FS: US $1, $2.50, $3.00 & $10 on eBay
tony cooper
http://shop.ebay.com/tony_cooper/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_from=&_ipg=25
Thanks for looking. Even more thanks for bidding.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Reid Goldsborough
> Eight auctions close tomorrow on US gold ANACs slabbed coins.
> http://shop.ebay.com/tony_cooper/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_from=&_ipg=25
> Thanks for looking. Even more thanks for bidding.
Do you specialize in damaged coins? All eight of these coins are have
rim dings, are bent, are scratched, or have been harshly cleaned to the
extent that ANACS indicates this on the slabs of each one of them. LOL.
A quick perusal of your past auctions indicates other damaged coins in
ANACs holders, along with salad forks and such.
It can be a good thing to specialize, I guess. Just curious: Do you buy
these damaged coins raw and try to make money by having them put in an
ANACS "Damaged" slab, or are these coins that you dropped, scratched
with a 2x2 staple, or otherwise damaged yourself? Maybe, in a fit,
you've thrown some of these across the room or taken a hammer to them? Ouch!
--
Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos
tony cooper
<reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 10/10/2010 2:39 PM, tony cooper wrote:
>> Eight auctions close tomorrow on US gold ANACs slabbed coins.
>> http://shop.ebay.com/tony_cooper/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_from=&_ipg=25
>> Thanks for looking. Even more thanks for bidding.
>
>Do you specialize in damaged coins? All eight of these coins are have
>rim dings, are bent, are scratched, or have been harshly cleaned to the
>extent that ANACS indicates this on the slabs of each one of them. LOL.
>A quick perusal of your past auctions indicates other damaged coins in
>ANACs holders, along with salad forks and such.
>
>It can be a good thing to specialize, I guess. Just curious: Do you buy
>these damaged coins raw and try to make money by having them put in an
>ANACS "Damaged" slab, or are these coins that you dropped, scratched
>with a 2x2 staple, or otherwise damaged yourself? Maybe, in a fit,
>you've thrown some of these across the room or taken a hammer to them? Ouch!
Valuable comments, as usual, Reid.
I have an extensive number of US gold coins, some of which have been
graded "DETAILS" by ANACS. I'm selling off this group (plus 12 more
"DETAILS" graded that haven't been listed yet. I'm not selling, at
the present time, any of the coins that are not in this group. Just
thinning out the group.
The coins were purchased raw originally. Mostly in lots where a
damaged coin was part of a group of better coins.
The coins offered are slabbed, graded professionally, clearly marked
"DETAILS", and clearly identified as to the reason for the "DETAILS"
designation. Pre-slab photographs are provided, but the photographs
were taken before I had a decent camera or any experience in coin
photography.
I was clever of you to notice that the coins offered have some damage.
It shows that you can read what is written on the slab. There are
some here that feel that this is not a manageable skill for you.
I'm sure you noted that some of the coins were marked "Cleaned".
That, according to you, means that the surface was melted and moved
around.
At one time I also collected sterling silver service, but - except for
the pieces we use as regular silverware - that's been sold off long
ago. At my age, it's best to sell things off now and not put the
burden on the heirs.
Thanks for looking, Reid, and for adding your comments. I will attach
the importance to your comments that they deserve.
Reid Goldsborough
> I'm sure you noted that some of the coins were marked "Cleaned".
> That, according to you, means that the surface was melted and moved
> around.
Nope, not true. According to me, and according to many others, "Cleaned"
in numismatics means "Damaged by cleaning." You don't have to melt a
coin's surface to do this! A steel wool pad will do the trick, or a rag
with a gritty cleaning solution, or even a piece of tissue alone that's
rubbed hard enough to produce hairlines. Any idea how your coins that
were damaged by cleaning got that way?
oly
wrote:
Except for the ten dollar coins with some decent gold content, it
wouldn't be to anyones' advantage to buy these pieces even at one-half
the price they are being offered at. The tens should be about $100 -
$150 less based upon current spot gold.
The first group offered about a week ago was even worse.
At the correct prices, at or below melt, all these coins should be
scrapped, into the melter. They are dogs.
oly
Zapp Brannigan
"oly" <oly...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:f4a4f767-401c-44c0...@c32g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
==========================================================
All the coins, with the exception of the $3 piece, should be sold for bullion.
I see nothing collectible about them, despite the fact that they've been
slabbed.
The $3 coin remains collectible but not at the price offered...
oly
> "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
One good thing.
With the coming 90 or 180 day Nation-wide Moratorium on ALL Mortgage
Foreclosures, and the ultra-huge TARP 2 that's going to be necessary
to keep the big banks from collapsing while the mortgage-fraud mess is
sorted out, Gold probably will double before Spring 2011.
The PTB might have to declare the National Mortgage-foreclosure
Moratorium before the November elections.
Then maybe Tony will get bailed out of these dogs at his price.
oly
P.S. If I had to guess, there are probably more damaged $3 Gold(s) in
existence than there are undamaged coins in existence. Of course the
damaged coins are still interesting as "historic artifacts". But you
can put your pecker in an ugle woman and get ugly kids, or you can put
your pecker in a good looking woman and get good looking kids. Easy
choice if you can get and afford the woman in the first place...
Peter
In the listing of item #330480861735 there is an error. The front of
a holder appears twice, but it is a different holder and coin. The
holder at the top of the listing is not the coin that is described,
below.
tony cooper
wrote:
This:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=330480861735&ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT
the ad you are referring to. The correct images are used in the ad
itself for the slab face and back are correct and the pre-slabbed
photo agrees with the slab images.
The error is that the thumbnail for gallery image was not changed from
the coin listed immediately before that. My error.
The gallery image has been changed. Thank you for bringing this to my
attention.
tony cooper
<reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 10/10/2010 5:44 PM, tony cooper wrote:
>> I'm sure you noted that some of the coins were marked "Cleaned".
>> That, according to you, means that the surface was melted and moved
>> around.
>
>Nope, not true. According to me, and according to many others, "Cleaned"
>in numismatics means "Damaged by cleaning." You don't have to melt a
>coin's surface to do this! A steel wool pad will do the trick, or a rag
>with a gritty cleaning solution, or even a piece of tissue alone that's
>rubbed hard enough to produce hairlines. Any idea how your coins that
>were damaged by cleaning got that way?
The last time I participated in rcc you were having a running argument
with someone (Jeff something?) about cleaning coins resulting in
whizzing which cause the gold to flow.
I understand what cleaning is, and the damage improper cleaning does
to coins. I don't clean any coins, and even handle the pre-slabbed
coins with those thin cotton gloves obtainable from photo supply
stores. Any damage to the coins was damage prior to my owning them.
I purchased these gold coins from individuals over the years, and
often purchase a group, or lot, of coins. Sometimes you take the bad
with the good in order to get the good. Any coin of the age of these
coins is likely to have had several owners along the line. There's no
way of knowing which owner did what.
I've had all of my gold slabbed, and the percentage of pieces that are
graded "DETAILS" is very low.
oly
> On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 19:03:51 -0400, Reid Goldsborough
>
The first time you came here to pimp, everybody was embarrased for
you.
Now, second time out, you're just another pimp.
You're a pimp who can't even keep his ugly girls straight in his mind.
You can't justify your shitty auctions and shitty actions.
oly
tony cooper
>Except for the ten dollar coins with some decent gold content, it
>wouldn't be to anyones' advantage to buy these pieces even at one-half
>the price they are being offered at. The tens should be about $100 -
>$150 less based upon current spot gold.
>
>The first group offered about a week ago was even worse.
>
>At the correct prices, at or below melt, all these coins should be
>scrapped, into the melter. They are dogs.
>
That's one of the advantages of eBay, Oly. What one person thinks is
an over-priced dog is what another person is willing to buy. As long
as full disclosure is made, it's up to the other person to decide
whether to bid and how much to bid. A slabbed coin with pix is as
close to full disclosure as I can get.
I haven't bought a coin in 15 years, I haven't been in a coin shop or
to a coin show in 5 years, and I haven't listed any coins for sale for
a year or two (before the 4 just before this listing). I'm out of
touch with the market, and priced them by-guess-and-by-golly.
If my guesses are wrong, the coins don't sell. That's eBay.
oly
I don't buy your bullshittae, let alone your coins.
The first time you did this, we were embarrased for you and we averted
our gaze.
No more.
When people are most wrong, they always have an internal rationale to
explain away their bad actions.
oly
tony cooper
>The first time you came here to pimp, everybody was embarrased for
>you.
Has something changed in RCC since I used to read it a few years back?
Is a "FS:" posting now considered "pimping"?
