Numismatic News (Krause) Helping to Screw Collectors

[gmarguli]

Anyone else get the "special messages" emailed by Numismatic News (Krause)? These come to you if you sign up for their free email newsletter.

 

Well their emailed specials keep getting worse and worse. I understand that advertisers just purchase the right to place their ad, but I'd hope a company wouldn't allow total scumbag organizations to use them to advertise.

 

Here is their latest special:

 

 

The World Reserve Monetary Exchange is the seller of those "ballistic rolls", rewrapped , and according to a google search, they also offer a "Cross made with grains of sacred sand from Christ's tomb."

 

I'd have thought that a major publication would have had the courage and brains not to accept the scam advertising.

 

Anything think that if we write letter to the editor of Numismatic News that they will publish them? I'd hope that Numismatic News would be trying to steer unsuspecting collectors away from "deals like these" and not helping promote them.

[MarkFeld]

Greg, while I agree with much of what you wrote, I was surprised by it. It seems inconsistent with your previously stated philosophy that buyers need to take responsibility for their own actions and not be treated with kid gloves, etc.

[gmarguli]

I still hold that philosophy. However, I'm surprised that a major publication would support the very type of organization they should be writing articles warning people about.

[DC Dawg]

Just because an entity accepts advertising does not mean they support the advertiser. As long as the advertiser is not doing anything illegal or trying to sell something that is outside the editorial policy of the publication, there should be no problem.

 

It's just an advertisement. Delete it and get over it!

 

Scott

[MarkFeld]

Just because an entity accepts advertising does not mean they support the advertiser. As long as the advertiser is not doing anything illegal or trying to sell something that is outside the editorial policy of the publication, there should be no problem.

 

It's just an advertisement. Delete it and get over it!

 

Scott

While it doesn't constitute direct support of the advertiser's actions, at a minimum, it's tacit acceptance of them. And I don't believe that just because such actions are legal, there is no problem with them.

[DC Dawg]

Just because an entity accepts advertising does not mean they support the advertiser. As long as the advertiser is not doing anything illegal or trying to sell something that is outside the editorial policy of the publication, there should be no problem.

 

It's just an advertisement. Delete it and get over it!

 

Scott

While it doesn't constitute direct support of the advertiser's actions, at a minimum, it's tacit acceptance of them. And I don't believe that just because such actions are legal, there is no problem with them.

Obviously, you are someone who hasn't worked in the media. When your business requires you to sell advertisements and you have the inventory, you sell the space you have. It makes no sense for a company that relies on the sale of advertisements to refuse to sell the space they have.

 

Advertisements are not an endorsement of a product. Advertisements are sold by a sales department with no input into the editorial control of the publication. The editorial department has no input to the selling of advertisements. All sales departments look at is whether the advertiser can pay for the ad, is there space for the ad, and whether it is germane to the publication. They will also look for scams (e.g., if they are not selling coins but information as to how to get the coins).

 

NN/Krause/F+P had space available, the client paid for the ad, and the ad is germane for their audience. There is nothing patently offensive with the ad. The price and conditions are just too high. There's nothing wrong with that. If you don't like it, then don't buy from the advertiser.

 

Otherwise, caveat emptor.

 

Scott

[coinman1794]

I still hold that philosophy. However, I'm surprised that a major publication would support the very type of organization they should be writing articles warning people about.

 

Not only is this the company that sells the "ballistic rolls" of Presidential dollars, but they have run that Pres. dollars ad for them in Numismatic News, so this I nothing new on the part of the publisher.

[MarkFeld]

Just because an entity accepts advertising does not mean they support the advertiser. As long as the advertiser is not doing anything illegal or trying to sell something that is outside the editorial policy of the publication, there should be no problem.

 

It's just an advertisement. Delete it and get over it!

 

Scott

While it doesn't constitute direct support of the advertiser's actions, at a minimum, it's tacit acceptance of them. And I don't believe that just because such actions are legal, there is no problem with them.

Obviously, you are someone who hasn't worked in the media. When your business requires you to sell advertisements and you have the inventory, you sell the space you have. It makes no sense for a company that relies on the sale of advertisements to refuse to sell the space they have.

