Really Bill W???

I am no expert but if Mr. Weiss is and expert and a respected expert, then whether he is selling for some one else OR for himself, it doesnt matter..He has certified a stamp..done deal.In my opinion a certification is a bonus as far as I am concerned.


Of course we all agree that certification papers are a great thing, though some would say it adds greatly to the cost..But at least we know it is the REAL DEAL.

Robert

BTW...Don makes some good points.

Bill is a known expertizer and well regarded in the field. He puts his reputation up every time he signs off on an article. The cert is free to the buyer, who then can take the piece on its merit with the cert or have another reputable firm confirm the cert. If it meets muster then it is a double up. I do not go to ebay because I do not trust some of the sellers (and am not an expert enough to view products & buy w/o touchy feely)) not to say that there aren't many legit sellers but my reads on the numerous threads make me more wanting to stay away. To call into question the integrity just to express an adverse opinion steps over the line.

I would consider any philatelist who is an expert in their particular area to be able to or capable of issuing an opinion even maybe along with a certificate on a stamp in their area of expertise. Most groups or societies that authenticate stamps and issue certificates for their authenticity usually consist of the opinions of several philatelic experts put together rather than that of just one expert. I would consider certificates or opinions from both an anonymous expert committee from a well-know stamp society/organization and a well-know individual expert in the philatelic field to be fine with me.

I make no apology for selling stamps from customers on consignment and consider Kevin's comments to be nothing more than an attempt to discredit me. My "other" business, aside from expertizing, is brokering material for a commission, which I do not advertize nationally, but do so privately. I have thousands of clients. Some want to sell. Somme have previously received my certs for material bought from others. So if I'm asked to sell something I've previously certed, I don't think that is unethical nor breaking any rule. And it appears that Kevin is merely looking for trouble, which I find interesting since I have seen him sell fake coils in the past for great profit, yet never said a word about it here, believing that we are a small community of nice foks merely interacting in a friendly way. Guess I was wrong?

Bill is following in the tradition of "name" sellers of the past like Stanley Ashbrook, Elliot Perry, and Lester Brookman. All three of them wrote up opinions on rare and unusual items, and sold them as well. After a while it was one opinion against another, and for neutrality labs promoting the scientific study of material turned to expertizing on a contract basis. They are still with us, but so are the dealer expertisers. But I think that today it comes down to language.

While the whole certification enterprise is about written opinions, to "certify" has come to imply a somewhat more neutral assessment by a committee, and one that is not complicated by the conflict of interest that can come from having a vested interest in the sale of an item. What the old time dealers, and dealers like Bill, offered was a personal written "opinion," and as a written figure that needs to be differentiated from the committee generated product. The point of differentiation today should, I think, revolve around the number of potentially differing expert opinions that a given certificate represents. Committees certify, and individuals give opinions. Call it "expert opinion," if you like, but do not call it "certification." And then, don't claim that the item is accompanied by a "cert."

That said, for the present Bill is within his legal and moral and ethical rights to call what he issues by the same name as what the committees issue, because no convention has been agreed upon generally to differentiate the language. However, if the tone of the hobby moved to observe a distinction between "certification" and "opinion" then it would be morally and ethically improper for Bill to ignore the distinction. And if the ASDA wrote up guidelines for such a distinction and got member agreement on that, then certain sanctions could be brought to bear to compel him to conform. But please understand, no such thing has happened, and I consider it highly unlikely that it will. It would be a hot potato that would wreak havoc for the ASDA, and I don't think they will go there.

If all that be so, then Kevin can rant and complain all he wants, and Bill can keep right on doing what he has. And both are within their moral, ethical, and legal rights.

I see no problem with it. He just like any other seller, trust him or don't. One of the biggest PCGS coin dealers in the world is David Hall, President of Collectors Universe which owns PCGS.

I would hate for this thread to adversley affect Kevin or Bill's participation in this forum. As a dabbler in this great hobby, this site and all you folks here are helping me become a "stamp collector" in earnest.

Losing either of you would deminish the forum.
Just my opinion.
Stephen

If I were buying a stamp from Bill I'd rather it have a cert than it didn't.

