eBay, ANA, PNG sued in antitrust claims
stonej
PC
"stonej" <sto...@mail.lib.msu.edu> wrote in message
news:24ade432-144a-4555...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.numismaster.com/ta/numis/Article.jsp?ad=article&ArticleId=5500
I was right! I said this would happen! All the other pretend lawyers in
this NG told me I was wrong. Vindication! ;-)
Aladdin Sane
"stonej" <sto...@mail.lib.msu.edu> wrote in message
news:24ade432-144a-4555...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.numismaster.com/ta/numis/Article.jsp?ad=article&ArticleId=5500
Does E-bay in fact prohibit the use of the Sheldon scale for coins not
graded by the 5 approved services, or are they only prohibiting the use of
the Sheldon scale in the title of the listing? I thought that the use of
the scale in the body of the description was permitted.
--
*
/?\
/___\
-O=O-
^
AS & His Magic Hat
A conclusion is simply the place
where you decided to stop thinking.
Donald Weber
be restrictive. The advantage most ignored here is the ability to provide
"Hits" when using the search function on eBay. Search "PCGS" vs searching
the non approved TPG's will provide much difference and most of the hits for
those unapproved TPG's would probably fail eBay's listing rules. I
understand, That which is right -vs- That which is within the law, rarely
line up with each other thereforee I don't give the suit much chance of
success but I'll hope for it.
Arizona Coin Collector
"stonej" <sto...@mail.lib.msu.edu> wrote in message
news:24ade432-144a-4555...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.numismaster.com/ta/numis/Article.jsp?ad=article&ArticleId=5500
Hello
There is a total of 15 pages to the Federal Charter
for the American Numismatic Association. Below is
the link to read it.
A change was made in 2002 on Dealers Code of
Ethics. I notice the lawsuit is about what
happen in 2001.
Page 13, Dealer Code of Ethics
Appoved August of 1967 by the ANA Board of
Governors; revised March 2002
As and ANA member dealer, I agree to
comply with the following principles:
To comply with the ANA Member Code of Ethics.
To purchase and sell numismatic items at
prices commensurate with reasonable return
to the seller and for reasonable return on
my investment with regaurds to the then
prevailing rate.
(There is more to it if you wish to read
it)
Frank Provasek
regulators, as the free market handles the fate of products of
substandard quality. No one would argue that a BMW is not better
quality than a KIA, but an association of high end car dealers acts
illegally when they attempt to restrict competitors from doing
business, even if they claim to be "protecting" people from "poor
quality" products.
Fact is, the Greysheet amd Bluesheet ALREADY list SEGS, PCI, NCI
slabs, appropriately discounted. Of course ANACS and NGC and PCGS also
all sell for DIFFERENT prices. The ONLY problem on eBay was sellers of
slabbed coins using the PCGS price guide for non PCGS coins. Even
then, the market got it right, even if a no-name slab was promoted as
L@@K! $35,000!!! It still brought what it was worth...maybe $35 or
$350. That's a matter of seller misrepresntation, which of course,
should be prohibited.
Since Ebay is "just a venue" they can prohibit sales of certain
classes of merchandise...guns, for example. But they cannot tell
sellers and willing buyers what brand names of items are or are not
acceptable.
Ebay, the ANA, and Stuppler are not law enforcement or government
agencies, so they have no legal power to restrict sales between
sellers and buyers UNLESS the law is being broken. There is no LAW
against starting a grading service and grading to your own in-house
standards...as that is what PCGS and NGC do! The Federal Trade
Commission or US Postal Service DOES have the power to restrict sales
of misleading merchandise, but only AFTER the fact is proven in a
court.
These botched eBay policies make it easier to sell a counterfeit coin
from China than a coin graded by Larry Briggs' respected SEGS grading
service. A Chinese crook can say about his FAKE coin "I grade this
VF20" and it's permitted. If you list a GENUINE coin and mention, even
in the TEXT, that "Larry Briggs' SEGS graded this VF20" ebay will
remove the listing and tell you that you violated the counterfeit
policy!
--
RARE COIN AUCTIONS NO RESERVES www.frankcoins.com
http://myworld.ebay.com/frankcoins Texas Auction License
11259, Board member of Texas Coin Dealers Association,
Member TNA, ANA, PCGS, NGC Full Time SInce 1991
RF
news:5630b1d0-7ee2-43a2...@u57g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
I liked your rant about Canadian coins better, Fwankie.
