its official ebay is being sued

[DC Dawg]

I still don't see any evidence of a conspiracy.

The definition of conspiracy (the tort definition) is simply

 

'An agreement between two or more parties to do an illegal act OR an act which may become by the combination injurious to others."

 

The ANA told ebay that they should implement the new policies ONLY IF they are based on the PNG survey. Ebay agreed and did so.

 

So a charge of consipracy can be made even if the acts were not illegal, but simply "injurious to others" This is a civil case.

Did the ANA say "eBay you must do this or you will lose any protection from us?"

 

Or did eBay ask the ANA, "what should we do?" The ANA responded with a recommendation, and eBay implemented that recommendation.

 

The former is a conspiracy that demonstrates collusion which is illegal under the Clayton Act.

 

The latter looks very legal but a matter that sends some shark... err... lawyers into a feeding frenzy looking for a lawsuit to pad their bottom lines.

 

Scott

[gmarguli]

The ANA told ebay that they should implement the new policies ONLY IF they are based on the PNG survey. Ebay agreed and did so.

 

Do you know who was really behind this change? I will not name them, but you may be surprised. Their initials aren't ANA.

[CHABSENTIA]

While that definition is true " the injurious to others is a problem". If Dealer A who sells "Raw coins " loses sales as the result of the New Policy is not a problem in itself.

 

 

There are Dealers on E Bay who use lighting techniques etc to mask problems with those Coins. There are people on E Bay that advertise certain Policies and do not adhere to them.The other day I posted a message in which I notified an E BAY seller and they never replied.

 

The Seller advertised a certain Morgan Dollar as a HOT 50. This particular Vam if it existed on the Coin is not a HOT 50.

 

There are still some Dealers who give the Grade on a Raw Coin. Some say that is their opinion and some say outright that it is such and such a Grade.In one instance I needed a certain Vam in the hot 50 and the Seller gave an opinion that it was an MS63. NGC grade it as a MS64. In another instance one coin I purchased was given a grade by the Seller as MS63 and NGC graded it as a MS62. The one that turned out to be an MS64 was a surprise. The one that went a grade lower was in my parameters.

 

Here is my problem.Not counting postage if I send Morgans in to be graded by NGC and they are VAMS recognized by NGC then I will apy $16.00 per coin and $7.00 for the Variety Plus or $23.00 in the Economy Tier.

 

 

If I enclose that fee and it has been cleaned and I am not able to detect it then I will lose $23.00.. If I send in a coin to be graded by NGC and do not enclose the Variety Plus fee the even if it has a VAM then NGC will grade it but not label the VAM.Thus there are also Certified Coins in NGC. PCGS and ANACS holders that are VAMS but are not Labeled.If I am aware of this and buy a Coin in the Certified holder then I only pay the VAM fee.

 

Therefore it is going to be a plus for the Buyer to either buy a Certified Coin to insure that it has not been cleaned etc and to also buy a Certified Coin and then name the VAM or request one.

 

 

If E BAY was a Perfect or close to a Perfect Mall in which say 99% of all the Sellers were above board then this is one thing.If ANA appears to be supporting E BAY then when people become disillusioned with the Unscrupulous Dealers mentioned above and blame ANA then this is injurious to ANA and EBAY.

 

If EBAY and ANA institute a Policy for everyone to guard against these and other less than Savory practices then there is no Conspiracy that is injurious to others just because their Sales decrease as a result.

 

They have three choices.

 

1. Leave the Mall

2. Only sell Certified coins that are recognized by most and are in the top 4

3. Police their Counterparts and demand that they be removed and/or suspended for unsavory practices.

 

I had a Seller tell me that they would not be responsible for a Coin unless I paid an Insurance fee and then did not pay the fee and put it in his pocket. When I asked him what would have happened if the Coin had been lost since he had not paid the fee his response was " you got your coin and if you give me Negative feedback I will retaliate".

 

If ANA and EBAY instiute policies to protect the Seller it is not injurious if the Sellers lose Sales because of it

[Frank Provasek]

If E BAY was a Perfect or close to a Perfect Mall in which say 99% of all the Sellers were above board then this is one thing.If ANA appears to be supporting E BAY then when people become disillusioned with the Unscrupulous Dealers mentioned above and blame ANA then this is injurious to ANA and EBAY.

 

If EBAY and ANA institute a Policy for everyone to guard against these and other less than Savory practices then there is no Conspiracy that is injurious to others just because their Sales decrease as a result.

 

 

They have three choices.

 

1. Leave the Mall

2. Only sell Certified coins that are recognized by most and are in the top 4

3. Police their Counterparts and demand that they be removed and/or suspended for unsavory practices.

 

 

 

I had a Seller tell me that they would not be responsible for a Coin unless I paid an Insurance fee and then did not pay the fee and put it in his pocket. When I asked him what would have happened if the Coin had been lost since he had not paid the fee his response was " you got your coin and if you give me Negative feedback I will retaliate".

 

If ANA and EBAY instittte policies to protect the Seller it is not injurious if the Sellers lose Sales because of it

 

As long as you got the coin, you should not complain. The dealer did not "put the money in his pocket" any more than your car insurance company "puts the money in their pocket" if you don't have an accident. Many retailers do NOT use post office insurance, but either use PIP, stamps.com, or their own business insurance, or simply self insure, in which case the the package is not marked "INSURED" which is the same as "STEAL ME"

 

The ANA is not a law enforcement agency, nor is ebay. To expect retailers to "Police their Counterparts and demand that they be removed " is unreasonable. Perhaps it is up to the buyer to deal only with reputable sellers.