Here we go again. A cleaned Unc coin advertised as Proof

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

I believe it would be an ethical sale, as long as Julian provided full, honest disclosure. And I believe that he would.

 

But please don't take my comment to mean I would feel good about such a transaction. I also believe that the buyer would be buried in the coin.

 

I agree with this. JL has the right to sell his coin (or even if it's consigned) at whatever price he wishes. I would also hope anyone who spends $20K on a coin better know what the hell they are doing. So that, basically, a sale of that magnitude is between a KNOWLEDGEABLE seller and KNOWLEDGEABLE buyer. Who are WE to say otherwise?

 

Given that...I don't for one minute believe Julian will ever sell that coin at that level....

 

jom

 

I agree; the coin will never sell. The only thing that is potentially in danger here is Julian's reputation. If he wants to risk it on a few coins, let him go for it. He reminds me of Walter Breen.

 

I recall I have seen pictures of Mr. Breen unshaven, wearing a whiteish/grey dingy unironed shirt, and suspenders. I don't know if Mr. Breen had a chair on rollers, however, you may be on to something, via a comparison.....

 

In my opinion, any references/comparisons to Walter Breen and his reputation seem off base and out of line.

 

While your point is well taken, and since I am included in the remarks you comment on, sometimes, we can take the comments of another a little to seriously.

 

There is nothing off base or out of line about satire or descriptive appearance similarities made in jest, especially when done to interrupt a flow of conversation that is leaning toward disrespect.

 

We collectively have built a nation on just such commentary.

 

Whether or not one agrees or disagrees with the thrust of a point being made by such commentary, or misinterprets same, does not mean disrespect was the intent of the comment.

 

I am sure you know this, and I am sure you know that there was no intent of malice.

 

Lastly, I do not interpret the comments to be a reputation comment. It is no different in comment than stating a person would be buried in a purchase, which implies an opinion of condemnation of the subject being discussed.

 

Was it my suspenders/shirt thing? Maybe I did go a little to far......

 

With Respect, Of Course.

[Hard Times]

No longer in a PCGS Unc holder, now a NGC Unc improperly cleaned holder.

 

Ebay ought to boot this guy.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1893-Proof-Columbian-Commemorative-Half-Dollar-NGC-Details-Cleaned-/181039054206?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item2a26c4bd7e

I did not read any of the thread discussion, but based on the images, that coin DOES look like a very rare proof Columbian half-dollar. The strike is key to attributing these, and the fully ribbed sails look awfully convincing.

 

I can't speak to any so-called cleaning, but even a cleaned proof would be very valuable.

Professional graders, with no stake in the coin, at PCGS, and NGC, disagree with it being proof. I think I will side with the professional graders here. This is a classic example of why numismatists should thank heavens for TPG grading and slabs and why the past days of raw only coins, where the dealers opinion on the coin they are selling may be overvaluing the coin, is in the past. Someone could have bought this based on Julian's opinion in the past before TPG and taken a serious hit......

Your post is so basically erroneous that I almost wonder whether you are joking.

 

The eBay item in question represents an issue of ATTRIBUTION, NOT "GRADING". The TPGs, both NGC and PCGS, make errors in judgement with regard to proof vs. circulation strike and will usually correct these errors when proven.

 

"Proof" has NOTHING to do with "grade" -- it is an indication of manufacturing process of the coin.

 

Most anyone who collects three-cent nickels and shield nickels is already well aware of the many errors made by the TPGs with regard to certain dates for which it is difficult to attribute a proof versus a circulation strike.

 

The problem, as I indicated in my first post, is NOT with "professional graders", but rather with "professional attributors", and PCGS at one time was notorious for not having any (they have augmented their professional staff in that regard over the last few years). NGC has always been a bit ahead of the competition in this regard.

 

Edited to add:

Here is a question for y'all to ponder: What if Julian actually sells this to someone lacking grading ability to make a proper evaluation of the coin and trusts Julian's assessment of it being proof. Is this an ethical sale at $19.5K?

