Dorset coin company

[LawrenceChard]

2 hours ago, Leonmarsh said:

Just had the displeasure of dealing with Terry at Dorset coin company 

Nice coins but shocking attitude, rude and obnoxious 

Won't be considering buying from there 

Made a coin enquiry saying what would be your best price on the coin as I had bought from them in the past 

Always provide balanced views when it's a dealer as its their business but you have to draw the line somewhere 

Greeted with this shocking really 

2 hours ago, Leonmarsh said:

Just had the displeasure of dealing with Terry at Dorset coin company 

Nice coins but shocking attitude, rude and obnoxious 

Won't be considering buying from there 

Made a coin enquiry saying what would be your best price on the coin as I had bought from them in the past 

Always provide balanced views when it's a dealer as its their business but you have to draw the line somewhere 

Greeted with this shocking really 

 

 

When I saw the thread title "Dorset coin company", I wondered if it was about a "Dorset coin company", or The "Dorset Coin Company".

Folowed closely by the thought that if a TSF member was asking if Dorset Coin Company are trustworthy or reputable, then I might add my opinion that they indeed very honourable, and well -respected numismatists. In the past, I have dealt with them (mainly with Ernie, but I probably have spoken to Terry).

The actual thread, with the comment "Thanks for your money sucker. Ha ha" shocked me. No wonder some other TSF members queried how the previous conversation had been phrased. Being pedantic, he should at least have put a comma after the word money, but perhaps he was replying using his phone, which seems to make everyone lazy, and sloppy about spelling, punctuation, etc. 🙂

Perhaps Terry was having a particularly bad day, but even so, the comments are inexcusable for two reasons. The first because it's no way to talk to any customer, but the deeper reason is that it appears to reveal his true attitude to customers and collectors. Nobody with that attitude should be in the coin business.

When I did a Google search for DCC, their ebay shop was the first result, which is quite revealing. I wanted to find their website, but I guess ebay pay Google adwords to be able to hijack the top spot, and DCC's website is not fantastic; it loaded slowly with missing images, and it's my further guess that ebay is there main online sales channel, while their own website is of much less importance to them.

I took a further look at Google results, and found: 
"Dorset Coin Company dorsetcoincompany.com
Site will be available soon. Thank you for your patience! © Dorset Coin Company 2020."

in 20th place, but their actual live site dorsetcoincompany.co.uk failed to appear in the first 5 pages (50 results), so might as well not exist as far as Google is concerned.

My third guess is that DCC discovered that it's easy to use ebay to market your products, and also that it requires considerable effort and expenditure to create a website which can compete with ebay.

I sure am glad that I took the view back in 1998, that we needed our own company website. We experimented with ebay years ago, and hated it for enough reasons to fill a book.

What seems to have happened is that unless a business has a fully-functioning, all-singing, all-dancing, website, then it might as well pack up and go home. The alternative is to delegate your online presence to ebay, Amazon, and the like. This applies not just to the coin business. Talk to anyone with a food take-away; if they are not using JustEat, Deliveroo, etc, they probably don't get enough trade to stay in business, so they have to pay maybe 15% to 20% commission to get sales, and that probably means they have to increase their prices to pay for it, which means that you, the customer, ends up paying more. The same thing applies to hotels on sites such as Trip Advisor and Booking.com. These sites also want hefty commissions for booking through their sites, and have T@Cs which debar the hotel from charging lower prices to direct bookers. I intensely detest this, and always try to book direct, but expect to get a better deal. Another example is review sites. While they are a good idea in theory, they are far from perfect, open to abuse, and they charge hundreds or thousands of pounds to allow companies to "manage" the feedback. It works a little like the old Mafia protection rackets.

My next thought is why @Leonmarsh enquired via ebay. I would have tried direct, and possibly suggested that as DCC would be saving (15%?) commission to ebay, they could pass it on as a discount instead. Of course, this does not guarentee a successful outcome. At least, buying from DCC, you could be reasonably sure the coin would be genuine...