If this has changed, let me know and I won't do it again. It was OK
in the past and I have made sales to readers of RCC. I never got
along with Reid Goldsborough, but that was hardly at black mark at the
time and it doesn't look like things have changed there.
I'm not quite sure where the vitriol is coming from, but if it makes
you feel good...have at it. All I want to do is thin down the stuff
in my safety deposit boxes and the "DETAILS" coins are going first.
I've got this batch and 12 more, and then I'll be out of your hair.
>
>Now, second time out, you're just another pimp.
>
>You're a pimp who can't even keep his ugly girls straight in his mind.
>
>You can't justify your shitty auctions and shitty actions.
I don't know what "shitty actions" you are thinking of. eBay is place
where you offer something and someone buys it if they want it and pays
the price they decide the item is worth. My ads clearly state what is
offered and what condition the item is in. My return policy is
standard "bid price refunded without question", but returns have never
been an issue. My feedback is excellent with "prompt delivery" and
"good packing" the most common comment.
My ads may be shitty in appearance, but I use the old deprecated HTML
and an ancient version of FirstPage. I don't have any reason to
improve on that since this is my only use of it. My pre-slab
photographs are admittedly shitty but I did those before I had a
decent camera or any experience as a photographer. I'd like a do-over
with them, but the coins are now all slabbed.
Anything else about me that bothers you?
Zapp Brannigan
"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:uos4b65pm92p5nd5p...@4ax.com...
I'm not offended neither by your coins nor your posting a FS notice here.
Coins are clearly marked as cleaned or scratched, so no problem there.
Just think you started the opening prices too high.
tony cooper
wrote:
That's a business decision and not a moral issue as Oly seems to
think. You may be right, but that is determined by whether or not the
coins sell.
If Oly is offended by coins that he has no interest in buying offered
on eBay, and coins listed at opening prices that are too high, he's
going to have a shit-fit every time he looks at the coin listings on
eBay. And, for that matter, the coins offered at stores and shows.
I'm just glad that I'm here for him to vent on.
I listed 8 items and two have bids on them with just under a day to
go. Usually, the last few minutes is when most bids come in.
Obviously, these two bidders feel the coins are worth the price they
are bidding, and I'm glad they do.
When I was more active in coins I saw countless examples of coins
being offered for more than I thought they were worth and sellers
taking lower prices than made sense to me. I was never offended,
though, by any of the individuals involved.
Reid Goldsborough
> The last time I participated in rcc you were having a running argument
> with someone (Jeff something?) about cleaning coins resulting in
> whizzing which cause the gold to flow.
Nobody talked about whizzing as a type of coin cleaning, of cleaning
dirt, stains, encrustations, and other debris off the surface of the
coin. If it's done right, cleaning doesn't disturb the surface in any
appreciable way. On the other hand, whizzing by nature disturbs the
coin's surface to flatten scratches, dings, dents, corrosion, and so on
and to then give the surfaces an artificial shiny and even
uncirculated-looking appearance. Whizzing is universally regarded as a
type of coin doctoring, and its considered unethically because of the
deception involved.
tony cooper
<reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 10/10/2010 9:45 PM, tony cooper wrote:
>
>> The last time I participated in rcc you were having a running argument
>> with someone (Jeff something?) about cleaning coins resulting in
>> whizzing which cause the gold to flow.
>
>Nobody talked about whizzing as a type of coin cleaning, of cleaning
>dirt, stains, encrustations, and other debris off the surface of the
>coin. If it's done right, cleaning doesn't disturb the surface in any
>appreciable way. On the other hand, whizzing by nature disturbs the
>coin's surface to flatten scratches, dings, dents, corrosion, and so on
>and to then give the surfaces an artificial shiny and even
>uncirculated-looking appearance. Whizzing is universally regarded as a
>type of coin doctoring, and its considered unethically because of the
>deception involved.
So you're no longer claiming that whizzing melts and moves metal?
Jeff R. would be pleased to see that you've now moved to "disturbs the
coin's surface".
Jeff R.
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 00:52:46 -0400, Reid Goldsborough
>...Whizzing is universally regarded as a
>>type of coin doctoring, and its considered unethically because of the
>>deception involved.
>
> So you're no longer claiming that whizzing melts and moves metal?
> Jeff R. would be pleased to see that you've now moved to "disturbs the
> coin's surface".
Reid finally (instantly!) conceded this obvious fact of physics the last
time 'round (What was it? A year ago?) when Tony Clayton pointed it out to
him in exactly the same terms I had used dozens of times for years on end.
Y'see, it's OK to accept it if *someone else* proposes it, but not if I do.
I'm humbled somewhat that I have the ability to intimidate him so. :-)
--
Jeff R.
(Whats's that Robin? Someone's mentioned "whizzing" in R.C.C?
...To the Batmobile! )
Zapp Brannigan
I fail to see why anyone would have a problem with your auctions.
There is no deception whatsoever.
The damage is noted, the pictures are clear enough.
I wish you good luck.
Reid Goldsborough
ANACS put in its "DETAILS" slabs? Damaged coins, and only damaged coins.
It's fine for ANACS to call their service anything they want, and it is
providing an authenticity service with these. But these aren't "DETAILS"
coins -- your description -- that you're selling, they're damaged coins.
Even weirder is that damaged coins are the only coins that you're
selling. Still even weirder is that it appears from past auctions that
this is your specialty, despite your contention that the percentage of
your "gold coins" that you've had graded that were put into ANACS'
"damaged" holders is very low. You've used ANACS to sell many other
damaged coins. Then you bring up unrelated subject matter about
whizzing. What does whizzing have to do with any of this? These coins
aren't whizzed, at least not this current batch.
If you're trying to deflect that you're using a grading service to help
you sell damaged coins with high start prices, it's not working. Well,
it may work, as you point out. You may yet get these "DETAILS" coins
into other people's collections. What a hobby...
tony cooper
<reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>First, you you're using a weird euphemism for "damaged." What coins does
>ANACS put in its "DETAILS" slabs? Damaged coins, and only damaged coins.
>It's fine for ANACS to call their service anything they want, and it is
>providing an authenticity service with these. But these aren't "DETAILS"
>coins -- your description -- that you're selling, they're damaged coins.
Any designation used to specify a coin's condition by a grading
service is based on that grading service's choice of terms. ANACS
uses "DETAILS" to indicate that the coin's grade is to be viewed
considering some problem with the coin: rim damage, cleaned, former
jewelry, etc.
I'm not using an euphemism; I'm using the term that the grading
service uses, and - in doing so - providing transparency in what I'm
offering. "DETAILS" is the general term ANACS uses to designate that
the coin has problems. The specific problem - cleaned, rim damage,
etc - is also specified on the holder. This is apparent by merely
looking at the image provided but I do repeat this information in the
body of the ad.
>Even weirder is that damaged coins are the only coins that you're
>selling. Still even weirder is that it appears from past auctions that
>this is your specialty, despite your contention that the percentage of
>your "gold coins" that you've had graded that were put into ANACS'
>"damaged" holders is very low.
You are a right idiot, Reid. Why does anyone list a particular coin
for sale? The answer, of course, is that this is the coin the person
no longer wants to keep. I'm not listing the coins I want to keep.
There's nothing weird about wanting to thin down what one owns and to
choose the coins to sell because these are the coins the person least
wants to keep and has the least chance of further appreciation.
I'm not listing any coins that are not graded with a "DETAILS"
designation because I don't need to, or want to, sell them at the
present time.
>You've used ANACS to sell many other damaged coins.
You really don't understand the grading services, do you? ANACS is
the only reputable grading service that will grade and slab coins that
have problems like rim damage and specify the problem on the slab so
the potential buyer will clearly understand that he is bidding on a
coin with some problem that may not show up in a photograph of the
unslabbed coin. I think the ethical thing to do is to give the
potential buyer all the information I can and to use an outsider - the
grading service - to provide this.
>If you're trying to deflect that you're using a grading service to help
>you sell damaged coins with high start prices, it's not working.
What deflection is involved? The coin slabs are clearly marked by the
grading service as to the problem. Offering a coin slabbed by a
reputable grading service that clearly states what problems the coin
has is as straight-forward as you can get when selling online.
>Well,
>it may work, as you point out. You may yet get these "DETAILS" coins
>into other people's collections. What a hobby...
Anyone who "gets" one of these coins into their collection does so
knowingly by bidding on a coin that has some stated defect. Unlike
sellers of problem coins who show only a fuzzy photo of an unslabbed
coin and neglect to point out that the coin has been cleaned or has
rim damage, I'm telling the person what he can expect.
Zapp Brannigan
Pay no attention to Reid. Don't respond to his mean-spirited flames.