 

Best, HT

Of course it would be, provided the buyer is not being coerced in an unfair manner. He would see the TPG opinion of "circulation strike", weigh that against an expert opinion of "proof", then decide to purchase the coin at $19,000. "Ethics" has not in any remote way been violated under that scenario. It is indeed a very common situation in the everyday business of dealing with any collectible.

 

 

 

Your original comment:

 

"The strike is key to attributing these, and the fully ribbed sails look awfully convincing."

 

Well last time I looked, assessing 'strike' is part of the GRADING process. So I may be just a stupid ole bubba who is basically erroneous to say that TPG graders have to make a decision as to whether this coin by Julian is proof or buisness strike but it is what is it - grading company, they grade coins. Pat of the grading is making an attribution of buisness or proof.

 

All I said is if two TPG's say it is not proof, I am going to go with their opinion over the dealer. Silly me.

 

Best, HT

 

 

 

 

[MarkFeld]

No longer in a PCGS Unc holder, now a NGC Unc improperly cleaned holder.

 

Ebay ought to boot this guy.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1893-Proof-Columbian-Commemorative-Half-Dollar-NGC-Details-Cleaned-/181039054206?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item2a26c4bd7e

I did not read any of the thread discussion, but based on the images, that coin DOES look like a very rare proof Columbian half-dollar. The strike is key to attributing these, and the fully ribbed sails look awfully convincing.

 

I can't speak to any so-called cleaning, but even a cleaned proof would be very valuable.

Professional graders, with no stake in the coin, at PCGS, and NGC, disagree with it being proof. I think I will side with the professional graders here. This is a classic example of why numismatists should thank heavens for TPG grading and slabs and why the past days of raw only coins, where the dealers opinion on the coin they are selling may be overvaluing the coin, is in the past. Someone could have bought this based on Julian's opinion in the past before TPG and taken a serious hit......

Your post is so basically erroneous that I almost wonder whether you are joking.

 

The eBay item in question represents an issue of ATTRIBUTION, NOT "GRADING". The TPGs, both NGC and PCGS, make errors in judgement with regard to proof vs. circulation strike and will usually correct these errors when proven.

 

"Proof" has NOTHING to do with "grade" -- it is an indication of manufacturing process of the coin.

 

Most anyone who collects three-cent nickels and shield nickels is already well aware of the many errors made by the TPGs with regard to certain dates for which it is difficult to attribute a proof versus a circulation strike.

 

The problem, as I indicated in my first post, is NOT with "professional graders", but rather with "professional attributors", and PCGS at one time was notorious for not having any (they have augmented their professional staff in that regard over the last few years). NGC has always been a bit ahead of the competition in this regard.

 

Edited to add:

Here is a question for y'all to ponder: What if Julian actually sells this to someone lacking grading ability to make a proper evaluation of the coin and trusts Julian's assessment of it being proof. Is this an ethical sale at $19.5K?

 

Best, HT

Of course it would be, provided the buyer is not being coerced in an unfair manner. He would see the TPG opinion of "circulation strike", weigh that against an expert opinion of "proof", then decide to purchase the coin at $19,000. "Ethics" has not in any remote way been violated under that scenario. It is indeed a very common situation in the everyday business of dealing with any collectible.

 

 

 

Your original comment:

 

"The strike is key to attributing these, and the fully ribbed sails look awfully convincing."

 

Well last time I looked, assessing 'strike' is part of the GRADING process. So I may be just a stupid ole bubba who is basically erroneous to say that TPG graders have to make a decision as to whether this coin by Julian is proof or buisness strike but it is what is it - grading company, they grade coins. Pat of the grading is making an attribution of buisness or proof.

 

All I said is if two TPG's say it is not proof, I am going to go with their opinion over the dealer. Silly me.

 

Best, HT

 

 

 

 

Assessing strike is part of the grading process. Assessing attribution is also part of the grading process, because grading labels include such information/opinions. And, whether James likes it or not, those who attribute and grade coins are typically referred to as "graders" (not "attributors").

[Kenneth F]

[CyberspaceVoid]

 

you got THAT right

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

 

you got THAT right

 

However, you both had an urge to continue same.