 

Advertisements are not an endorsement of a product. Advertisements are sold by a sales department with no input into the editorial control of the publication. The editorial department has no input to the selling of advertisements. All sales departments look at is whether the advertiser can pay for the ad, is there space for the ad, and whether it is germane to the publication. They will also look for scams (e.g., if they are not selling coins but information as to how to get the coins).

 

NN/Krause/F+P had space available, the client paid for the ad, and the ad is germane for their audience. There is nothing patently offensive with the ad. The price and conditions are just too high. There's nothing wrong with that. If you don't like it, then don't buy from the advertiser.

 

Otherwise, caveat emptor.

 

Scott

I need not have worked for the media to understand that a person or a company can turn down business, based on principle. That is of course up to them, and apparently you and they see it differently than I do.

[Schatzy]

I need not have worked for the media to understand that a person or a company can turn down business, based on principle. That is of course up to them, and apparently you and they see it differently than I do.

 

(thumbs u

[DC Dawg]

I need not have worked for the media to understand that a person or a company can turn down business, based on principle. That is of course up to them, and apparently you and they see it differently than I do. No, you need to have worked for a media company to understand why they don't turn down business (especially in this economy) and that principle does not pay the bills.

 

Sorry Mark. We're going to have to agree to disagree.

 

Scott

[MarkFeld]

I need not have worked for the media to understand that a person or a company can turn down business, based on principle. That is of course up to them, and apparently you and they see it differently than I do.

No, you need to have worked for a media company to understand why they don't turn down business (especially in this economy) and that principle does not pay the bills.

 

Sorry Mark. We're going to have to agree to disagree.

 

Scott Scott, you could easily say the same thing about many other types of business, the current economy, paying the bills, etc. What's so different between that and a coin dealer refusing, on principle, to deal in certain coins and/or with certain dealers and/or collectors and/or auction houses, thereby costing himself/herself money? There is always a choice involved.

[DC Dawg]

Scott, you could easily say the same thing about many other types of business, the current economy, paying the bills, etc. What's so different between that and a coin dealer refusing, on principle, to deal in certain coins and/or with certain dealers and/or collectors and/or auction houses, thereby costing himself/herself money? There is always a choice involved.

Mark... I guess I am taking a flippant attitude because I've worked in media environment and know that the only morals they have is how much they can sell their ad space. Most media sales departments do not care about principle beyond a narrow definition of "good taste" and germane to the space they sell. They don't care if the advertiser is price gouging. That is not their concern. It's ad space... sell it!

 

In your situation, part of what you are selling is your reputation. If you are selling reputation, then you make the decision as to how to maintain the reputation. Media companies sell space and impressions (readers, viewers, etc.). They try to keep as broad of an audience as possible to keep selling that space. They don't care if they tick off a reader-or-two. It is never enough to make a difference in their circulation or the number of people who watch. Thus, it does not matter to them and, quite frankly, they do not care.

 

Media companies are whores who will sell space to anyone as long as they are not doing anything illegal. This is why the sales staff is kept separate from the editorial staff.

 

Scott

[MarkFeld]

Thanks Scott.

[jgrinz]

" I dont always phrase things right or say them properly but bear with me "

 

To me its falls into a kinda Warranty / Guaranty type of issue. You would hope that the Company accepting the ad would have done some 'good faith' research on the company submiting an ad so as not to mislead the buyers into thinking that the product is santioned by the magazine. As in most businesses the reputation of the company is vital to staying in buisness and if one was to let an advertiser put ads of "questionable quality or value " as content in thier magazaine then it reflects badly on the company itself.

 

Translate that into my industry ( Auto Repair ) , I DO REFUSE work if someone brings in their own 'substandard parts' or 'Used' parts and wants them installed by me. If that part should fail he could blame me for shoddy workmanship which would not be the case but definitely WOULD affect my reputation.

 

I would rather refuse the work than let that happen.

 

" I hope this ramble made some sort of sense"

[Catbert]

Well, under this high principle standard, Coin World would be out of business!

