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

[brg5658]

The word "proof" has been removed from the auction listing title description.

Oh. Well, then, he's good, right? It's just his opinion in the body of the listing? We restrict one's speech, we restrict our own. Isn't that how it works? Who is he defrauding with his opinon? Nobody. Jury dismissed.

 

That doesn't make it good in my book. I could care less if he uses the word "proof" in the title of his E-Bay listing. The 1892 Columbian Proofs had a total mintage of 103 pieces. To my knowledge, the number of 1893 Columbian Proofs is unknown but they are considerably more rare than the 1892. The current NGC population is one coin. I don't know how many PCGS coins there are but my guess is only a handful. Knowing that information, are we really supposed to believe that one dealer has been so diligent in his search to find the elusive 1893 Columbian proofs that he has actually found two of them? Despite the fact that both were attributed as mint state specimens by the TPG's. And while he may consider what he is doing a legitimate business strategy, my opinion is that it is a misrepresentation of the value of the coin unless he offers a guarantee.

 

For the record, I never said that it made it okay. I was merely updating the thread...

 

AND, just for Lehigh, I leave you with this:

 

[Kurtdog]

The word "proof" has been removed from the auction listing title description.

Oh. Well, then, he's good, right? It's just his opinion in the body of the listing? We restrict one's speech, we restrict our own. Isn't that how it works? Who is he defrauding with his opinon? Nobody. Jury dismissed.

That doesn't make it good in my book. I could care less if he uses the word "proof" in the title of his E-Bay listing. The 1892 Columbian Proofs had a total mintage of 103 pieces. To my knowledge, the number of 1893 Columbian Proofs is unknown but they are considerably more rare than the 1892. The current NGC population is one coin. I don't know how many PCGS coins there are but my guess is only a handful. Knowing that information, are we really supposed to believe that one dealer has been so diligent in his search to find the elusive 1893 Columbian proofs that he has actually found two of them? Despite the fact that both were attributed as mint state specimens by the TPG's. And while he may consider what he is doing a legitimate business strategy, my opinion is that it is a misrepresentation of the value of the coin unless he offers a guarantee.

That doesn't make any sense. You're not obliged in any way. And he's not misrepresenting any fact, either, he's merely stating an opinion. It's like if I'm offering an NGC AU58 for MS64 money, or a PCGS MS64 for MS68 money, you have no cause to accuse me of misrepresentation just because I happen to think that highly of those coins. Don't ever buy from me, that's your choice. Chastise me for price-gouging. But don't call me Shirley.

[newprepper]

leslie neilsen......funny

[lehigh96]

The word "proof" has been removed from the auction listing title description.

Oh. Well, then, he's good, right? It's just his opinion in the body of the listing? We restrict one's speech, we restrict our own. Isn't that how it works? Who is he defrauding with his opinon? Nobody. Jury dismissed.

That doesn't make it good in my book. I could care less if he uses the word "proof" in the title of his E-Bay listing. The 1892 Columbian Proofs had a total mintage of 103 pieces. To my knowledge, the number of 1893 Columbian Proofs is unknown but they are considerably more rare than the 1892. The current NGC population is one coin. I don't know how many PCGS coins there are but my guess is only a handful. Knowing that information, are we really supposed to believe that one dealer has been so diligent in his search to find the elusive 1893 Columbian proofs that he has actually found two of them? Despite the fact that both were attributed as mint state specimens by the TPG's. And while he may consider what he is doing a legitimate business strategy, my opinion is that it is a misrepresentation of the value of the coin unless he offers a guarantee.

That doesn't make any sense. You're not obliged in any way. And he's not misrepresenting any fact, either, he's merely stating an opinion. It's like if I'm offering an NGC AU58 for MS64 money, or a PCGS MS64 for MS68 money, you have no cause to accuse me of misrepresentation just because I happen to think that highly of those coins. Don't ever buy from me, that's your choice. Chastise me for price-gouging. But don't call me Shirley.

