Very Big Scam

I'm delighted to say that there's nothing else on my radar at this moment. During June and July a large number of coins that strongly resembled the photos that are linked to in post #79 traded hands on eBay. Well over $30,000 worth of auctions closed before eBay finally took action. They weren't huge transactions individually, mostly around $20, but they added up. eBay shut down that group of sellers, who all used the same set of photos, by the end of July. So it's kind of quiet, now. Gives me time to add to my Panda counterfeits page: http://www.pandacollector.com/rogue.html.

It's exactly as you put it, the fakes tend to be fairly obvious if you know what to look for.

Best wishes,
Peter Anthony
http://www.pandacollector.com/

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Yeah I've taken a look at your website, good info!! Keep us posted on the ebay ripoffs! It would be really nice if ebay had an "open" forum where the public can go to find out which sellers or coins look fishy. I know they have the "Community" forum but that's mainly for sellers. The whole idea behind that forum was that the sellers would police each other and that's fine, but how about all these youngsters and whatnot who seem to trust all sellers even the ones from China? The buyers who don't know any better are supporting the counterfeiters from abroad and somethings gotta be done about it. Now I know you're doing your part by listing the counterfeiters on your website, do you know of any other sites like yours?

 

The Chinese Coin Forum has a section called Fake Coins that is quite active: http://china-mint.info/forum/index.php?board=11.0
China-mint.info has a list of eBay sellers to avoid. The list is updated weekly: http://www.china-mint.info/fakechinesecoinsellers.html

Those are the two most up-to-date sites I know of for Chinese counterfeits. There are also lots of single articles and news reports you can find on the net through Google. My favorite is a photographic exposé of a Chinese counterfeiting operation. It has photos of phony Morgan Dollars and Indian Cents being knocked out among others. http://coins.about.com/od/worldcoins/ig/Chinese-Counterfeiting-Ring/Chinese-Fake-Coin-Minting.htm

I think we all need to realize that while many fakes enter the country via eBay, after that they turn up at swap meets, coin shows, coin clubs, etc. Every collector should have a working knowledge of what counterfeits look like and this includes counterfeit NGC and PCGS slabs.

Hope that helps.

Best wishes,
Peter Anthony
http://www.pandacollector.com/

 

Just a heads up y'all! Check out this scammer and look at his other items as well. What do you think? Barely started selling on ebay and he's out to make some big money fast!! UNC, yeah right!!

270620122535

 

CHEETAH RETURNS! http://cgi.ebay.com/1997-Chinese-Go...58-Minted-/260650759647?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0

What a deal! Now just $10,000 for $39,000 in gold! eBay sure fixed that.

Best wishes,
Peter Anthony
http://www.pandacollector.com/

 

Someone could just send him an email and say that you're in the area and you want to pick it up personally and test it! I wonder if he would even respond??

 

Probably not... he states: "do not message me im not on alot im very busy"

Yep... busy staying one step ahead of eBay and the law...

 

Typical crook message! I wonder why ebay would just remove him and then let him back on? Doesn't make sense!! There was a girl on this forum awhile back, she said she was from ebay. I can't remember her name but I bet someone remembers. Maybe someone should send her an email with a link to this thread!!

 

They didn't NARU the seller... they only removed his auction. He is still free to list as many phoney auctions as he wants.

 

Mr. Rim's Cents,
You were absolutely right that eBay would respond to the owner of the photo. I emailed Mr. alderwood this afternoon about the new listing, he contacted eBay and they pulled Cheetah's sale down within 30 minutes. I don't think we will see this one again. Out of curiosity, does that count as circumstantial evidence that the photo is alderwood's? Thanks again.
Best wishes,
Peter Anthony
http://www.pandacollector.com/

 

Mr pindicolapsor,

I do not know why I bother to reply because you obviously do not read what I write, but be different and try reading post #66.

 

Mr. Rim's Cents,
I guess I'm just really sloooow, but post #66 is about hearsay evidence. By pointing me to post #66 it seems you are implying that the following chain of events is hearsay: 1) I write to alderwood. That is first person 2) I receive a response from alderwood. That is first person. His response - dated and time stamped - is about contacting eBay. Receiving the email is first person, the veracity of its contents is undetermined without a legal corroboration from Mr. alderwood. That part is currently hearsay but could be admissible if Mr. alderwood confirmed it under oath, yes? 3) eBay removes Cheetah's listing within minutes. That is an observable fact by anybody. So it seems circumstantial that Cheetah's auction was pulled minutes after I got Mr. alderwood's email. So please bear with me, you are saying that this entire chain of events - including all my first person experiences - is inadmissible because it is hearsay? Thanks for your answer and I promise not to ask anything further on this topic.

By the way, I do read what you write and take it seriously (see post #78). I also get a kick out of how you spell my name.