Bruce Remick
"Frank Provasek" <fr...@frankcoins.com> wrote in message
news:5630b1d0-7ee2-43a2...@u57g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> regulators, as the free market handles the fate of products of
> substandard quality. No one would argue that a BMW is not better
> quality than a KIA, but an association of high end car dealers acts
> illegally when they attempt to restrict competitors from doing
> business, even if they claim to be "protecting" people from "poor
> quality" products.
>
> Fact is, the Greysheet amd Bluesheet ALREADY list SEGS, PCI, NCI
> slabs, appropriately discounted. Of course ANACS and NGC and PCGS also
> all sell for DIFFERENT prices. The ONLY problem on eBay was sellers of
> slabbed coins using the PCGS price guide for non PCGS coins. Even
> then, the market got it right, even if a no-name slab was promoted as
> L@@K! $35,000!!! It still brought what it was worth...maybe $35 or
> $350. That's a matter of seller misrepresntation, which of course,
> should be prohibited.
>
> Since Ebay is "just a venue" they can prohibit sales of certain
> classes of merchandise...guns, for example. But they cannot tell
> sellers and willing buyers what brand names of items are or are not
> acceptable.
Are you STILL bitching about this ?? Hasn't it sunk in yet that all legal
coins are acceptible for sale on eBay, as long as you follow their listing
guidelines?
>
> Ebay, the ANA, and Stuppler are not law enforcement or government
> agencies, so they have no legal power to restrict sales between
> sellers and buyers UNLESS the law is being broken. There is no LAW
> against starting a grading service and grading to your own in-house
> standards...as that is what PCGS and NGC do! The Federal Trade
> Commission or US Postal Service DOES have the power to restrict sales
> of misleading merchandise, but only AFTER the fact is proven in a
> court.
>
> These botched eBay policies make it easier to sell a counterfeit coin
> from China than a coin graded by Larry Briggs' respected SEGS grading
> service. A Chinese crook can say about his FAKE coin "I grade this
> VF20" and it's permitted. If you list a GENUINE coin and mention, even
> in the TEXT, that "Larry Briggs' SEGS graded this VF20" ebay will
> remove the listing and tell you that you violated the counterfeit
> policy!
Why keep persecuting yourself? Sell your stuff in a shop, in newspaper ads
or yard sales where you can pretty much be in total control. Ohterwise
you'll end up with an ulcer, or worse, if you continue to play Don Quixote
with eBay. Most of the rest of us who still value eBay's wide customer
exposure have long ago figured out how to list auctions for "non-approved"
slabs there.
Frank Provasek
writing about this, considering that he is the first attorney to
specialize in law relating to numismatics. David Lawrence Rare Coins,
which bought the PCI business, and Alan Herbert, "Mr. Answerman" newly
appointed to the ANA board are both against these ebay policies as
implemented. Bruce, If you can't list a "non-approved" slab where the
name of the grading company can be found anywhere in a text
search...title, subtitle or text, but has to be searched visually by
looking at the photos of every item listed, that is certainly a unfair
playing field.
Bruce Remick
>I was responding to stonej's post. It's telling that David L. Ganz is
> writing about this, considering that he is the first attorney to
> specialize in law relating to numismatics. David Lawrence Rare Coins,
> which bought the PCI business, and Alan Herbert, "Mr. Answerman" newly
> appointed to the ANA board are both against these ebay policies as
> implemented. Bruce, If you can't list a "non-approved" slab where the
> name of the grading company can be found anywhere in a text
> search...title, subtitle or text, but has to be searched visually by
> looking at the photos of every item listed, that is certainly a unfair
> playing field.
>
Okay, I will sympathize with those collectors who insist on conducting eBay
searches for non-approved slabs instead of for the particular coins these
slabs might contain. I DON'T sympathize with dealers or collectors who feel
disadvantaged by having to describe the coin(s) in their listing without
mentioning the specific (non-approved) slabbing service, even though a photo
can show the slab with name of that service. Those bidders who don't
discriminate among the myriad of slabbing services will judge each coin on
its own merits.
You still seem more interested in attacking windmills in public than in
simply tweaking your auctions to comply with eBay's latest rules-- agree
with them or not. Like you, many here have claimed that they don't care for
the latest eBay guidelines (myself included). But as a result, most of us
have either quit selling on eBay or made the appropriate adjustments to our
auctions if we still want to sell our stuff.
Aladdin Sane
"Donald Weber" <dwe...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Gs2dnZS_mKPx757U...@earthlink.com...
search for coins to fit into my collection. If I like the looks, and
believe I can afford a coin, and that it is reasonably priced, I bid.
RF
news:ZTPMk.9423$Zc....@newsfe09.iad...