... unlike https://atkinsonsbullion.com/gold/gold-coins/other-gold-coins/pre-owned-saudi-arabia-1-guinea-gold-coin, current price £339.13 although out of stock, where it seems you can be assured the coins will be fake "The photograph shows the type of coin you will receive, not the exact item.". The photos on ths page show a very obvious fake. I only became aware of this when @BackyardBullion posted a YouTube video

 BYB was very kind about Atkinsons when he discovered the coin was fake, and reported that the problem was rectified, although I would not have had such kind thoughts.

I looked at Atkinsons website at the time, and they had two pages for Saudi Guineas, one generic and one for the specific date. Both had the same photos which were of a counterfeit, although BYB's coin was a different fake. 

What surprised me at the time was that, weeks afterthe BYB incident, Atkinsons' website still had the same photographs of the same fake coin. It seems they had not thought to check whether the coin in their photos was genuine or fake. I have looked at the site and page occasionally since then, waiting to see if the would ever replace it (I have previouslly publicly commented about it). I checked again today, and have stopped being surprised that they still have the fake photos there. What does surprise me is to notice that more than two years have passed since the incident. (Where did the time go?).

I also just checked our website (not for images of fakes), here: https://www.chards.co.uk/1950-saudi-arabia-gold-one-guinea/1761 priced just under £370 (plus our additional postage charge!). It does say we are out of stock (actually it says "add stock alert" which I think we should re-word). Our photos are of a genuine coin (of course), all our coins are guaranteed genuine, and we do know the difference, and how to tell. The listing is for an ungraded "bullion" coin, but most of these Saudi Guineas are minty anyway. Just after the BYB video, we sorted through our stock of them, from memory about 20 coins, added them to our site, and sold them all quite quickly.

I may have upset two dealers with this single response, but c'est la vie! 🙂

 

 

[Leonmarsh]

Some good points made by all 

Anyway match is onwards and upwards 

[Leonmarsh]

@ilovesilverireallydo has come to the rescue and I have purchased one

Thanks all closing thread has had my Sunday morning moan 

[HerefordBullyun]

1 minute ago, Leonmarsh said:

Some good points made by all 

Anyway match is onwards and upwards 

Indeed and hopefully like mine and your undercrackers upwards!

[LawrenceChard]

50 minutes ago, Chrisplym said:

All very interesting. Maybe it’s the heat? Lol

Leon, I can see why you like the Saudi Guinea. It looks great! 👍

I agree they look quite nice, but I can't read a word on them...

might even be Arabic for thanks for your money sucker, Ha ha!...

or "Death to all infidels". 🙂

[LawrenceChard]

20 minutes ago, BrumChris said:

I bought a proof coin described as mint condition but it arrived with a finger print on both sides. It was going for conservation and grading so I wasn't too fussed given the price. However, I'd be wary buying from them again.

Don't forget that "mint condition" doesn't mean perfect.

We have had sealed tubes of silver Britannias with fingerprints on them before now, and they were on both sides of the coins.

To be fair, I think the RM usually only put fingerprints on one side. 🙂

[Goldhooked]

Personally I would report them to eBay for that message, it’s totally unacceptable.  I’ve been selling professionally on eBay for years and have dealt with some proper cretins of customers but have never replied to any of them like that.  No need to be an ar5e when dealing with ar5eholes 🤷‍♂️

[HerefordBullyun]

1 minute ago, Goldhooked said:

Personally I would report them to eBay for that message, it’s totally unacceptable.  I’ve been selling professionally on eBay for years and have dealt with some proper cretins of customers but have never replied to any of them like that.  No need to be an ar5e when dealing with ar5eholes 🤷‍♂️

Buddy you must have the patience of a saint! The great british public! nuff siad!

[Goldhooked]

4 minutes ago, HerefordBullyun said:

Buddy you must have the patience of a saint! The great british public! nuff siad!

12 years of dealing with eBay/Amazon/Etsy customers has certainly been an experience!!

[HerefordBullyun]

Just now, Goldhooked said:

12 years of dealing with eBay/Amazon/Etsy customers has certainly been an experience!!

