Should Auctioneers Be Held Accountable When...

[TonerGuy]

their descriptions of the coin are proved to be false, inaccurate and misleading ?

 

There's an interesting discussion ATS about a 1920 SLQ former Eric Newman coin up for sale in the up coming Legend Auction. Legend describes the coin as

 

From the famous Eric Newman Collection, this piece is unquestionably original, undipped, and unaltered. The surfaces are super clean, satiny and untoned, while a surprisingly strong luster beams from all over. Miss Liberty and the details are exceptionally struck. You can clearly see all the shield rivets. The eye appeal is awesome!"

 

The OP "originalisbest" makes a very good point that the coin was recently dipped when it was removed from its NGC slab and crossed to PCGS.

 

Here is the thread... 1920 PCGS MS66 SLQ ex Newman CAC

 

Does Legend have a duty to the bidders to now change the auction description language ? Is their description mere puffery ? Since their description is unwavering to the coins originality, if someone buy this coin as original and discovers later that coin is not original does Legend have any responsibility to the buyer for not doing their homework on the coin ?

 

As an aside, how did the coin retain its Newman pedigree if it was removed from its NGC holder and dipped ?

[MarkFeld]

their descriptions of the coin are proved to be false, inaccurate and misleading ?

 

There's an interesting discussion ATS about a 1920 SLQ former Eric Newman coin up for sale in the up coming Legend Auction. Legend describes the coin as

 

From the famous Eric Newman Collection, this piece is unquestionably original, undipped, and unaltered. The surfaces are super clean, satiny and untoned, while a surprisingly strong luster beams from all over. Miss Liberty and the details are exceptionally struck. You can clearly see all the shield rivets. The eye appeal is awesome!"

 

The OP "originalisbest" makes a very good point that the coin was recently dipped when it was removed from its NGC slab and crossed to PCGS.

 

Here is the thread... 1920 PCGS MS66 SLQ ex Newman CAC

 

Does Legend have a duty to the bidders to now change the auction description language ? Is their description mere puffery ? Since their description is unwavering to the coins originality, if someone buy this coin as original and discovers later that coin is not original does Legend have any responsibility to the buyer for not doing their homework on the coin ?

 

As an aside, how did the coin retain its Newman pedigree if it was removed from its NGC holder and dipped ?

 

As to your "aside" question, presumably, the submitter to PCGS provided proof that the coin was the Newman coin. The fact that it was removed from the NGC holder and supposedly dipped - I have not studied the images - does not change the Newman pedigree.

[Afterword]

How are they so certain it was dipped?

[TonerGuy]

 

As to your "aside" question, presumably, the submitter to PCGS provided proof that the coin was the Newman coin. The fact that it was removed from the NGC holder and supposedly dipped - I have not studied the images - does not change the Newman pedigree.

 

Wait.. Ive always been told that once you remove a coin from the original slab you lose the pedigree because otherwise there is no proof. What proof could a submitter provide to PCGS to allow for this ? Images of the coin in the original slab ? Is that now sufficient ?

 

How are they so certain it was dipped?

 

Comparison of the photos between the Heritage sale when the coin was in an NGC slab and the photos provided by Legend now that the coin is in a PCGS slab.

[MarkFeld]

How are they so certain it was dipped?

 

Because if you compare the current Legend images to the original Heritage ones, the former appear to show a color-free reverse and the latter, an obviously toned one.

[MarkFeld]

 

As to your "aside" question, presumably, the submitter to PCGS provided proof that the coin was the Newman coin. The fact that it was removed from the NGC holder and supposedly dipped - I have not studied the images - does not change the Newman pedigree.

 

Wait.. Ive always been told that once you remove a coin from the original slab you lose the pedigree because otherwise there is no proof. What proof could a submitter provide to PCGS to allow for this ? Images of the coin in the original slab ? Is that now sufficient ?..

 

 

If you've always been told that, you were sometimes told incorrectly. For proof, I would think a paid auction invoice would likely suffice.

[Afterword]

"Because if you compare the current Legend images to the original Heritage ones, the former appear to show a color-free reverse and the latter, an obviously toned one."

 

 

 

 

Right, I somehow overlooked the links to the photographs.

[TonerGuy]

If you've always been told that, you were sometimes told incorrectly. For proof, I would think a paid auction invoice would likely suffice.

 

So I can submit a raw coin with an auction invoice and that would be enough to claim pedigree ? Would a slab insert be better or just the same as an invoice to submit with a raw coin ?

[MarkFeld]

If you've always been told that, you were sometimes told incorrectly. For proof, I would think a paid auction invoice would likely suffice.

 

So I can submit a raw coin with an auction invoice and that would be enough to claim pedigree ? Would a slab insert be better or just the same as an invoice to submit with a raw coin ?

 

My guess is that such submissions are treated on an individual basis and that the grading company makes use of auction images, comparing them to the coin being submitted.

[RWB]

Certainly does not fit within the "comfort zone" of some.

 

Lots of auction companies now defer to the authentication companies, and that confuses many buyers when a description is full of bologna or maybe souse....

[Hard Times]

Apparently Legend's definition of 'originality' includes recent dipping.

