Should I grant an eBay refund for a coin received 21 days ago?

"Very quietly" listed it as cleaned. It clearly says "cleaned" in the listing. It's just stupid to market your coin as "cleaned garbage" just so you're satisfied. I liked the coin. I thought it was beautiful despite the cleaning. And that holder wasn't doing it any favors. So I cracked it out.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

My problem is you highlighted the condition of the coin in the title and buried the fact it was cleaned in the text. If you were truly trying to represent the coin as is...you would have mentioned all the condition of the coin in the same place...the AU+ nearly MS with cleaned.

 

You know I'm gonna have a little something more to say CBD, especially with how I feel about the TPGs.

The only thing I seen wrong with your listing is having a little bit more disclosure on the cleaning. At least at the bottom of the actual description.

I do commend you for facing the issue and staying involved in this thread. Many folks would run and hide and this to me is a sign that you are at least willing to listen to what others have to say.

 

I never called it garbage...and I don;t think it is. But, to state the coin is AU+ in the title and not called it cleaned when you know full well that it is cleaned is someone suspect. Had you said: "AU+ details, cleaned but has great eye appeal" in the title...nobody would fault you.

The holder was doing something...it was stating to the world the coin was cleaned and you didn't want that stated so obviously. Which is why it was omitted from the title.

 

I've heard of folks sending in stuff from the US Mint and had the items come back slabbed as being cleaned.

 

I didn't bury anything! It's clearly listed and I market items the way eBay told me to. You can take your "problem" with that to eBay. Go ahead and give em a piece of your mind, Camaro

 

Come on Doc, let's use our brains here for a minute. Gold doesn't tone that wildly to cover marks when it was noted on one holder, which protected the coin, even from excessive toning. Then it was cracked out and resubmitted for a second opinion, possibly multiple times.

Toning wasn't the issue, that's a straw man argument right there.

Gradeflation and Market Acceptability is likely what accounted for the change.

And I don't fault LD at all in this. He's doing what he needs to to survive, and it's oked by the most trusted people in the industry. He's done his part to the best of his ability.

However, like I said the original problem didn't disappear, and to me this is hurting the hobby.

I've had to question how so many terrible coins make it into holders, and had to reevaluate how I was buying. I am by no means an expert, but I did learn my lesson about blindly trusting the TPGs opinion.

 

Which just gives me an even bigger reason not to entirely trust their opinion.

I rely on my own eyeballs at this point. Sure I'm still learning, but I'm not gonna be quiet about my opinion and knowingly having to double check the TPGs stated opinion on a given coin.

 

You just don't like being told you did something wrong. The funny thing is...when I look at that listing I see several tell-tale signs of someone trying to scam the buyer.

There are several different "grades" listed in the title (AU+, MS, UNC)...the photos are so over-exposed they hide the surfaces flaws of a clean...you copy and paste a bunch "Red Book" like facts in the listing to overload the buyer. That way, people don't read every word in the listing. All that text everywhere makes it very easy to miss that subtle mention of cleaning in the listing near the top. I didn't see it until the third time I looked for it...and I knew it was in there somewhere.

I don't have a problem with eBay...I have a problem with how you conduct business. You go out of your way to make the coin seem awesome in your listing...and very quietly mention that it is cleaned. It's hard to see, but it's there. That way, if someone complains about it "not being as described" you can point it out and call them a liar. There is a reason why it sold for so much more than when you bought it...because you hid the truth about the coin.

 

Somewhere. A coin collector paid $12,000 for a PCGS cleaned gold eagle that he thinks is problem free. But that's ok... we just gotta get rid of those scumbag sellers like C-B-D. He's a real problem in the hobby.

 

Gold certainly tones...especially old gold coins. It is slight...but it does tone. If the cleaning was very minimal...all it would take is a tiny bit of toning to soften it up. Slabs don't protect the coin from toning as they are not air tight. The fact that the second opinion came back as problem free tells me that the original grading was certainly on the fence.

The bottom line is, with any coin...you must examine it yourself to determine if it is properly graded. If I were interested in buying that coin...in the problem or problem free holder, I would look at it and decide if it met my standards. If it didn't I would pass. TPGs are good for 2 things IMHO: 1, authenticity, and 2, determining the market acceptability of a coin (which helps determine how liquid it is)...that's it. Everything else is up to the buyer.

 

That coin was certified as problem free by leading experts in the field. If that buyer decided he didn't like the coin...because of that certification it could easily be sold and the money recouped. The same is not true of the coin you sold...and made a pretty decent profit on.

 

You're so so wrong and off-base, it's funny, Camaro. I market coins so as to get the best result. You can call it cheating or lying or whatever, but I took a coin that I bought, evaluated it, listed it clearly as I thought it was, and sold it for a minor profit.

You say you have a problem with the way I conduct business. Then stay away! Are these attacks making yourself feel better? Aww. Aren't you a big strwong guy? Get off your high-horse.

 

That $10 eagle was cleaned. PCGS said so. Again with the double-standard!

 

Listed it as clearly as you could...it's fine to lie to me, but don't lie to yourself. You posted photos of the coin that were greatly over exposed which hide ALL of the cleaning hairlines easily seen in the original auction listing. You also made a huge mention of the coin being "AU+, MS UNC" and listed quietly that it was "lightly cleaned" (when in fact it was harshly cleaned). If you think this is listed clearly than I am quite concerned about you.

One highly touted expert in the field thought it was cleaned and another didn't. This argument does not apply to your coin. There is no double standard at all.

 

Be as concerned and as blind to the truth as you want. Your hypocritical beliefs are amusing to me.

 

I agree with the second part entirely. The first half sounds like you are just making excuses for LD. Plain and simple. I got no gripe with him or what he did. He played within the established rules.

However blaming his problem free grade on toning is ridiculous. Gradeflation and MA are more likely the culprits in this matter, not arbitrary possible light toning that may or may not have effected the surface. Especially through a slab. That's reaching.

More likely what happened is the new graders looked at the age of the coin, the minor issue, because I agree whatever problem was there was probably minor, and how the market was accepting coins of that nature. Then BOOM, problem free grade.

My issue is that coin still has a problem regardless of what a grader or the 'market' says. What happens when the market trends back the other way? I'll tell ya what, there will be many displeased collectors who bought crap coins thinking they were good. Sound familiar?

 

My beliefs are not hypocritical at all. I run a very successful business doing things honestly. You can run your business however you see fit.

 

And I do, despite your ranting, which sounds awfully self-righteous. Yep!

 

I'm not making excuses for LD or anybody else. The reason I have no problem with this is I have accepted what the TPGs do and have moved on. I agree...in a perfect world, a problem coin would be labeled as such...no exceptions. Perhaps you are right to the reason it crossed into a problem free holder...I have seen it many times before. It is also possible that NGC truly believed it was a problem free coin. I would have liked to see it in person and decide for myself.

I have less of a problem with this as I do with the idea of "cabinet wear." If a coin has wear, it has wear. I don't care if that wear came from circulation or from the coin being bumped up against a coin cabinet. But, for reasons I don't completely understand, the TPGs see a difference and can somehow tell the two apart.