| Author |
 Replies: 9 / Views: 1,215 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
314 Posts |
I don't want to stand in the way of someone making a living, but I came across an ebay listing for a dateless SLQ and the title was "1916 or 1917 Standing Liberty quarter." Upon examination, all the well-known distinguishing points made it clear that this was a 1917 Type 1. Absolutely no doubt about it. So I have two thoughts: first, just by the logic of language, the advertisement is true. I could say, for sale is a pumpkin or a Ferrari, and if you get the pumpkin, well, it's true that it was one or the other. But the second thought is that if I, a rank outsider to the SLQ world, can identify the date of this coin, someone who makes a living as a coin dealer certainly knows the same. So he is, at best, selling a melt value coin for a few times that much, and it's hard to suspect that he does not hope some more gullible buyers get into a bidding war and pay a few hundred dollars for the coin. Finally, I will note in the seller's defense, that clear photographs were provided, so that the analysis could be made before purchase. My question: what do you think about this? Would you call out this person? Or do you think this falls safely within caveat emptor range? Thanks for any opinions. |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
21605 Posts |
Would you please post the link. The 12 digit ID number is sufficient. It is against ebay policy to improperly describe a coin. It has to be one or the other in his description. |
|
Valued Member
 United States
314 Posts |
JimmyD, with respect, I would prefer not to do that, but your comment cements my resolve to communicate my concern. Thanks. P.S. I don't have time to be the ebay police, but a quick search reveals that this is being done by more than one seller. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2203 Posts |
Well, if he were some ordinary Joe who knew the minimal amount about SLQs, I'd give him a pass.
Edited by jpsned
08/02/2018 3:57 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2023 Posts |
Here's one: 352418967415 -- the seller has several similar listings I agree -- the seller may know enough to recognize that it is one of these dates based on obvious markers (e.g. the presence or absence of stars on the reverse) but not enough to be able to tell which year it is, or the coin may be in such bad condition to prevent making that distinction. I didn't look that closely. Calling it "1916 or 1917" is still an accurate description. It's just not very precise, like a dateless Buffalo nickel. You can still call it a Buffalo nickel. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Nothing wrong with the title. The coin, who knows!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3733 Posts |
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
17900 Posts |
Selling coins doesn't always indicate that the seller knows anything about them.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
719 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Even if the person is a dealer that doesn't indicate that they now how to tell a dateless 16 from a 17. I have had several dealers that have been in the business for a long time come to me with dateless type 1 quarters and ask me which they are. There are a lot of dealers out there that know how to market coins that don't know the "fine details" about varieties, types, and slight design changes. Sure they know they type 1 doesn't have stars under the eagle, and the type 2 does. They know the type one doesn't have chain mail and the type 2 does, but that is the full extent of their knowledge.
As for you is it a pumpkin or a Ferrari analogy, you show a good picture and the buyer can look at it ad decide for themselves which it is. Same as with dateless type 1 quarter. It woorks the same way. If you don't have enough personal knowledge to be able to tell a pumpkin from a Ferrari either don't buy or learn how to tell.
|
| |
Replies: 9 / Views: 1,215 |
|
Posted 08/02/2018 3:53 pm
