Poor Ebay Seller: Keyword Spamming Again

That would get a DMPL designation from a blind person.

If you buy bulk from him hes really good at rates. I buy dateless buffalos for 20 cents a piece and he sells bars at tiny premiums.

On the DMPL the photos are juiced. The coin is most likely semi PL.

I know who the seller is.
He is not well thought of.

Bobby I wouldn't use the term juiced, but the images in the listing are taken to maximize the PL cameo effect. However, it is clear that the coin is not DMPL as stated since even with ideal lighting to make the devices pop and fields dark, the seller could not hide all of the luster in the fields which is a clear indicator the coin cannot be DMPL.

As one point of evidence that the photos were manipulated afterwards, please take a look at the one of the reverse of the slab. Saturation of white and black in the barcode label on the back of the slab is a clear indicator of contrast maximization in the photo due to post-processing applied to further deepen the apparent "DMPL" effect which is illusory, as discussed.

At the risk of oversimplification, a coin is either a proof or it isn't.

ANACS and PCGS would most certainly have the experience, knowledge, and expertise to determine whether a 1909 Lincoln Cent was, in fact, a matte proof, based on die markers, strike indicators, rim type, and many other factors besides. I'll flat-out say it: this coin is not a Matte Proof, and that's MY opinion. There's simply too much evidence available to authenticate a genuine Matte Proof to make it a credible scenario that both ANACS and PCGS would flat-out miss one that was submitted. You might as well win the Powerball after being struck by lightning on the same day -- it's not mathematically impossible, but it stretches credibility far past what any logical analysis would allow.

To me, this listing is unethical on the part of the dealer, although it is not a violation of ebay listing practices, because he is using his reputation and experience to put weight behind his opinion. A buyer who trusts this seller and is then disappointed to find out that the coin is not, in fact, a Matte Proof, will have lost a large amount of money on the deal, and it is far too easy for the dealer to say "Oh, well, it was just an opinion, sorry I was wrong" and walk away. It wouldn't be considered a SNAD, so ebay and PayPal would not likely defend the buyer.

Imagine you have a ring. Your opinion is that it's 24K gold. You take it to two well-respected jewelers, who both tell you it's 14k. You list it on ebay as a 24K gold ring, with the caveat that "Two well-respected jewelers both told me this is 14K gold, but my opinion is that it's 24K gold." The buyer wins it (paying 24K gold prices) and his own jeweler tells him it's really 14K and then proves it. As a seller, you (technically) haven't done anything wrong by ebay standards IMO, but your sense of ethics is garbage and the buyer is hosed.

The same scenario could be true for any item (1804 Dollar? Two TPG's told me it's fake, but I think it's real!)

While it is ultimately the responsibility of the buyer to know what he or she is purchasing on ebay, the dealer's tactics in this case are slimeball sleaze designed to fleece less-knowledgeable collectors into thinking they bought something far more rare and valuable than what they actually won.

with paralyse, with the caveat that occasionally (rarely) TPGs do make a mistake. In this case, I'd think it would behoove the seller (and therefore the buyer) to try to have the coin re-slabbed with the proper designation. That alone would ensure he got the right/higher price for a properly labeled coin. In the absence of that, the buyer paid too much and would have a hard time selling the coin at the higher price because then it's only their opinion (which is almost certainly less reputable than the seller's) and this seller is now out of the picture completely. Would this buyer be able to convince a TPG that they have a matte proof? Not likely.