| Author |
 Replies: 39 / Views: 6,648 |
Page 3 of 3
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
 Canada
367 Posts |
@Redzapsid
Let me explain.
On CC&C website, if you purchase the coins individually,
- Coin 1: 1867 Confederation is priced at $1,695
- Coin 2: 1927 Diamond Jubilee of Canadian Confederation is priced at $1,395
- Coin 3: 150th Anniversary of Canadian Confederation is priced at $1,195
If you purchase all three coins as a subscription, they cost $899.95 each.
According to CC&C policy, if I return Coin 2, I must pay the difference for Coin 1 and Coin 3.
For Coin 1 and Coin 3, I will have to pay a total difference of $1090.1 (295.05+795.05).
For Coin 2, I will receive a refund of $899.95.
1090.1 - 899.95 = 190.15
Therefore, by returning the Coin 2 for a refund, I actually have to pay CC&C a net of $190.15.
Edited by YesOrNo
09/20/2017 3:25 pm
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
92 Posts |
Quote:
How would you owe money if you return it? I don't understand I think the logic here is that if the coins were to be purchased individually, then it would cost the market price. Thus if you're not purchasing the entire subscription, they are charging you the single prices, which are currently higher than the issue/subscription price. But market price here is not true market price... it's just the (arbitrary) price the dealer wants you to pay. |
|
Valued Member
Canada
367 Posts |
Quote:
I would be interested to know what the company will do with the defective ones you already returned. "Conserve" them and sell them again? As a business, a dealer would want to sell as many coins as possible. There is no law against selling inferior coins. Also, some customers' tolerance of inferior coins are higher than others; they wouldn't even notice the subtle stains or scratches. Edited by YesOrNo
09/20/2017 2:48 pm
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
83 Posts |
Thanks for documenting your hassle, YesOrNo. Hope it helps others avoid a similar experience. I currently have a near identical problem, although in truth worse, and while ruminating on it you began your tale! My regret also involves a Brommy production although this subscription was purchased through RCM. Hello, if we were so keen to send stuff in the mail, we'd probably already be finding reasons to do so. So stupid. So, my solution is to learn from this misery, and delete invitations to join touchymcfeelies insiders club. As prestigious as being accepted to the recyclers and/or depots club is..... And no more subscriptions. Swear! In case anyone was wondering, I am chastened enough by this misfortune to keep mum about it. So that also is to your credit. We'll just hope Infolax doesn't get wind of that. |
|
Valued Member
Canada
367 Posts |
Received another replacement today! I do appreciate the fast handling and shipment from CC&C. This replacement coin is like the child of the first returned coin and the second returned coin: it inherits both imperfections of its parents: stains on the rim and broken pin inside capsule.  I think the stains are a bigger issue. Any chance this coin can still be graded as 69? I was told this replacement coin was "checked on camera for verification." I will ask them if their camera can catch the stains. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2984 Posts |
If I were you I would return all 3 coins for a refund, then you would not be charged any extra fees. I would be fed up with keep returning the coin.
I am sure you can get these coins for a lower price down the road.
Are those really stains? It look more like chipping from the plating process. I wonder if it is a common problem for this coin.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
367 Posts |
I emailed CC & C and voiced my concern. I received a response on Friday.
For the stains, I was told "all the coins have this in varying degrees (not stained). It is simply the residue from a clear coat used by the MINT to protect the surface edge of the coins. This should not affect the future value of your set."
Based on the explanation above, I decided to keep this coin.
@MoneyPenney
You are right. The "stains" might be the residue from the production.
My only concern is if the residue would hurt the coin value (or grade). Based on the explanation from CC & C and your observation, the answer is no. So I will keep this coin.
Thank you for your advice!
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
92 Posts |
If so, would you see something similar to some degree on the other two coins in the set? Or is this something specific to the production of this particular coin?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1571 Posts |
If a dealer You bought a car from told you that all cars of that make and model have scratches on the hood as a result of the production procedure, would you be satisfied with the explanation?
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
367 Posts |
Quote:
If so, would you see something similar to some degree on the other two coins in the set? Or is this something specific to the production of this particular coin? The other two coins in the set ("150th Anniversary of Confederation" and "1867 Confederation") don't have the same problem. I haven't found any imperfections with these two coins. The only issue is the capsule of the "150th Anniversary of Confederation" coin is impossible to close completely. I'm worried the pins inside might cause scratches on the coin's rims, if I press the capsule too hard to close it completely. For unknown reasons, I have had lots of problems with the coin "1927 Diamond Jubilee of Canadian Confederation." To recap my previous posts, below are the problems: Delivery 1: Stains Delivery 2: Broken pin, white spot (photo below for white spot), but no stains Delivery 3: Stains and broken pin  The white spot is certainly an imperfection that would hurt the coin's grade (and value). The stains, on the other hand, may not be an imperfection, or may be cleaned, if they are indeed residue from RCM. |
|
Valued Member
Canada
367 Posts |
Quote:
If a dealer You bought a car from told you that all cars of that make and model have scratches on the hood as a result of the production procedure, would you be satisfied with the explanation? I'm not sure if the car scratch analogy is appropriate. For example, a scratch definitely hurts car value, while a little residue may not hurt the coin value. Even if the analogy is appropriate, what I can do about it? I have two options: 1) ask for another replacement, and 2) return the whole set of 3 coins. For the option 1, I think most of us here would agree that the next replacement will be more or less the same, based on the prior 3 deliveries. For the option 2, I don't want to return the two other coins. Therefore, unless this coin is in bad condition, I won't return the whole set. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5324 Posts |
Any stain will surely degrade a coins value, the broken pins or capsule has no bearing on grade, if you can live with it it's okay but these NCLT are suppose to be near perfect. not with some manufacturing residue, that is a crock excuse, if you can see it with a naked eye it is a problem.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1571 Posts |
What I meant is if the car dealer says the cars all come with a scratch and it doesn't effect the value, would you believe them? Surely a scratch on the hood would effect the value. How is the coin different? Personally, I'd prefer a flawless coin over one with a stain, residue, misaligned plating etc. Quality control must remain priority number 1. NCLTs from the RCM should come problem free, with fantastic quality for the premium being paid. Virtually all coins released in the last several years have lost value, and having poor quality will only do more damage. |
|
Valued Member
Canada
367 Posts |
@john100 and @Redzapsid
I agree with you. The coin should be perfect; that's why I returned it twice.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
815 Posts |
The infamous "milk spots'. The reason I stopped buying Canadian Silver. And I'm Canadian.
|
|
Page 3 of 3
|
Replies: 39 / Views: 6,648 |
Page 3 of 3
|
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 09/20/2017 1:08 pm
