Help Me Play With This eBay Scammer

Lo Mintage?

Actually, I believe the 2008 issue is considered to be "Low Mintage #".

It is true they make less than one million? (My Red Book is to old to fess up.)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I appreciate your support, but "caveat emptor" is not so popular today. Someone else has got to protect us from ourselves.

 

I don't know the mintage number, but correct me if I am wrong, the satin finish coins come from the mint sets. These coins are not usually entered into circulation therefore the mintage number that appears rare is actually not rare at all. If you can get one in MS68RD graded by PCGS for $50, how rare can they be?

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=29054&Lot_No=27030

With the number of collectors and dealers in the market today, any low mintage issue would fall victim to the same fate as the 1950-D Jefferson Nickel. The coin would be hoarded in mint state, never enter circulation, and anyone paying huge premiums would be very disappointed down the line when the apparent rarity is dispelled and the prices crash.

 

With all the outright scamming on eBay why this guy, with what might be called a bit of a deceptive intent in wording, was singled out I can imagine. At least he is selling what he said he is selling. I look on eBay and search ancients and about every other coin is down right fake...so many I quit even thinking about reporting them all. I doubt it is much different with other coin types...If ONLY most sellers were just slightly iffy on the description!!

 

There was no intention of singling this guy out. I report all deceptive ads in an effort to hopefully make this a better hobby. So, if your ads are as deceptive as this guys, watch out!

For those that defend this guy, don't worry it's unlikely I'd bid on any of your items, as I only buy from quality sellers, ones that accurately describe their items.

As for the satins, we're all entitled to our opinion. But, tried to be a little more on point when comparing a satin with a mintage of around 745,000 to another coin.

 

Again, well said, Lehigh. Actually, $50 for a Satin Finish MS68 is alot of money. These Satin Finish coins SHOULD regularly grade 69, as they are struck differently (obviously) than regular MS coins. There is much discussion amongst collectors as to whether or not a Satin Finish coin is actually a 'real' MS coin, as the dies aren't pushed to it's limit to produce as many coins as possible, as are non-SF coins. Registry sets WILL accept them, so this makes MS68 SF coins attractive, as it is a MUCH cheaper to put one of these in your set. Much discussion on this, as it's MUCH harder to get that kind of grade in a non SF coin. It's similar to ASE production, as those dies are retired after a certain amount of strikings, also. A Satin Finish coin that graded MS68 in the first 2 years of production would bring pocket change, as evidenced by this example of a 2007 Thomas Jefferson SF MS68 dollar (1 hour left at time I'm posting this), and don't forget, even with bulk dealer discount, this won't come close to breaking even for the grading and shipping costs of the coin:
http://cgi.ebay.com/2007-Thomas-Jef...mQQptZCoins_US_Individual?hash=item518f91f452

ANY Satin Finish MS68 that goes for $50 SHOULD be an anomaly. Consider an ASE that is graded MS68....MS68 ASE's are routinely cracked as there is NO premium over bullion at that grade, but is strictly due to the Mints QC. Any SF coin that can't grade MS69 is equivalent to a Proof ASE that can only get a CAM designation, instead of DCAM.

 

Statequartersguy may have gone a bit overboard in his persecution of some on this forum, but he is 100% correct in calling this seller out for misrepresentation, IMO.

 

If you went to a B&M and the dealer is trying to sell you an AU Morgan dollar, and looks you in the eye and tells you its MS, are you going to go to the police to report him? No, you'd walk out and never go back....because you KNOW he's overgrading.

Now, if you saw a seller selling a 1916 Mercury dime, but it was actually a 1916-D, would you email the seller to tell him what he's got, just to be fair to the seller?? I don't think so...you'd jump on that as fast as your finger could hit the BIN button.

ebay has been, and always will be a 'buyer beware', as well as 'seller beware' site. If neither knows what they are doing, then it's every man/woman for him/herself.

I can absolutely, unequivocally agree with you that deceptive titles/descriptions, as well as ALL fakes SHOULD be reported. However, in THIS particular instance, there was no REAL deception. Questionable practice? Perhaps. But, DOES the coin have a P mintmark? No. BUT, SHOULD it have a P mintmark? No, again. This is where 'caveat emptor' still applies.

 

If you report all deceptive ads, here are 2300+ of them http://desc.shop.ebay.com/numismati...911.m270.l1313&_odkw=(copy,replica)&_osacat=0
Another 300+ http://shop.ebay.com/ixwisdom/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_from=&_ipg=&_trksid=p4340
another 2000 http://shop.ebay.com/coins.hk/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_from=&_ipg=&_trksid=p4340.

That should keep you busy for a while. Tell me if you need some more when (if?) you can get rid of these.

 

I agree that the original listing sucked. I don't personally think it was egregious enough to report it to ebay but if he wants to that is his prerogative. However, questioning the character of others who simply disagree with him is an entire different matter that is just as out of line as the conduct of the seller mentioned in the OP, IMO.

 

Go git em tiger!! If I were to report every seller I saw who was selling out right fakes I would be doing nothing but reporting people...let alone people who are a bit deceptive (but again, he is selling what he said he is selling). Now I just say buyer beware... I cant spend all my time playing guardian angel. But good luck with the crusade.

 

True, that 745,000 MINT sets were produced, but mint set production is included in total production output, so you are looking at a total mintage figure of WAY more than 745,000. In order to really get the most out of a SF coin, the complete, intact mint set should be put away.

 

Good analysis of the satins, I like how you routinely cover a subject in depth. I would like to ad to that analysis, not at all countering your grade population analysis. Unlike the bullion coins you compare the uncirculated mint set satins to, I believe one must factor in the future added demand for the unc set satins due to the fact that these coins are varieties of heavily collected circulating coins, ones that will be demanded to complete the collection. Thus, even though MS 69's will carry the highest premium, lower grades should carry significant premiums too. When I say significant, I mean significantly more than the dollar they cost today. Of course that's just an opinion and you know what opinions are like.

 

I'm gonna disagree with this one. The Mint states, unc sets are not included in total production. These satins are a distinct unique variety that will be heavily broken out to complete collections and a mintage of 745,000 will stand on it's own and not be considered just a few more of the billions of business strikes. That's not to say intact mint sets won't be worth more - original is always nice.

 

I appreciate the kind words, and DON'T like arguing, though disagreeing civilly IS what allows us to learn, to become better informed collectors, thus, ultimately, making us better (smarter) collectors.

 

This is a valid point!! IF we all took the time to report everything deceptive/counterfeit/fraudulent, we may NEVER have time to locate the coins we WANT to bid on!! lol

 

Since statequarterguy will not/cannot answer this, I will give you a try. Just what has he misrepresented? If you say it is the "no p mint mark", please explain how stating the obvious can possibly be misrepresenting anything.

 

I've already explained this, refer to my other posts - you're repeating your questions. Now, to quote your mentor again, "Go away son, ya bother me".

 

Yes true, I mostly report those I keep bumping into, I don't search them out. On the other hand, if none of us report any of the bads ones, we wind up with what we have now.

 

This SHOULD be true, and WOULD be true, but its not going to TRULY happen until TPG's seperate SF from non SF coins for registry sets, which they SHOULD have done from the start. As a matter of fact, there are some SF coins getting graded and NOT being designated as SF coins (accidentally, of course), thereby throwing off pops (just another problem when it comes to SF/non SF coins).