[Bugmann1974]

" I dont always phrase things right or say them properly but bear with me "

 

To me its falls into a kinda Warranty / Guaranty type of issue. You would hope that the Company accepting the ad would have done some 'good faith' research on the company submiting an ad so as not to mislead the buyers into thinking that the product is santioned by the magazine. As in most businesses the reputation of the company is vital to staying in buisness and if one was to let an advertiser put ads of "questionable quality or value " as content in thier magazaine then it reflects badly on the company itself.

 

" I hope this ramble made some sort of sense"

 

You made perfect sense J. My father worked in print media for years, and any publication he worked for would pull ads from companys that had a dubious reputation. All it usually takes is a few phone calls from subscribers with verifiyable complaints.

[Houston Investor]

Greg - I question if you know much about pricing coins or how the coin business operates. I believe this $99 price is not that much above seller's cost or what the mint is selling them for (I see they have the unc at $38 but there does not seem to be a price available on the proof). I am not sure the advertisers asking price is even a keystone markup (100%). Normally I mark up USM ASE's I offer customers at shows about 50 - 100% above my cost from USM anyhow. So I dispute your observation these coins are overpriced for retail. 10c on the dollar does not cut it in the coin business. Selling coins is a retail business like any other, not a brokerage. Generally it takes 40% Gross Margin to cut it in the coin business. I hardly think these dealers are going to even be able to buy the 2009 pair as low as $60 if the USM is already asking $38 for just the unc. Your blasting NN is way off base!

 

As long as its legal for Krause to accept this advertising so what if you don't like the price? Don't buy it then. Looks like a great ad / marketing tool and money making idea. At least since it is preorder they will know how they much have to order from the mint. What a sweet deal - collect the money in advance, print out a nice cert they will slab 69, order the coins from USM, and then ship them. And silver is going up too. Considering how much these guys paid to run these ads they must believe it is possible to make some money on this stuff. I am not so sure - what is the price going to be on the proof ASE? If silver advances much more all bets are off they will make much money from this.

 

I am have been burning the midnight oil repricing a lot of my junk box silver, trying to stay ahead of the advancing prices: 1954 BU 25c $25, 1963 PF 25c $20, 1964 Pf 10c $10, Canada 1965 PL 50c $7, 1954 BU 10c $7, 1963 D BU 50c $10. While raw, all grade 64 or above. Due to the economy, I will be bringing out my junk box out at local shows.

 

Collectors need to take responsibility and do their own homework. Krause makes their money advertising, not selling coins. There is nothing unethical about them running this ad. I think the cost to the sellers for this material will be close to $50 or more at the very least. And this does not include allocated overhead cost like Advertising!

 

 

 

[gmarguli]

Greg - I question if you know much about pricing coins or how the coin business operates.

 

Maybe a tiny bit. I've bought and sold one or two coins in my life.

 

I believe this $99 price is not that much above seller's cost or what the mint is selling them for (I see they have the unc at $38 but there does not seem to be a price available on the proof).

 

The proof SAE is likely going to be priced the same as last year. That's $31.95 retail. This company will get them 4% cheaper (5% bulk discount minus a 1% shipping fee). I know this for a fact as this is what I pay under the program. That's $30.67 for the proof. I believe that the Mint charges $1.40 over spot for the unc silver eagles. That puts the current cost for this company at about $15.50. Not sure where you are seeing $38 from the US Mint for this coin. That's $46.17 total for the pair.

 

I am not sure the advertisers asking price is even a keystone markup (100%). Normally I mark up USM ASE's I offer customers at shows about 50 - 100% above my cost from USM anyhow. So I dispute your observation these coins are overpriced for retail. 10c on the dollar does not cut it in the coin business. Selling coins is a retail business like any other, not a brokerage. Generally it takes 40% Gross Margin to cut it in the coin business.

 

It's a free country, but I don't know any rational person who would buy these bullion at those marked up levels. You can find them all over the internet from reputable dealers for a couple dollars over the mint wholesale price.

 

As long as its legal for Krause to accept this advertising so what if you don't like the price? Don't buy it then.