 

It is misrepresentation if the seller knows his own opinion to be false. And if it is not misrepresentation, then it is price gouging as you say. And if he is guilty of price gouging then he is still in violation of the PNG Code of Ethics: Section 9a

 

9: To refrain from any of the following in dealing with non-professional customers:

(a) buying or selling at unreasonable prices

 

I would like to ask you a question. What do you think the chances are that he has found two proof 1893 Columbians, an issue with a population in the single digits across all grades?

 

 

[newprepper]

The word "proof" has been removed from the auction listing title description.

Oh. Well, then, he's good, right? It's just his opinion in the body of the listing? We restrict one's speech, we restrict our own. Isn't that how it works? Who is he defrauding with his opinon? Nobody. Jury dismissed.

That doesn't make it good in my book. I could care less if he uses the word "proof" in the title of his E-Bay listing. The 1892 Columbian Proofs had a total mintage of 103 pieces. To my knowledge, the number of 1893 Columbian Proofs is unknown but they are considerably more rare than the 1892. The current NGC population is one coin. I don't know how many PCGS coins there are but my guess is only a handful. Knowing that information, are we really supposed to believe that one dealer has been so diligent in his search to find the elusive 1893 Columbian proofs that he has actually found two of them? Despite the fact that both were attributed as mint state specimens by the TPG's. And while he may consider what he is doing a legitimate business strategy, my opinion is that it is a misrepresentation of the value of the coin unless he offers a guarantee.

That doesn't make any sense. You're not obliged in any way. And he's not misrepresenting any fact, either, he's merely stating an opinion. It's like if I'm offering an NGC AU58 for MS64 money, or a PCGS MS64 for MS68 money, you have no cause to accuse me of misrepresentation just because I happen to think that highly of those coins. Don't ever buy from me, that's your choice. Chastise me for price-gouging. But don't call me Shirley.

 

It is misrepresentation if the seller knows his own opinion to be false. And if it is not misrepresentation, then it is price gouging as you say. And if he is guilty of price gouging then he is still in violation of the PNG Code of Ethics: Section 9a

 

9: To refrain from any of the following in dealing with non-professional customers:

(a) buying or selling at unreasonable prices

 

I would like to ask you a question. What do you think the chances are that he has found two proof 1893 Columbians, an issue with a population in the single digits across all grades?

 

 

If buying or selling at unreasonable prices is unethical, how do you explain the prices of rainbow or monster toned coins, or top pops, or something you just want really bad. People will pay what they perceive something to be worth. How do you define a non-professional customer?

[lehigh96]

The word "proof" has been removed from the auction listing title description.

Oh. Well, then, he's good, right? It's just his opinion in the body of the listing? We restrict one's speech, we restrict our own. Isn't that how it works? Who is he defrauding with his opinon? Nobody. Jury dismissed.

That doesn't make it good in my book. I could care less if he uses the word "proof" in the title of his E-Bay listing. The 1892 Columbian Proofs had a total mintage of 103 pieces. To my knowledge, the number of 1893 Columbian Proofs is unknown but they are considerably more rare than the 1892. The current NGC population is one coin. I don't know how many PCGS coins there are but my guess is only a handful. Knowing that information, are we really supposed to believe that one dealer has been so diligent in his search to find the elusive 1893 Columbian proofs that he has actually found two of them? Despite the fact that both were attributed as mint state specimens by the TPG's. And while he may consider what he is doing a legitimate business strategy, my opinion is that it is a misrepresentation of the value of the coin unless he offers a guarantee.

That doesn't make any sense. You're not obliged in any way. And he's not misrepresenting any fact, either, he's merely stating an opinion. It's like if I'm offering an NGC AU58 for MS64 money, or a PCGS MS64 for MS68 money, you have no cause to accuse me of misrepresentation just because I happen to think that highly of those coins. Don't ever buy from me, that's your choice. Chastise me for price-gouging. But don't call me Shirley.

 

It is misrepresentation if the seller knows his own opinion to be false. And if it is not misrepresentation, then it is price gouging as you say. And if he is guilty of price gouging then he is still in violation of the PNG Code of Ethics: Section 9a

 

9: To refrain from any of the following in dealing with non-professional customers:

(a) buying or selling at unreasonable prices

 

I would like to ask you a question. What do you think the chances are that he has found two proof 1893 Columbians, an issue with a population in the single digits across all grades?

