[Ancientartifacts] Re: 'Good' Seller with poor COA


Sorry to disagree with you. According to your rules, anyone can from
now on sell items re-constitute from different ancient fragments,
ancient glass fragment re-fashioned into a rare forms and covered with
irredescence, half an authentic scarab, the lower half having been
restored, carved with a rare cartouche and covered with the same color

If the buyer finds out its highly restored/and or altered, the seller
can strongly deny it. If he proves his point by testing the modern
paint/patina with acetone, the seller can deny the refund arguing it
has been altered. It's a win win situation for dishonest sellers.

Removing authentic and original patina/encrustations/irredescence from
objects and coins is totally different. The item is still authentic,
though the surface altered, no modern areas were found added unless

Here we have a case of an item which is half fake, half authentic, not
just repaired.

My suggestion to Stephen: Re- paint the pot with the same color adding
some dust on top and return it for full refund. What argument can
Ernie come up with then. (Probably that his paint was made by Dupond,
while yours is made by P&G).


--- In Ancientartifacts@yahoogroups.com, Kim Ghobrial <euroburms@...>
> I haven't jumped in here, but I would have to agree with what Joel
has said, if you have
> done any type of acetone or whatever to the piece it could be
considered alterations to
> the piece. It could have been that it was a hairline crack and
Ernie didn't see it,
> sometimes those are hard to see even for those who Sell large
quantities all the time. A
> hairline crack is totally different than a fixed or repaired piece.
> This is very simular to Coin Dealers who sell Uncleaned coins, when
a person gets them, if
> they don't like them, they need to keep them in the same shape as
when they received them
> to send them back to the Seller. If there has been any cleaning,
even put into water,
> that is considered altering them and most if not all Uncleaned
Dealers will not take back
> those and even if the Buyer sends them back, they will not receive
any credit or money
> back from them, no matter how mad or disgruntled they become.
> Sincerely,
> Kim
> Stephen Churley wrote:
> > Well let's see what Rolf thinks when he examines the pot early next
> > week. If I am wrong about the extent of the restorations I will
> > apologise to Ernie. If the restorations are more extensive than
> > COA suggests, I hope he will then refund me.
> >
> >
> >
> > Stephen
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: jmwarren2001 <jm4906@...>
> > To: Ancientartifacts@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Friday, June 6, 2008 4:49:34 PM
> > Subject: [Ancientartifacts] Re: 'Good' Seller with poor COA
> >
> > In defense of Ernie, who I don't know, you guys seem to think this
> > acetone test done by a collector (not a recognized expert in
> > restoration) settles the whole matter. First, that is NOT proof of
> > restoration. You would need more proof than that. Have you tried
> > blacklight? And, you have indeed now altered the piece. Suppose you
> > removed original pigment and the piece is 100% accurately described?
> > Once again, your test isn't enough to determine if Ernie's description
> > was not accurate. I suggest you take good images of the piece and post
> > them. Let people see the piece, and see if they can see restoration.
> > Unless it is done by quite a talented person, experienced collectors
> > should be able to see something.
> >
> > Joel
> >
> >
> >


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:


<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:


(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:


Amazon Video

bUy dvds OnlInE