 

You're missing the point. A publication that presents itself as educational and pretends to try and protect the hobby should not be accepting ads and promoting companies that are "questionable" at best and inflate the prices well above the average retail market. The mint has even released warnings about these type companies.

[just-john]

Think sometime people forget what.why companys publish these magizines. Krause publication and all that sell ads are to make money. The cost of the subscription is in most cases a break even or small loss .They don't print them to inform you they do it to make money by selling ads. Simple no judgements it print media which right now is in worst shape than the housing market and the banks.

Full page ads cost alot inside cover- inside back cover -back- center fold cost even more.The good thing about print media they buy lunch's and take you to play golf and sometimes help you sell product..

[RI AL]

Here we go again...another parallel situation and another RI AL .

 

Early on Sunday mornings, I listen to the radio to a show by Dr. Dean Adell (spelling may be off). One of his frequent advertisers is Cold-EZE, an absolutely worthless, useless product with absolutely NO medical credibility or research behind it. It was developed by a 2nd grade teacher...she must be pretty damned smart to be able to develop a product that prevents the common cold when all of medical science hasn't been able to accomplish that yet.

 

Dr. Adell, when asked the question about if the product is any good (it is a call in format show) stated that it absolutely is USELESS but...he has no choice in who advertises on his show. Do we blame the good doctor for the garbage that unfortunately chooses to use his show to pedal their ?

 

On the other hand, Paul Harvey, who personally I can't stand, is another one that advertises snake oil type medications but he gives his own personal testimonials based on supposed letters he receives in the mail. He SHOULD have some moral obligation to his faithful (and misguided) listeners as he personally hawks the garbage. I'd love to see the FCC get their claws into him!

 

I guess if we expect all companies that advertise through the media to be forthright, where would HSN be? They sell junk coins at highly inflated prices to the ignorant, uninformed masses. I think that with all things, it's a case of "let the buyer beware". It's just sad that people base their purchases often on the credibility of the source. Coin newspapers are no different. How much over graded, overpriced JUNK is sold through the ads in the publications is anyone's guess, but my own experiences do not speak highly of some of the adbvertisers that I have delt with in the Coin papers. Still, that does not make it the responsibility of the coin paper to screen each and every advertiser. If they did that, Coin World (or other publication) would arrive weekly in a thin, white business envelope.

[Conder101]

Translate that into my industry ( Auto Repair ) , I DO REFUSE work if someone brings in their own 'substandard parts' or 'Used' parts and wants them installed by me. If that part should fail he could blame me for shoddy workmanship which would not be the case but definitely WOULD affect my reputation.

Now complete the analogy. YOU are the same as the editorial dept at the publication (I'm assuming you own the business) but the people with the used parts don't come to you, they go to your mechanics (the ad sales department) who in this case are the ones that schedule and do the work. They say sure because they want to stay busy.

 

And in fact even the editorial dept probably wouldn't have control over what ads run. That is the realm of the owner/publisher and in most cases his only concern is "are we making a profit". He may not even know anything about coins, and doesn't know that it is a slightly shady ad.

 

[jgrinz]

YOU are the same as the editorial dept at the publication (I'm assuming you own the business) but the people with the used parts don't come to you, they go to your mechanics (the ad sales department) who in this case are the ones that schedule and do the work. They say sure because they want to stay busy.

 

I have total control being Owner/ Operator and Head Tech so they would se me -

 

But I do see where you are getting at with larger companies, someone is not ALWAYS looking over the shoulder, and may not always make the 'right' decisions based on keeping up a reputation but upon staying 'occupied' or 'busy'

[just-john]

The old salesmen in me say's if I sell the ad and sombody were to deside not to use it or run it thats fine .But I would still expect my commision show me the money.

[Houston Investor]

Your title about Krause (NN) being a party to screwing collectors is one of the most idiotic titles in a thread I have seen here. But why not your from ATS where a lot of them essentially have their head stuck up a toilet.

 

Krause / NN is a reputable numismatic publication. Collectors screw themselves whether they are buying over priced junk or certified material Its called "tuition" and they are gonna end up paying it if they won't do their homework. Too bad so sad.

