Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;SuperDave, post: 2655294, member: 1892&quot;]It takes some pretty remarkable mental gymnastics to arrive at that conclusion, so I won&#039;t bother to try changing your mind. You have to be tired enough by now. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>However, I <i>will</i> mention a couple things for the benefit those reading while holding more open minds. </p><p><br /></p><p>First, there is no ethical defense for withholding the information that a professional third-party evaluator whose opinion is widely accredited as &quot;capable&quot; considers the coin you&#039;re offering cleaned, damaged or of a different grade than the one you claim. If you send a coin to PCGS and it comes back 92&#039;d (or similar), and then crack it and offer it for sale without mentioning that opinion, shame on you. The fact that you refuse to mention the opinion is damning evidence in itself.</p><p><br /></p><p>Yes, the TPG&#039;s get it wrong sometimes. It&#039;s your right to disagree. But considering yourself their superior is kinda silly on its&#039; face. They&#039;ve seen more cleaned coins <b>this week</b> than you may have in your entire career. Do you have the equipment to detect chemical residue on the surface of a coin? Somebody who gets paid to know - right or wrong - has offered a public opinion regarding that coin and you&#039;re deliberately refusing to acknowledge that opinion. That makes you greasy.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Let us contrast that with the idea of offering a coin for sale for which you&#039;ve not bothered to do appropriate due diligence. You, as a seller, are purely responsible - like any other retailer of the last three millennia or so - for determining the value and pricing of your offering. You can&#039;t use ignorance as an excuse for breaking the law, either. This, to one extent or another, is a fundamental aspect of buying coins or anything else, for that matter. Do you know anyone who has never, <b>ever</b> paid less than the maximum they possibly could have for something? Someone willing to pay $10,000 for a loaf of bread? The last loaf in the store before the hurricane hits might_just be worth that to someone, except there&#039;s laws against gouging.</p><p><br /></p><p><i>This is how a trade-based economy works. </i> A few years ago, I made a fairly decent market - for a short while - in certain used electronic gear with a trading partner overseas who had access to a clientele who couldn&#039;t get what I was selling. He gave me double the money which I could get in America for the stuff, and only did that because he was profiting on the flip. It only happened because I sold something at auction, and when it hammered well above what I thought it worth, I inquired of the buyer. Hell, I was going to cut his price some, because what he paid was so ridiculous, until he told me he had plenty of margin left on his end.</p><p><br /></p><p>Otherwise I&#039;d have been ignorant, and would have cheerfully sold him all the gear he could buy for well less than he would have paid me had I not asked.</p><p><br /></p><p>If you want to be a successful retailer, you sell things for the lowest price you can get away with in order to build business and command the market. If you could sell those things for a lot more, and fail to do so, that&#039;s not my fault.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>The difference? In one case, the seller knows better and deliberately holds back relevant information in order to artificially inflate the price. In the other, the seller lacks information it&#039;s his fundamental responsibility to acquire and undersells something he should have known better about.</p><p><br /></p><p>The two do not conflate in any moral sense, regardless of how you twist things.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in