Being the village idiot keeps him busy when he's not occupied with masturbation.
oly
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:09:16 -0400, Reid Goldsborough
>
It's to nobody's advanatge to buy these particular coins.
By the picky commercial standards of our hobby, they are damaged goods
and not priced to reflect their problem status.
Tony wasn't smart to buy them in the first place, and now he is
shamelessly looking for a greater fool.
What pride of ownership can there possibly be in such bad coins?
IF coin prices advance in the future, problem-free coins will do
relatively better, moneywise, than these problems.
And the problem-free coins will be more liquid, easier to dispose of.
Problem-free coins will sell first, while these dogs stand in-line
like wallflowers waiting for an invitation to dance.
I don't like Reid much, but he's correct here and Tony is a freakin'
PIMP.
oly
tony cooper
>It's to nobody's advanatge to buy these particular coins.
>
>By the picky commercial standards of our hobby, they are damaged goods
>and not priced to reflect their problem status.
>
>Tony wasn't smart to buy them in the first place,
I've never owned a coin store, but anyone who does or has knows that
sometimes lots are offered. Someone offers 10 coins for sale, and in
that lot are a few good ones and a few bad ones. Sometimes the buyer
can cherry-pick but often the seller is insistent on selling all 10 or
nothing. In my case, the experience was with individuals and the lots
were larger than 10 coins. The good ones made the lot worth buying.
> and now he is shamelessly looking for a greater fool.
You are correct that I feel no shame in offering these coins for sale.
>
>What pride of ownership can there possibly be in such bad coins?
>
>IF coin prices advance in the future, problem-free coins will do
>relatively better, moneywise, than these problems.
I agree, and that's why I'm *not* selling any problem-free coins and
am selling what I don't want to keep. Seems reasonable to me.
>And the problem-free coins will be more liquid, easier to dispose of.
Yeah, and that's why I'm keeping mine.
>Problem-free coins will sell first, while these dogs stand in-line
>like wallflowers waiting for an invitation to dance.
Somewhere, today, some coin collector is selling a FR-2 or AG-3 coin
because he's replaced it with a better coin or no longer wants to keep
it. Is he wrong to offer it for sale because the coin is worn and in
poor condition? An AU-58 that has been cleaned, or has a scratch on
one side, can be a better coin in his view.
>
>I don't like Reid much, but he's correct here and Tony is a freakin'
>PIMP.
You've yet to justify that designation.
oly
I've always liked you since I found your webpage:
http://en.netlog.com/cooper_1987
oly
tony cooper
>I've always liked you since I found your webpage:
>
>http://en.netlog.com/cooper_1987
>
Now *that* is funny. He even has the same first name.
Damn, though, it would be nice to be 23 again. I have ties older than
that.
oly
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:56:02 -0700 (PDT), oly <oly2...@aol.com> wrote:
> >I've always liked you since I found your webpage:
>
> >http://en.netlog.com/cooper_1987
>
> Now *that* is funny. He even has the same first name.
>
> Damn, though, it would be nice to be 23 again. I have ties older than
> that.
>
> --
> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peace. I will go away for a while. If I were 23 again, I might not
"do" coins the second time around. oly
Bremick
"Reid Goldsborough" <reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:44s2cg....@news.alt.net...
This chiding from one who proudly seeks out coins with holes in them for his
collection. What a hobby indeed!
Jud
entertaining than TV!
Reid Goldsborough
> "DETAILS" is the general term ANACS uses to designate that
> the coin has problems.
There is no definition in any dictionary that corresponds to the word
"details" meaning damaged. ANACS doesn't even use the word this way, the
way you have, as synonymous with damaged or problem. Further, at no
place at its site does ANACS use this term or yours -- "details coin."
ANACS honestly and nondeceptively calls these coins "problem coins."
YOU avoid calling these coin what they are in your auction descriptions
and in your promotion of your auctions in his discussion group, using
instead your made-up term, details coin, and your own deceptive
definition of the word "details." A very quick search didn't turn up any
other sellers on eBay using the term details coin, but I suspect you're
not the first with this particular disingenuousness.... A Google search
right now just turned up others using the term details coin. Sell, sell,
sell.
Jerry Dennis
> ::::::pulling up a chair and grabbing a beer. This is more
> entertaining than TV!
Move over, and pass one to me!
Jerry
You can't buy this type of entertainment
Bremick
"Jud" <numis...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:8bf66f25-7bd1-405f...@l14g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> ::::::pulling up a chair and grabbing a beer. This is more
> entertaining than TV!
>
......even more than Dancing with the Stars?
tony cooper
<reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 10/11/2010 1:07 PM, tony cooper wrote:
>> "DETAILS" is the general term ANACS uses to designate that
>> the coin has problems.
>
>There is no definition in any dictionary that corresponds to the word
>"details" meaning damaged.
A company or a person shouldn't use a word that does not have a
corresponding dictionary definition with the specific meaning
according to that person's usage. Right?
I agree.
I now expect you to purge this website:
http://rg.ancients.info/bogos/ of all instances of the improper usages
of "bogo" and to refrain from using that word in newsgroup posts when
it is entirely inappropriate. I don't see any dictionary definitions
of "bogo" that correspond to "bogus" or "counterfeit".
Bogø is a Danish island in the Baltic Sea and Bogos are an ethnic
group in the Horn of Africa. How you could possibly stoop to
improperly employ this word for your deceptive purposes? Shame!
> ANACS doesn't even use the word this way, the
>way you have, as synonymous with damaged or problem.
>Further, at no
>place at its site does ANACS use this term or yours -- "details coin."
>ANACS honestly and nondeceptively calls these coins "problem coins."
Reid, it's almost impressive to see how hard you try to come across as
a blathering idiot. I quote from the ANACS FAQ page:
Does ANACS certify “problem coins”?
Yes. ANACS is the first major grading service to grade cleaned,
corroded, damaged, repaired, and other "problem coins". Label's
display a coin’s "detail grade" and the coin’s corresponding
problem(s). “Details” Graded coins are not eligible for the ANACS
Guarantee.
The page can be found at:
http://www.anacs.com/contentPages/FAQServices.aspx#jump1
Why you would make such an inane and patently incorrect comment
without first visiting the ANACS site is a mystery me.
>
>YOU avoid calling these coin what they are in your auction descriptions
>and in your promotion of your auctions in his discussion group, using
>instead your made-up term,
Made-up, hunh? Have you looked at any image of any of the coins I've
listed? Right on the top of the ANACS slab is written "AU-55
(DETAILS)". (Substitute the appropriate grade for the appropriate
coin)
That's exactly the way I write the title for my ads. I exactly follow
the ANACS term as it is used on the slab.
> details coin, and your own deceptive definition of the word "details."
"Deceptive", hunh? Using the term that the grader uses, and the term
that is written on the slab, would only deceive someone so blindingly
stupid and intent on finding fault that they don't look at what is
staring them in the face.
> A very quick search didn't turn up any
>other sellers on eBay using the term details coin, but I suspect you're
>not the first with this particular disingenuousness.... A Google search
>right now just turned up others using the term details coin. Sell, sell,
>sell.
Jeezus! You speak of dictionary definitions. Look up
"contradiction". No other sellers using the term but you just turned
up other instances of sellers using the term.
You're kinda fun, Reid. About as much as a challenge as Matt Garza
would find in blowing a fast ball past a green bencher in St Pete, but
entertaining in your never-ending pursuit of being completely wrong.
tony cooper
Yeah, but I have to dance with a Scarecrow who wishes he had a brain.
Bremick
I think you're doing a more than adequate job of defending yourself and your
auctions.
tony cooper
In grad school (MBA) in the 1960s I spent a lot of time on price
points. There are two basic theories: High unit price (over costs)
with the expectation of low unit sales but sufficient revenue from the
lower number of units, and low unit price with the expectation of
sufficient revenue from a greater number of unit sales.
In this case, I listed 8 items with a (high) combined total of unit
prices of $5,545.00 and sold 4 of them for (pre-fee) revenue of
$2,332.50.
Advocates of using a low starting price would have to feel that
reductions in the starting prices would have pulled in more than
$2,332.50 in revenue. Theoretically, low prices attract bidders on
eBay, but it isn't my opinion that these items would result in a
bidding war. The items that did sell would have simply sold at lower
prices than they did.
That means to get the same revenue, one or more of the other coins
would have to have sold and sold at reasonably good prices.
I have an advantage here in that I'm not selling because I need the
money and I'm not in any time constraint to sell the coins. I can
re-list the items that didn't sell at practically no cost to me, and I
can set the prices lower on the next go-around.
