Gonna Call This One As A Fake

Hi everyone. I'm the seller of a couple of the stamps in question. sinclair2010 let me know about this topic of discussion as well as revenuer I believe who messaged me and I removed the stamps. I'm a fairly new dealer. I'm not trying to rip anyone off. As sinclair mentioned I did buy these from a more established firm, so I assumed they were authentic.

I've pulled them off ebay and have taken a loss on them. I'm trying to learn as much as I can, and admit I do make mistakes. And when I do I make them right. I don't have any negative reviews on ebay. And there have been a few returns with misidentification and I have refunded them without question.

One thing we all have in common is a passion for philately. And if we are to continue to grow and support our industry we should all help and support each other. I agree that fraud has to be battled, but at first there should be some common courtesy and understanding that not everyone is going to agree with an opinion.

I recall the late Bill Weiss ripping me a new one on a listing I had. He threatened and insulted me. And he didn't even know me. And it made me think twice about getting into philately.

Although I respected his expertise 100%, I did not respect the way that he approached me. Not every misidentified stamp has a person on the other side who is trying to scam someone. In fact, I believe that is the rare case. For the most part, people just are unaware or mistaken. Instead of threatening them, offer to educate them.

And stating that you are expert and that's why you are correct doesn't help either. Provide proof, reasoning, etc. If we want our hobby to continue we are going to need new dealers and collectors, and pointing the finger at them or threatening them is not helping the situation.



Ryan Joneson
WCstamps

Hi Ryan and welcome to the community.
I have the emails that Bill Weiss sent you on 1/15/2015, and the exchange that followed. At that time you said 'I appreciate your input on my listings' and the exchange was civil.

You also said in one of the replies that


I understand that mistakes happen, but the same listing mistakes are happening to this day.
Don

Hi Ryan,




I believe that both were presented:













Also,




Some of the above quotes are from Revcollector, who is in fact an expert at the Philatelic Foundation. If he calls it a fake, it's like you just got a free certificate with that wording on it.

Jim

I see a lot of sellers on ebay that are really trying to rip off collectors. They wouldn't bother to come here to defend themselves because they have no intention of changing course. Give the guy a chance to prove that he is better than that.

WC Stamps, I don't contact sellers on bad items much anymore unless it is something that I want and can't compete as it is described. When I do, I try to be courteous but quick to the point. I don't necessarily offer a lot of proof of what I am contending. The onus is really on the seller to investigate, learn, and fix the errors. Welcome to the forum, and as I said, you will learn a lot if you stick around.

Hi Ryan,

This is an example of what drives collectors here nuts.

This is not a "partial pair."

That isn't even an understandable word in the English language.

It's like saying "almost pregnant." It's either a pair, or it isn't.

This is a single stamp with a clipped corner (but it is genuine), and with some additional stuff hanging onto one side.

Not sure if this helps?

Jim

http://www.ebay.com/itm/WCstamps-U-...AOSw03lY6XBU

I agree, I really don't think that that is the case here.

Removing questionable lots promptly speaks highly of an intent to be as honest as possible.

Jim

This is how my last attempt to fix a bad listing went. CKStamps, item #352175268006, ended 10/6/17, a totally fruitless exercise.

wsinclairstamps: I would like to add this stamp to my collection but I cannot compete as it is described. I guarantee that this stamp is a top row stamp from Plate 20. Plate 20 only produced Type III, Scott #26. In other words, this is a #26 not a #26A

CKStamps: the broken frame line on top are very obviously, I think it is #26A, thank you

wsinclairstamps: All top row stamps have a break at top. That is why the Scott catalogue has a special note regarding top and bottom row #26 stamps.

CKStamps: thank you, I will check it again.

The listing was of course, never changed and I didn't get the stamp.

Well at least you weren't blocked from participating in future lots from the seller (presumably).

That's been my experience whenever I try to reach out and be helpful.

So, I stopped doing that.

Jim

I didn't even bother on this one. I can easily see a seller getting reamed out for selling this stamp. A fake cancel on top of a cleaned pen cancel... but it had a good cert. What a world.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/CKStamps-US...047675.l2557

Maybe the lightened black marks across George's forehead and chin weren't obvious at the time?

Nor was the just-applied-yesterday look of the magenta "cancel"?

No wonder why I moved into back of the book material...

Jim

Hi Ryan it was nice of you to take the time to stop and explain. That makes you an update standing person. People make mistakes as a dealer you have to make fewer. Why? Most people to trust dealers. That means you have to put more time and effort into your knowledge base than buyers.

At least I can say so far your earning my trust so I will give you the benefit of doubt. Good luck and I hope you have a successful endeavor.