| Author |
 Replies: 35 / Views: 5,724 |
Page 3 of 3
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
You are still missing my point...who makes any TPG the end all be all? No one should have that authority and in fact most likely violates FTC collusion laws when ebay is requiring that sales be authenticated via specific services only. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1812 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 861 Posts |
Any TPG can join the ebay 'authority'. All they have to do is meet the minimum ebay standards ie on-line data base etc. There is no collusion, it is open market. In the future, other TPG's may be added and some removed. Companies set their own standards. ebay set these standards to protect buyers from unscrupulous sellers. These standards were adopted by ebay based on public input. No system is perfect and as ebay finds changes are needed, they implement them. |
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
It's a question of degree, unholyroller. Yes, it's known that there is wiggle room in many TPG "Details" designations. However, that wiggle room does_not exist in the majority of them. You can see the reason for the "Details" designation as clearly as I, or any other halfway-knowledgeable collector. And presentation counts, as well. Let's go back to the original 1851-O $20 mentioned here. The original auction, as evidenced by the original seller's very high-resolution images, made the coin's cleaning very apparent and unmistakable. Nobody would argue that the coin had been altered. The resale auction's images were not nearly so clear, and offered none of the obvious evidence, while the accompanying copy made no mention of any discrepancy. Here, let's have a look. Original auction image (keep in mind, I downsized this one by 1/3 just to post here:  The image, as in Centsles' auction, actual size:  The marks visible on both images serve to conclusively identify them as the same coin. In fact - although I do not make that direct accusation - there's evidence that the smaller image was physically altered to lessen the impact of the coin. Note how much "nicer" the major planchet flaw next to the T looks in the smaller pic - that's not attributable to photography alone. This is what you're defending, not some subtle, arguable difference. I have to assume you're just not aware of the scale of the deception involved here. And, keep in mind, this seller is a former finalist in the PCGS Grading Contest, a person whose grading and attribution skills - as defined by numismatic standards and the TPG's - are established beyond question. He knows better. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4421 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
Just to be clear...I am not defending this person at all...he is obviously a scumbag. I just question the policies and blind faith.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
By the way...check out his positive feedback....he obviously sells himself a lot of coins! Lol
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
Just to be clear...I am not defending this person at all...he is obviously a scumbag. I just question the policies and blind faith.
Absolutely understood. The chief complaint - at least, in the way that I personally visualize this situation - is that the TPG's were unmistakably correct in their initial evaluation, and the crackout reseller would/should have listed the hidden discrepancy had the coin been acquired raw or not. The thing is, TPG's get it right more often than wrong (even though it's the mistakes which get all the press), and there's every reason to generally trust their opinion. Mindful of your mention of "blind faith," that is. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1053 Posts |
good catch again. Quote:
He is NNC. The grading table is set up in his basement.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
861 Posts |
You can't make this stuff up........centsles has just relisted the same 1855-d $1 gold that ebay removed a couple of days ago from my 1st post in this thread: new ebay listing: item#: 3107811936121855-D $1 Gold Crack-out: removed ebay listing: item#: 141051510266item#: 141098070071Seller, centsles, bought this coin on ebay as item # 141051510266 in an ANACS XF details-Altered Surfaces holder. He cracked this coin out and has listed it as an AU-55 with NO mention of the known defects. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1247 Posts |
so he bought one for 2930 and sold it for 3650.00
Nice profit...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8137 Posts |
If he wants to make the most money he should just resell them in the original slab. Makes no sense to me.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4337 Posts |
Quote:
If he wants to make the most money he should just resell them in the original slab I'm not sure that is accurate. The whole point of his crack-a-lackin' is to maximize profits by passing the coin off as "problem free". Of course the latter part of my statement is the whole debate to begin with as he disagrees with the original TPG assessment of the coin so he has decided to apply his own standards which, were explained by a very knowledgeable collector in this post as near certified caliber, and assign a new grade. SSUPERDDAVE points out: Quote:
It's a question of degree Quote:
However, that wiggle room does_not exist in the majority of them. You can see the reason for the "Details" designation as clearly as I, or any other halfway-knowledgeable collector. I suppose if he (centsless) was so formally trained he should know better and if ebay were so flippin' holier than thou as they sometimes like to present themselves they would also know better that a lot of uneducated collectors are getting overpriced coins when said pricing is measured to the "acceptable" standard of the industry or at least the majority of it. But alas, Centless is in biz for the mighty dollar and ebay is certainly not going to pass up a profit to the degree that this seller represents especially as a publicly traded corporation. |
|
Valued Member
United States
61 Posts |
Hi, please fotoshop my wife, maybe than I'll be happy Totally OVER graded !! Buyer: 1***2 ( 1969) Jul-22-13 09:38 Loved that negative feedback! NETHERLANDS 1931 CENT OUTSTANDING UNCIRCULATED RED (# 380659447289) |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1750 Posts |
This kind of crap is why I only consider older gold coins in holders from the big 4. If it's in these off brand holders or raw I walk away immediately. Protects me from this kind of crack out game or accidentally getting a counterfeit in the raw coins. I leave it to the professionals at the big 4 to authenticate and grade. Call me a coin bigot or whatever...so far it has worked for me.
Good job, g048406. People like you reaffirm my faith that most dealers in this hobby still are honest folks and want to do right by their customers.
Edited by DoubleEagle20
11/01/2013 07:29 am
|
|
Page 3 of 3
|
Replies: 35 / Views: 5,724 |
Page 3 of 3
|
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 10/25/2013 1:49 pm