Well your patience and perservence must be admired. Well done sir!

[Coincollector]

I went to DCC to sell some crowns and showed both father and son five crowns I wanted to sell four were Victorian and a 1934 wreath all in EF / UNC condition. They took a glance at the 1934 and said it’s fake but offered £250 for all.

I declined and sold the 1934 to another coin dealer who said he will get it graded and if it comes back as genuine he would pay 3k. The coin was genuine and 3k was paid up.

I won’t be offering any more coins to the DCC again.

[Bimetallic]

That's strange behavior, though I know people who would make the bad "sucker" joke in a way that wouldn't be meant as an insult. There's a personality type that would think that it was an innocent, throwaway joke, not meaning it seriously. There are all kinds of people out there, and some jokes don't do as well in various mediums, like email. He might be one of those people, thinking it was funny but not insulting, or maybe he really is a jerk.

The fact that you never posted your end, or the full thread, gives me some pause, since people repeatedly requested it. From what I see, you only paraphrase your end of part of the thread, I think your first reply to his reply. We can't really know anything about this situation without seeing both sides, not just one side.

On the price issue, there's no such thing as a "fair price" in the sense of someone else being obligated to agree that it's fair, much less agree to the price. Humans have a rich psychology around price and trade and sometimes this wobbly concept of "fair price" (which people use in a lot of different meanings). If someone doesn't agree to an offered price, there's no point in complaining that it was a "fair price". It doesn't add any information to our understanding of a situation or attempted transaction. This reminds me of people who talk about wanting retail silver to reach its "true" price (they usually call it "physical" silver, but they're exclusively referring to retail silver specifically, not physical as purchased by industry or anyone else). It's already at its true price, since the market price is the only true price, unless we think there's some kind of broad manipulation of retail silver, a tiny market that hardly anyone cares about.

In this case, a seller's behavior is a big clue to how "fair" or "true" a price is. Since he didn't accept the price, it's likely that he's able to sell them at his listed prices (or he thinks he can, and he'll either be right or wrong about that). So it doesn't mean anything to say a price is "fair" if the market is carrying along at a much higher price.  (Buyer behavior is also a clue to fair or true prices. Your rejection of his price could've indicated that it was too high if you were able to get it for your price elsewhere, or if he wasn't able to sell any at his listed price, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.) You offered more than 20% over spot, which seems like a lot for gold, even in this market, but I guess those guineas are going for much more. (They were out of stock at Bullion by Post and Chard's when I looked.)

[Leonmarsh]

Didn't want to litter the thread with the ebay exchange 

Anyway bit of boring thread this now 

Won't buy again from them simple as other can of course 

[LawrenceChard]

12 hours ago, Coincollector said:

I went to DCC to sell some crowns and showed both father and son five crowns I wanted to sell four were Victorian and a 1934 wreath all in EF / UNC condition. They took a glance at the 1934 and said it’s fake but offered £250 for all.

I declined and sold the 1934 to another coin dealer who said he will get it graded and if it comes back as genuine he would pay 3k. The coin was genuine and 3k was paid up.

I won’t be offering any more coins to the DCC again.

Somewhere out there is a fake 1934 wreath crown, or more specificially a re-engraved date one.

Going back to about the 1965 to 1968 period, we used to get a regular visit, perhaps monthly, by a man from Southport called Wheeler.

He was always looking to buy wreath crowns, but only those from 1930 to 1936.

The other coins he wanted to buy included pennies from 1862 to 1868, halfpennies from 1870 to 1879, Edward halfcrowns from 1902 to 1909.

Typical coins he owned and was offering for sale included the above mentioned 1934 crown, 1869 pennies, 1871 halfpennies, and 1905 halfcrowns. These are all the key dates in their series.

It is very unusual for collectors to own all the key dates, but be looking to buy most of the common in a series, and this fact raised my suspicions. I had also noticed that some of his rare date coins looked to have have some "work" done around their dates.

Further, in the wreath crown series, he was never interested in any dated from 1927 to 1929. Similarly, he avoided 1910 halfcrowns, 1860 and 1861 pennies, which are a different variety from the 1869, and the same pattern with Victoria young head halfpennies.