[19Lyds]

No longer in a PCGS Unc holder, now a NGC Unc improperly cleaned holder.

 

Ebay ought to boot this guy.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1893-Proof-Columbian-Commemorative-Half-Dollar-NGC-Details-Cleaned-/181039054206?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item2a26c4bd7e

I did not read any of the thread discussion, but based on the images, that coin DOES look like a very rare proof Columbian half-dollar. The strike is key to attributing these, and the fully ribbed sails look awfully convincing.

 

I can't speak to any so-called cleaning, but even a cleaned proof would be very valuable.

 

Professional graders, with no stake in the coin, at PCGS, and NGC, disagree with it being proof. I think I will side with the professional graders here. This is a classic example of why numismatists should thank heavens for TPG grading and slabs and why the past days of raw only coins, where the dealers opinion on the coin they are selling may be overvaluing the coin, is in the past. Someone could have bought this based on Julian's opinion in the past before TPG and taken a serious hit......

 

Best, HT

I need to dsagree on this in that the graders and the TPG's DO have a stake in the coin. That stake is the grade guarantee which amounts to a cash settlement should they get it wrong or if it can be proven that they got it wrong. Judging certain coin on whether or not they are proof or PL business strikes can be a very costly venture if there are no specific die markers AND the price differential is extreme.

 

Additionally, not all coins get looked at by the same graders. As such, resubmissions can and often do come back with a different grade or designation. I have come across a few coins that were incorrectly attributed and have even cracked out and resubmitted certain coins where I felt they were incorrect in their "assessment" on the coin being cleaned. That crackout came back with a grade. A bit low but graded none the less.

 

While the TPG's are a good baseline for attribution and grade assessment, they don't always get it right and sometimes, they'll stick to their opinions regardless. Folks need to understand this as its nothing new with coins.It's the primary reason that TPG's were formed in the first place.

 

Yes, they are professionals (only meaning that they get paid for their services) but even professionals make mistakes.

 

Having said that, there is nothing wrong with "siding" with professional graders but slamming a "professional" numismatist such as Julian who has some fairly extensive experience is simply not the right thing to do. Since he's been in the business for longer than some folks have been around, it's a bit questionable to think that he'd start pulling newbie stunts in order to make a buck.

 

Just like the TPG's may believe that the coin is not a proof, Julian believes that it is and there isn't any set standards to determine that it is not. It's simply a matter of "opinion".

[Raisethis2]

 

 

I still take issue with the poster above siding with Julian as though he's proven the coin in question is in fact a proof. Until someone at a TPG who knows the series says it is in fact a proof, the clear and convincing evidence is that it's not. The fact that a questionable coin is for sale (whether E-Bay or anywhere else) demanding money only suitable to a proof is the issue the OP raised.

 

The fact that anybody would side with Julian and his impeccable integrity in the face of that same evidence demonstrates a level of loyalty not supported by the facts. He should remove the coin from sale consideration as a proof until/unless he can prove it actually is one.

 

If somebody buys the thing taking his word for it and cannot get it certified is Julian going to go out of his way to buy it back at the price sold?

[mumu]

bump

[RockMyAmadeus]

Why this board entertains him speaks poorly of the group. IMO

 

Beware of group think.

 

Every individual has something to contribute to someone.

 

Every individual in good standing on these boards has the right to post what they will, within the bounds of the rules, free from people attempting to influence "the board" one way or the other.

 

As well, judging the entire group for not denouncing a particular individual with whom you disagree speaks poorly of you.

 

If you want group think and mob mentality, check out the Water Cooler or the CGC side of the boards. You'll find it there aplenty.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Do you wear suspenders and dingy whiteish/grey unironed shirts, by the way? Just curious.

 

Your anti-dingy whiteish/grey unironed shirts agenda has not gone unnoticed.

 

 

The conformity police will be along shortly to deal with you.

 

As for the rest of your post...

[coinman_23885]

In my opinion, any references/comparisons to Walter Breen and his reputation seem off base and out of line.

