Deleted Thread

[newprepper]

It appears my thread was deleted, now I have no way to contact Datentype. Does anybody have his # that he posted so I can call him?

 

Any ideas why it was deleted?

 

 

[cpm9ball]

He/She is in the User List. Did you try sending a PM?

 

Chris

[brg5658]

PM sent newprepper.

[coinman_23885]

His handle ATS is the same as his eBay handle. Try PMing him ATS as it appears that he posts there more than here.

[MarkFeld]

Can't you contact him through Ebay, since you bought from him there?

[brg5658]

I sent newprepper his phone #, and I also sent Datentype a direct email. I have dealt with him a lot in the past, he's a good guy and works his off getting top pop modern coins graded.

 

Good luck newprepper!

 

-Brandon

 

[coinman_23885]

Any ideas why it was deleted?

 

It's possible that the seller asked that the thread be deleted and given his explanation of the bidding patterns, etc., it is understandable that NGC complied. Another possibility is that NGC simply chose to delete it. Although nothing I saw rose to the level of defamation (only opinions that the activity could be construed as suspicious), NGC could have feared that the thread might be heading in that direction or it, on its own initiative, could have deleted the thread to be fair to the seller.

[brg5658]

Any ideas why it was deleted?

 

It's possible that the seller asked that the thread be deleted and given his explanation of the bidding patterns, etc., it is understandable that NGC complied. Another possibility is that NGC simply chose to delete it. Although nothing I saw rose to the level of defamation (only opinions that the activity could be construed as suspicious), NGC could have feared that the thread might be heading in that direction or it, on its own initiative, could have deleted the thread to be fair to the seller.

 

The seller had more than defended himself and his selling practices (no matter how suspicious it looked to uninformed persons who don't know datentype). I think that the (unfounded) accusations that were thrown around by many members here who have never had dealings with datentype were very close to if not defamation. I think it's appropriate that the original thread was removed.

[Coindude]

Personally I felt the thread was healing itself. Datentype had a great explanation as to what was going on. It was very logical and it didn't hurt that Brandon came to his defense with quite a bit of valid information that we all over looked.

[coinman_23885]

Any ideas why it was deleted?

 

It's possible that the seller asked that the thread be deleted and given his explanation of the bidding patterns, etc., it is understandable that NGC complied. Another possibility is that NGC simply chose to delete it. Although nothing I saw rose to the level of defamation (only opinions that the activity could be construed as suspicious), NGC could have feared that the thread might be heading in that direction or it, on its own initiative, could have deleted the thread to be fair to the seller.

 

The seller had more than defended himself and his selling practices (no matter how suspicious it looked to uninformed persons who don't know datentype). I think that the (unfounded) accusations that were thrown around by many members here who have never had dealings with datentype were very close to if not defamation. I think it's appropriate that the original thread was removed.

 

No one actually said that he did anything wrong or made accusations (unless I outright missed them); only that it looked odd to have received a second chance offer so quickly which it arguably did/does. This distinction is important. It doesn't quite reach the threshold IMO, but I agree that deletion was appropriate even though the seller did an excellent job of defending himself. I'm glad that he did post the very reasonable explanation that he did. And you helped a great deal by pointing out that the seller uses (and informs bidders) that he uses stock images.

 

 

 

[newprepper]

I have no problem with threads being removed, it's their site after all, but I think an explanation would be in order, or simply remove the offending posts instead.

 

 

 

[MarkFeld]

Before the thread was deleted, I had apologized.

 

In my post, I also asked D&T if he explained to the offerees why/how second chance offers were being made available. If not, many people would understandably be suspicious.

[brg5658]

Any ideas why it was deleted?

 

It's possible that the seller asked that the thread be deleted and given his explanation of the bidding patterns, etc., it is understandable that NGC complied. Another possibility is that NGC simply chose to delete it. Although nothing I saw rose to the level of defamation (only opinions that the activity could be construed as suspicious), NGC could have feared that the thread might be heading in that direction or it, on its own initiative, could have deleted the thread to be fair to the seller.

 

The seller had more than defended himself and his selling practices (no matter how suspicious it looked to uninformed persons who don't know datentype). I think that the (unfounded) accusations that were thrown around by many members here who have never had dealings with datentype were very close to if not defamation. I think it's appropriate that the original thread was removed.

 

No one actually said that he did anything wrong or made accusations (unless I outright missed them); only that it looked odd to have received a second chance offer so quickly which it arguably did/does. This distinction is important. It doesn't quite reach the threshold IMO, but I agree that deletion was appropriate even though the seller did an excellent job of defending himself. I'm glad that he did post the very reasonable explanation that he did. And you helped a great deal by pointing out that the seller uses (and informs bidders) that he uses stock images.

 

 

 

You must have missed a lot then. There were posts specifically accusing the seller of shill bidding. They were NOT shrouded in "maybe" statements. But, it doesn't matter this point. The issue has been resolved. No need to get all legal-system about it.

[newprepper]

I just got off the phone with Datentype, very nice guy, Yes my prices were higher than previous auctions, is that bad? To my wallet it is, does it mean I got a bad deal? Maybe, maybe not, comparing 2 different auctions is like comparing apples to oranges, different bidders etc. I'm sure I could look at prices realized from the big houses and compare them to ebay and find similar situations. Should those buyers think they got a bad deal?

