I have been corresponding with the seller on this item. He says that the quantity of 1 indicates only one slab at the price noted. I think it is an e-Bay misrepresentation and intend to leave bad feedback. What do you think ? Should or should not ? Dave Three 1957 Washington Quarter NGC 64 + Free Gift - Stock #94 Item condition: -- Sale date: Jun 28, 2016 Quantity: 1 Price: US $12.00
Trust your gut, we all have that little voice that says; no doesn'tfeel right. I wouldn't ask him the time of day
I would rather not, since I could be misjudging him. I am just upset because I thought I was getting a good deal.
It looks like the Seller revised his listing today. The current description states very clearly that the auction is for one coin. Maybe it was more ambiguous before the current revision, but it doesn't appear to me that he's "trying to pull a fast one." I also noticed that he has set the price at $14 per coin, which is apparently higher in price than originally ($12). He is correct in stating fees that are paid to have TPG certification. I would give him the benefit of the doubt. He has a pretty good rating at 678 feedback ratings, for 99.8% positive. Jack
auction has quantity of 3 total 2 available / 1 sold and the revised description $14 = 1 coin. One offer = One Coin. Cost more than $20 each to slab. Free bonus “Good for $20” redeemable, half-dollar-size token with every lot purchased. and previous revisions Date Time Revised Information Jun-23-16 18:33:33 PDT Title Jun-26-16 03:35:20 PDT Buy It Now Price Jun-26-16 13:42:40 PDT Title Description Buy It Now Price Jul-07-16 18:32:53 PDT Title Description so either take it as one coin, or find another seller.
I can certainly understand the desire to get a "good deal", and I didn't see the listing prior to its revision, but it is your responsibility as a buyer to KNOW what you're buying. When one sees a photo of three coins, with three available for sale, at what would be a "good deal" price (for all three), common sense should suggest the obvious... that the photo shows each of the three coins available and not one of an unmentioned three lots. If still not sure, all it would take is a quick and simple message to the seller. From what I see, negative (or in any way "bad") feedback is completely unwarranted, and by leaving it you would not only be blaming, but also punishing someone else for what was your own misunderstanding.
I was under the impression that the order for 1 indicated the set of three. I am glad to hear that he has clarified his ad. I guess I can say mission accomplished. Dave
Maybe I should be posting this in the "pet peeves of coin collecting" thread, but it really bugs me when sellers do this. If your auction title says "three coins", that's what I'm bidding on, and if the "quantity available" says 3, that means you've got 9 coins total. If you do what this seller did, eBay considers that "Search and browse manipulation", and expressly prohibits it: It doesn't get much more explicit than that.
Yeah - but if it's too good to be true and nobody else is buying/bidding there has to be something up! Just read more careful - if in doubt just ask the seller your questions before buying/bidding! If you think you are getting a good deal on Ebay , Lotsa luck - this is what usually happens.
Usually. But the confusion can work to the (or at least one) buyer's advantage. I remember seeing a listing for "1886 Morgan Dollar", BIN at $150. I had to click through to the listing to realize that it was for ten 1886 Morgans, and, yep, one price takes all -- at a time when the melt price for that many was north of $250.
Fair enough... And I'm sure you jumped right on complaining to ebay, right? Funny how it's bad until it's good.... for you, isn't it?
I also think that it's bad for a grocery store to charge you more than the marked price for an item, but perfectly fine for them to charge you less than the marked price. If I mistakenly underpay for an item (say, I miss something in my cart when I'm going through self-checkout), you'd better believe I'll go back and make it right. If I mistakenly overpay, I might go back and ask if the store will make it right, or I might not; it's my mistake, and if it doesn't hurt someone else, I'll live with the consequences. But if the checkout scanner rings something up at more than the marked price, I'll contest it, every time. I'm sorry if that confuses or upsets you.
Great examples, Jeff. Unfortunately, they have little to do with what I initially said. This isn't about a grocery store, but about ebay and how you take such issue with anything that could be remotely misleading or against the almighty rules, but haven't the slightest problem with it when it could benefit you personally. You know what that's called, right? My apologies for so easily confusing you.
Yes, I know exactly what label you want to pin on me. It's just that it doesn't fit. (I'm also amused at how you slip a derogatory term like "the almighty rules" into the middle of an impressively judgmental attack.) When a seller produces a listing that's misleading in a way that benefits himself, I object to that behavior, and so does eBay. When a seller produces a listing that's misleading in a way that costs him, it's entirely up to him what to do about it; he's not hurting anyone else. Haven't you ever wondered why state regulatory agencies prosecute businesses that falsely overcharge their customers, but not businesses that falsely undercharge their customers? Getting back to something that perhaps has more to do with what you initially said, consider these two scenarios: 1. I buy what's advertised as a mint-state Morgan, and receive a cleaned XF coin. The seller refuses to accept a return. I invoke Buyer Protection, and leave negative feedback. 2. I buy what's advertised as a cleaned XF Morgan, and receive a mint-state coin. I ask the seller if he's sure he sent the right coin, since the one I received is nicer than the one he described, and he says everything's fine. I leave him glowing positive feedback. Am I a hypocrite (there, I said it) for behaving differently in these two scenarios? After all, both items were Significantly Not As Described!