 

Best, HT

[RWB]

If the coin was sold in the Newman auctions, but was then removed from the holder and altered in some way, then I question whether it now qualifies as a "Newman auction" coin: it is not the identical piece as when sold. Admittedly and arguable point, but if Legend was or is aware of the dipping, then their ethical obligation seems to be full disclosure to the public.

[Hard Times]

I don't see how Legend could not be aware of the dipping. It is a famous recently auctioned collection well documented by images on HA.

 

Best, HT

[MarkFeld]

I don't see how Legend could not be aware of the dipping. It is a famous recently auctioned collection well documented by images on HA.

 

Best, HT

 

Had they been aware of it, I don't believe there is any way they would have described the coin the way they did. And in order for them to have been aware of it, they would have had to remember the coin and/or compare the current and previous appearances.

 

They look at and handle a lot of coins and I'm surprised you don't see how they could be unaware of a dipping.

[Coinbuf]

As an aside, how did the coin retain its Newman pedigree if it was removed from its NGC holder and dipped ?

 

While Mark's theory may be correct (and if so brings the issue of a TPG giving special treatment to certain submitters into the equation), however another and equally possible option was brought up in the thread ats. It's quite possible that who ever submitted it to PCGS asked for a conservation and cross over, which would be an easier way to retain the pedigree I would guess.

[Hard Times]

I don't see how Legend could not be aware of the dipping. It is a famous recently auctioned collection well documented by images on HA.

 

Best, HT

 

Had they been aware of it, I don't believe there is any way they would have described the coin the way they did. And in order for them to have been aware of it, they would have had to remember the coin and/or compare the current and previous appearances.

 

They look at and handle a lot of coins and I'm surprised you don't see how they could be unaware of a dipping.

 

It is a NEWMAN coin it says so ON THE SLAB, easy to look up on YOUR company website, would have taken 3 minutes and HA actually did a passable job imaging NEWMAN coins. The numismatists at Legend surely know of the famous Newman collection and the auctioning of it?

 

There are 255 lots in the Legend auction, not much time lost by looking at the original auction on HA for this coin. Unaware of a NEWMAN coin? A highly reputed auction house selling coins of this price range did not try to trace back the history of a coin with such a famous pedigree? How would they know it is authentic if they didn't go back to the original auction source? Especially since it is not in the slab it was auctioned in previously? They knew it was dipped between holders, no possible way unless they are very sloppy in preparing auctions which would be hard to believe. And they call it original, a definition most informed numismatists would not use on a coin that was so recently dipped.

 

 

Best, HT

[RWB]

The responsibility for a lot description ultimately belongs with the auction company. If they know or should reasonably have known of some discrepancy or alteration of a lot, then I feel they have an ethical responsibility to disclose it. That seems the only right and honest thing to do.

[Raisethis2]

I'll bet PCGS was the party who dipped the coin. Since the chain of custody was unbroken they knew it was a Newman coin.

 

Accordingly, they retained the pedigree.

 

As to the Auction company's description, I agree with RWB that they have an ethical obligation now that these facts have come to light. They may not be able to change printed catalogs but should correct their online info. Doing so at the time of the auction is an option, but a pretty weak one.

[TonerGuy]

 

Had they been aware of it, I don't believe there is any way they would have described the coin the way they did. And in order for them to have been aware of it, they would have had to remember the coin and/or compare the current and previous appearances.

 

They look at and handle a lot of coins and I'm surprised you don't see how they could be unaware of a dipping.

 

Aware or unaware at this point is academic. Its public information and its posted on two public forums. It will be interesting to see if they change it now.

 

IMHO they should and they should note their mistake and allow anyone to withdraw any bids if the bidders so choose to do so.

 

Otherwise they have potential liability when it comes to the actual buyer and the market in general.

 

While Mark's theory may be correct (and if so brings the issue of a TPG giving special treatment to certain submitters into the equation), however another and equally possible option was brought up in the thread ats. It's quite possible that who ever submitted it to PCGS asked for a conservation and cross over, which would be an easier way to retain the pedigree I would guess.

 

I think you hit the nail on the head with your post. Remember though PCGS just launched their conservation service this week. It was not available until then. Unless it was available to certain dealers prior to the launch, which would only go to the strength of your first point.

 

As another aside from the thread ATS - CAC is also getting criticized for green beaning the coin as a MS67 with NCG and then also green beaning it as a PCGS MS66 FH. Some are saying as a MS67 it might have deserved the green bean - therefore as a 66 wouldnt it deserve a gold bean as being undergraded by 1 pt ?

[RWB]

Maybe it really deserves a jelly bean or a gummi bean for flexibility...?

[Conder101]

Images of the coin in the original slab ? Is that now sufficient ?

It would be sufficient IF the images are good enough to identify markers on the coin and the coin in the original slab that prove it is the same coin.

[Raisethis2]

After being dipped it might not deserve any bean. You pay your dues, you take your chances.

[BillJones]

Auctioneers have a responsibility to both the consigner and the bidder in addition to their need to generate income to stay in business. They owe the consigner a fair shot at getting the best price possible and they owe the bidders descriptions that are a reasonable reflection of the item for sale. "Reasonable" does not mean perfect.

 

I also believe that the best houses give fair assessments to their preferred clients. I am a "legacy client" at Heritage, and when I have asked, they have given me honest opinions about auction lots. Those opinions have included advice like, "That coin has a problem 'X.' It would be better for you to keep looking.