I'm not saying that my choices in setting the prices was the best way,
but I do feel that it worked out the best for me.
I fully realize that the above is of no particular interest to anyone,
and that most people here understand the decisions of pricing and have
their own methods. It's just turned into something of interest to me
because of the comments, and I'm retired and have time on my hands.
I hope that Reid doesn't get involved in this particular discussion.
Past experience in here tells me he tends to wade into discussions
where he not only doesn't understand the subject matter but comes up
with some bizarrely mistaken theories of his own.
oly
If the purpose of this little exercise was a transparent lesson in e-
baying and pricing theories, we should get to know if any coins are
unpaid for, if any coins get returned and yes, we will check back to
see if there are any negs left for you.
Since you haven't sold ten coins, we won't likely be seeing all that
little star information.
At $40 to $50 over spot, the ten dollar Lib will get paid for and not
come back. The other three will take ten days or so to really know
the final disposition.
And finally, it would be interesting if any of the sales were to RCC
denizens.
oly
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sorry, I did the math again and one might calculate that the ten Lib
went as low as $20 over spot...
oly
tony cooper
One's been paid for already, but it wasn't for a $10 piece. You
really want me to follow up and let you know if all have been paid
for?
>Since you haven't sold ten coins, we won't likely be seeing all that
>little star information.
I'm not exactly sure what the deal is on the star, but it takes 10
detailed seller rating in the last 12 months. I really don't know
what a detailed seller rating is. I do know that I have 273 feedback
ratings. It says I have a 100% rating, but that's just for the last
12 months. I had some negs in the past, but not for coin sales.
A seller negged me, after first leaving a positive, because I objected
to an insurance charge that was supposed to be included in the S&H. A
stamp buyer negged me because I refused to give him credit if he
didn't return the stamps even though I offered to mail him $2 cash for
postage for two postage stamps. That was my cock-up because I used
the wrong Scott number on the stamp. Completely my error. I got
another neg because S&H was in the ad at $6 for Priority Mail and
Insurance but the buyer felt the item could have been shipped 1st
Class. He short-paid and I negged him and he negged back. That's
all, and that goes back to May, 2002.
>At $40 to $50 over spot, the ten dollar Lib will get paid for and not
>come back. The other three will take ten days or so to really know
>the final disposition.
>
>And finally, it would be interesting if any of the sales were to RCC
>denizens.
That wouldn't be something I'd disclose. I would consider that to be
unethical. Besides, I might not know. Newsgroup names and eBay names
are sometimes different. Reid didn't buy any, though. I'll tell you
that.
You know, Oly, you're blowing a lot of smoke here. Except for the
fact that you don't personally like the coins I offered/sold, you
really don't have anything to base a complaint on. You really should
watch that blood pressure considering your weight problem.
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Again, you are coming up with elaborate guises, arguments and ruses to
avoid the fact that your auction coins suck. This "kidding yourself"
we can live with as long as one recognizes that you're full of shit,
in the wrong and are trying to justify bad intentions and bad
actions. Bernie Madoff belittled his detractors too.
One of my points in the last response is that you're taking a lot of
risk for an additional $20 or so, on that $10 Lib, shipping it out to
unknown parties as compared to selling it locally for scrap.
Otherwise, you don't need to follow up with information on how the
transactions go. We'll look at your feedback later, maybe. If you
get something returned, that's common when selling U.S. Coins on
ebay.
Your coins aren't nice and but that's not the problem (or my
problem).
The problem is pimping them on this particular RCC street corner.
Most people posting here simply don't do that (and we've given people
who did do on a regular basis in the past it a lot of shit), and they
especially don't show off coins they can't be proud of. Many of the
FS coins prostituted here in the past at least had some claim to being
superior coins in top condition.
I was at the doctor this A.M. and the b.p. number was something like
138 over 88 (sitting) and 134 over 84 (standing). I need to take the
pills a bit more religiously and I can easily stay at 120 over 80.
Thanks for your concern.
oly
Reid Goldsborough
> A company or a person shouldn't use a word that does not have a
> corresponding dictionary definition with the specific meaning
> according to that person's usage. Right?
I never said nobody should ever use a neologism. Rather, I criticized
you, justifiably, for using a fabricated euphemism to avoid calling the
problem coins you're selling problem coins. You quoted an ANACS page,
which I read, but you didn't quote ANACS using your fabricated euphemism
"details coin."
Are you a dealer or a collector or both? You say you buy groups of coins
and couldn't help buying problem coins, I mean details coins, in order
to buy coins you wanted. That sounds like a dealer. Then you say you
haven't bought any new coins in 15 years and are selling off wares to
avoid burdening your heirs.
All this sounds like dealertalk, and not honest dealertalk either.
Reid Goldsborough
> This chiding from one who proudly seeks out coins with holes in them for his
> collection. What a hobby indeed!
I consider myself having saved these holed coins, saved them from being
melted for their bullion value, and so on, as I've said many times. One
local dealer here who I asked about holed coins said he sells all the
holed silver coins he gets to a smelter. Not saying at all that my
saving the few numbers of holed coins I have in my collection makes me
some great savior or anything like this.
Most relevant here is that unlike the current seller under discussion,
I'm not making up or using some euphemism for these holed coins to avoid
calling them holed coins, and I'm not selling them using this fabricated
euphemism. See the distinction here? Let me try to be clearer.
I've bought problem coins, holed coins, and call them by their name,
holed coins (they're also sometimes called pierced coins, which conveys
the same meaning). This seller sells problem coins but he doesn't use
the name problem coins. Instead, he uses a fabricated euphemism, details
coins, which doesn't convey the same meaning at all. The certification
services he uses, ANACS, uses the term problem coins. But he no doubt
feels he'll get better prices by avoiding using this term for them.
This situation is exactly the same as with that coin replica maker who
advertised their replicas on TV, calling their wares anything but
replicas, instead calling them "clad proofs," "tribute coins," and all
the rest. Sell, sell, sell.
oly
wrote:
It's O.K. to collect holed coins. It would make sense to be picky
about exactly what the coin is (country, type, value as a historic
artifact), it would make sense to be picky about the size and location
of the hole, and it would make sense not to tie up big sums of money.
For example, an early Mexican bust real or two reales with a small
hole that avoids the bust, legends and date would be worth having at a
modest price, especially if the remainder of the busts legend and date
were in above average condition. Or a neatly holed but nice condition
Caps & Rays 8 reales might very well be O.K. to have (I was an
underbidder on a holed 1863-dated 8 Reales just the other day - it
sold for $28 and I dropped out of the bidding at the "melt-me" level
of $21).
Now this is the part where I gotta specifically tell Reid "I'm not
talking about you personally"...
However, if you posted a holed coin on an e-bay auction and your
asking price was the same price as a pristine undamaged specimen, that
would be unethical.
Obviously, numismatics today is plagued with a strong disregard for or
lack of ethics.
oly
tony cooper
<reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 10/11/2010 5:34 PM, tony cooper wrote:
>> A company or a person shouldn't use a word that does not have a
>> corresponding dictionary definition with the specific meaning
>> according to that person's usage. Right?
>
>I never said nobody should ever use a neologism. Rather, I criticized
>you, justifiably, for using a fabricated euphemism to avoid calling the
>problem coins you're selling problem coins.
Back to play?
Something that is "fabricated" is "made up" in the context you are
referring to. There's nothing fabricated about using the term the
grader uses. Using '"DETAILS" coin' is like referring to an '"AU"
coin': it places the coin in a particular class or group.
By the way, a "neologism" is a new word that has enough usage by
enough people that there is indication that it is the process becoming
commonly used. It is *not* a word that only Reid Goldsborough uses.
I can't start referring to people who are usually wrong in everything
they say and make fools of themselves by defending and compounding
their errors as "Goldboros" and claim I've created a neologism. Other
people have to start using "Goldboros" with the same meaning before it
becomes a neologism.
I can provide one definition for "neologism" where "Bogo" qualifies:
Merriam-Webster's online dictionary shows Definition #2 as : a
meaningless word coined by a psychotic.
>You quoted an ANACS page,
>which I read, but you didn't quote ANACS using your fabricated euphemism
>"details coin."
Try for accuracy for a change, Reid. I've referred to '"DETAILS"
coins'. The ANACS page explains their use of "DETAILS".
>Are you a dealer or a collector or both?
Not a dealer, and never was a dealer. A collector at one time but I
stopped collecting some years ago. Not a collector of coins in
general; only US gold although I picked up a few - very few - other
coins at times. When I was buying coins I had enough capital to be
able to afford to buy coins in lots when the seller wanted to part
with a group of coins.