 

 

If buying or selling at unreasonable prices is unethical, how do you explain the prices of rainbow or monster toned coins, or top pops, or something you just want really bad. People will pay what they perceive something to be worth. How do you define a non-professional customer?

 

I would be very difficult to accuse a seller of toned coins of price gouging since there are no established price guides and the nature of eye appeal is so subjective. What I will say is that huge premiums for toned coins part of the market as can be seen clearly by auction results. By that rationale alone, the prices are not automatically unreasonable. Selling a coin worth $50 in a price guide for $20K is a whole different animal.

 

I did not write the PNG rules, but my guess is that non-professional customer refers to anyone who does not make a living buying and selling coins.

[newprepper]

Is that what the coin in question is worth? $50?

[lehigh96]

Is that what the coin in question is worth? $50?

 

NGC's Price Guide has an 1893 Columbian worth $51.60 in MS62. The one in question has been cleaned so I was being generous.

[newprepper]

better snatch it up before the price goes up!!!

[Kurtdog]

I would like to ask you a question. What do you think the chances are that he has found two proof 1893 Columbians, an issue with a population in the single digits across all grades?

A long-time expert with credentials the ANA looks up to? Quite frankly, I don't know. But, you're accusing him of fraud. That's what an intentional misrepresentation is. For his price-gouging, kick him out of the PNG for it. Don't censor his opinions on his coins. He has a free speech right, there. Short of fraud, he can exercise it as he sees fit.

 

Oh, and BTW, I also agree with George. Just don't call him Soldier Boy.

 

PS: George, we're OK on that little misunderstanding, now, aren't we? I think we are.

[newprepper]

What misunderstanding?

[Kurtdog]

You're OK. I don't care what everyone else says about you.

[newprepper]

You're OK. I don't care what everyone else says about you.

 

I just glanced over this whole thread, and I have a coupla points,

1. Nobody has offered any proof either way on this coin, because nobody besides the owner and the 2 TPG's have seen it in hand

2. While there is a ton of knowledge here, it is all conjecture based on an ebay image.

3. Until he sells this coin, and it is proven to be an MS coin he cannot be accused of price gouging

4. I don't know anything at all about it, just my POV

5. I can understand why the TPG's would not want to definitively declare it a proof because of the financial liability, but that doesn't mean it's not

[lehigh96]

I would like to ask you a question. What do you think the chances are that he has found two proof 1893 Columbians, an issue with a population in the single digits across all grades?

A long-time expert with credentials the ANA looks up to? Quite frankly, I don't know. But, you're accusing him of fraud. That's what an intentional misrepresentation is. For his price-gouging, kick him out of the PNG for it. Don't censor his opinions on his coins. He has a free speech right, there. Short of fraud, he can exercise it as he sees fit.

 

Oh, and BTW, I also agree with George. Just don't call him Soldier Boy.

 

PS: George, we're OK on that little misunderstanding, now, aren't we? I think we are.

 

Just because I believe what he is doing is misrepresentation of the value of the coin does not make it so, it is my opinion. And how am I censoring his opinions on his coins? I didn't start this thread. I never asked for any action to be taken. All I did was chime in with my 2 cents. Furthermore, if he were to explain in detail the reasons why he thought the coin graded as a mint state Columbian is actually a proof coin, I would have no problem with the listing at all.

 

Are you gonna answer my question? What do you think the chances are that he has found two proof 1893 Columbians, an issue with a population in the single digits across all grades?

[newprepper]

about the same that we can determine its a proof without seeing it

[RockMyAmadeus]

The idea that there is a "fair" price for any item is communistic nonsense.

 

I set a price. A buyer either accepts it, or they do not. No one is forced to shop with me. Provided I have not defrauded anyone (this covers both the concealed problems issue and the person who asks for your honest opinion issue), it's no one else's business what I charge, and what I pay,

 

If you don't like the price someone is charging, shop elsewhere. If there is nowhere else to obtain that item, either suck it up and make the purchase, negotiate, or learn how to not have something you desire.

