SEGS NOT HONORING GUARANTEE

I know this is the 2nd time I have mentioned this but am I literally the only one of these boards who is flabbergasted that Doug gave his stamp of approval to this coin at 66 and then said it was graded correctly at 66. I don't think I ever recall during my time here, ever, seeing Doug agree with any grade on a piece of plastic

...carry on

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The amount of irony in criticizing others ability to read when you are arguing something that directly contradicts SEGS own wording on their website is unfathomable.

http://www.segsgrading.com/Content/Guarantee

There's the link again since clearly you still haven't read their own wording.

This is copy and pasted directly from their website as they worded it at this time:
"If the re-grade is lower than that originally assigned by SEGS, SEGS shall pay the owner the difference between the fair market value of the coin at the newly established grade and the fair market value of the coin at the original grade. Fair market value shall be determined by SEGS based on recent actual transactions in the market place for coins of that type, variety, error, and/or grade."

Their own wording states no disclaimers as to when it was graded. As I mentioned before exclusions are standard practice for the guarantee and everyone is fine with that because PCGS/NGC are upfront about their exclusions, ANACS is also upfront about what generations of slabs their guarantee covers. If SEGS wishes to have exclusions their website should state it just like the others do.

Authenticity is NOT all their guarantee covers as you continue to try and proclaim.

 

If you're done editing... The problem the OP has is that he has not received satisfaction, irregardless of what the guarantee says, and he wanted us to side with him.
And, if anyone is trying to place blame solely on SEGS for not wanting to honor their "guarantee" then they are missing the possible original intent of the OP in purchasing the coin in the first place. Obviously Mr Briggs did not!

 

Apparently you're missing what the guarantee says entirely. The ONLY thing that matters is what the guarantee says. No one forced SEGS to grade that a 66, no one forced them to change the grade.

Obviously you just want to make excuses for SEGS. The blame is entirely on SEGS if they are in fact refusing to honor a guarantee which their own words state exists. If you had read you would see not a single person has said they should pay PCGS money for it, but they absolutely should be paying the SEGS price difference.

It's really hard to have a rational discussion though when you spent so long denying what it actually said when it took 20 seconds to look it up.

 

Why does intent matter? A guarantee is a guarantee. According to you, "I don't like how you smell" is a good reason not to honor a guarantee.

If they don't want people buying 66's that then downgrade to 64's, maybe they shouldn't put 64's into 66 slabs.

 

And not one time did I say anything about anyone paying PCGS money for it. Good grief! If you are at all interested in what I actually said instead of blindly bolstering the OPs complaint then you would know the ultimate shame is not with SEGS.
I'm done!

 

Your logic is quite flawed. The op's intent when purchasing is meaningless. If there's such a thing as below meaningless I would use that term

 

The problem is we did respond to what you actually said. You stated out posting several times that the "guarantee" is for authentication only, that is not true. You then tried to shit the blame to the OP like the OP's intentions have anything to do with whether or not anything should be paid as part of the guarantee, they don't. Then now you are saying no one is listening to you when the reality is you didn't listen to the numerous people who had posted the guarantee and several pages already which clearly laid out the issue is that apparently no offer was made.

If the OP made everything up then this is just becomes a hypothetical discussion. But you keep falling back on this idea that because someone may have tried to get a rip from a SEG coin that somehow voids their guarantee which is simply not true.

 

Thanks Insider I plan on holding the current slab until this is resolved.

 

Are you trying to get to keep the coin and $16,000? How much did you ask Larry Briggs for in compensation, if you don't mind me asking?

 

Hi Copper I am fairly new to coin collecting and this was a big purchase. My thought process wrong or right was let me resubmit to SEGS to get a second pair of eyes on SEGS to confirm. If they look at it twice and came up with the same grading then it should hopefully cross over nicely. If they messed up on the first grading they would make we whole. I thought for sure it would come back an MS66 and I would cross it to NGC or PCGS. Never in my wildest dreams did I envision it coming back as an MS64.

 

This probably has been covered, but for purposes of the guarantee, SEGS the corporation, and SEGS the LLC are as separate legal organizations as PCGS and NGC.

 

I'm just really glad I don't complicate my collecting life with BS such as this........

 

By the way, isn't SEGS a third tier grading company? OP said a second tier one, which is incorrect as far as I know

 

I believe that a reasonable settlement could only be based on the fair market value of a SEGS MS66 graded coin relative to a SEGS MS64 graded coin having identical parameters.

I think it would be generally determined in a litigious process that the onus for establishing the difference between the 2 SEGS graded coins would be that of the OP, possibly disputed or discounted by SEGS, as is thus stated by another TPG.

The OP has by purchasing the MS66 SEGS coin in an open auction, may have determined the possible maximum value for that coin, dependent upon shown enthusiasm for acquisition of same. A lesser value may be established by past sales of other SEGS MS66 graded coins of the same parameters.

I can't believe that a reasonable jury/jurist would find the damages greater than a fair market acquisition value, hardly anything greater than the purchase price.

A replacement SEGS MS66 graded coin may be determined as a fair settlement, as it appears to be the matter of contention, that a SEGS MS66 coin was diminished in value by the regrade process.

JMHO

 

Be interesting to see how this plays out. I am also sure SEGS gets to determine the fair market value for the coins. Not sure where those initial values were coming from At least PCGS is pretty clear they get to determine the fair market value.

 

Market Pricing has never worked this way otherwise some $500 Presidential Dollars I have would still have a "market Value" of $500 instead of $5.00.

Market Pricing is based upon a lot of factors of which the main attribute is what a seller "could reasonably expect" and certainly not "what an individual buyer paid".

 

I'd have to agree with your assessment since it does in fact say ALL.

Larry needs to update his web page or face further problems.