> Why keep persecuting yourself? Sell your stuff in a shop, in
> newspaper ads or yard sales where you can pretty much be in total
> control. Ohterwise you'll end up with an ulcer, or worse, if you
> continue to play Don Quixote with eBay. Most of the rest of us who
> still value eBay's wide customer exposure have long ago figured out
> how to list auctions for "non-approved" slabs there.
eBay threw out the baby with the bath water with their draconian rules
about TPGs.
Yes, there was a problem but the problem was people listing fly-by-night
TPG coins and quoting PCGS prices.
Why sellers feel the need to quote trend prices for their wares is
beyond me. At any rate, the quoting of "trend" prices is what should
have been banned.
Collectors of Canadian coin are up in arms because two respected TPG
companies (ICCS & CCCS) are not among the annointed.
I feel eBay is guilty of restraint of trade and will ultimately be
forced to allow other TPG coins to be listed the same as the currently
permited ones.
Bruce Remick
"RF" <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:ge1rst$tf$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
You may well be right. Certainly eBay seems to have overstepped its bounds
with its selective restrictions. But for those who still choose to use eBay
to sell coins that have been slabbed by non-approved TPG's, the
controvercial rules are fairly clear. Serious bidders looking for an 1858
Canadian cent will most likely be using the coin as a search term and not
the name of the slabber.
I agree that the citation of PCGS prices for raw or non-PCGS coins is
misleading and bordering on fraud in some cases. But here the onus should
be on the bidder to do some basic research. Just as they should with those
TV shopping network coin pitches. Ebay should keep out of it and let the
naive or greedy learn their lesson in a way they'll remember it.
tony cooper
wrote:
>
>"RF" <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>news:ge1rst$tf$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
>> "Bruce Remick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:ZTPMk.9423$Zc....@newsfe09.iad...
>>> Why keep persecuting yourself? Sell your stuff in a shop, in newspaper
>>> ads or yard sales where you can pretty much be in total control.
>>> Ohterwise you'll end up with an ulcer, or worse, if you continue to play
>>> Don Quixote with eBay. Most of the rest of us who still value eBay's
>>> wide customer exposure have long ago figured out how to list auctions for
>>> "non-approved" slabs there.
>>
>> eBay threw out the baby with the bath water with their draconian rules
>> about TPGs.
>> Yes, there was a problem but the problem was people listing fly-by-night
>> TPG coins and quoting PCGS prices.
>> Why sellers feel the need to quote trend prices for their wares is beyond
>> me. At any rate, the quoting of "trend" prices is what should have been
>> banned.
>> Collectors of Canadian coin are up in arms because two respected TPG
>> companies (ICCS & CCCS) are not among the annointed.
>> I feel eBay is guilty of restraint of trade and will ultimately be forced
>> to allow other TPG coins to be listed the same as the currently permited
>> ones.
>
>
>You may well be right. Certainly eBay seems to have overstepped its bounds
>with its selective restrictions.
While I whole-heartedly agree that the current eBay rules on coin
listings are ill-conceived in many areas, they have overstepped no
bounds. eBay is not a public service; it's a private venture.
A restaurant can refuse service to customers who are not wearing a
jacket and tie. A retail store can ban minors. A bar can refuse
service for any reason that is not unlawful discrimination. A coin
shop owner can install a buzzer-entry system and refuse to admit any
prospective customer they don't like the looks of. A newspaper can
refuse ads with content that they don't approve of. Any business can
set their own rules of what form of payment is accepted or refused.
eBay may be operating under a self-destructive set of restrictions,
but it's their ball and they get to set the rules. None of us have a
*right* to list what we want on eBay and how we describe what we list.
Someone else posted here that eBay may be in restraint of trade. They
are not. They are restricting how trade is done in *their* business,
but in no way restricting trade in general.
The same people who complain about the eBay restrictions on how coins
can be listed are placing their own restrictions in their ads. Some
require or decline certain payment methods, some restrict sales to the
country in which the seller resides, some require insurance be
purchased, and some refuse bidders that don't meet certain feedback
requirements.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Bruce Remick
"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:gmv8g4p7uvsb4jrs2...@4ax.com...
It will be interesting to see how the arguments against eBay are treated in
court. They may not have overstepped any bounds but if the suit ever makes
it to the judge the plaintiffs may have some recource. I recall reading
where one of the automakers once tried either to prohibit any cars not made
by them from parking on the company lot or at least forced them to park only
in the outer limits of the lot. People complained and the rules were
relaxed. Can a flea market restrict sellers from offering certain brands of
merchandise, or banish them to the far reaches of the market? I don't know.
I'll watch what develops in the eBay lawsuit.