 

I called eBay and talked with them, some of the information they gave me corresponded to what Datentype told me. Do I think he was using a shill bidder.....Nope. Will I be returning my coins....Nope. I don't think it's right to return based on past auction prices.

 

I paid what I was willing to pay. Will I research more in the future....more than likely.

 

Datentype........Sorry for the turn my thread took, it was not my intention for that to happen

George

 

 

 

[brg5658]

I just got off the phone with Datentype, very nice guy, Yes my prices were higher than previous auctions, is that bad? To my wallet it is, does it mean I got a bad deal? Maybe, maybe not, comparing 2 different auctions is like comparing apples to oranges, different bidders etc. I'm sure I could look at prices realized from the big houses and compare them to ebay and find similar situations. Should those buyers think they got a bad deal?

 

I called eBay and talked with them, some of the information they gave me corresponded to what Datentype told me. Do I think he was using a shill bidder.....Nope. Will I be returning my coins....Nope. I don't think it's right to return based on past auction prices.

 

I paid what I was willing to pay. Will I research more in the future....more than likely.

 

Datentype........Sorry for the turn my thread took, it was not my intention for that to happen

George

 

 

 

George thank you for the closure and summary. Ultra modern high grade coins can sell for extremely wide ranges of prices. I don't think that just because a coin sold a week before for less means you got a bad deal. All of the coins you posted were very nice, and I suspect the prices you got were quite fair.

 

Best of luck with your collecting, Brandon

[MarkFeld]

I don't think that just because a coin sold a week before for less means you got a bad deal. All of the coins you posted were very nice, and I suspect the prices you got were quite fair.

 

George, did you post the actual coins you bought? If so, I missed it.

 

And I will go on record as saying that if the coins you bought had been the identical ones which has sold very recently (as it appeared to those of us who didn't know about the stock photos) and you had paid considerably more for them, chances are excellent that you would have gotten a bad deal.

 

Quite fortunately, we have been told that was not the case here.

[brg5658]

All of the coins you posted were very nice,

 

George, did you post the actual coins you bought? If so, I missed it.

 

I meant "nice" in the sense of I thought they were reasonable prices and likely quite choice for the dates. George never posted pictures that I'm aware of.

 

[newprepper]

I purchased a 1987-D, 1991-D, 1994-P, 1996-D, all Lincolns, all MS68, all NGC

[newprepper]

No photos, I have not received them yet.

 

 

[coinman_23885]

In my post, I also asked D&T if he explained to the offerees why/how second chance offers were being made available. If not, many people would understandably be suspicious.

 

That is an excellent point and I think it might be wise for the seller to list his practice in the listing, noting that the seller has several and may offer duplicates via second chance offers. This would eliminate headaches and misunderstandings in the future.

 

Edited: By listing, I mean second chance listings. When I have received second chance offers in the past, it was created as a separate listing. If he included a statement in all second chance listings indicating that it could be caused by, among other things, there being more than one available it would lessen suspicions.

[Datentype]

Hey Feld, pardon me but I do not have that short of a memory. Anyone who has any questions about coins, prices and auctions can talk to me directly at 805-368-4407 or email me at datentype@hotmail.com

 

Feld, we had done some coin business on a fraud case a couple of years back and we handled that like Men did we not? None of this back stabbing stuff. I consider myself nothing but the very highest caliber dealer and I do not appreciate being treated any other way.

[newprepper]

I disagree, I think as a buyer, if I know there are multiples I may not be willing to bid as high thinking I may get a shot at a second chance offer. But as a seller I would explain in the offer

[MarkFeld]

Hey Feld, pardon me but I do not have that short of a memory. Anyone who has any questions about coins, prices and auctions can talk to me directly at 805-368-4407 or email me at datentype@hotmail.com

 

Feld, we had done some coin business on a fraud case a couple of years back and we handled that like Men did we not? None of this back stabbing stuff. I consider myself nothing but the very highest caliber dealer and I do not appreciate being treated any other way.

 

I had no reason to contact you - as far as I knew the buyer was going to do that. And let's face it, if you had been shilling your auctions - I am not intimating that you were - you wouldn't exactly be the best person to call with questions. You really don't seem to be able to look at it from another point of view.

 

I don't recall the fraud case to which you refer, but I am glad we handled it like men.

 

I don't consider posting on a forum "back stabbing" (particularly when a poster said you had been made aware if it) and am sorry you feel that way. It was nothing personal, as I was trying to help someone I thought was being taken advantage of.

 

 

[coinman_23885]

I disagree, I think as a buyer, if I know there are multiples I may not be willing to bid as high thinking I may get a shot at a second chance offer. But as a seller I would explain in the offer

 

I meant the second chance listing - see above.

[newprepper]

I understand, but what I meant to say was as a seller I would not disclose in the original ad I had more than 1, this would tend to reduce the bidding if buyers thought they would get one at a reduced price.

 

When I go to auctions, (not coin, junk stuff) if I see a lot of something I don't worry about being the top bidder if all the same stuff.