We used to have a local competitor and fellow dealer called Peter Ireland, and I spoke to him about Wheeler. At first Peter seemed happy with the coins he had bought from Wheeler, but he was happy to re-check, and also to have a closer look at any subsequent coins he was offered by Wheeler.

This co-operation paid off, as on his next visit to Blackpool, Peter and I both identified highly suspicious coins in Wheeler's stock. We called the police, Wheeler confessed, was convicted and went to jail.

When he was arrested, and his home searched, there was no trace of the 1934 crown.

I called in to a Blackpool jeweller, a man called Fielding who ran Regan's jewellers, and I asked about various coins including a 1934 crown. He retreived the coin from his back room, I examined it, and could easily identify it as the same fake that Wheeler had offered to me. When I told Fielding this, he went into denial, even though I was able to tell him the name of the seller, and more details about the case. Fielding seemed clueless about the fact that I was one of two local numismatic coin dealers. I believe he subsequently sold the coin to an unsuspecting sucker, made a profit, avoided a loss, but lost any respect from me. I also informed Peter Ireland about this.

This was not the last time I have known jewellers to sell fake coins, sometimes in ignorance, sometimes in full knowledge. It is a very common occurrence.

I am still waiting for the faked 1934 crown to re-surface. If I do get to see it again, it will be very interesting when it's owner asks how and what I know about it.

[Bimetallic]

On 14/06/2021 at 11:24, Leonmarsh said:

Didn't want to litter the thread with the ebay exchange 

Anyway bit of boring thread this now 

Won't buy again from them simple as other can of course 

Nah man, I'm not buying it then. You keep making excuses to hide what you told him, and I have to assume there's a reason for that. If you're the one who first used the word "sucker" in the convo, for example, then his reply would be interpreted very differently. Like if you said "I'd have to be a sucker to pay that price..." and he replied joking about you being a sucker, that's very different. I have no idea what happened – that's just one easy to imagine possibility. There's no point trashing a seller by quoting only one side of an exchange, and we'd have to be suckers to fall for one-sided reports.

[Stu]

On 14/06/2021 at 19:52, LawrenceChard said:

Somewhere out there is a fake 1934 wreath crown, or more specificially a re-engraved date one.

Going back to about the 1965 to 1968 period, we used to get a regular visit, perhaps monthly, by a man from Southport called Wheeler.

He was always looking to buy wreath crowns, but only those from 1930 to 1936.

The other coins he wanted to buy included pennies from 1862 to 1868, halfpennies from 1870 to 1879, Edward halfcrowns from 1902 to 1909.

Typical coins he owned and was offering for sale included the above mentioned 1934 crown, 1869 pennies, 1871 halfpennies, and 1905 halfcrowns. These are all the key dates in their series.

It is very unusual for collectors to own all the key dates, but be looking to buy most of the common in a series, and this fact raised my suspicions. I had also noticed that some of his rare date coins looked to have have some "work" done around their dates.

Further, in the wreath crown series, he was never interested in any dated from 1927 to 1929. Similarly, he avoided 1910 halfcrowns, 1860 and 1861 pennies, which are a different variety from the 1869, and the same pattern with Victoria young head halfpennies.

We used to have a local competitor and fellow dealer called Peter Ireland, and I spoke to him about Wheeler. At first Peter seemed happy with the coins he had bought from Wheeler, but he was happy to re-check, and also to have a closer look at any subsequent coins he was offered by Wheeler.

This co-operation paid off, as on his next visit to Blackpool, Peter and I both identified highly suspicious coins in Wheeler's stock. We called the police, Wheeler confessed, was convicted and went to jail.

When he was arrested, and his home searched, there was no trace of the 1934 crown.