 

Krause is a class organization and they certainly have more class than Legend or CAC. Greg, you don't think Legend has huge markups on their material after applying the CAC marketing gimmick? Get outta here . Probably the least those guys could get the 2 pc ASE set is $50 cost - so they are trying to make double bubble on their inventory - so what? Its called business guy. Thats peanuts compared to the huge commissions above bid that Legend has on their stuff. Cudos to them if they can get that kinda money. But with the bids in the CDN going south I bet they are getting pretty nervous. I would hate to be sitting on all that big ticket material nowadays.

[physics-fan3.14]

Your title about Krause (NN) being a party to screwing collectors is one of the most idiotic titles in a thread I have seen here. But why not your from ATS where a lot of them essentially have their head stuck up a toilet.

 

There is no excuse for name calling or insults. If you want to do that, go ATS. Greg is a controversial poster, yes, and he likes to stir the pot, yes, but he is also very knowledgeable. I respect him, even if I don't agree with him on everything. There is no reason for your nastiness. I don't like you very much, but I'm not going to call you names and insult you.

[MikeInFL]

Wow, Greg, I never thought you would get worked up over someone (else) ripping off a collector by fooling them into thinking they are getting something less valuable than it appears.

 

For future reference (and in your opinion), at what point does profit turn into a "screwing"?

 

Just wondering...Mike

 

p.s. FWIW, I agree with you that Krause should be ashamed for accepting such ads -- however once you choose to accept advertising revenue, it's a difficult fence to sit on, which is what my question to you is getting at.

[MikeInFL]

Your title about Krause (NN) being a party to screwing collectors is one of the most idiotic titles in a thread I have seen here. But why not your from ATS where a lot of them essentially have their head stuck up a toilet.

 

There is no excuse for name calling or insults. If you want to do that, go ATS. Greg is a controversial poster, yes, and he likes to stir the pot, yes, but he is also very knowledgeable. I respect him, even if I don't agree with him on everything. There is no reason for your nastiness. I don't like you very much, but I'm not going to call you names and insult you.

 

So let me see if I got this right...

 

It's just fine if Greg says that Krause is "helping to screw collectors", but it's not OK to call Greg's title idiotic (edited to add) or to infer "he has his head stuck up a toilet".

 

Do you see the hole in that logic? It seems to me that once Greg takes off his gloves, turnabout is fair play.

 

But perhaps that's just me....Mike

 

p.s. That's not to defend either position (frankly, I would have worded both posts differently if I had written them), but rather a sense of fair play.

[gmarguli]

Wow, Greg, I never thought you would get worked up over someone (else) ripping off a collector by fooling them into thinking they are getting something less valuable than it appears.

 

For future reference (and in your opinion), at what point does profit turn into a "screwing"?

 

When you try to represent yourself as trying to educate the person you are helping screw.

[Conder101]

It's just fine if Greg says that Krause is "helping to screw collectors", but it's not OK to call Greg's title idiotic.

 

Mike, While Greg's thread title may be a bit extreme Physic did not complain about Arizona's comment on the title, it was the personal attack in the second sentence that he was taking him to task for.

[MikeInFL]

Wow, Greg, I never thought you would get worked up over someone (else) ripping off a collector by fooling them into thinking they are getting something less valuable than it appears.

 

For future reference (and in your opinion), at what point does profit turn into a "screwing"?

 

When you try to represent yourself as trying to educate the person you are helping screw.

 

But what point do you consider it a screwing? 50% gross margin, 100%, 300%?

 

Setting that aside for a moment, do you see a parallel between your own actions and the actions of Krause? Do I really need to point out the irony in your comments?

 

---------------------------

 

Greg M. Helping to Screw Collectors

 

Greg M. buys low-grade proof copper coinage and paints them blue with MS-70, upgrades the coins and sells them for profit, but in the same breath informs collectors what to look for in such coins.

 

-----------------------------

 

I suppose it takes one to know one....Mike

 

p.s. thanks Conder, I have ammended my comments above to be more clear -- however, the point still stands -- once the gloves comes off, it's tough to say one party is any less guilty than the other. However, at least one of them had the guts to say it to the other party's face, so to speak.