Ebay...Still a Cherrypickers Paradise 2017'

Seems like we have discussed matters like this before and I think a majority of members consider this unethical behavior.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Which part is unethical? The person looking for a quick cash out or the dealer buying on the cheap thinking they are making a quick buck or the TPG selling opinions and then telling people that it isn't at fault if they are wrong?

 

It's only unethical if you know for a fact it is wrong and should be sent back to be corrected. Anyone who believes that they are selling what the label says may be misinformed, but that wouldn't be unethical.

 

So all those people selling over graded TPG coins are unethical. Want about selling slabbed coins that failed to CAC?

The only people who have an obligation to have an opinion would be the dealer buying the coin and the TPG who were paid for their opinion. The thing about opinions is they are neither right or wrong, they are opinions. The dealer buying the coin wouldn't give [language] about the sellers opinion if it was raw nor do they care when it is slabbed. It isn't the collectors job to educate anybody about the nuances of die pairs, that is why they paid the professionals to go on the record with an opinion. I don't buy the "we were sloppy so you can discredit our opinion this time" argument from the TPGs.

 

Which part??!!! It's called lying and thievery no matter how you justify it.

 

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion from what I said. Failing CAC doesn't mean it isn't the right grade either. Say you have a barber half dollar that is clearly MS and they graded it a proof, anyone who knows it should have an MS grade would be unethical to sell it as a proof. Now if you have a 65 that some people would be a 64 no that isn't unethical to sell.

Even the coin from this thread wouldn't have been if someone believes the TPG. Where it becomes unethical is the comments that appeared some places of people saying things like to just dump it and take the money before the mistake is caught. That would be knowing it is wrong and trying to profit.

Ethics largely depend on intentions. Two people could sell the same mistake for the same amount of money and one could be ethical while the other is not

 

Damnum absque injuria.

 

Just picked up a stack of Morgans for ~$26ea shipped - seller listed dates (3 1878, 4 1921, etc), poor pictures and failed to list mint marks.

I usually don't bite, but something about this auction said he didn't know what he was selling - and I was right.

Well I ended up with a stack of at least 10 that will go MS62 or better, 3 "GEMS" that I think will go at least 64, one will go 65 and maybe higher. A few better dates as well. One MONSTER toned end coin that I will get photos up of soon.

Oh yeah,

I forgot to mention the toned 1878-CC in AU+ and the 1891-CC in VF.

Yes, there are still deals to be had - but you gotta hunt them down relentlessly!

 

Stupid, just stupid for unknowledgeable sellers to just let the "market" decide. There is no real market if the offered items are not properly offered. If he had just taken advantage of the Anacs or ICG specials, the guy would have made a lot more money.

 

From the other stuff for sale, it appears it was a dumpster diver or possibly a guy buying storage lockers that got lucky.

I got luckier I took the risk on pictures that were too blurry to see any mint marks, but from the whole auction, it looked like it was a picker's dream. And it was!

 

What if it was to a dealer whom you assumed would do their homework, and you still believed you had plausible deniability about it not being a proof (or to skip the double negatives, you still honestly thought it was a proof)?

Most dealers would just look at the slab and shell out the cash on sight. If this had happened, PCGS would be in a lot bigger doo-doo since an individual faced material damages from PCGS's mistake.

And, to be honest as a flipper, I would have offloaded this coin as soon as possible, and likely would have been sold before I even posted it here. I don't have the diagnostics memorized, and I would have trusted PCGS on their opinion (though, like @jtlee321 , I would have done my research before sending it in, thus preventing this scenario from happening).

 

I don't know, maybe if it were a $200 coin an unsuspecting buyer would be duped. But before shelling out $30,000 for a coin I would make sure it is what it's suppose to be. This is a coin that is very easy to authenticate. Anyone in the market for a proof VDB won't be fooled by what the label says.

 

If I knew in my head that it wasn't a proof I wouldn't try to sell it as a proof. Not to a dealer either. I'm a dealer. I know lots of dealers and they all know me.

 

Wait. Is that even a thing?

 

Since ethics are being discussed, would it be ethical to break out a slabbed details coin and sell it as if it were original? Yes, the buyer could question it but how many collectors are able to make that distinction all of the time.

 

How many years of education do you want to require before people are allowed to buy and sell coins?

 

Oh Jeff, are you really sure you want to feed me straight lines like that?

 

No, it is not ethical, PERIOD. No excuses.

 

But if you REALLY dispute the reason for the details grade, it IS ethical to resubmit it raw and see if it still gets detail graded.

 

I disagree, I am allowed to disagree with a TPG opinion. If I want to crack out a coin and offer it differently based on my opinion that is 100% ok. The buyer has the responsibility to value my opinion in their opinion when ascertaining the value they are willing to pay.

You are insinuating that every different opinion is catamount to lie. The world simply isn't that black and white. You are also implying that coin sellers are always the expert in the transaction and need to take it easy on the sellers and considering how much of the true market is dealer to dealer, well that isn't true either. Many if not most sale are of buyers looking for undeclared value and not simply hole fillers. If over asserting the value is unethical, then how can one claim that accepting an undervalued quote isn't?