(As an aside, some 25 years ago I dove headlong into the hobby after having a bad experience with a dealer. I became hellbent on not letting him ruin it for me and I haven't looked back. The dimension that philately has added to my life is immeasurable.)
Just want to state up-front that I'm all for supporting the APS's mission. And I'm all for seeing the hobby flourish and (somehow) reduce people's bad experiences with sellers. But I just don't see how that can be accomplished via this proposal. We're now 5 pages deep into this conversation and it's still unclear what this merger would accomplish. Can someone summarize it in 2 or 3 sentences? I've tried but I can't do it.
From the proposal: "Uniting the Hobby.... [this] idea is modeled after the American Numismatic Association, where collectors and dealers work together as one for the health of the hobby and integrity in the marketplace."
Unfortunately, the merger proposal doesn't offer any details of the model. So in an effort to understand for myself, I visited the ANA website (
https://www.money.org/) from the link provided in the APS article on the proposed merger (
https://stamps.org/news/c/news/cat/...06e02cccbc). I figured a good place to start would be
About > Our Mission. It's a very brief read, and the takeaway is that that ANA is an educational organization. There's no mention of collector/dealer cooperation/collaboration.
Under
About > Member Benefits you'll find a beautifully done PDF brochure. I'd urge the APS powers-that-be to have a look at this and note the production value. Slick, but not too slick. Great photography that depicts younger people (I say this to address laments about the inability to attract younger people to the hobby). And so on.
After spending a few minutes reading that (and writing this), I'm wondering how much deeper I'd have to dig to understand the structure of the model on which the proposed merger is based.
Back to the proposal itself. There's this notion of (quote) "the dealer community." Given how the proposal describes a proliferation of online sellers operating without accountability, there really isn't any such "community." And how could there be? What's to stop philatelically-ignorant Joe Estate Sale from listing his "rare finds" on
ebay with the caveat of "I don't know anything about stamps, so returns are not accepted if I've inadvertently misdescribed what I'm selling"? If he was called on the carpet post-sale for selling a reperfed stamp, how would he know the difference? This situation puts the seller at the mercy of the buyer precisely because of the seller's ignorance. And who's going to resolve that dispute?
ebay? What do they know about reperfed stamps? Considering that
ebay's philatelic listings come under the heading of "Postal (sic) Stamps" it's pretty clear that they're not very invested in philatelic specifics.
The truth is, anyone can hawk anything on
ebay as long as it conforms to their guidelines. Thus, it's entirely unclear how any organization or institution can address this point of the proposal:
"Failing to adapt and assert our collective membership value in the digital marketplace will erode consumer confidence and allow bad actors to profit from unsuspecting buyers."
If there's a solution, it begins (on
ebay at least) with their commitment to taking user complaints seriously. But they don't. I related a story about this several posts up. Even getting the complaint process started is difficult. Just try it for yourself. No, really, take a minute and make the attempt: Find an
ebay item and click on "report this item." You will immediately be confronted by the difficulty of actually reporting whatever you have to say about it.