 

How so? Walter Breen enjoyed a reputation as a distinguished numismatist, but at the same time, he also attributed several specimen strikes that have been rejected by the numismatic community and that there exists evidence that are nothing more than normal business strikes. How in the world is that out of line? Are you reading something else into the comment?

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

 

I still take issue with the poster above siding with Julian as though he's proven the coin in question is in fact a proof. Until someone at a TPG who knows the series says it is in fact a proof, the clear and convincing evidence is that it's not. The fact that a questionable coin is for sale (whether E-Bay or anywhere else) demanding money only suitable to a proof is the issue the OP raised.

 

The fact that anybody would side with Julian and his impeccable integrity in the face of that same evidence demonstrates a level of loyalty not supported by the facts. He should remove the coin from sale consideration as a proof until/unless he can prove it actually is one.

 

If somebody buys the thing taking his word for it and cannot get it certified is Julian going to go out of his way to buy it back at the price sold?

 

The OP raised the point that the seller stated it is Proof, -not about money-though it could be implied.

 

That is not what the Seller stated.

 

The Seller stated Proof IMHO.

 

We all know that means -In my humble opinion.

 

I already stated my position re. Mr. Julian.

 

The "evidence" you state has been presented is an opinion, and not a "fact", and the "evidence" is not supporting a "fact". We are dealing with a difference of opinion.

 

The level of loyalty may, or may not, be present.

It certainly is not, in my case.

 

I do not believe that is the reason for the stated position of 19L.

 

Why should the coin be removed? It is not definitively stated as a Proof. It is stated as a Proof, in his opinion.

 

People have to make up their own minds. They can choose any course of action they like.

 

It is not our responsibility to protect people when they make a choice, and decide that the choice was made by them out of ignorance.

 

Whether or not someone takes his word for it is not germane. He is not giving his word. He is giving his opinion, and his opinion is not the same as the TPGs.

 

I will state again, I am not a fan of suspenders/whiteish-grey wrinkled shirts/rolling chairs at coin shows, etc., but (blah,blah), that is not the point.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Do you wear suspenders and dingy whiteish/grey unironed shirts, by the way? Just curious.

 

Your anti-dingy whiteish/grey unironed shirts agenda has not gone unnoticed.

 

 

The conformity police will be along shortly to deal with you.

 

As for the rest of your post...

 

I will give you that one...you WC Escapee...Get you gone!!!

[19Lyds]

 

I still take issue with the poster above siding with Julian as though he's proven the coin in question is in fact a proof. Until someone at a TPG who knows the series says it is in fact a proof, the clear and convincing evidence is that it's not. The fact that a questionable coin is for sale (whether E-Bay or anywhere else) demanding money only suitable to a proof is the issue the OP raised.

 

The fact that anybody would side with Julian and his impeccable integrity in the face of that same evidence demonstrates a level of loyalty not supported by the facts. He should remove the coin from sale consideration as a proof until/unless he can prove it actually is one.

 

If somebody buys the thing taking his word for it and cannot get it certified is Julian going to go out of his way to buy it back at the price sold?

Am I siding with Julian OR am I NOT siding with the OP? Two different scenario's folks.

 

Certain derogatory statements have been made with regard to Julian which are simply incorrect. Booted from eBay? Why? Because the OP thinks so that why and by golly, the mob needs to rally and get Julian booted off of eBay because Julians opinion differs from some TPG's.

 

Anybody here ever submit a high grade Kennedy which was taken from an original bank roll and have it come back as SMS?

 

I myself have. I've even purchased SMS attributed coins that, when submitted to CONECA, came back as die varities which were only associated with business strike coins.

 

I know of one fella that bought a boxs of 2007 Jefferson Nickels. He picked out the best and submitted them. Every one of them came back as High Grade "Satin Finish" coins. Some were even FS.

 

I was consulted on what to do and since they had not shipped, I advised the submitter to give the TPG a call and explain that these had come from bank rolls. The TPG ultimately agreed with the submitter but then proceeded to down grade most of the high grade coins??

 

The entire point being, that the TPG's, as stated, err on the side of caution anymore, with regard to high dollar coins, and just because the subject coin has been in a PCGS Genuine non-Proof slab and now resides in a Genuine NGC non-Proof slab, does not necessarily mean that either TPG actually got it right.