 

I would never be involved with an organization, no matter how "noble" they sound, which attempted to dictate what THEY feel is a "reasonable" price for anything.

 

The only pressure I must bow to is the market. If I wish to sell, I am forced to meet the market. If I don't...then the item probably won't sell.

 

Knowledge is power.

[RockMyAmadeus]

PS. If I were to charge $50 for a PCGS MS64RB 1909-S Indian Head cent...which, according to the market, is worth substantially more...would someone come and take away my membership for setting an "unreasonable" price on this item?

 

Because it is, most assuredly, an "unreasonable" price...

 

If it doesn't work both ways, it doesn't work at all.

[newprepper]

PS. If I were to charge $50 for a PCGS MS64RB 1909-S Indian Head cent...which, according to the market, is worth substantially more...would someone come and take away my membership for setting an "unreasonable" price on this item?

 

Because it is, most assuredly, an "unreasonable" price...

 

If it doesn't work both ways, it doesn't work at all.

 

you are in the wrong forum, but, I'll take it. haha

[newprepper]

The idea that there is a "fair" price for any item is communistic nonsense.

 

I set a price. A buyer either accepts it, or they do not. No one is forced to shop with me. Provided I have not defrauded anyone (this covers both the concealed problems issue and the person who asks for your honest opinion issue), it's no one else's business what I charge, and what I pay,

 

If you don't like the price someone is charging, shop elsewhere. If there is nowhere else to obtain that item, either suck it up and make the purchase, negotiate, or learn how to not have something you desire.

 

I would never be involved with an organization, no matter how "noble" they sound, which attempted to dictate what THEY feel is a "reasonable" price for anything.

 

The only pressure I must bow to is the market. If I wish to sell, I am forced to meet the market. If I don't...then the item probably won't sell.

 

Knowledge is power.

 

Agreed

[Hard Times]

You're OK. I don't care what everyone else says about you.

 

I just glanced over this whole thread, and I have a coupla points,

1. Nobody has offered any proof either way on this coin, because nobody besides the owner and the 2 TPG's have seen it in hand

2. While there is a ton of knowledge here, it is all conjecture based on an ebay image.

3. Until he sells this coin, and it is proven to be an MS coin he cannot be accused of price gouging

4. I don't know anything at all about it, just my POV

5. I can understand why the TPG's would not want to definitively declare it a proof because of the financial liability, but that doesn't mean it's not

 

All correct observations, but I would add to 5 that while it does not mean it's not proof when two reputed TPG's say it's not, it probably is very likely that it is not and the onus is then on the owner two prove otherwise. It would add alot of credibility to his listing if he would show his evidence for his belief that it is proof.

 

Best, HT

[Buffalo Head]

PS. If I were to charge $50 for a PCGS MS64RB 1909-S Indian Head cent...which, according to the market, is worth substantially more...would someone come and take away my membership for setting an "unreasonable" price on this item?

 

Because it is, most assuredly, an "unreasonable" price...

 

If it doesn't work both ways, it doesn't work at all.

 

Apparently it doesn't work at all! PNG....I see many folks on e-bay flashing this "PNG" around and let me tell ya, many sellers have the grade wrong!

 

[newprepper]

You're OK. I don't care what everyone else says about you.

 

I just glanced over this whole thread, and I have a coupla points,

1. Nobody has offered any proof either way on this coin, because nobody besides the owner and the 2 TPG's have seen it in hand

2. While there is a ton of knowledge here, it is all conjecture based on an ebay image.

3. Until he sells this coin, and it is proven to be an MS coin he cannot be accused of price gouging

4. I don't know anything at all about it, just my POV

5. I can understand why the TPG's would not want to definitively declare it a proof because of the financial liability, but that doesn't mean it's not

 

All correct observations, but I would add to 5 that while it does not mean it's not proof when two reputed TPG's say it's not, it probably is very likely that it is not and the onus is then on the owner two prove otherwise. It would add alot of credibility to his listing if he would show his evidence for his belief that it is proof.