>
> A restaurant can refuse service to customers who are not wearing a
> jacket and tie. A retail store can ban minors. A bar can refuse
> service for any reason that is not unlawful discrimination. A coin
> shop owner can install a buzzer-entry system and refuse to admit any
> prospective customer they don't like the looks of. A newspaper can
> refuse ads with content that they don't approve of. Any business can
> set their own rules of what form of payment is accepted or refused.
A coin shop owner may refuse entry to anyone he doesn't like the looks of,
but I doubt he could post a list of specific types or classes of individuals
that will be turned away. Otherwise, I understand how the freedoms work.
>
> eBay may be operating under a self-destructive set of restrictions,
> but it's their ball and they get to set the rules. None of us have a
> *right* to list what we want on eBay and how we describe what we list.
Couldn't agree more.
>
> Someone else posted here that eBay may be in restraint of trade. They
> are not. They are restricting how trade is done in *their* business,
> but in no way restricting trade in general.
>
> The same people who complain about the eBay restrictions on how coins
> can be listed are placing their own restrictions in their ads. Some
> require or decline certain payment methods, some restrict sales to the
> country in which the seller resides, some require insurance be
> purchased, and some refuse bidders that don't meet certain feedback
> requirements.
I see what you're saying, but most of these are practical business
restrictions, unlike eBay's coin listing policies. Anyway, I hope the eBay
suit gets resolved quickly one way or another.
tony cooper
wrote:
The "specific types or classes", in refusing people, spills over into
the area of unlawful discrimination. However, there's nothing to stop
a coin store from posting a sign that states that they refuse admit
unaccompanied minors. Or that bags and purses must be checked at the
door. "Types and classes" of people is entirely different from "types
and class" of third-party grading services. There are no federal,
state, or local laws that deal with third-party grading services, but
there are laws about types and classes of people.
>>
>> Someone else posted here that eBay may be in restraint of trade. They
>> are not. They are restricting how trade is done in *their* business,
>> but in no way restricting trade in general.
>>
>> The same people who complain about the eBay restrictions on how coins
>> can be listed are placing their own restrictions in their ads. Some
>> require or decline certain payment methods, some restrict sales to the
>> country in which the seller resides, some require insurance be
>> purchased, and some refuse bidders that don't meet certain feedback
>> requirements.
>
>I see what you're saying, but most of these are practical business
>restrictions, unlike eBay's coin listing policies.
"Practical" is in the eye of the viewer. What is, and is not,
practical is a subjective decision. Obviously, someone at eBay thinks
that it is practical to ban statements regarding third-party graders.
I disagree, and you disagree, but the rule is practical to them.
PC
>
> The same people who complain about the eBay restrictions on how coins
> can be listed are placing their own restrictions in their ads. Some
> require or decline certain payment methods, some restrict sales to the
> country in which the seller resides, some require insurance be
> purchased, and some refuse bidders that don't meet certain feedback
> requirements.
>
Bad analogy.
eBay is not a seller of goods. They are just a venue. Comparing the
declining of payment types by an eBay seller to eBay purposely favoring
certain TPGs and giving them an unfair advantage are not at all the same
thing.
eBay sellers don't even have the ability to decide what payment types they
select - well they can decide as long as they decide to accept PayPal or
some other electronic payment service no one uses.
Try again.
note.boy
There any many who list UK coins slabbed in the USA as, for example, EF, the
seller then quotes the Spink Catalogue value for an EF coin while they are
perfectly aware that a Spink EF is far superior to a slabbed USA EF.
They are being very dishonest doing this. Billy
tony cooper
>
>"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:gmv8g4p7uvsb4jrs2...@4ax.com...
>
>>
>> The same people who complain about the eBay restrictions on how coins
>> can be listed are placing their own restrictions in their ads. Some
>> require or decline certain payment methods, some restrict sales to the
>> country in which the seller resides, some require insurance be
>> purchased, and some refuse bidders that don't meet certain feedback
>> requirements.
>>
>
>Bad analogy.
>
>eBay is not a seller of goods.
\
eBay is a seller. They sell you the right to place your ad on their
site. They place restrictions on that right.
You, in turn, may place restrictions in that ad.
>Try again.
The analogy is good. It deals with restrictions placed by both eBay
and the seller on eBay.
PC
>>eBay is not a seller of goods.
> \
> eBay is a seller.
But not of goods.
RF
>>eBay is not a seller of goods.
> \
> eBay is a seller. They sell you the right to place your ad on their
> site. They place restrictions on that right.
>
> You, in turn, may place restrictions in that ad.
But eBay is not a seller of goods, rather it is a seller of services, so
your logic is, as usual, self-serving and absurdly wrong.
