Watch Out For This Seller

quote:

---

The bill for your car repair is exactly $100.
The bill for your car repair is actually around $100.

---

As far as I'm concerned that is a completely unfair comparison, this is the correct one...

The bill for your car repair is exactly $100.
The bill for your car repair is actually $100.

There's no difference in those 2 statements. Adding the word around completely changes the whole meaning of the sentence.

ebay says...

Include a clear picture of the actual coin or paper money item that is being offered for sale.

They don't say...

Include a clear picture of the approximate actual coin or paper money item that is being offered for sale.

You will never convince me that ebay's wording could ever possibly leave any wiggle room for a stock photo to be permissible.

I agree with you, Bobby. I draw the distinction in that I don't see a problem with posting a photo of 10 Indian Head cents, then having a dutch listing for 10 Indian Head cents, as long as it is made very clear in the listing that the buyer will receive a random ONE of the pictured coins.

I think that's the issue we're all disagreeing on. Nobody would ever argue with your logic about it being wrong to list a photo of one coin and try to sell it 10 times.

I think it is getting to a point that selling stuff on ebay is going to become too difficult for the average Joe Smith.

You just cannot expect someone with 5000 wheat cents, with different dates and mint marks, to take 5000 pictures, one of each coin. If ebay comes out with a "no stock photos allowed" policy, I'll abide by it or find somewhere else to sell. Until then, or until one of you report me, I will use stock photos. I do not feel the least bit that I am deceiving the person or misrepresenting the item using a stock photo.

Would it be ok if I rolled the wheats into a roll, take a picture of a roll and say you are bidding on one coin from the roll? And then use the wheat roll photo in many auctions? I find hundreds of listings like this, including from sellers that this forum has endorsed in their list of positive experiences.

Here is an example- this seller has been endorsed by several on this forum. He uses stock photos! That in no way makes his auctions a negative experience!

http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQfgtpZ1Q...MEFSQ3aMESOI

Things that (in my opinion) are really bad and should be dealt with include:

showing a VG Morgan and says it is uncirculated.

showing blurry pictures.

showing pictures of things from such a far distance away that you can't tell condition.

saying or showing one thing but receiving something different.

stating ridiculous book values on items- but I am ok with approximate reasonable book values being stated. I learned to look the coins up myself and figure out the book value and if the seller is way off, I ignore the auction.

insanely high shipping (probably to circumvent ebay fees)- like $50 to ship a small box of coins that could be done in a flat rate box for $10.

A lot of folks in this forum are saying "No stock photos" because it violates ebay's policy. Yet, CCF members (maybe not the same ones?) have endorsed the above seller in my previous post, who USES stock photos in nearly ALL of his auctions. So which is it? Are we ok with endorsing those sellers who you claim violate ebay policies by using stock photos, as long as their merchandise was purchased by a CCF member and it turns out to be great? I find talking out of both sides of the apparently large CCF mouth to be most troublesome. (deleted in edit)

For the above seller I posted, you are not bidding on the exact (or actual) roll you will receive, but one "like" the roll pictured. I personally have no problem at all with the stock photos and think they are fine. But there are folks here in this forum who think stock photos violate ebay policy. If you believe this, then why don't you report the above seller, even though he is endorsed by members of this forum?

Reasons: because 1) he is selling good coins 2) you probably know his is not out to deceive/misrepresent his item, 3) because this is a rather minor issue compared with the more deliberate misrepresentation done by coin sellers and 4) you are willing to let the stock photo issue slide for this seller because of 1 2, and/or 3.

I don't care who is using stock photos, people get away with it but they are still wrong:-) So big dealer or small dealer, the issue is if it is a scam it gets reported.

Those of us with experience can tell who is running a scam and who isn't. I've worked with people on ebay to help them learn how to list according to the rules and they were extremely grateful to find out what the rules were and work with them. They obviously weren't running scams so they did the right thing based upon the rules.

eBays rules are there and should be followed by all participants.... AND... Yes, when I used to sell lots that were piles of coins, I took a picture of each pile and listed the coins in the pile.

People have gotten away with shortcuts on ebay for so long that they appear the norm. They are still shortcuts. The shortcuts are done to make the dealers job easier. The shorcuts still are not following the rules.

Here's an analogy. It is against the law to stop 10 ft after a stop sign. You are supposed to stop before you pass it, then ease out to check for traffic.

Almost everyone who drives, will ooze past a stop sign before they stop.

It is illegal, a cop will only catch you on breaking that rule if he sees you. Then he may at his discretion , warn you or give you a ticket.

The fact that everyone gets away with it doesn't lessen the rule and it doesn't mean that if you get caught you won't get a warning or a ticket because everyone else gets away with it.

Same thing here, there's a rule. Does it get broken...Yes , all the time. Does ebay go after it when it's reported...Yes but like the cop, they can't catch everyone.

Dealers are left to police themselves. Some do a great job of it and some don't.

Playing games with words is just another way of trying to be right when in reality, rules meant to protect buyers are being broken by accident, by mistake, and by some, intentionally.

How is a newbie buyer supposed to tell the difference?

There is no such thing as random because there is no way for anyone to verify that a coin is being picked 'at random.' That is why the term 'actual' is used--to keep people from selling items based on their 'potential.'

This is the kind of stuff I'm talking about:

Stock Photos, Unopened rolls, unsearched....Yeah.. Who isn't going to look for a $100,000.00 coin first.


http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZtomhugre

mycrob, thats the point though. and you actually put your finger on it in a round about way.

The guy with the "unsearched" rolls using stock photos is obviously bogus.

Your stuff is NOT bogus.

But by using stock photos, which regardless of how you try to spin it is not allowed with coins, you get placed by many buyers in the same category as the guy mentioned above.

That is the reality of it. Wouldn't you rather play by the rules, rather than bend them to meet your definition so that you can be several steps above the guy mentioned above as well as others like him?

Your motivation can be as clean as new snow but many buyers shy away from listings with stock photos because they look like some of these other guys.

You are savvy enough to determine if a roll is unsearched despite what is in a listing. Many of us are.

The guy I mentioned depends upon people who do not understand what they are doing yet and they are making a fortune preying on the unwary.

You are much, much, better than that and your motivation is fine. but, you accidentally make yourself look like the other guys for the sake of ease.