As I've said before, I trust Bill Weiss, and in this case I see no problem with him selling something he previously certified.

As far as getting or not getting an ebay item that has been certified, it is probably better to get one, as long as you are not greatly overpaying for a stamp or cover because it is certified. Because of the questionable nature of many higher priced items on ebay, I will not buy anything over $50 without some type of recognized cert. By the way, I do not sell on ebay because, in my opinion, it is too much of a pain.

regards, Theron.

Many average run of the mill collectors don't know any expertizer by name. For those of us who are aware of Bill's reputation and knowledge I would wonder why he didn't provide a cert for a high-end item. It would raise more questions to me. Is a cert implied? Is there something wrong with the item?

Dan

danstamps54, I think that's an excellent point.

When we were retail dealers and also while in the public auction business, we provided "Lifetime Guarantee Certificates" on request, which meant that whatever was sold, the ID AND condition are guaranteed for my lifetime. And in all the years sice we started to issue those, I do not recall one item that was returned because an expert service did not agree with the description on the cert.

Of course, running an Expert Service is entirely different in many respects. I still guarantee the ID of any item and will refund the cert. cost if any other US-based expert service disagree with the ID. This rarely happens, but every so often we might get a claim for refund because one of the other committees disagreed with our ID, and usually it's a flat plate coil that we felt was genuine, but they do not, or the other way around, we thought was bad, and they thought it was good.

I do agree with much that essayk says about the difference between a certification and an opinion. All of the expert services are offering OPINIONS. The only one that currently offers a guarantee is APEX. So only APEX is offering Certifications as outlined by Essayk). PSE also did for several years, but abandoned it, so all of us (I think) do guarantee the ID, but not the condition - which is a good topic for another thread sometime!

Last, I am grateful for the outpouring of support shown to me in this thread. Really I am.

Thank you all.

Without seeking to be contrarian for its own sake, based upon this information, I will not buy a stamp with a Weiss certificate from anyone. When an expertizer is also a seller, it at least creates the impression of a conflict of interest and that the opinion expressed in the certificate was biased to increase the chance of sale or the price. I am NOT saying that Weiss has ever done this, nor any other expertizer that is or was a dealer. It just creates the impression. Just as judges should not fraternize with lawyers who try cases before them, it undermines confidence in an impartial system. And here, in my opinion, my confidence is now undermined. If others have a personal relationship with the expertizer that supports confidence, good for them ... I don't. I'm sure he's a fine, upstanding guy ... It's just that the confidence one wants to have in impartiality, to me, cannot exist with this dual role. If it works for him and for you, great, best wishes for success.

While I can appreciate Mr. Palermo's point-of-view, it seems to me that it would do Mr. Weiss no good whatsoever to issue a certificate that was false just for the sake of selling a particular stamp. Once the marketplace found out that the certificate was worthless, Mr. Weiss's reputation would be ruined and he would be seriously compromised as an expert going forward.

Honesty is more important than impartiality. Honest people don't let partiality interfere with truth. Besides, impartiality is knowable only formally, from the outside: the expertizer is not the same as the seller. Hidden partiality could still be operative--the third-party appraiser, unbeknownst to everyone, is best buds with the seller's third cousin's mother-in-law.

Of course, how to know who's honest and who's not, well, there's the rub.

But, in this case, since everyone affirms that Bill Weiss is honest, that's good enough for me. If it were Joe Schmoe Stamps Unlimited of East Wackford, Missouri, at question, I'd have to ask around to try to find out: is this guy honest?

But even those in highest dudgeon on this thread about self-certifying agree that
Bill
Weiss
is
honest.

Reputations like that don't get manufactured overnight. Which is why they are so darn valuable in a world filled with hype and spin from dawn to dusk.

Now, in addition to honesty, skill and knowledge are crucial. If someone is utterly honest but doesn't know his craft well or who knows his craft but is careless and overlooks things, all his honesty in the end won't help.

But in the case at hand, everyone, even those in highest dudgeon over self-certifiers, agree that
Bill
Weiss
knows
his
stuff.

And no one has claimed that he's careless.

Just sayin'