 

To place "absolute", unquestioned authority in a TPG could be a very costly mistake. Especially when one's gut feeling, based upon "experience" and agreement from fellow dealers/collectors, and actually having the coin in hand, tell one otherwise.

 

Julian feels that the coin is a proof and I have no doubt that if he sells the coin as a proof AND it's positively proven that the coin is not a proof, that Julian would make the buyer whole. Thats his business reputation that, unless he's thinking of retiring to Costa Rica (which I doubt), he will protect.

 

To alter your quote a bit:

 

"The fact that anybody would side with a TPG and their impeccable integrity in the face of that same evidence demonstrates a level of loyalty not supported by the facts."

 

The "facts" are:

 

1. TPG's do make mistakes. Especially with high dollar coins and their manufacturing process. I know this to be a fact.

2. Julian has been in business as a "professional" numismatist for a great many years. Folks don't stay in business as professional numismatists because they have no idea what they are talking about. That is a fact.

3. The OP appears obsessed with getting Julian booted from eBay and perhaps kicked out of the ANA (some other posts). That is a fact.

 

To continually attack someone based upon that someone else's opinion simply is not right as each of us could come under that same attack at anytime.

 

As for the eBay listing, I don't see where anything is being demanded regarding the price. Potential buyers either agree with Julians opinion or they don't and simply move on.

 

This is what the OP should do. Just move on.

 

Key Word Spamming? Have we, as a collective, been so entrenched in eBay that we are above "reading" the content of a listing?

 

[MarkFeld]

Key Word Spamming? Have we, as a collective, been so entrenched in eBay that we are above "reading" the content of a listing?

 

One need not be "above reading the content of a listing" in order to object to keyword spamming.

[MarkFeld]

In my opinion, any references/comparisons to Walter Breen and his reputation seem off base and out of line.

 

How so? Walter Breen enjoyed a reputation as a distinguished numismatist, but at the same time, he also attributed several specimen strikes that have been rejected by the numismatic community and that there exists evidence that are nothing more than normal business strikes. How in the world is that out of line? Are you reading something else into the comment?

 

Because of Walter Breen is associated with (outside the realm of numismatics).

[coinman_23885]

In my opinion, any references/comparisons to Walter Breen and his reputation seem off base and out of line.

 

How so? Walter Breen enjoyed a reputation as a distinguished numismatist, but at the same time, he also attributed several specimen strikes that have been rejected by the numismatic community and that there exists evidence that are nothing more than normal business strikes. How in the world is that out of line? Are you reading something else into the comment?

 

Because of Walter Breen is associated with (outside the realm of numismatics).

 

That was never my intention, and I thought it was clear that he was being compared to Walter Breen the numismatist, not Walter Breen's non-numismatic issues. The context was in reference to a erroneous claim of a proof or specimen strike, something Breen was regularly associated with.

[MarkFeld]

In my opinion, any references/comparisons to Walter Breen and his reputation seem off base and out of line.

 

How so? Walter Breen enjoyed a reputation as a distinguished numismatist, but at the same time, he also attributed several specimen strikes that have been rejected by the numismatic community and that there exists evidence that are nothing more than normal business strikes. How in the world is that out of line? Are you reading something else into the comment?

 

Because of Walter Breen is associated with (outside the realm of numismatics).

 

That was never my intention, and I thought it was clear that he was being compared to Walter Breen the numismatist, not Walter Breen's non-numismatic issues. The context was in reference to a erroneous claim of a proof or specimen strike, something Breen was regularly associated with.

 

Glad to hear it and I apologize for misunderstanding.

[brg5658]

The "facts" are:

 

1. TPG's do make mistakes. Especially with high dollar coins and their manufacturing process. I know this to be a fact.

2. Julian has been in business as a "professional" numismatist for a great many years. Folks don't stay in business as professional numismatists because they have no idea what they are talking about. That is a fact.

3. The OP appears obsessed with getting Julian booted from eBay and perhaps kicked out of the ANA (some other posts). That is a fact.