I called in to a Blackpool jeweller, a man called Fielding who ran Regan's jewellers, and I asked about various coins including a 1934 crown. He retreived the coin from his back room, I examined it, and could easily identify it as the same fake that Wheeler had offered to me. When I told Fielding this, he went into denial, even though I was able to tell him the name of the seller, and more details about the case. Fielding seemed clueless about the fact that I was one of two local numismatic coin dealers. I believe he subsequently sold the coin to an unsuspecting sucker, made a profit, avoided a loss, but lost any respect from me. I also informed Peter Ireland about this.

This was not the last time I have known jewellers to sell fake coins, sometimes in ignorance, sometimes in full knowledge. It is a very common occurrence.

I am still waiting for the faked 1934 crown to re-surface. If I do get to see it again, it will be very interesting when it's owner asks how and what I know about it.

My suspicions would have been immediately ignited upon learning said con-mans name. 😄

Did Tealeaf Terry ever darken your door? 

[Leonmarsh]

5 hours ago, Bimetallic said:

Nah man, I'm not buying it then. You keep making excuses to hide what you told him, and I have to assume there's a reason for that. If you're the one who first used the word "sucker" in the convo, for example, then his reply would be interpreted very differently. Like if you said "I'd have to be a sucker to pay that price..." and he replied joking about you being a sucker, that's very different. I have no idea what happened – that's just one easy to imagine possibility. There's no point trashing a seller by quoting only one side of an exchange, and we'd have to be suckers to fall for one-sided reports.

Thanks for your useful input and observations bi metallic all the best 

[LawrenceChard]

4 hours ago, Stu said:

My suspicions would have been immediately ignited upon learning said con-mans name. 😄

Did Tealeaf Terry ever darken your door? 

I'm missing the allusion there.

[Stu]

15 minutes ago, LawrenceChard said:

I'm missing the allusion there.

Wheeler/Dealer, “a person who engages in commercial or political scheming”

[LawrenceChard]

25 minutes ago, Stu said:

Wheeler/Dealer, “a person who engages in commercial or political scheming”

I was looking too deeply, and thought there must have been an infamous Terry Wheeler!

[Stu]

4 minutes ago, LawrenceChard said:

I was looking too deeply, and thought there must have been an infamous Terry Wheeler!

Nah, cryptic I ain’t. 

[Goldhooked]

Wheeler Dealer Man by Terry Wheeler 🤷‍♂️

Edited June 17, 2021 by Goldhooked

[LawrenceChard]

On 17/06/2021 at 02:56, Bimetallic said:

Nah man, I'm not buying it then. You keep making excuses to hide what you told him, and I have to assume there's a reason for that. If you're the one who first used the word "sucker" in the convo, for example, then his reply would be interpreted very differently. Like if you said "I'd have to be a sucker to pay that price..." and he replied joking about you being a sucker, that's very different. I have no idea what happened – that's just one easy to imagine possibility. There's no point trashing a seller by quoting only one side of an exchange, and we'd have to be suckers to fall for one-sided reports.

That appears to be a consensus opinion.

I have considerable experience that some people on forums (fora?), and review sites, post one-sided and incomplete accounts of transactions and conversations. The missing parts are often very important, and would often show the complainer as being unreasonable, misleading, in the wrong, and sometimes plain dishonest. 

Now that the topic has been aired here, it would be interesting to hear the while story.

Perhaps someone should invite Terry to add his comments, and have the chance to defend DCC.

[LawrenceChard]

On 14/06/2021 at 19:24, Leonmarsh said:

Didn't want to litter the thread with the ebay exchange 

Anyway bit of boring thread this now 

Won't buy again from them simple as other can of course 

On 17/06/2021 at 08:23, Leonmarsh said:

Thanks for your useful input and observations bi metallic all the best 

That's rather dismissive, and certainly convinces me that @Bimetallic might have hit the proverbial nail on the head.

I am sure that most members who participated or read this topic would be interested in hearing the whole story, and it is rather rude to disappoint them, and dismiss their interest because you now find it boring.

🙂

 

[Leonmarsh]

I can't help by think mr chard you like a bit if niggle especially when it comes to other dealers 

Wish I hadn't posted the thread to  be honest as it is boring, people can still buy from there I'm not the dealer police just an honest thread for an honest guy on an honest experience