What a less than honest listing on eBay looks like. 1 1

[Henri Charriere]

As the least informed member of this Forum is painfully aware, I am in [desperate] need of a 1913 French 20-franc gold rooster.  But not just any rooster.  Only one that has been certified MS-67.  Presently featured on eBay is an example of the obverse of a purported raw1913 which I peg as a shoo-in for the exalted high-tier slot.  Only problem is, while the seller claims the image posted front-and-center is not a stock photo, I am beginning to have my doubts which I have taken the liberty of reporting to eBay.

I cannot allege fraud but I can describe behavior that is dishonest and deceptive.  Briefly, while the primary photo of the coin's obverse is crystal clear, the five accompanying photos, all of the reverse -- is reduced in size, its features obscured by a near-transluscent plastic flip.  I politely inquired as to why the reverse could not be similarly photographed unobstructed by a holder.  For the next two days, I was assured [in carefully-worded language meant to assuage the concerns of eBay reviewers] that another photo would be put up shortly. Some 48 hours later one was of the purported reverse -- "encased" in hard plastic.  It is virtually impossible to discern surface topography which would enable a viewer to determine whether the coin was worthy of an MS-67 assessment.  It is fairly clear to me that the seller is hoping to snare an uninquisitive buyer. Seller's reviewer rating: 91.7%  Note:  Last I checked, NGC had certified only ONE such coin.  If you, gentle reader and fellow hobbyist, feel I overstepped my bounds, I will surrender forthwith my Rising Star status and submit my resignation as a member, again.

[RWB]

Doubts are doubts and from the scenario so far, seem reasonable. Anytime a seller equivocates, prevaricates, or kissmekates one has to wonder about anything they might say or do. I suspect Quintus would feel the same.

[Greenstang]

A rating of only 91.7% is considered a low rating and a seller I would avoid.   
Normally a rating of 98% or higher is considered  a good rating. A top rated seller usually always supplies    
clear photos of both sides whereas the lower rated are usually, as you put it, dishonest and deceptive.   
There is no reason to not supply a clear photo of the reverse unless the seller is hiding something.

 

[powermad5000]

Well, I would say you were within your rights. The report does not mean eBay won't take the listing down though so be aware of that. They remove or allow listings at their discretion.

As for the seller, 91% to me is a HORRIBLE seller. 97% is not even a good seller. 98% could go either way. I always look at their feedback before even thinking about buying. If the neutral and negative feedback is whiney stuff about how it should have been packaged inside full foam, inside a small box, inside a bigger box, inside a plastic shipping carton, inside a metal safe, inside a fire safe, and transported inside an armored truck with two dozen armed guards, and delivered by said armored guards also accompanied by the Secret Service, then that is whiney feedback that should be ignored. Lots of feedback stating either the item received was not what was shown, was not what was bought, was not even sent or delivered is of note. Feedback that states the sellers communication was less than stellar or lacking completely should also be of note. In those cases you don't buy no matter how badly you want the item.

Your requests should be met by the seller no matter what they are. And if the seller cannot comply to such requests, that is not a good seller. I once sold a Mercury dime already slabbed by NGC and graded as AU 58 FB. The customer who bought it requested photos of the reverse showing the full bands before he would make the purchase. His request stated that he wasn't doubting NGC, but just wanted to see the full bands clearly for himself. I thought they were clear enough in the photos in the listing, but I took four more photos of the reverse from different angles and lighting so the buyer could see the bands better. Point of this dissertation is I complied fully with the buyers request without hesitation or without showing the item for anything less than what it actually was. That is called an honest seller. One who fully complies with a buyers request no matter the what, when, where, why of it.

Being I know your demands for these roosters, and the slight chance that it might qualify for your demands, I could only imagine with so few of them graded at that level that the sellers coin is not one of the top level specimens. As for your actions, I find them to be well within right. Asking for a clear photo is not like asking the seller to perform the Prisyadka Dance on cue.

[Dave1384]

I went looking for that sale. I found it. Below that sale is another listing for a ms 64 1913. The one  photo you are concerned about appears to be lifted from that 64 sale. Quite possibly. I may be wrong but take a look . The fifth one. 

Edited January 16 by Dave1384

[VKurtB]

Desperate searches encourage deception.