 

Best, HT

 

Very much agreed

[crypto79-migration]

You're OK. I don't care what everyone else says about you.

 

I just glanced over this whole thread, and I have a coupla points,

1. Nobody has offered any proof either way on this coin, because nobody besides the owner and the 2 TPG's have seen it in hand

2. While there is a ton of knowledge here, it is all conjecture based on an ebay image.

3. Until he sells this coin, and it is proven to be an MS coin he cannot be accused of price gouging

4. I don't know anything at all about it, just my POV

5. I can understand why the TPG's would not want to definitively declare it a proof because of the financial liability, but that doesn't mean it's not

 

All correct observations, but I would add to 5 that while it does not mean it's not proof when two reputed TPG's say it's not, it probably is very likely that it is not and the onus is then on the owner two prove otherwise. It would add alot of credibility to his listing if he would show his evidence for his belief that it is proof.

 

Best, HT

 

I bet he would if a legitimate buyer or established client asked. That said can anybody blame him for not taking part in a Internet cry fest started by a few posers without an actual intrest in the coin or the ability to act even if they did. Some of the people on this forum are quick to discount a proven man'd opinion all the while having little merit to their own all the while over valuing what people think about there input or notions of fairness.

 

For the collectors who don't know him but have formed such strong opinions on the man , maybe you should consider how integrated into the hoobby you truly are. He has had a B&M longer then many have been out of diappers and has been at just about every major auction, show or numismatic event for the past 40 years. If you don't know him and your resume consists of here and eBay, I would suggest it is your opinion's relevance that needs to be considered and merit debated in a thread.

[Hard Times]

You're OK. I don't care what everyone else says about you.

 

I just glanced over this whole thread, and I have a coupla points,

1. Nobody has offered any proof either way on this coin, because nobody besides the owner and the 2 TPG's have seen it in hand

2. While there is a ton of knowledge here, it is all conjecture based on an ebay image.

3. Until he sells this coin, and it is proven to be an MS coin he cannot be accused of price gouging

4. I don't know anything at all about it, just my POV

5. I can understand why the TPG's would not want to definitively declare it a proof because of the financial liability, but that doesn't mean it's not

 

All correct observations, but I would add to 5 that while it does not mean it's not proof when two reputed TPG's say it's not, it probably is very likely that it is not and the onus is then on the owner two prove otherwise. It would add alot of credibility to his listing if he would show his evidence for his belief that it is proof.

 

Best, HT

 

I bet he would if a legitimate buyer or established client asked. That said can anybody blame him for not taking part in a Internet cry fest started by a few posers without an actual intrest in the coin or the ability to act even if they did. Some of the people on this forum are quick to discount a proven man'd opinion all the while having little merit to their own all the while over valuing what people think about there input or notions of fairness.

 

For the collectors who don't know him but have formed such strong opinions on the man , maybe you should consider how integrated into the hoobby you truly are. He has had a B&M longer then many have been out of diappers and has been at just about every major auction, show or numismatic event for the past 40 years. If you don't know him and your resume consists of here and eBay, I would suggest it is your opinion's relevance that needs to be considered and merit debated in a thread.

 

All good and I have nothing but praise for him from my personal interactions at shows and on web boards. But bottom line, in that holder with that attribution, that coin is worth <$50 and I can certainly be interested at that price if I was collecting them. But not as a proof at $20K that NGC and PCGS have both said it is NOT, whether it is or isn't, I side with the TPG's and err on the side of caution.

 

PS - Don't confuse the issue with the coin with the issue of the man's character, no one here I think is questioning the latter, just the former.

 

Best, HT

[comicdonna]

"PS - Don't confuse the issue with the coin with the issue of the man's character, no one here I think is questioning the latter, just the former".

 

 

 

Exactly! (thumbs u

 

 

[brg5658]

I bet he would if a legitimate buyer or established client asked. That said can anybody blame him for not taking part in a Internet cry fest started by a few posers without an actual intrest in the coin or the ability to act even if they did. Some of the people on this forum are quick to discount a proven man'd opinion all the while having little merit to their own all the while over valuing what people think about there input or notions of fairness.

