A Curious Response to a Review 1 1

[Henri Charriere]

I recently received the following overture from a well-known precious metals concern:

"We would like to offer a $20. partial refund in exchange for you to revise your negative feedback to neutral or positive."

I did not dignify this with a response, but for interested viewers [and in deference to @Oldhoopster who has an allergy to long-winded dissertations] I provide the following details.

Totally disregarding @VKurtB's admonition not to buy coins sight unseen, and yet, mindful of @RWB's prescient observation that the reason early 🐓 have so few grades is because not enough of them have been submitted, I threw caution to the wind and, basing my selection solely on the photographic evidence provided on eBay, took the plunge. Following is the review that prompted the seller's offer:

REASON FOR RETURN

Does not match description or photos.

COMMENTS

Too much significant PMD (that's "post-mint damage for the unacquainted) to qualify for consideration as BU, AU, GEM & CHOICE, each featuring their own deficits.  The ENTIRE rev. field is riddled with scratches and gouges.

This is absolutely unacceptable on a BU coin whose fields and devices should be chaos-free.  This coin has no place in the #1 [ranked "P" Rooster Registry Set which will require [the] pristine surfaces I already have for different dates/same condition.

Now, I want to make it clear that I asked this bullion seller for his definition of Brilliant Uncirculated and even contributed a thread devoted to the definition of the grade at hand and received identical responses from both the seller and @MarkFeld: "It embraces all grades from MS-60 to MS-70." My feeling now is if you are a numismatist it does not bode well to order antiquities from a bull in a china shop. My money was refunded in full, eBay more or less demanded a review, and I complied.

This leaves the matter of ethical considerations. I conferred with my sister on this and she reported a similar "request" (I prefer to call something else) but, having stated my case, ask the membership for their opinions.  The negative reviews received by this seller continues to reflect 0.

Our @VKurtB has repeatedly stated, do not place your faith in population reports, and rightly so.  But what about reviews?  Mine is being withheld for $20! Anyone care to comment or share a similar experience? 🐓 

 

[VKurtB]

So disavow your actual truthful review for a double sawbuck? Sounds par for the course in the Internet age. It’s ALL “fake news”. The farther we get into this Internet age mindset, the more I am glad that I’ll be shuffling off this mortal coil soon enough.

Edited December 7, 2021 by VKurtB

[Henri Charriere]

@VKurtB

That's correct.  So now I am slighted by the fact a coin I returned to a different company because it was no shape, way or form, an MS-67 🐓 of which I have several fine examples, refunded my money -- and promptly restocked for re-sale at the original purchase price well north of $1G, and a raw coin that similarly failed to pass muster with me, for which I submitted a negative review and was offered a "bribe" to remove it after already receiving a full refund. What a hobby! 🐓 

[RWB]

Consider the option that is consistent with your ethical values, both as you expect them and as you present them.

[Zebo]

I’ve seen this happen before. $20 is not worth bending on your principles. On the other hand - a MS 60 coin can have very distracting bag marks (ANA description below). If described as BU, according to others, would include MS 60 coins. You need very good images of the coin if purchasing raw. As Kurt mention - see them in hand before you buy. I have not followed that advise and have on occasion purchased off of photographs only. The results are sometimes good, sometimes not. I only purchase if you can return the item if dissatisfied (lessens the risk). 
 

A coin graded MS-60 will be unattractive, dull, or washed-out mint luster may mark this coin. There may be many large detracting contact marks or damage spots, but no trace of circulation wear. There could be a heavy concentration of hairlines or unattractive large areas of scuff marks. Rim nicks may be present, and eye appeal is very poor. Copper coins may be dark, dull, and spotted.