> You say you buy groups of coins
Accuracy, Reid: "bought". That's past tense as in "did at one time".
>and couldn't help buying problem coins
Accuracy, Reid. I didn't say I couldn't help it. What I said was
that I bought lots that contained these coins. It was my choice to
buy or not buy the lot, and there were situations where I considered
it a good deal to take the lot.
>I mean details coins, in order
>to buy coins you wanted. That sounds like a dealer. Then you say you
>haven't bought any new coins in 15 years and are selling off wares to
>avoid burdening your heirs.
>
>All this sounds like dealertalk, and not honest dealertalk either.
I'll let the dealers in this group decide if you are now disparaging
dealers.
Zapp Brannigan
news:f61dd1ed-4385-4c86...@g17g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
>However, if you posted a holed coin on an e-bay auction and your
asking price was the same price as a pristine undamaged specimen, that
would be unethical.
Overpricing a holed coin in an auction may be a poor sales strategy but as long
as the description and pictures are accurate, it hardly is unethical.
Reid Goldsborough
> Something that is "fabricated" is "made up" in the context you are
> referring to. There's nothing fabricated about using the term the
> grader uses. Using '"DETAILS" coin' is like referring to an '"AU"
> coin': it places the coin in a particular class or group.
Not. The word "details" in numismatics has a positive connotation. Coins
with lots of details, with details not worn away, with preserved
details, are considered more desirable by collectors and have higher
market value, all other things being equal, than coins that circulated
such that some percentage of their details have disappeared.
When you replace the term "problem coin," which has a negative, and
accurate, connotation, with "details coin" or "'DETAILS' coin" or
whatever else you call want to call the damaged coins that you're
offloading, you're conveying sometime positive about something that
should be called by what it is, problem coin. Again, ANACS doesn't use
your euphemism, details coin, despite your contention that it does, but
it does use the term problem coin, which you don't.
Again, salesmanship. Happens all the time, of course, and nothing wrong
with it, so long as people can see through it, just as there's nothing
wrong with people pointing it out when they obverse it and want to
discuss it in a discussion group like this, despite your calling me
"psychotic" and all your other names for doing so.
tony cooper
<reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 10/12/2010 12:05 AM, tony cooper wrote:
>
>> Something that is "fabricated" is "made up" in the context you are
>> referring to. There's nothing fabricated about using the term the
>> grader uses. Using '"DETAILS" coin' is like referring to an '"AU"
>> coin': it places the coin in a particular class or group.
>
>Not. The word "details" in numismatics has a positive connotation. Coins
>with lots of details, with details not worn away, with preserved
>details, are considered more desirable by collectors and have higher
>market value, all other things being equal, than coins that circulated
>such that some percentage of their details have disappeared.
>When you replace the term "problem coin," which has a negative, and
>accurate, connotation, with "details coin" or "'DETAILS' coin" or
>whatever else you call want to call the damaged coins that you're
>offloading, you're conveying sometime positive about something that
>should be called by what it is, problem coin. Again, ANACS doesn't use
>your euphemism, details coin, despite your contention that it does, but
>it does use the term problem coin, which you don't.
Take a look at the ads, Reid. The headlines read exactly what is on
the slab - AU-55 DETAILS - and that's what ANACS offers as the grade.
Further, the slab gives the reason for the "DETAILS" designation (ie:
Cleaned) and this information is repeated in the body of my ad.
It's immensely foolish for you to argue about this when you have been
provided with a photograph of the actual slabs using the actual
terminology used by the grader. Nowhere on the slab does "problem
coin" appear although viewer is told that there is a problem and the
problem is identified.
The ANACS site I linked to explained their use of "DETAILS".
>Again, salesmanship.
The ads repeat what the grader, ANACS, has used. Nothing has been
embellished or added or omitted or changed. None of the puffery that
some use like "Trending up!" or other verbiage. No dancing icons or
flashy templates.
The term "details coin" was not used in the ads. It was used, with a
significant change, in the newsgroup. When you read ["DETAILS" coin]
that punctuation style identifies the group just as ["AU" coin] would
identify that coin in that group.
"DETAILS" is a logical term to use because it indicates that there's
something about the details that affects the grade. Rather than wear,
the details have been affected by cleaning or previous use in jewelry
or something else.
You are giving my use of the term "Goldsboro" - to mean someone who is
usually wrong in everything they say and make fools of themselves by
defending and compounding their errors - legs. It may become a
neologism before your use of "Bogo" does.
Zapp Brannigan
"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3g39b6p8mmnpqid7g...@4ax.com...
Reid Goldsborough
> You are giving my use of the term "Goldsboro" - to mean someone who is
> usually wrong in everything they say
All this is interesting from many angles. First is the interest, and
humor, of Tony Cooper selling only problem coins on eBay, currently, and
many problem coins in the past, all in ANACS holders. Then there's the
euphemistic way he describes what he's doing, his saying that he's
selling details coins, not problem coins or damaged coins, but details
coins, because ANACS writes the word details on the coin slab for the
problem coins it grages, and even though ANACS calls these coins for
what they are, problem coins, this gives him legitimacy, he indicates,
in calling them details coins. Further dubiousness is his saying he's a
collector, not a dealer (after all, as he says, he has never owned a
coin store), but he has bought groups of coins from collectors in order
to obtain coins he wants, which is something that dealers do to earn
profits. It's not difficult all all for collectors to find want-list
coins without having to buy coins they don't want, either looking
yourself or by giving your want list to as many dealers as you'd like.
Finally, as some kind of weird debating technique, he further makes
things up. In response to my saying he uses the fabricated euphemism
details coin, he falsely says that I've used the word cleaned to mean
that the surface of a coin has been melted, which I've never said or
implied and which on its face it patently absurd. And he calls me
psychotic and other names and tries to make fun of my last name by
misspelling it and by defining it as a new word that means someone who
is wrong in everything he says, as he just did, for the second time, above.
Far more interesting than this one individual selling his problem coins,
trying to justify himself, and saying really weird things is the bigger
picture, looking at how far people go in selling, how much they stretch
the truth, how long a distance they travel into the large gray area that
separates the totally truthful and forthcoming from the totally
dishonest and withholding. Despite his selling only problem coins, his
euphemizing, and the dubiousness of his claims, this Tony Cooper is not
in the extreme here, with some sellers doing far worse. On the other
hand, some sellers tell it like it is, are completely honest, don't play
games, use words and terms as they're commonly understood, and fully
disclose instead of trying to obfuscate.
As one example, such as seller, a local jeweler, just so happened to put
an ad in my local newspaper today offering to buy jewelry as well as
gold and silver coins. For the coins, they listed various denominations
and dates and gave a range of prices they would be willing to pay. In
the limited space they had, they included prices for only two "grades"
of these denominations and dates, "Used" and "New," and they specified
that the prices they quoted were "up to" prices.
Here's how their honesty stood out. In a box that was part of the ad,
titled "'Up To' Prices," and using typography that was similar in size
to that used for their prices (not overly small type), they defined
their "up to" prices in this way: "IMPORTANT: All prices are based on
rarity and condition. If an item is in poor condition, its value will be
low. If an item is very rare, and in superb condition, it might be worth
more than the "up to" price listed.... In most cases, the "up to" prices
listed in this advertisement are for items of exceptional rarity and
quality. Chances are, you will not have these items. But we are willing
to take the time to look at your items just in case, free of charge, and
give you our opinion."
Seems fair, and forthcoming. No euphemisms, obfuscation, hyperbole,
empty promises, and all the rest that you see, not rarely, when coins
are advertised and sold.
Zapp Brannigan
"Reid Goldsborough" <reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:450oie....@news.alt.net...
Bremick
Stepping down from your pulpit, would you have been mislead by any of Tony's
auctions. Was there any doubt about what was being offered? Any attempt to
disguise the items or their condition? With the high price of gold,
wouldn't this be an opportune time to cull some damaged gold coins from
one's holdings, especially on eBay? Is it really any of your concern what
Tony chooses to sell on eBay? If he did indeed receive more than spot
price for those coins, that's likely a lot more than a dealer would have
offered. The fact that they were in ANACS slabs assures a potential
collector/speculator that they were genuine, regardless of the individual
coin faults. You're simply jousting at windmills again, Reid.
Reid Goldsborough
> Stepping down from your pulpit, would you have been mislead by any of Tony's
I didn't say I'd be misled. I was commenting on what he does -- selling
only damaged coins or primarily damaged coins -- and how he
characterizes what he does, saying he sells details coins. I also said
this wasn't the worst thing done by those selling coins. But it is
interesting and funny and worth commenting on, which is the reason I have.