4. Even the hallowed Julian Leidman occasionally makes mistakes. We all do. That's inherent in being human.

 

I think you forgot a 4th point.

[jerseycat10]

[19Lyds]

Key Word Spamming? Have we, as a collective, been so entrenched in eBay that we are above "reading" the content of a listing?

 

One need not be "above reading the content of a listing" in order to object to keyword spamming.

This is true but really, what is there to object to Mark? A good eBay search includes searching the title and the body of the listing so the word "proof" would turn up anyway.

 

Additionally, the entire point behind eBay searches and as such "key word spamming" is to get the listing included in a list of items to look at.

 

Is it unreasonable to expect that once the listing gets included in a search that the searcher actually read the listing of do folks just start dropping bids from the list of items returned?

[19Lyds]

The "facts" are:

 

1. TPG's do make mistakes. Especially with high dollar coins and their manufacturing process. I know this to be a fact.

2. Julian has been in business as a "professional" numismatist for a great many years. Folks don't stay in business as professional numismatists because they have no idea what they are talking about. That is a fact.

3. The OP appears obsessed with getting Julian booted from eBay and perhaps kicked out of the ANA (some other posts). That is a fact.

4. Even the hallowed Julian Leidman occasionally makes mistakes. We all do. That's inherent in being human.

 

I think you forgot a 4th point.

!

 

I suppose that is a relevent fact as well!

[MarkFeld]

Key Word Spamming? Have we, as a collective, been so entrenched in eBay that we are above "reading" the content of a listing?

 

One need not be "above reading the content of a listing" in order to object to keyword spamming.

This is true but really, what is there to object to Mark? A good eBay search includes searching the title and the body of the listing so the word "proof" would turn up anyway.

 

Additionally, the entire point behind eBay searches and as such "key word spamming" is to get the listing included in a list of items to look at.

 

Is it unreasonable to expect that once the listing gets included in a search that the searcher actually read the listing of do folks just start dropping bids from the list of items returned?

 

Lee, your definition of a "good Ebay search" is different than mine (and that of many others). I prefer that my search results not be cluttered and include claims that I don't care about.

[newprepper]

It seems to me that the man has some serious credentials. If that is the case, he knows people, so why doesn't he speak to the bosses, CAC included and come to an understanding once and for all about the pedigree of this coin? Seems like he could go above the graders heads in this case. Or maybe I just don't know WTF I'm talking about, which is probably the case.

 

Sorry, but the above post sounds as if you don't know what you're talking about.

 

CAC has nothing to do with a PCGS or NGC coin which has received a no-grade.

 

And the pedigree of the coin is largely irrelevant - perhaps you meant method of manufacture?

 

Finally, who at a grading company should render a grading opinion, if not the graders?

 

As I stated, I don't know what I'm talking about, that has never been in question, now to clarify my thinking, it seems in most places of business that the lowest rung usually gets the worst jobs, I don't know if the most experienced grader in that type of coin received it for grading, when ever I have a customer service problem, I bump it up to the next level, that is what I'm saying he should do with his connections, As far as bringing CAC into it, I would think due to his connections and experience he could call John A, explain what he is trying to establish and get another opinion. As to my incorrect usage of pedigree, you are correct, attribution??? would be more correct? Everybody, strike that, I know how you are about extremes.....Many people already agree that the TPG's are not infallible and only offering an opinion anyways. I want to state this again, as far as the grading process goes, I'm clueless, I am looking at it from a customer service point of view.

[MarkFeld]

It seems to me that the man has some serious credentials. If that is the case, he knows people, so why doesn't he speak to the bosses, CAC included and come to an understanding once and for all about the pedigree of this coin? Seems like he could go above the graders heads in this case. Or maybe I just don't know WTF I'm talking about, which is probably the case.

 

Sorry, but the above post sounds as if you don't know what you're talking about.

 

CAC has nothing to do with a PCGS or NGC coin which has received a no-grade.

 

And the pedigree of the coin is largely irrelevant - perhaps you meant method of manufacture?

 

Finally, who at a grading company should render a grading opinion, if not the graders?

