My local coin shop also encourages cherrypicking. As a matter of fact one time they told me they only look for certain major varieties and don't always attribute coins. I have mentioned a couple to them but I still get my normal discount percentage - 5 to 10%. I always try to cherrypick on ebay - I don't worry about that. I did miss a nice 1858/7 flying eagle on heritage a few weeks back.
I have said, "I think it is a variety" before when asked why I was buying a particular coin. I wouldn't lie if asked...but that doesn't mean I need to volunteer everything I find to the owner of whatever shop I am shopping at. Now, if I'm working for someone, I always note the varieties I find, or key dates.
MANY OF US HAVE COINS, THAT ARE WORTH MORE THAN WE KNOW. IS IT NOT, OUR RESPONSIBLE, TO FIND OUT AND TO KNOW? THE PART OF COLLECTING, IS THE HUNT, OR SEARCH. NOW, WHEN YOU DO FIND SOMETHING, THAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR, YOU MAKE AN OFFER, AND THAT IS THAT. TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT. "THE CHERRYPICKER'S GUIDE" IS OUT FOR ANYONE TO ACQUIRE AND ENJOY THE KNOWLEDGE OF COLLECTING AND DOING WELL. I HAVE FOUND COINS IN SLABS THAT ARE NOT WHAT THEY ARE LISTED TO BE, AND HAVE TOLD THE DEALER. WOULD ONE NOT HAVE, OR ACQUIRED THE COIN, IF INDEED IT WAS, A MUCH BETTER COIN, THAN OF THE VALUE ASKED OR STATED ON THE SLAB. In our coin club, we have one of the guys, that wrote half of, The Cherrypicker's Guide, he picks coin out, sometimes, at our club's auction, and we all know that someone lost. When he buys, you can bet it's a good one.
LOL With your absolute ethics philosophy, I assume you're unmarried, and have yet to vote. I personally haven't met anyone who doesn't Lie (i.e. extend the truth). I learned very early in life that a response to the many questions for which there isn't a satisfactory answer, is evasion, or answer with a question. e.g. What is that variety of which you speak? Is it uncommon? Do you have a coin with that variety that I might view? What's the total for these coins? If someone informed me they didn't fib, equivocate, palter. prevaricate, etc., I would generally consider them a liar, and be suspicious of their credibility. JMHO, Rich
So you deny that lying is unethical? Wow, that's the first time I've heard that one. Look imrich, the issue is not weather or not that someone lies(obviously everyone lies). The issue is that he was asked a direct question, in a business transaction, he didn't evade or dodge, and he lied(if I am reading this correctly). Then, he asked if it was unethical or not. The answer is no. I see no way that anyone could honestly answer yes.
You are correct, when someone asks a direct question "Is it ethical to lie", the ethical response is NO if we were a world of theoretical ethical practices, which I believe, we are not. I believe I could provide definitive examples of where the leaders of virtually all segments of our societies, from parents through the Judiciary, by example/mandate define the acceptable ethic as being the transmission of untruths. The leader (s) of our society, virtually daily, prevaricates openly without challenge, establishing the ethical basis for society. I'm certain that an objective current litigious process would affirm my argument (s), as a definition of ethics is: "the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group" (Merriam-Webster) JMHO, Rich
Isn't cherrypicking an example of a buyer taking advantage of a seller's mistake/lack of knowledge? Now flip the situation. If a seller takes advantage of a buyer's mistake/lack of knowledge, this forum would blow up with outrage. (Yes, I cherrypick and I love it, but want to suggest a potential double-standard for debate).
Is there some basis for this notion proffered above Ad nauseam that a consumer has some burden to educate a seller and/or assist in the seller getting the most possible profit on a transaction? Free Market.
I knew a dealer in Richmond that I would travel to occasionally. He had a little shop, permanently sat around with an O2 tank, and admitted he was "on his way out" with lung cancer. With some conversation, it became more and more clear that he probably wasn't "with it" enough to still be running the shop. I did not cherrypick. He's sinced passed and his wife is trying to run the shop on her seemingly little knowledge of coins. I won't cherrypick with her either, and I actually do feel the burden to educate her, the seller. But I understand this is a special situation.
This depends. If one or two coins, I see no problem with the dealer telling you unless there have been past problems. However, if someone is trying to sell a larger number of coins and expects the dealer to dig through each and every one, then the answer is no. Just as it should not be up to collectors to do a dealer's job, it is not the dealer's responsibility to, within reason, freely attribute for a collector. Really, it all comes down to the collector and what their intentions are, as there are plenty of guys out there who want their cake and to eat it too. With exceptions noted, you're on the money with this one. From a simple pick, to taking complete advantage of someone, when it comes to a certain minority here, this is only okay if they or their buddies are the ones doing it. Anyone else should expect tar and feathers, or to be hung by their unmentionables.
In Jaceravone's original scenario there was only one coin in question and it was just such a scenario that I was responding to. I quite agree with you that if I were to walk into a dealers place of business ,with an armload of 2x2's, it would be presumptuous of me to expect him to attribute each and every one of them. That's my job. But, when served with a pointed question by the dealer as to whether or not I feel that the coin I just picked out of his pile of junk is a 'such and such variety' I would feel compelled to answer quite honestly. However, in doing so, I think I would take ToughCoins tack and counter with, "If it was, would you still sell it to me at the quoted price?"
My apologies for going off track. I agree with answering honestly, at least in most cases. However, and unless I am not remembering correctly, in the past the OP did tell them and they refused to honor the original price, right? If so, I feel he is under no ethical obligation to answer them. As I believe someone else may have said: fool me once, shame on you, but fool me twice, shame on me.