Peter
wrote:
"I was commenting on what he does -- selling only damaged coins or
primarily damaged coins -- and how he characterizes what he does,
saying he sells details coins."
Yes, so you say. But Mr. Remick is directing your attention to the
actual observables. What you say he does is an inference you have
drawn. Elaboration on the inferences you have drawn may be amusing
for some, but it is conclusions in advance of the facts.
Bremick
> On 10/13/2010 8:36 AM, Bremick wrote:
>> Stepping down from your pulpit, would you have been mislead by any of
>> Tony's
>
> I didn't say I'd be misled. I was commenting on what he does -- selling
> only damaged coins or primarily damaged coins -- and how he characterizes
> what he does, saying he sells details coins. I also said this wasn't the
> worst thing done by those selling coins. But it is interesting and funny
> and worth commenting on, which is the reason I have.
So what is your personal beef with Tony choosing to sell his damaged coins
on eBay? You seem to be the only one who finds all this "interesting" to
the extent you apparently researched to see what else he has put up for
auction. Are you suggesting that he has some sinister motive for selling
primarily damaged coins? If his auctions weren't misleading in any way, how
would you propose he unload these coins? He quoted what was on the label,
described the coin, and provided clear photos. What else is lacking?
You seem quite hung up on the term "details" and the fact that he used that
term in his auctions. Since ANACS includes that term, where appropriate,
following the grade on the top line of their slab label, calling one or a
group of ANACS-slabbed problem coins "Detail coins" would seem to be an
obvious choice of words to most people. But obviously it's interesting and
funny to you.
oly
> "Reid Goldsborough" <reidgolduse...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
No, the terms "net" and "details" in this context are only meaningful
to some of the numismatic cognescenti.
There might be 20 to 50 thousand coin people in the USA who instantly
understand the reference, MOL. I doubt more.
However, the seller is simply trolling for someone who isn't
knowledgeable.
Reed has an incredibly hard time spitting out the obvious, but it
doesn't make him wrong - this time.
oly
Frank Provasek
where a VF20 coin with a big scratch is graded VG8 without mentioning
the problem because it's "worth" VG8 money. The other method is
DETAILS grading where you grade the coin ignoring any defects, then
describe the defect, such as VF20 SCRATCHED.
Tony Cooper is certainly following "best practices" by having ALL US
gold coins certified by a reputable service.
----
Frank Provasek Rare Coins www.frankcoins.com
http://shop.ebay.com/merchant/frankcoins Texas Auction License
11259, Board member of Texas Coin Dealers Association,
Member TNA, ANA, PCGS, NGC, ICTA - Full Time Since 1991
tony cooper
>> You seem quite hung up on the term "details" and the fact that he used that
>> term in his auctions. �Since ANACS includes that term, where appropriate,
>> following the grade on the top line of their slab label, calling one or a
>> group of ANACS-slabbed problem coins "Detail coins" would seem to be an
>> obvious choice of words to most people. � But obviously it's interesting and
>> funny to you.
>
>No, the terms "net" and "details" in this context are only meaningful
>to some of the numismatic cognescenti.
What title or wording would you suggest that I should have used in the
ads? What do you think I should have added to the eBay listing that
was not there?
>
>There might be 20 to 50 thousand coin people in the USA who instantly
>understand the reference, MOL. I doubt more.
>
>However, the seller is simply trolling for someone who isn't
>knowledgeable.
>
>Reed has an incredibly hard time spitting out the obvious, but it
>doesn't make him wrong - this time.
>
>oly
--
oly
As I've stated, my essential gripe is that you listed/referenced your
auctions on RCC. I don't think your prices are right or fair either,
but I'd happily never know that if you didn't link your auctions to a
post on RCC.
I come back to this thread, reluctantly, because Reed can't zero in on
certain obvious things. "Net" and "details" are insider terms and the
unwashed laymen are going to learn them the hard way if they buy
cleaned and damaged coins at lofty prices. That's the problem with
using those euphemistic terms in an auction forum where laymen might
be tempted to bid/ buy.
oly
tony cooper
Well, that's been acceptable in the past and as far as I know it is
still acceptable if the thread is labeled "FS:" or similar and if the
auction is for genuine coins. It was a bare-bones notification
without any hyperbole. As are the ads.
> I don't think your prices are right or fair either,
I don't think that a legitimate subject of complaint or anything
anyone else should care about. I can understand thinking that *you*
wouldn't pay those prices, but not that someone would ask the prices.
And, I don't think lower prices would have left you with any more
favorable view of the listings.
Since you have used "PIMPING" and "trolling", I'm genuinely interested
in what you might think is a better way to describe the coins. "AU-58
Problem Coin" seems to me to be a ludicrous choice. Do you have a
better suggestion?
>but I'd happily never know that if you didn't link your auctions to a
>post on RCC.
>
>I come back to this thread, reluctantly, because Reed can't zero in on
>certain obvious things. "Net"
I don't understand this reference. I didn't use "Net" in any ad or
post.
> and "details" are insider terms and the
>unwashed laymen are going to learn them the hard way if they buy
>cleaned and damaged coins at lofty prices. That's the problem with
>using those euphemistic terms in an auction forum where laymen might
>be tempted to bid/ buy.
That presumes that uninformed laymen might be in the market for coins
priced at the $400 to $1,000 level. If so, and they don't read the
line that says "Scratched" or "Cleaned", then are bidding at their own
peril.
Reid Goldsborough
> So what is your personal beef with Tony choosing to sell his damaged coins
> on eBay? You seem to be the only one who finds all this "interesting" to
This isn't a personal beef. I'm discussing this! As I said, several
times now. This is what these discussion groups are for -- discussing
things! Geez. I mean, geez! That I'm not the only one who finds this
interesting, that others find it interesting, is evident from the fact
that they're participating in this thread, including you. Tony Cooper is
free to do what he wants in selling his wares, up to a point, and others
are free to comment on it. He promotes the auctions of his problem
coins, his details coins, here, and people are free to comment. See?
That's how this all works.
I don't agree with what oly says at times, don't agree with his frequent
practice practice of anonymous flaming, and don't agree with the same
tactics he uses that Tony Cooper uses in changing the spelling of
people's names in a weirdly childish way of trying to make fun of them,
but what he says here is what I've been saying and is blatantly obvious.
The word details and the term details coins the way Tony Cooper uses
them to sell his coins are nowhere close to being universally understood
even among coin people. Despite all of Tony Cooper's denials, they're
obvious euphemisms that obfuscate and that attempt to make what he sells
appear more desirable than it is. AGAIN, he's free to sell in this way
... and others are free to discuss it. Even if he didn't promote his
auctions here, people would still be free to discuss what he sells and
his his method of selling it and the way he promotes his auctions here.
Reid Goldsborough
> It's O.K. to collect holed coins. It would make sense to be picky
I can't tell you how reassuring to read that you approve of the practice
of collecting holed coins. Of course this is OK! You can collecting
anything you want that's legal to collect, any kind of problem coin you
want. This Bruce Remnick is the only one here who tried to disparage
this, not understanding that it isn't the legitimacy collecting or
selling problem coins that's under discussion here but how you sell them.
I don't agree at all with oly's calling Tony Cooper a pimp for pricing
his problem coins the way he does, and it's ironic in the extreme for
him to call Tony Cooper unethical for this. A key aspect of a free
economy is sellers being able to set prices as they see fit. If buyers
buy, fine, if they don't fine, but overpricing something doesn't render
you a pimp. But Tony Cooper calls me psychotic for disagreeing with the
how he describes his wares as details coins, so it all comes around and
is all part of the character of these unmoderated online discussion groups.
tony cooper
<reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> But Tony Cooper calls me psychotic for disagreeing with the
>how he describes his wares as details coins, so it all comes around and
>is all part of the character of these unmoderated online discussion groups.
The actual culprit is the Merriam-Webster online dictionary. I said:
"I can provide one definition for "neologism" where "Bogo" qualifies:
Merriam-Webster's online dictionary shows Definition #2 as : a
meaningless word coined by a psychotic."
The contributors to M-W may or may not have had you in mind when they
added that dictionary. Personally, I don't think so. You are not
that well known or that much paid attention to.
Bremick
> On 10/13/2010 12:24 PM, Bremick wrote:
>
>> So what is your personal beef with Tony choosing to sell his damaged
>> coins
>> on eBay? You seem to be the only one who finds all this "interesting" to
>
> This isn't a personal beef. I'm discussing this! As I said, several times
> now. This is what these discussion groups are for -- discussing things!
