| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 2,361 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
81 Posts |
*** Edited by Staff to clarify topic title. Titles are important! ***Hello all. I'm seeking help in settling an argument. I purchased a 1967 centennial quarter from ebay recently. It was advertised as being a "beautiful, brilliant BU coin." Redundant, I know. The listing image showed some pretty obvious damage to the high points of the coin, so I messaged the seller prior to purchase to ask if the coin received was the one pictured with the damage, or if I would one honest to the description. Their response: "all coins are beautiful BU coins." Armed with this assurance I hit the good 'ol Buy It Now button. The coin on the bottom is the one I received. After firing off an angry message, I received their response. "This is not a damaged coin. You may return it at your expense if you wish." From my perspective, I'm thinking "In what world is this not a damaged coin?" But if I know anything, it's that there are things I don't know (especially in the world of Canadian coin collection). With that in mind, I'm turning to you, good forum members. Am I wrong and this amount of damage is acceptable for a BU Canadian coin? Or is this just another case of ebay fraud? Thanks for your help! 
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10284 Posts |
You're not wrong, open a case with ebay and demand return shipping in refund as well. Even the top one has rim damage and surface scratches. Negative feedback would be my final move because of the attitude of the seller as well. Edited by TNG
06/10/2019 8:53 pm
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
460 Posts |
Looks like damage to me and not just wear, as the undamaged areas look new.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I agree completely. Can you give us a link to the original listing?
|
|
Forum Dad
United States
24150 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1221 Posts |
I think this is just a die that didn't fill properly during minting and not wear or damage.
Not positive but I think it's called die burn.
Someone will correct me if I'm wrong. (I hope)
Cheers, Bill
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
249 Posts |
Hi CoinsinVT. I am not sure if the issues with the coin you purchased are something that happened during the minting process but I don't believe it is die burn. The marks on this 1948 quarter are die burn and they do not look similar to me. I certainly believe you should have the right to return the coin at no cost to you.   |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2781 Posts |
Different coin received than shown in your first photo, but the one you got has similar "damage" as the one shown on ebay. Since the photo on ebay looks a lot like the one you received (not exactly the same coin as shown, but very similar), it's hard to argue that you didn't know what you were getting. Personally I would never buy "1 out of many available" without seeing what I am actually getting. I didn't think ebay allowed "stock photos", but regardless - you bought it knowing you were getting a mystery coin. Hate to say it, but this one is on you by a slim margin. Lesson learned, be glad it wasn't an expensive tutorial. Bottom line: #1 You paid $6 for $3 worth of silver  #2 You're out $3 bucks.  #3 Life is too short, no one died, move on  PS: If it makes you feel any better, there were nearly 50 million of these made, and if you stick around here long enough (hope you do) and get to 50 posts, someone from this community would likely send you a BU example for the price of a stamp. cheers Edited by Wade
06/11/2019 12:03 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
9862 Posts |
 with Houndog Bill And here is yet another with "die burn". 113192938894A not uncommon condition for mid-60's quarters. It's not PMD, the coin is uncirculated and left the mint looking like that. It's an ugly coin worth only melt value, not collectible. Shame on the seller for trying to foist that one off on you. It is far from beautiful, you deserve a full refund and return shipping. Can you post the original item number? "Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
Edited by DBM
06/11/2019 12:04 am
|
|
Moderator
Canada
10456 Posts |
The coin is NOT damaged (post mint). This particular striking is subject to a lot of metal being drawn out to the deepest parts of the die, matching up on both sides of the coin. The term has been described as "die burn" (as Hounddog Bill has mentioned), but more as slang. The surface you are seeing is a function of the rough planchet surface not being fully struck. Again, this is common to this coin, and sometimes even the proof-like (PL) strikes have the same feature. I have opened up mint bags of this coin, and found every coin in the bag to have this feature... PCGS, which does place weight on the quality of the strike, would still grade it, albeit with a grade that reflects the poor striking quality shown.    "Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1505 Posts |
If the image is different than the coin sent, file a complaint. Even if it is $3, it is the only way to keep sellers honest, hit them in their pocket book. Bad feedback/lost money due to shipping will hurt them in the long run.
If the coin is similar to the image,then the responsibility is on you.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3733 Posts |
the coins is not damaged, it is just not a great strike. If you are unhappy with it, return it.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1463 Posts |
I've seen ICCS graded these at ms 63 with the 67 quarters with die burn they understand it has nothing to do with circulation it's an artifact of the strike
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
81 Posts |
Lots of great info here. Thank you all so much for your help. I learned something. Have a great day, all!
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10284 Posts |
So it isn't damaged, OK.
I learned something new about "die burn", but I myself, would never slough a coin off as a "beautiful, brilliant BU coin" looking like that. Even if it came from an unc roll, it is not an acceptable example.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
24885 Posts |
Quote:Different coin received than shown in your first photo, but the one you got has similar "damage" as the one shown on ebay. Since the photo on ebay looks a lot like the one you received (not exactly the same coin as shown, but very similar), it's hard to argue that you didn't know what you were getting. |
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 2,361 |
|
Posted 06/10/2019 8:53 pm