Those who argue for a free market on eBay would deny eBay the very right
they seek for themselves.
IMO, eBay's restrictions on TPGs were ill-conceived and poorly
implemented and probably should be abandoned to allow a free market
among TPG coins.
OTOH, they hit the nail on the head (after some mild tinkering) when
changing feedback to not allow negatives from sellers.
Of course, the feedback system could be improved by a system generated
negative for deadbeat buyers.
It seems to me that the only sellers who whine about the new FB system
are those who have been shafting buyers for years.
Bruce Remick
"RF" <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
I believe most of the eBay whiners are people who grew up using that
technique in trying to get what they want, instead of using initiative and
inventiveness to overcome obstacles.
Also, I believe for every drop of rain that falls...........
PC
>
>> It seems to me that the only sellers who whine about the new FB system
>> are those who have been shafting buyers for years.
>
> I believe most of the eBay whiners are people who grew up using that
> technique in trying to get what they want, instead of using initiative and
> inventiveness to overcome obstacles.
>
This has been my general observation. The sellers making the most noise
about the changes really were not good sellers to begin with and are now
pissed that buyers have the upper hand.
tony cooper
wrote:
>"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:22l9g41q3c2l1h9a1...@4ax.com...
>
>>>eBay is not a seller of goods.
>> \
>> eBay is a seller. They sell you the right to place your ad on their
>> site. They place restrictions on that right.
>>
>> You, in turn, may place restrictions in that ad.
>
>But eBay is not a seller of goods, rather it is a seller of services, so
>your logic is, as usual, self-serving and absurdly wrong.
That's an interesting bit of "logic", there. You seem to feel that
the seller of services, rather than goods, is somehow not a seller and
somehow not permitted to place restrictions on their service.
Yet, the issue is over a seller of services: the third-party grader's
service. That same seller who imposes restrictions on what they will
grade and how you have to go about dealing with them.
Any individual or entity that offers goods or services for sale is
allowed to impose restrictions on what they will allow and provide as
long as those restrictions do not violate some extant law. That's
just a fact of business that we all should recognize.
We can object to those restrictions, and we can feel that those
restrictions do not reflect a good business model, but our ultimate
choice is to either observe the restrictions or to deal with some
other individual or entity.
RF
> On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 20:50:20 -0400, "RF" <inv...@invalid.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>news:22l9g41q3c2l1h9a1...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>>eBay is not a seller of goods.
>>> \
>>> eBay is a seller. They sell you the right to place your ad on their
>>> site. They place restrictions on that right.
>>>
>>> You, in turn, may place restrictions in that ad.
>>
>>But eBay is not a seller of goods, rather it is a seller of services,
>>so
>>your logic is, as usual, self-serving and absurdly wrong.
>
> That's an interesting bit of "logic", there. You seem to feel that
> the seller of services, rather than goods, is somehow not a seller and
> somehow not permitted to place restrictions on their service.
Do you just make it up as you go along?
Your "logic" is once again absurdly flawed and/or you're just lying
and/or stupid - maybe all three.
I specifically stated eBay is a seller of services and has the right to
impose restrictions.
OTOH, I think certain of those restrictions are ill-conceived and poorly
implemented.
The courts will decide is eBay is engaging in restraint of trade, if it
gets that far.
tony cooper
wrote:
>"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:b8aag4djtqdde5l6k...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 20:50:20 -0400, "RF" <inv...@invalid.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>news:22l9g41q3c2l1h9a1...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>>eBay is not a seller of goods.
>>>> \
>>>> eBay is a seller. They sell you the right to place your ad on their
>>>> site. They place restrictions on that right.
>>>>
>>>> You, in turn, may place restrictions in that ad.
>>>
>>>But eBay is not a seller of goods, rather it is a seller of services,
>>>so
>>>your logic is, as usual, self-serving and absurdly wrong.
>>
>> That's an interesting bit of "logic", there. You seem to feel that
>> the seller of services, rather than goods, is somehow not a seller and
>> somehow not permitted to place restrictions on their service.
>
>Do you just make it up as you go along?
>Your "logic" is once again absurdly flawed and/or you're just lying
>and/or stupid - maybe all three.
>I specifically stated eBay is a seller of services and has the right to
>impose restrictions.
>OTOH, I think certain of those restrictions are ill-conceived and poorly
>implemented.
Since this is exactly what I said, then what was my self-serving and
absurdly wrong illogical statement?
I can only deal with what you actually write. When you disagree with
me by saying the same thing that I have, I can't help but feel that
logic is not a mental tool that you possess.
RF
No, that wasn't what you said, you senile old fart.