> Geez. I mean, geez! That I'm not the only one who finds this interesting,
> that others find it interesting, is evident from the fact that they're
> participating in this thread, including you. Tony Cooper is free to do
> what he wants in selling his wares, up to a point, and others are free to
> comment on it. He promotes the auctions of his problem coins, his details
> coins, here, and people are free to comment. See? That's how this all
> works.
Reid, you're actually complaining about YOURSELF here. Your diatribe here
was not a "discussion". It was unsolicited criticizm of Tony's gold coin
auctions. You questioned his auction language, his motivations for posting
the auctions, the possibility that he mostly auctions problem coins, and
finally his methods of purchasing coins in the first place. Of course he is
free to do as he pleases in selling his wares, but it wouldn't seem so from
reading your critique. I have no idea of the motives of the people who are
participating in this thread, but I'll bet you are one of the few who finds
Tony's auctions as "interesting" and "funny" as you do.
>
> I don't agree with what oly says at times, don't agree with his frequent
> practice practice of anonymous flaming, and don't agree with the same
> tactics he uses that Tony Cooper uses in changing the spelling of people's
> names in a weirdly childish way of trying to make fun of them, but what he
> says here is what I've been saying and is blatantly obvious. The word
> details and the term details coins the way Tony Cooper uses them to sell
> his coins are nowhere close to being universally understood even among
> coin people. Despite all of Tony Cooper's denials, they're obvious
> euphemisms that obfuscate and that attempt to make what he sells appear
> more desirable than it is. AGAIN, he's free to sell in this way ... and
> others are free to discuss it. Even if he didn't promote his auctions
> here, people would still be free to discuss what he sells and his his
> method of selling it and the way he promotes his auctions here.
I repeat, were you at all confused by any of his auctions? Did the word
"details" really confuse you after examining his photos and reading his
auction descriptions? If not, what's your point about belaboring this? Are
you trying to be a public protector? If non-collectors were confused by
any of these auctions, they shouldn't be allowed to bid on 3- or 4-figure
eBay gold auctions without professional supervision. The word "details"
would be the least of their problems. Wait until they scratch their head
over "AU". You still can't leave those windmills alone.
Bremick
> On 10/11/2010 11:41 PM, oly wrote:
>> It's O.K. to collect holed coins. It would make sense to be picky
>
> I can't tell you how reassuring to read that you approve of the practice
> of collecting holed coins. Of course this is OK! You can collecting
> anything you want that's legal to collect, any kind of problem coin you
> want. This Bruce Remnick is the only one here who tried to disparage this,
> not understanding that it isn't the legitimacy collecting or selling
> problem coins that's under discussion here but how you sell them.
Quote, please. My mere mention of one of your hobby preferences is
"disparaging"? You must have a guilty conscience.
>
> I don't agree at all with oly's calling Tony Cooper a pimp for pricing his
> problem coins the way he does, and it's ironic in the extreme for him to
> call Tony Cooper unethical for this. A key aspect of a free economy is
> sellers being able to set prices as they see fit. If buyers buy, fine, if
> they don't fine, but overpricing something doesn't render you a pimp. But
> Tony Cooper calls me psychotic for disagreeing with the how he describes
> his wares as details coins, so it all comes around and is all part of the
> character of these unmoderated online discussion groups.
Actually, Tony is the only one who used the word in print. I find this
interesting and funny.
Reid Goldsborough
> Reid, you're actually complaining about YOURSELF here. Your diatribe here
> was not a "discussion". It was unsolicited criticizm of Tony's gold coin
Unsolicited criticism? I read this and read no more. This is utter
nonsense. Do sellers often solicit criticisms here about what they do?
Of course what I did was an unsolicitied criticism, and it was on topic,
dealing directly with the subject matter of this discussion group, and
dealing with a frequent topic of conversation, the way coins are sold to
collectors.
tony cooper
similar, and I think it should be done.
A few years ago I was at a sit-down dinner at a wedding reception and
seated next to a lady I didn't know. Her husband had died the
previous year.
She mentioned that, due to the medical and funeral expenses, she had
sold her late husband's coin collection to a local dealer to raise
some cash and accepted the offer he'd made. She didn't know anything
at all about coins. I had dealt with the dealer a few years before
that, and he's one of those types that run down what you are selling
and low-balls you if he thinks he can buy on the cheap. Knowledgeable
collectors can deal with him successfully, but I dunno how good a deal
this lady would have received.
None of my coins were slabbed at that time. I always thought slabbing
impersonalized a coin. I thought of my wife, though, and knew she
wouldn't have the slightest idea of what was a fair price for any
coin.
I started sending my coins out to be slabbed. The good ones went to
NGC and the ones with visible problems went to ANACS because they are
the only ones who will grade a cleaned, ex-jewelry, rim damage, etc
coin. I sold a few along the line so the project was self-financing
with sold coins paying the slabbing costs. Now all the coins are
slabbed.
I typed out a couple of pages of instructions on selling the slabbed
coins and included information on how to look up the current price for
the coin and what range of offer from the gray sheet would be
reasonable. I was clear that the stated price for the coin and grade
would not be what she should expect to get, but gave her a percentage
range to work with. That's all in the safety deposit box.
The ANACS pieces worry me because the same ranges don't apply to these
coins and I didn't want my wife to have deal with that. She's not
someone who would try eBay. That's why I've started to move these
out.
It's worked out well. This weekend is our 47th wedding anniversary
and we're going out of town on a mini-holiday. I'll be using my
PayPal card since I've received payment 3 of the 4 sold coins. (The
4th is mailing a check)
Bremick
> On 10/13/2010 5:17 PM, Bremick wrote:
>
>> Reid, you're actually complaining about YOURSELF here. Your diatribe
>> here
>> was not a "discussion". It was unsolicited criticizm of Tony's gold coin
>
> Unsolicited criticism? I read this and read no more. This is utter
> nonsense. Do sellers often solicit criticisms here about what they do? Of
> course what I did was an unsolicitied criticism, and it was on topic,
> dealing directly with the subject matter of this discussion group, and
> dealing with a frequent topic of conversation, the way coins are sold to
> collectors.
Yes, it was "on topic", but only because you posted it in Tony's coin
auction message thread. Your post was unwarranted criticism of his auction
content and methods. Tony certainly didn't solicit comments about what he
does. He simply posted a FS eBay auction heads up like so many others here
do. Your subsequent "discussion" didn't deal with the subject matter of
this group. It was just you unloading on Tony for no apparent purpose
except a possible self-serving one. If you feel there's a real need to
discuss how coins are sold to collectors (?), well go for it. I hope this
latest post wasn't your idea of how to initiate such a discussion.
It apparently hit a nerve when you thought I had disparaged your interest in
holed coins. So I'm sure Tony just loved your contrived criticism of his
choice of auction language, your concern for his auctioning mostly "problem"
coins, and even his methods of purchasing coins.
oly
wrote:
If you approve of what Tony's doing under the guise of "the free
economy", then you approve of every junk bond, every toxic cmo or mbs
(bet you don't know what those are, why they are so important, and why
they've already exploded our financial system), every phoney pump-and-
dump stock offering and under the guise of the "free economy" you
approve of Bernie Madoff and Enron et alia.
It's dangerous to agree with you on anything Redd, because you're
basically a mindless phoney psuedo-intellectual and goddamn dumb-
stoopeede in the extreme. You're faster than the speed of stupid.
oly
oly
I've said it a bunch of times already here: when people want to
justify their bad intentions and bad actions, they will come up with
endless rationale and excuses. You're a psych course textbook
example, Tony.
Please, go die already. I intend to leave my heirs the biggest
goddamn mess that I can possibly afford to. And I love 'em just as
much as you love yours.
oly
Reid Goldsborough
> Tony certainly didn't solicit comments about what he
> does.
You continue to post here like you're schizophrenic, living in an
alternate universe that nobody else lives in. Since when in this
newsgroup has it been required that somebody selling coins must solicit
comments in order for people to comment on what the seller is selling or
how he or she is selling it? Yet you're trying to find fault with me for
not doing this? Bizarroworld revisited.
Reid Goldsborough
> If you approve of what Tony's doing under the guise of "the free
> economy", then you approve of every junk bond, every toxic cmo or mbs
> (bet you don't know what those are, why they are so important, and why
> they've already exploded our financial system), every phoney pump-and-
> dump stock offering and under the guise of the "free economy" you
> approve of Bernie Madoff and Enron et alia.
I guess you missed an important word I used: legal. What Bernie Madoff
and the principals at Enron did was illegal. That's why they're in
prison or were going to be sentenced to prison before they died. Tony
setting high start prices for his details coins/damaged coins isn't
illegal. Comparing these kinds of acts is ridiculous, as you well know.
