As has been pointed out on a lot of threads on various forums there are people who when they see someone got a good deal message sellers to tell them the variety they missed and ruin someones cherry pick. It happens a lot more then most people realize. My personal opinion for the quarter is that the seller certainly should have known what he had, but I will never realistically expect anyone to take a 4 or 5 figure loss or leave that much on the table and ship something anyway. More reasonable amounts yes they should ship and honor it but again the structure of the buying process is really to blame for why some don't always follow through if the price wasn't high enough. Even major auction houses have language that would void the sale of an error of the 5 figure magnitude and everyone seems to accept their terms. The idea of a finders fee while intriguing doesn't seem very practical if the buyer isn't the one who alerted the seller and is a first time buyer. No knock on STL at all and it sucks that someone ruined his cherry pick but to put it in perspective there are people who make less in a year then the sale price and what the sale price probably should have been. I can't blame someone for not shipping that
Yea just kind of the slang for it. Sometimes you will see people refer to it as a green bean or beaned as well.
I didn't call E-Bay, but I did message them about the unfair practice. Of course they haven't responded as their rule states. Supposedly they are to investigate and take some kind of action based on their findings and the complainer is never to know the results. Dave
As a seller, I've had stuff close really low plenty of times. I just took the loss and moved on. Ain't worth the bad karma of trying to wriggle out of the deal. This guy is really brazen admitting it like that, rather than just making up a story about the items being lost or accidentally sold through another venue, etc. (I actually have lost an item a few times, and had to give a buyer a refund, in the process wondering if they thought I was trying to play games like this. I wasn't- I'm just not always the most organized fella around.) Several other times, including recently, with a multi-auction deal I had to ship to South Korea, I had made the mistake of offering free worldwide shipping. I'm happy to do this on a single coin or two when it's affordable, but sometimes it's crazy-high. After paying for the shipping, I barely broke even on those items, but I'd still rather give something away and make somebody happy than treat 'em like dirt. (Within reason, of course. I don't mind giving away some <$25-ish stuff now and then. It does start to sting at the $40-50-ish level. But a deal's a deal.) I'm primarily a hobbyist, not a businessman. But I do try to act like a businessman in my ethics, if not my profit motive.
Ouch! I only ship to the U.S. and Canada. All kinds of weird stuff can happen if you ship stuff worldwide. And yes, the shipping costs can get quite crazy.
Here's a conundrum. If neither the buyer nor seller noticed the rarity, and the deal concluded at 3% of the value, what is the right thing to do when the buyer figures it out two years later?
No conundrum at all. Cherrypicking is Cherrypicking period. Whether blind or knowingly if you bought the coin and have possesion do a 10 day happy dance and on to the next. I see no moral or ethical obligation when it comes to cherrypicking no matter the size of the score
Interesting question, though I must confess that since I'm bordering obsessive compulsive when it comes to details, I don't think I'd ever find myself in that situation.
I agree. In this situation, there is no ethical obligation whatsoever upon the buyer to recompense the seller, especially after such a long time has elapsed. Now, if you unknowingly cherrypick someone you have a good and long-lasting relationship with, you may, at your discretion, "throw him or her a crumb" (i.e., give a modest thank you gift). I have both given and received these kinds of friendly "sweetener" gestures after the fact. It's a nice courtesy. But totally voluntary on the part of the one who did the cherrypicking. Case in point: when Rich Sayre (aka "Cladiator" on CU) bought a holed 1806 Draped Bust half from me for $75 in 2005, neither he nor I realized it was a previously undiscovered Overton Variety. When he listed it on eBay later, it sold for $1,801. It became the 1806 Overton-129 Discovery Coin, and, if you look at that article I just linked, at least one expert placed a $20,000 value on it at the time! Was I upset that such a rarity unknowingly passed through my hands? Not really. Rich didn't know he was cherrypicking me. And had two specialists not seen the coin on eBay and got into a bidding war over it, neither of us would have been the wiser. Rich had no ethical obligation to me. But he bought me a copy of the Overton book and signed it and had the specialists who discovered the O-129 sign it as well. I later signed it, too, so all of the owners in that coin's pedigree signed that book. That gesture by Rich was exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. He didn't owe me anything at all, but gave me a thoughtful gift anyway.