Best wishes,
Peter Anthony
http://www.pandacollector.com/

 

Mr pindicollector,

"The only person in this world who can report that is seller #1." The only person whose evidence is not hearsay when reporting a stolen picture is the owner of the picture. i.e. Mr. alderwood. Is that simple enough for you or can you misread that also.

BTW, my spelling of you name is closer to correct than your spelling of my name.

 

Mr. rim's cents,
Well, I promised not to ask any more questions but your answer didn't address what I was trying to find out. Maybe someday I'll meet you and have the chance to make my question clearer in person. Thanks for your time.
Best wishes,
Peter Anthony
http://www.pandacollector.com/

 

Mr. pindicollestor
Lets try it this way.
You testify that you wrote a letter to alderwood. not hearsay you did it
you testify that mr. alderwood sent you a letter. hearsay :dead-horse: You got a response, but you have no idea who it was from or that it is truthful. You can testify what the response says, but that is meaningless unless you can prove who wrote it and that it is truthful

Now go read post #66 because that is what it says there.:dead-horse:

 

Here is a quick alert about some presumably fake 2010 gold 1/10 oz. Pandas. This is the item http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=280547148993&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fshop.ebay.com%3A80%2Fi.html%3F_adv%3D1%26_nkw%3D280547148993%26_in_kw%3D1%26_ex_kw%3D%26_sacat%3DSee-All-Categories%26_okw%3D280547148993%26_oexkw%3D%26_adv%3D1%26_udlo%3D%26_udhi%3D%26_ftrt%3D901%26_ftrv%3D1%26_sabdlo%3D%26_sabdhi%3D%26_samilow%3D%26_samihi%3D%26_sadis%3D200%26_fpos%3DZip%2Bcode%26_fsct%3D%26LH_SALE_CURRENCY%3D0%26_sop%3D1%26_dmd%3D1%26_ipg%3D50%26_fvi%3D1&_rdc=1

I have no doubt that the photos are of counterfeit coins. Look at the rounded edges of the pouches. In the experience of all the China Mint personnel and Panda dealers I have spoken to, genuine gold Pandas never come in pouches with sealed rounded corners. This is because they are cut and sealed into rectangular sheets of 10 coins with straight edges at the Mint. The only way to get a round corner — as in the item's photo — is to seal the coin individually. That is not how the Chinese Mint works.

If these are like the others I've seen there are other details that are wrong with the coins, but the somewhat blurry photos hide those.

My June 22 entry about counterfeit Pandas (http://www.pandacollector.com/rogue.html) focuses on this exact topic and includes photos that compare fake to real coins. Hope that helps.
Best wishes,
Peter Anthony
http://www.pandacollector.com/

 

Mr. rim's cents,

The removal of the item minutes after the alderwood email is a fact. The question was if these 3 facts add up to circumstantial evidence and if that is admissible. 1) I wrote Mr. alderwood 2) someone with access to Mr. alderwood's email address wrote back to me and signed it with his name 3) eBay removed the item minutes later .

Post #66 doesn't answer that. No need to respond, I have gone past my self-imposed limit.

I am curious, though, how I am misspelling your name now? Is it the Mr. that's wrong?

Best wishes,
Peter Anthony
http://www.pandacollector.com/

 

Mr. Paddycollector,

My initials are R L M. There is no i in my user name.

I will also give you odds that someone else reported that listing before you emailed Mr. alderwood and that that someone knows how to report such items.

 

Mr. rlm's cents,
In post #66 you wrote, "I do not think I am mistaken when I say that the only people who can report any circumstance beyond what is specifically spelled out in the listing (not in any way implied) are eBay, the seller, the buyer, and only any other person who may be the owner of copyrighted material or similar stuff the may have been borrowed, stolen, or whatever for and in the listing."

Well, alderwood is the first person to use the photo in a listing. My email to alderwood went through eBay and was sent to the address that eBay has on file for alderwood. Those are facts. That address then replied to eBay and that message was relayed by eBay to me. The message said that the original lister (alderwood) had reported the theft of a photo to eBay. Minutes later Cheetah's listing was pulled down by eBay.

As you said, only two people (maybe the same person) had the right to demand action from eBay: the seller and the copyright holder. One of those two, via eBay, claims he/she did just that and eBay acted in minutes. That's a pretty incredible coincidence if you think the relevant report had been made by someone else at an undetermined earlier time and eBay just happened to act right then. Remember the email address that owns alderwood's account on eBay claims to have contacted the company about the photo. In fact, to presume it was someone else utterly strains credulity and I would be close to incredulous if that sequence of facts is inadmissible.

Do you still regard this as hearsay, counselor RLM? I remain grateful for your attention to this.

Best wishes,
Peter Anthony
http://www.pandacollector.com/