will fall for the listings)
The first, third, and fourth auctions are all in violation of ebay rules, the second one might be. (Ebay rules do not allow a grade to show on the slab image unless it is one of the four acceptable companes. If an image of the slab for another service is shown the grade has to be blurred out.) They are selling it as ungraded and they don't show the label of the slab, but in the description they do mention that "the grading service placed a PF70 on the coin".