His use of a fabricated euphemism here to make his wares seem more
attractive is worthy of criticism here, since this is where he used it.
But it's not worthy of anything more severe, let alone a 150-year prison
sentence. OK, maybe a year in prison, but no more!
Bremick
> On 10/13/2010 8:54 PM, Bremick wrote:
>> Tony certainly didn't solicit comments about what he
>> does.
>
> You continue to post here like you're schizophrenic, living in an
> alternate universe that nobody else lives in. Since when in this newsgroup
> has it been required that somebody selling coins must solicit comments in
> order for people to comment on what the seller is selling or how he or she
> is selling it? Yet you're trying to find fault with me for not doing this?
> Bizarroworld revisited.
I don't recall others criticizing peoples' coin-selling methods like you
have. What's your real motive? Attention?
Does your inevitable poetic name-calling usually make you feel better when
you've lost a "discussion"?
Bremick
> On 10/13/2010 8:59 PM, oly wrote:
>> If you approve of what Tony's doing under the guise of "the free
>> economy", then you approve of every junk bond, every toxic cmo or mbs
>> (bet you don't know what those are, why they are so important, and why
>> they've already exploded our financial system), every phoney pump-and-
>> dump stock offering and under the guise of the "free economy" you
>> approve of Bernie Madoff and Enron et alia.
>
> I guess you missed an important word I used: legal. What Bernie Madoff and
> the principals at Enron did was illegal. That's why they're in prison or
> were going to be sentenced to prison before they died. Tony setting high
> start prices for his details coins/damaged coins isn't illegal. Comparing
> these kinds of acts is ridiculous, as you well know. His use of a
> fabricated euphemism here to make his wares seem more attractive is worthy
> of criticism here, since this is where he used it. But it's not worthy of
> anything more severe, let alone a 150-year prison sentence. OK, maybe a
> year in prison, but no more!
The term "details" is a fabricated euphemism? You might tell that to ANACS.
And you still avoid my question as to how one might be misled or confused by
any of Tony's auctions. Thank God we have Reid to decide what merits
criticism here and to dispense it when it's needed.
Reid Goldsborough
> The term "details" is a fabricated euphemism?
No, I never said that. You continue to post here as if you lived in an
alternate universe. I said that details coin is a fabricated euphemism.
You just argue to argue here, nonsensically. Pick your spots, boy. If
you have nothing to say, don't say it.
tony cooper
<reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 10/13/2010 10:55 PM, Bremick wrote:
>
>> The term "details" is a fabricated euphemism?
>
>No, I never said that. You continue to post here as if you lived in an
>alternate universe. I said that details coin is a fabricated euphemism.
>You just argue to argue here, nonsensically. Pick your spots, boy. If
>you have nothing to say, don't say it.
Do you not see the difference between [ details coin ] and [ "DETAILS"
coin ] ?
The second, the version that I use, indicates a coin that is in a
group that is identified. It is similar to writing [ "MS" coin ]. It
places the coin in the group of coins graded as MS.
It's an eminently logical construct. That may be what confuses you.
Reid Goldsborough
> Please, go die already. I intend to leave my heirs the biggest
> goddamn mess that I can possibly afford to. And I love 'em just as
> much as you love yours.
You, and the kinds of comments you write, such as the above, and people
like you who feel that have perfect license to be as anonymously
malicious as they want, are the reason this newsgroup isn't what it used
to be and that so many people have left. "Please, go die already."
That's a nice thing to say, and you sound like a great human being, just
the kind of person I'd like to have for a neighbor, friend, family
member ... or online acquaintance. Not.
Look, I started this debate, knowingly, mindfully. I saw something that
I felt warranted comment, the sale of all these damaged coins, with some
attempted humor thrown in with the comments. Then criticism became
justified with Tony's attempt to justify what he was doing by using what
I've described, accurately I still believe, as a fabricated euphemism,
details coin.
But Tony for the most part has explained himself well, and what he is
doing, in toto, appears far more good than bad. Nothing justifies
comments like yours, above. From reading this, it's apparent that your
heirs will remember you for exactly who you are.
Reid Goldsborough
Do you not see the difference between [ details coin ] and [ "DETAILS"
> coin ] ?
Do you know see that there are people who aren't going to know what
"DETAILS" coin means same as they won't know what details coin means
whereas if you had simply used the term that ANACS itself uses, problem
coin, there would be no possibility of confusion. I'm not confused --
you know this well. But others could be. Yes, you don't used this
fabricated euphemism in your auction descriptions, it seems, just here
in explaining yourself.
oly
wrote:
Ream, on some things, yes, Tony has made some excellent responses.
But there is still a vast amount of rationalization going on,
rationalization of bad intentions and bad actions.
Tony keeps piling on the excuses, and now he has piled on with
"cleaning up the estate". I call Bullshittae. We are all going to
die in the scheme of things, and that's also not a good reason to hurt
somebody financially by selling them very poor coins at a high price.
I am hardly anonymous BTW. You're just not very smart. And your
sense of humor (self-mentioned only after the fact that your "logic"
falls flat) seems to have an audience that is entirely limited to one
person - yourself.
oly
Bremick
> On 10/14/2010 11:58 AM, tony cooper wrote:
> Do you not see the difference between [ details coin ] and [ "DETAILS"
>> coin ] ?
>
> Do you know see that there are people who aren't going to know what
> "DETAILS" coin means same as they won't know what details coin means
> whereas if you had simply used the term that ANACS itself uses, problem
> coin, there would be no possibility of confusion. I'm not confused --
> you know this well. But others could be. Yes, you don't used this
> fabricated euphemism in your auction descriptions, it seems, just here in
> explaining yourself.
Do you realize that these uneducated people you cite also may not know what
ANACS means? Not to mention things like AU, MS, XF, etc. They also may not
know the difference in value from one date/mint to another. They'd best
stick to simple bullion coins. Anyone with $$$$ to spend on eBay on gold
coins would be well served to learn some basics first. Either that or
carefully read the descriptions and check out the photos in auctions like
Tony's. Nothing was hidden or misrepresented. How you can be so totally
obsessed with a trivial phrase like "details coins" is, well.........
understandable.
tony cooper
<reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 10/14/2010 11:58 AM, tony cooper wrote:
>Do you not see the difference between [ details coin ] and [ "DETAILS"
>> coin ] ?
>
>Do you know see that there are people who aren't going to know what
>"DETAILS" coin means same as they won't know what details coin means
>whereas if you had simply used the term that ANACS itself uses, problem
>coin, there would be no possibility of confusion. I'm not confused --
>you know this well. But others could be. Yes, you don't used this
>fabricated euphemism in your auction descriptions, it seems, just here
>in explaining yourself.
That's even less logical. If there is a group of people who can most
easily understand what ANACS' [ "DETAILS" ] coins are, it is the
readership of this group. Anyone in this group who is interested
enough to look at the ads and sees the way ANACS grades the coins has
understanding.
There are many readers who have never used ANACS - or any outside
grading service - but they would be quick studies after one glance at
the ads in question where the term is prominently displayed. "Problem
coins" is not.
Zapp Brannigan
"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:hddeb65b2r4ktcv9n...@4ax.com...
Why do you feel the need to constantly justify your actions?
You did nothing wrong and your interlocutors should just take a pill and calm
the fuck down already!
tony cooper
wrote:
>Why do you feel the need to constantly justify your actions?
>You did nothing wrong and your interlocutors should just take a pill and calm
>the fuck down already!
You're right.
Reid Goldsborough
> That's even less logical. If there is a group of people who can most
> easily understand what ANACS' [ "DETAILS" ] coins are, it is the
You *continue* to use this term ""DETAILS" coin," which ANACS does not,
despite your continued rationalizing.
Go to ANACS' Web site. There is no "DETAILS" service listed, and your
term "'DETAILS' coin" is not used. Go to its services page. Under
"Problem Coins Graded" (!!!), ANACS specifies that through its regular
grading service it will grade damaged coins and give them a "detail
grade" (it also mentions "details grade"). At its FAQ page, after the
question, "Does ANACS certify 'problem coins'?" (!!!), ANACS uses the
term "'details'-graded coin").
All this is clear. The terms ANACS uses don't attempt to obfuscate,
unlike your term "'DETAILS' coin." It's all semantics, but these
distinctions are important, trying as they do to make something --
problem coins -- appear more desirable than they are. What sounds
better: "I sell "'DETAILS' coins"? Or "I sell problem coins?" Which is
clearer? Again, all this refers to how you explain what you do here.
oly
wrote:
Gosh Reem, you went almost 28 hours without posting.
You must have gotten a-hold of some good shit.
Take more next time.
oly