 

As I stated, I don't know what I'm talking about, that has never been in question, now to clarify my thinking, it seems in most places of business that the lowest rung usually gets the worst jobs, I don't know if the most experienced grader in that type of coin received it for grading, when ever I have a customer service problem, I bump it up to the next level, that is what I'm saying he should do with his connections, As far as bringing CAC into it, I would think due to his connections and experience he could call John A, explain what he is trying to establish and get another opinion. As to my incorrect usage of pedigree, you are correct, attribution??? would be more correct? Everybody, strike that, I know how you are about extremes.....Many people already agree that the TPG's are not infallible and only offering an opinion anyways. I want to state this again, as far as the grading process goes, I'm clueless, I am looking at it from a customer service point of view.

 

I am very confident that a number of graders examined the coin at both NGC and PCGS, not just one or two graders at "the lowest rung".

 

I don't think that NGC or PCGS would put their name, reputation and money on the line, and attribute a coin as Proof, because John Albanese had a different opinion than they did. And that is with no disrespect, whatsoever to Mr. Albanese.

 

"Attribution" works fine in place of "pedigree". As do words such as method of manufacture, designation, etc.

 

I see that you are indeed aware of how I am about extremes.

 

(thumbs u

[newprepper]

Like I said, just looking at it from a different point of view, and trying to learn about the whole process, thanks for your input

[Raisethis2]

So, I guess we're suppose to believe that Julian knows better than the grading services and should be allowed to price a coin based upon his opinion rather than the opinions of the graders who also had the coin in hand.

 

That this type of dispute with the grading services has happened before and in each case his "out of the box" thinking and storied numismatic career enable him to ask what he wants and receive the support of fellow Dealers and Numismatists in doing so.

 

That if the coin were purchased at the lofty fee required he'd stand behind the sale and refund the purchase price if the coin ever were "proved" to only be a superior business strike, and.....

 

as collectors we're expected to look the other way rather than question the motives of the seller.

 

I must add, I've never met the guy and couldn't afford coins in his case if I ever did. I've never met or spoke with the OP either, I just admire his effort to wave the red flag on a listing that has more plot lines than a reality TV show.

 

Finally, at the end of the day we're talking about money. As collectors we all have an interest in keeping the hobby/vocation as transparent as possible because every time one of us loses, we all lose.

 

[19Lyds]

Key Word Spamming? Have we, as a collective, been so entrenched in eBay that we are above "reading" the content of a listing?

 

One need not be "above reading the content of a listing" in order to object to keyword spamming.

This is true but really, what is there to object to Mark? A good eBay search includes searching the title and the body of the listing so the word "proof" would turn up anyway.

 

Additionally, the entire point behind eBay searches and as such "key word spamming" is to get the listing included in a list of items to look at.

 

Is it unreasonable to expect that once the listing gets included in a search that the searcher actually read the listing of do folks just start dropping bids from the list of items returned?

 

Lee, your definition of a "good Ebay search" is different than mine (and that of many others). I prefer that my search results not be cluttered and include claims that I don't care about.

Well I'm open for lesson Mark since every one of my searches returns lots and lots of stuff that I did not search for nor care to review.

 

 

[EVillageProwler]

My understanding of the matter of superbly well manufactured coins whose precise method is not well-documented is that the TPG's will err on the side of caution. This, however, is a current day development. Especially where records don't really exist.

 

It used to be accepted that proofs exist of BM Morgan's, Isabella's and 20c pieces (among others). Steve Contursi wanted his 1794 dollar to be classified as proof. Now we have the term "specimen". It's a compromise. Is it the right compromise? Who knows...

 

On the matter of whose opinion is better (Julian's or the TPG's), I say it is a toss up. On some, I'd trust Julian's opinion over the TPG's. On others, perhaps not. I'd trust the TPG on numerical assessment, but necessarily a nuanced matter as method of manufacture.

 

The assessment of the TPG's is a reflection of how much warranty they wish to provide this coin and is not intended to be an absolute judgement of the method of manufacture.

 

As for the OP, since I've nothing nice to say about him, I will simply refrain.

 

EVP