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

I don't know, I see it differently. The OP mis-represents his coins that's been proven. How many more crackout "detail" slabs are listed below? Well nobody knows but the seller, that's dishonest and wrong on so many levels I won't go into it. jmho

http://www.ebay.com/sch/capped-bust...h=item35c488dd36&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2562

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

High grade is an inaccurate term...you are correct. But, at minimum it means gradable. If a coin is so harshly cleaned that it is not gradable...it should not be listed as "high grade" even if a perfectly clear photo is posted.

 

The lesson I get from this thread is we all need to step up our game on the ethics side of the hobby. This hobby could self-destruct if newbies are constantly scared off.

 

I concer sir. Let me finish by saying. Buyer "Beware" on any "Raw" coins and Sealed US Mint envelopes. Just not true most of the time. OP should clean up his titles and descriptions "NOW" before he runs into these problems again. ****, I just sold a nice raw piece of Gold/Quartz specimen and the buyers E/check bounce on me 4 tries. After 23 days I open a case to get my final value fees, I get a email from him in all caps saying ARE YOU GOING TO CANCEL THIS TRANSACITON AND WHY? So, other things going on daily on the great and powerful Bay. Lol.

Good luck OP rethink the help you are getting on here. I have learned that I needed to change things on my ebay account over the years. These guys are very smart and helpful and don't mean nothing other than educating you.

 

While I completely agree that he has a history of cracking out coins and misrepresenting them when selling. He has stated here that he wants to do things the right way. He already re-listed that one half dollar. I am hoping that he goes through his listed auctions and revisits each done to determine if it is listed honestly and if not fixes them. Hopefully he has seen the error in his ways and moves forward with better selling practices.

 

But he is here, listening to us. I guess i am just optimistic he will change those practices. Most who find nothing wrong with what they are doing, or simply wish to keep doing it, woukd have stopped posting after they were called out on it, right?

 

I've only read about 2/3 of the posts on this thread, but one question came to my mind after people were getting upset at cracking slabs at are graded at AU and listing them as BU/UNC/MS. Details grade (cleaning) aside, do people see this as a problem? If a coin comes in at AU55 or AU58, but a seller believes that the TPG blew it, is it unethical to crack it and list it as UNC? I don't know if the same logic can be applied to a cleaning since TPG's likely have better equipment for detecting that...but lets say the guy that purchased the cleaned coin and took it to a dealer and was told it was probably cleaned. If the seller doesn't see any evidence of the cleaning, is he obligated to defer to the dealer? BTW- I don't have a dog in the fight. I only buy coins on ebay, and I never take the sellers word for how they grade their coin. But I am curious about how others view the ethics of these topics.

 

Hopefully you're right, people do change so it can definitely happen. :thumb:

 

I agree - but have to opin that a lack of ethics has always existed in this hobby. The lack of ethics continues unabated, but only the means and methods change.

 

Now, someone buys this coin (without OFFICIAL ANACS certification of cleaned) really believes that it was not cleaned and tries to sell it as a problem free coin. What is the verdict on his honesty? Does the sin get passed to the family till the 7th generation?

 

[FONT=&amp]When a coin is clearly dreck, heck yes there is a problem with it! That said, I see no problem if one wants to play the odds in resubmitting gennied coins trying to get them in graded holders. I've cracked PCGS gennies and sent raw to NGC because they are (or at least can be IMO) overly lenient on (certain) gold, but this is night and day from buying a coin that no one in their right mind would think problem free, fluffing up a description, and offering it in an ebay auction. If one wants to play the TPG game, it is to be played by their rules; if the grade doesn’t fit, resubmit. Cracking no-question gennied coins and offering as problem free is a game for shysters and the lazy.




[/FONT]

So you do not believe it misleading for a seller who clearly knew these coins to be ungradable dreck to intentionally describe them in a way that would/could make the uneducated buyer think they are problem free? Nonsense. There is also a great difference between educating buyers and intentionally misleading them, sir.

You're right... there is a buyer who would gladly purchase the coins, but likely at nowhere near the price paid because of the deception. If this were not true, bottom feeding sellers would not bother, would they? There are all sorts of bidiots out there; some are simply delusional, while others actually take the seller's word at face value. In this case I think it clear the seller's description had everything to do with the achieved price.

 

All I can say is this whole thread has brought up at least three old sayings: "you sew what you reap" or "what tangled webs we weave when first we practice to deceive?" and "you can't shine sht." All are fitting. Especially the last one.

 

So here's another question: A couple weeks ago I put up a "guess the grade trade dollar of mine". It was deeply toned and a few people said it wouldn't get a grade due to it being covered in verdigris. PCGS graded it AU53. So what if I listed it raw as problem free and a few people here and elsewhere raised cain over me listing a "problem" coin and not identifying it? Am I in the wrong then? In this case the trade dollar got a grade, but it could have easily NOT gotten one I presume. Get what I'm asking? I was debating a peace dollar on here the other day deemed as scratched, but it just looked like a significant bag mark to me and a bunch of others. We all looked around and found worse "scratches" on certified coins that actually got graded! I want to improve, but I list 50 coins a week most of the time and all our opinions vary. I get that avoiding deception is the key, but what if I'm just plain wrong sometimes? Or what if you are?

 

Personally I don't think it's ever alright to crack open a slab and try to sell the coin as something it's not. It's totally dishonest to do that, period.

 

I DIDN'T. I'm saying if I had NOT submitted it and sold it as raw instead...

 

With all due respect, sir, it is very unbecoming of you to say you were wrong while continuing with the excuses. The situation above is night and day compared to what you have done. Please do not expect us to believe that you honestly believed both coins discussed in this thread to be problem free. Since you are clearly submitting on a regular basis, and if you truly believed this, why not put your money where your mouth is?

There is no way to please everyone every time, but you can do your best to hold to an acceptable standard; this is something you failed to do on many, many levels.

 

Here's a post I made a few days ago. True stories. Examples of varying opinions on "problem coins". """2 quick examples from my submissions. 1. I bought a 1824 CBH in a NGC VF details scratched holder. I noted it was the 1824/1 so I cracked it out and sent it to PCGS for the variety. It came back VF20 despite the 1mm scratch (which was pretty deep) near the date! I was shocked, and had only sent it in expecting the variety to be noted. 2. I found an NGC AU50 1836 CBH that I saw was the 1836/1336 over date. I cracked it out and sent it to PCGS. It came back XF details, cleaned. Again, I was shocked, but in a much less fun way.

Read more: http://www.cointalk.com/t224647-3/#ixzz2OObryO2g

 

If we can turn it down a notch, we can talk here. I think these are legitimate questions I'm asking.

 

Then you would have used your knowledge and experience to offer with your HONEST opinion.

In response to your linked thread; this is proof that you are willing to resubmit when you believe it can/may benefit you, but not when you know it is a losing proposition.

 

Why do I keep hearing "A leopard doesn't change its spots"