SEGS NOT HONORING GUARANTEE

LOL

I believe this is a subject upon which we could intensively debate, but probably the exercise would be futile. The crux of the problem in the Numismatic "Industry" is as I believe will be someday shown, without an industry "standard".

The "standard" is based on an industry seemingly without a minimal semblance of required accreditation. The individual firms state titles and grades based on subjective standards, which can be shown to be inconsistently applied.

If you objectively review the PCI case, and you've broad experience in this industry you'll probably be amazed at the proceedings. Maybe wonder how firms/individuals without published standards supporting their arguments can be the decisive basis for damages.

In my state we've had to initiate unique statutes for successful interstate prosecution of outstate firms in the Federal courts. Several of these prominent firms still believe they're immune, and continue their efforts of violation. The wheels of Justice slowly turn, and it's believed that retribution will be earned.

I BELIEVE, heretofore stated, as was the final decision in the PCI action, that until precedents and uniform legislation is implemented, uninformed Jurists may use the established "standards" of each firm to determine culpability.

Your beliefs may be more accurate than mine, but only time will tell.

JMHO

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

You're correct and it cracks me up that the best defense SEGS should offer is , "Hey, we're a crappy 3rd rate grading company"

Not talking motives or merits but the SEGS guarantee doesn't single out that only their coins are comparable.
"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." Based on that wording, sales of any 1910 MS-66 would be fair game - NGC, PCGS,ANACS or whoever.

 

We can all play lawyers as much as we want, but it will be decided between the OP and SEGS or as a court matter.

 

I hate to be Little Miss Mary Sunshine, but I don't think that guarantee, as a practical matter, is worth the paper it's printed on.

 

Thanks for your input/comments everyone. Just wanted to point out a guarantee is a guarantee. Don't give a guarantee if you don't back it up. Its called false advertising period. If you obtained a guarantee/warranty on a new car and it breaks down when you drive it out of the parking lot and the dealer says just kidding about the guarantee/warranty would that be ok?
Secondly, if the sole purpose of your company is to grade coins and you cant properly grade them then you shouldn't. We wouldn't allow a surgeon who keeps botching surgeries to continue performing surgeries. Basically, from reading the comments we are saying when you buy a coin from the non-top tiers its a crap shoot. You have no idea what you are buying even though someone paid that company to grade it. Why do we as coin collectors allow this? Shouldn't they be held accountable? We say NGC and PCGS are pretty decent at grading coins so why shouldnt the others be able to grade properly as well? If more people held their feet to the fire they would either get better at grading or go out of business.

 

We don't, there's a reason why the overwhelming majority of those coins are in PCGS or NGC slabs. The ones that are in other slabs have almost certainly been tried to be crossed over and failed. The value difference is to large not to try on high value coins.

 

I'm upset over the long reply I'd nearly finished when my outdated browser reloaded the page.

Here's a question/comment from it I won't allow to dissipate into the ether:

On the SEGS submission form, is there the option to instruct them not to crack it unless it meets or exceeds the current grade? I've heard other TPG's have that option. Please correct me if I'm mistaken. Is there any language in its policies that spell out a standard practices for crossovers to SEGS (however unlikely) and resubmissions?

So vexed at the wasted effort on the lost, lengthy reply on this crappy browser!

 

I wondered in the initial thread why was a coin like this not in a pcgs or ngc slab. I wonder if there's some doctoring or other issue that would prevent it from grading that is not apparent from the pics. I do believe my original post in the first thread was cross it to pcgs

 

I agree there is more to this story, we need to know exactly what Larry Briggs' response was.

 

You're right. I shouldn't discuss law right before going to bed.

 

This is EXACTLY why I didn't want this to devolve into a "buy the slab and not the coin." The number on the slab (no matter the slab) should not be the sole determiner of value. People who follow this mentality are hopelessly ignorant, especially if it is a third-tier slab.

Sure, until the next one sells to more-educated buyers for $40. Your case is what is called an anomaly. Try to sell it while advertising the market value you set (and give proof), and you will realize that almost all people would pass on your coin or make a much lower offer. The exception would be ignorant individuals such as your past self in this case.

 

We can debate it but it would be futile but you debate it anyway? And you're the one LOL'ing? Pot meet Kettle.....

 

I'm reminded of a scene from Tommy Boy starring Chris Farley. "But there's a guarantee on the box!"

 

I find it unusual to send in a coin graded at MS66 to the original company just to see if it still grades MS66, and request it be re-slabbed if they are going to slab it lower.

Reasons that SEGS would have re-slabbed.. at the request of the submitter because of a damaged slab. At the request of the submitter if it can gain in grade. If the submitter requested to not change it if it didn't gain, SEGS would not have. Add me to the skeptical who believe we are not being privy to the entire story.
We all want to believe the story is just as the OP stated, and hopefully it is, but without the opposing side we can't make any judgement other than to say the guarantee should be followed.

There are certainly varied opinion on this board, which is a good thing. One member may have thought of something others had not.
In the end we all benefit, especially the newer collectors.

 

...and according to the OP "If they look at it twice and came up with the same grading then it should hopefully cross over nicely."

Exactly. I am a believer too!

 

There is no law governing it, nor can there be, any more than we could "govern" fine art opinion or movie reviews.

 

I think SEGS' guarantee should be revised to correctly define the limits. Of course that will bring up the ? of how do you identify pre- and post- graded coins.

I also think there is some gamesmanship here. The most charitable version is
"I like this coin as an MS65 (not a MS66) and if I buy it for $5k and they downgrade it, I have a nice $4k coin that I will only have paid $4k for..."

 

Hi Copper there is not a spot on the form to not reslab it so I wrote it on the form to not reslab if its lower than MS65, but unfortuately that didn't happen

 

...folks keep saying "we are only hearing one side of the story!" Well, we're the hell is Mr. Briggs??? I remember about 4 years ago I had a couple of the micro o contemporary counterfeit's that I wanted slabbed, I heard that SEGS would slab them so I googled their phone number and called and bam...Mr. Briggs picked up the phone. Nice guy I might add. I never did any business with him however but only because I chose not to slab the coins in the end and sold them raw. My point is: Mr. Briggs is not too hard to reach and this thread is red-hot and I have a hard time believing that not one single person has reached out to Mr. Briggs to point him in this threads direction. I understand that he was probably just at the LB show but geez...I think it's time for a response from Mr. Briggs here on this thread, no? I sure as hell would be here defending my company if I were him. That's all

 

We also say buy the coin not the holder. We also say NGC, PGCS, and ANACS are the three trusted TPGs, and everything else (with few exceptions) should be treated as if raw.