 

For the collectors who don't know him but have formed such strong opinions on the man , maybe you should consider how integrated into the hoobby you truly are. He has had a B&M longer then many have been out of diappers and has been at just about every major auction, show or numismatic event for the past 40 years. If you don't know him and your resume consists of here and eBay, I would suggest it is your opinion's relevance that needs to be considered and merit debated in a thread.

 

And, if your ability to spell "diappers" and "intrest" and "hoobby" is any indication of your greater worth, then self-reflection may also be in order for you.

 

I would like to note that the number of years a person has been doing something doesn't excuse that person or put them above common sense. I'm not certain what your stake is in supporting such behavior, but it seems you are having some sort of "cry fest" of your own.

[coinman_23885]

I bet he would if a legitimate buyer or established client asked. That said can anybody blame him for not taking part in a Internet cry fest started by a few posers without an actual intrest in the coin or the ability to act even if they did. Some of the people on this forum are quick to discount a proven man'd opinion all the while having little merit to their own all the while over valuing what people think about there input or notions of fairness.

 

For the collectors who don't know him but have formed such strong opinions on the man , maybe you should consider how integrated into the hoobby you truly are. He has had a B&M longer then many have been out of diappers and has been at just about every major auction, show or numismatic event for the past 40 years. If you don't know him and your resume consists of here and eBay, I would suggest it is your opinion's relevance that needs to be considered and merit debated in a thread.

 

You come here constantly to run to Julian's defense. No one is criticizing his ethics (at least not in what I have read so far unless I am overlooking something); they are only questioning his claim that two problem coins that were labeled as business strikes by both PCGS and NGC are rare proof coins. This is a perfectly legitimate discussion. What is your opinion on whether the coin is a proof or business strike? Interestingly, you have omitted this information. If you collected the series, would you purchase it as a proof? You act as if Julian is perfect and above being questioned, yet I am betting that you probably agree with many of the posters here that it is unlikely to be a proof. If you do believe it is a proof, on what basis do you rely? If it is Julian's or anyone's blind word (I don't care how knowledgeable they are) that is the sole basis of your opinion, then I don't trust your judgment nor should anyone else. Everyone makes mistakes. Even you and Julian.

[newprepper]

Is that what this is about? Spelling? I routinely misspell here, not from being stupid, from hitting the wrong button inadvertently. I couldn't care less to make all the corrections, I truly think its about the content of the thread, not what my 9th grade english teacher thinks.

[brg5658]

Is that what this is about? Spelling? I routinely misspell here, not from being stupid, from hitting the wrong button inadvertently. I couldn't care less to make all the corrections, I truly think its about the content of the thread, not what my 9th grade english teacher thinks.

 

Newprepper, it was an attempt to show crypto how juvenile his own ad hominem attacks were. He is questioning the intelligence of those having a problem with a coin listed by Julian, instead of addressing the issue as to whether the coin in question is indeed a proof or not. Nothing more, and nothing less...but it is a bit ironic to have someone come here, tell us all how "low" we are, all while not being able to make complete sentences or spell simple words like interest. That's all.

[Kurtdog]

Just because I believe what he is doing is misrepresentation of the value of the coin does not make it so, it is my opinion. And how am I censoring his opinions on his coins? I didn't start this thread. I never asked for any action to be taken. All I did was chime in with my 2 cents. Furthermore, if he were to explain in detail the reasons why he thought the coin graded as a mint state Columbian is actually a proof coin, I would have no problem with the listing at all.

You're entitled to your opinion and I respect that. You're entitled to think whatever you want of him or of me or of anybody for whatever reason and I also respect that. Personally, I think you're being unnecessarily hard on the guy, but, again, you're entitled.

 

Are you gonna answer my question? What do you think the chances are that he has found two proof 1893 Columbians, an issue with a population in the single digits across all grades?

I already answered it when I said in effect I don't know. That's an answer, isn't it? I hesitate to speculate beyond that, as I think it's unproductive. The smart money says he's talking through his hat, I'll agree with you on that.